Irvine’s Freeway Foes Plan Appeal of Court Ruling

The day after an Orange County Superior Court ruling that left them dazed, a group of Irvine freeway foes vowed Friday to fight for what they believe to be the people’s right to vote on taxes and fees to pay for roads.

A spokesman for the Committee of Seven Thousand said the group will appeal Judge Judith M. Ryan’s Thursday decision, which ruled invalid a proposed citizens’ initiative that would have required a citywide election on new taxes and fees to pay for freeway construction.

“We will file for appeal as soon as possible,” said William Speros, chairman of the committee that drafted the initiative.

At issue was a proposed developer-fee program that would raise nearly half the costs of building new freeways in the San Joaquin Hills, Foothill and Eastern transportation corridors through assessments on new homes and commercial development.

The group’s proposed ballot initiative, which was called the “Citizens’ Right-to-Vote Ordinance,” would have required that all fees and taxes assessed to build new roads and freeways first be voted on by Irvine residents.

A coalition of more than 1,400 businesses that support construction of the freeways filed suit July 26 to stop the council from voting on the ordinance, contending it was illegal. Although a Superior Court commissioner refused last month to stop the council from voting on the ordinance, he scheduled the Thursday hearing on the legality of the proposal.

Ryan informed city officials by telephone late Thursday of her decision invalidating the initiative. In the formal opinion released Friday, the judge said she based her decision on the fact that the freeways in question are matters of statewide significance and therefore cannot be decided by a local initiative.

“The court finds that, based on the entire record in this action, the electorate does not have the power to enact the proposed ordinance inasmuch as it is a matter of statewide concern and not a municipal affair,” the opinion said.

Appeal Called ‘Essential’

Jean Hobart, attorney for City Councilman Larry Agran, who helped draft the initiative, said an appeal is essential.

“Unless they appeal this order, they can never draft an initiative that would go after these freeways, unless it was a statewide initiative, because a local one will not do,” she said. “I think that’s the analysis, but I’m not an expert in this area.”

Committee of Seven Thousand Chairman Speros was shocked Thursday when he heard of the ruling, he said, and he was even more shocked Friday when he found out Ryan’s reasoning.

“If what I understand is correct, she’s telling us the initiative is not a viable tool here,” Speros said. “I am shocked that the opinion was predicated on a statewide issue because it was not one of the issues the judge asked for oral argument about.”

Constitutionality Issue

In filing suit in July, the business coalition argued that the ballot initiative was unconstitutional because state law gives the City Council, not the public at large, the authority to decide on new road and freeway fees.

At the end of the hearing, Ryan said she would not decide on the constitutionality of the initiative, only whether the voters had the power to vote on fees to finance transportation costs.

But Robert Thornton, one of the business coalition’s attorneys, said Friday evening that Ryan’s opinion “is not surprising at all.”

“The plaintiffs in the suit raised several major arguments,” Thornton said. “A significant one was that local initiatives cannot address matters of statewide concern. And certainly the regional transportation facilities--the subject of the proposed ordinance--were clearly a matter of statewide concern and not a municipal affair.”

Irvine City Atty. Roger Grable refused to comment on Ryan’s ruling. “It pretty much speaks for itself,” he said.