Poll Showing Lack of Support Puts Anaheim Recall ‘on Hold’

The results of a poll commissioned by Anaheim homeowners who opposed and forced defeat of the controversial Katella redevelopment project prompted organizers to conclude Sunday that there is insufficient public support for a recall of three City Council members.

Less than a quarter of those questioned in the telephone poll supported a recall, and more than half said they would be unwilling to pay the cost of a special recall election, said organizers of the homeowner groups.

Based on the survey results, “We feel the recall effort should be put on hold at this time,” Doug Kintz, president of Anaheim Home, told about 200 people gathered Sunday at Willow Park for a fund-raiser and rally. Home, which stands for Home Owners for Maintaining their Environment, is one of three coalitions that solicited the poll.

Kintz, one of a half-dozen leaders in the successful drive to kill the Katella redevelopment project, said after the rally that he personally favored a recall. “But I’m glad we found out what the people want. . . . Maybe this has got the attention of the council.

“And a recall is still not out of the question,” he added.

In the telephone survey conducted by Nason, Lundberg & Associates, 500 to 700 residents were asked about 20 questions designed to gauge their interest in the ouster of Mayor Ben Bay and council members Miriam Kaywood and Irv Pickler.

Kintz said 55% of the residents polled were unaware of the homeowners’ recall movement, and 56% said they would not support such a recall effort, knowing that a special election to vote out the council members would cost taxpayers about $80,000.

About 12,000 signatures would have been needed to ensure a recall ballot initiative, city officials have said.

Only about 20% of those surveyed said they supported recalling Bay and Pickler, with 22% of the respondents supporting the recall of Kaywood. About 50% either said they were undecided or declined to answer questions, Kintz said.

The recall poll was begun Sept. 7 and concluded by Wednesday, said Betty Ronconi, acting treasurer of Anaheim Home, a group with 50 core members that claims to have received donations from about 500 residents. Ronconi said Home paid the Orange firm $5,000, which was raised by member contributions.

She and other organizers said that, despite the rejection of a recall drive, the money was well spent.

Pickler, the only targeted council member who attended Sunday’s gathering, said of the poll results, “I don’t think I was surprised and I’m happy they’re not going ahead with the recall . . . no one ever wins that way.”

During the three-hour session, about 15 residents aired grievances or asked questions of Councilmen Fred Hunter and William Ehrle, who were not recall targets, and Pickler, who suffered the brunt of the criticism about the city’s controversial redevelopment projects.

Pickler told those present that he did not support condemning privately owned homes to make way for redevelopment projects. He also announced that he would seek the resignation of the city’s redevelopment director, Norm Priest.

But Hunter and Ehrle, while both conceding that they were disappointed in the redevelopment projects, said they believed it would be a violation of Anaheim’s charter to fire any city employee.

Backs No-Confidence Vote

Hunter stopped short of saying he held Priest personally responsible, instead stating that he would support a no-confidence vote in the redevelopment director. Ehrle said, however, that Priest has too many responsibilities overseeing the city’s redevelopment, planning, building, zoning, and code enforcement divisions.

“It’s overwhelming for one individual to do,” said Ehrle. He added that he would recommend to acting City Manager Bill Simpson that Priest’s responsibilities be divided among other staffers to allow him to concentrate exclusively on the city’s numerous redevelopment projects.

Priest could not be reached for comment Sunday.

The recall movement emerged from a volatile Aug. 11 City Council meeting at which the $2.7-billion Katella redevelopment project was formally abandoned by the city.

The 4,500-acre project could have affected more than 12,500 residences in an area bounded roughly by Santa Ana Street and Ball Road on the north, the city limit on the south, the Santa Ana River on the East and 9th Street on the west.

It was to provide revenue for improvements to area sewers, street and neighborhoods, as well as for improvements in the Anaheim Stadium Business Center development area, which is slated for extensive increases in commercial, industrial and office space over the next 20 years.

Many residents opposed the plan, saying that the redevelopment project benefited mainly big businesses, including Disneyland and the large hotels clustered around the amusement park.