Mission Viejo Nears Vote on Cityhood As Debate Rages

“I (love) Mission Viejo” stickers are pasted proudly on the bumpers of cars that wind through this orderly community carved out of the Santa Ana foothills.

The innocuous slogan is being used as a rallying cry for both sides of a battle that’s been raging in Mission Viejo for years. Should it become a city?

Residents agree on one thing: they like their community the way it is. They just can’t agree on how to keep it that way.

Voters in the community of about 64,000 will take to the polls Nov. 3 to decide if they want to become the 27th city in Orange County and the first to incorporate since Irvine did in 1971.

They also will cast votes for their first city council members, who would take over March 31, 1988, should incorporation measure Proposition M pass with a simple majority of the vote. Twelve candidates are running for five seats on the council.

Fear of Higher Taxes

Backers of incorporation--an idea that has been floating around Mission Viejo for years--cite the enhanced prestige cityhood would bring, along with the belief it will provide a more responsive form of government.

The opposition believes incorporation is a costly vanity, that creating a municipal structure on such a narrow base will inevitably lead to higher taxes.

Incorporation and annexation are on the minds of many south county residents whose communities are seeking independence from county government, including Saddleback Valley to the north, and Capistrano Beach, Dana Point and Laguna Niguel to the west.

If incorporation in Mission Viejo succeeds, proponents believe it will set a precedent for other south county communities.

The proposed city of Mission Viejo would be in the boundaries of the planned community, which covers about 18 square miles. It stretches east from Interstate 5 to El Toro Road, west to O’Neill Regional Park, north to the Rancho Trabuco Grant line, and south to San Juan Capistrano.

The Mission Viejo Co. has been carving out this community since the county approved its development plan in 1965. It is expected to be completed by the mid-1990s.

Wanted Petition

“When the build-out comes, the population will rise to about 90,000 people, so it’s inevitable that this area is going to be incorporated and if they think it isn’t then somebody’s smoking grass,” said George Kopf, a member of Mission Viejo Citizens for Cityhood.

But others believe that Mission Viejo would be better off incorporating into a larger Saddleback Valley city, or not incorporating at all.

“Most people move to Mission Viejo to get away from cities. I know I did,” said Val Secarea, of the No City Committee.

Secarea and other members of the No City Committee have charged that Mission Viejo Community Services District board members spearheaded the incorporation drive and are making false promises for personal political benefit. Four of the five board members are running for city council.

The No City Committee contends that the CSD board should have petitioned residents, rather than proposing incorporation through a board resolution.

Mission Viejans voted in 1985 to form the Mission Viejo Community Services District, which took over some services formerly provided by the county. The district received a share of Mission Viejo property taxes to operate and maintain parks and recreation, street lighting, roadway slopes and medians, street sweeping, streets, and undergrounding of public utilities.

The incorporation resolution was one of the CSD board’s first actions at the request of the Mission Viejo Incorporation Feasibility Study Committee, a private group of citizens who paid about $8,000 for an independent study to determine if incorporation was viable for the planned community.

The consulting firm of Christensen and Wallace Inc. of Oceanside concluded that incorporation would be “imminently feasible.” So with study in hand, the CSD brought its proposal to the county’s Local Agency Formation Commission, the agency that reviews and recommends proposals for incorporation. The commission and the Board of Supervisors subsequently approved the proposal--now known as Proposition M--for the Nov. 3 ballot.

Under state law, a community can seek incorporation either by a governing board resolution or by petition. The cityhood group sought the faster process of a board resolution because filing for incorporation by March 1, 1987, would save the new city money.

On Jan. 1, a new state law went into effect that essentially puts a double burden on new cities by having them reimburse the county for municipal services while not receiving the property tax to pay for these services.

The Board of Supervisors voted to waive the law for two months to give communities a chance to file for incorporation before allowing the law to take effect.

But those opposed to cityhood contend that there was not enough community input for the incorporation proposal.

“There was no poll, no vote, no referendum, nothing at all from the people. They went ahead without the will of the people,” said Arthur Katz of the No City Committee.

The cityhood proposal could have been stopped with a petition signed by 50% of Mission Viejo’s 32,980 registered voters when it went before the Board of Supervisors in July. But Katz said there wasn’t an organized effort against incorporation at that time.

Not Enough Signatures

There was a move to have on the ballot a proposal for a larger Saddleback Valley city, which would have included Mission Viejo, plus the communities of El Toro, Laguna Hills, Aegean Hills and Lake Forest. Organizers believed that a larger city would provide a better tax base, but they were unable to get the 17,000 signatures necessary for a formal challenge.

Denis Horn, the only CSD board member who is not running for city council, defended the board’s intentions for incorporation during a recent community forum.

At the same time the Mission Viejo cityhood group asked the board to sponsor the resolution, proponents of a larger Saddleback Valley city asked the board for its support. Horn said the board wasn’t necessarily opposed to a larger city, but that the feasibility study was completed for Mission Viejo only, and no study was completed for a city with a larger scope.

“It also was the mood of Mission Viejo residents to go for a city,” Horn said.

The feasibility study concluded that if Mission Viejo had been a city in 1985-86, it would have had revenue of $17.6 million, costs of $11.3 million and $6.3 million in reserves.

The study also projects the proposed city’s first complete fiscal year of 1988-89 would see $19.3 million in revenues, $15.9 million in costs, for a $3.4 million in reserves. But opponents take issue with the study’s figures for the interim fiscal year 1987-88.

Christensen and Wallace based figures for 1987-88 on the assumption that Mission Viejo would become a city on Dec. 1, 1987. However, the Board of Supervisors instead called for a March 31, 1988, start-up date, decreasing the windfall the city would have received from sales and other taxes. (The county continues to collect property taxes during the transition period.)

Under state law, if a community incorporates, the county continues to provide municipal services until the end of that fiscal year, June 30, 1988, in Mission Viejo’s case.

If Proposition M passes, the Mission Viejo City Council would officially take over as the governing body on March 31, 1988, and would have three months, to June 30, to organize the city’s administration and prepare for transfer of services.

The Community Services District would dissolve and would transfer an estimated $3 million in surplus income from self-insurance retention funds, contingencies and reserves and funds set aside to build the second phase of a community center.

May Collect Taxes

During the transition year, the new city is entitled to begin collecting sales and other taxes. However, under state law the city must adopt an ordinance and present it to the state Board of Equalization in order to begin collecting the taxes, which is about a two-week process, proponents said. Since the taxes are collected on a quarterly basis, the city would not have enough time to file for collecting the taxes by the beginning of the second quarter April 1.

Opponents see it as losing $3 million, but cityhood backers were looking at the tax money as a windfall and do not consider it a loss.

“It (1987-88) is going to be a bastard year any way you look at it,” proponent Kopf said.

As a city, Mission Viejo would become responsible for municipal services including police protection, traffic control and accident investigation, animal control, planning and land use regulation, building and safety, drainage channel maintenance, and street construction and maintenance.

According to the proposal filed with the county, the city of Mission Viejo intends to be a contract city, meaning it will contract with other agencies for certain municipal services, including the county for police protection, flood control, transit and library services. Fire protection and water services would continue to come from local district agencies.

If incorporation fails, Mission Viejo will continue to function as it presently does.

MISSION VIEJO CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES

If Measure M passes with a majority vote, Mission Viejo would become a city, and five of the 12 candidates would become the first City Council. The 12 candidates are:

Robert D. Breton, left, 42, deputy attorney general for the California Department of Justice. Married, two children. Eleven-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Mission Viejo Community Services District Board and the Municipal Advisory Council. Goal: To implement long-range planning, more police protection and more parks.

William S. Craycraft, center, 44, sales and marketing manager, DCP Inc., aerospace materials manufacturer. Married, four children. Fourteen-year Mission Viejo resident. Chairman, Mission Viejo Incorporation Feasibility Study Committee. Goal: Ensure that the new City Council will not increase taxes or impose user fees.

Robert A. Curtis, 32, attorney. Married, two children. Twenty-year Mission Viejo resident. Former President Reagan appointee to the U.S. Justice Department. Goal: To make crime-fighting a budgetary priority and prevent tax increases.

Wanda Driskill, left, 49, education professor, National University. Married, two children. Nine-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Mission Viejo Municipal Advisory Council Planning Committee. Goal: To provide better traffic control, increased police protection, and prevent tax increases.

Barry Gilmore, center, 51, manager, private computer software, accounting and consulting business. Married, three children, two grandchildren. Eight-year Mission Viejo resident. Director and treasurer, Oso Valley Greenbelt Assn. Goal: Opposed to cityhood, would work to discourage extraneous political regulations and ordinances.

Victoria C. Jaffe, 40, vice president/chief financial officer branch office State Farm Insurance Co. Married, two children. Nine-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Mission Viejo Community Services District Board and the Municipal Advisory Council. Goal: To evaluate impact of development on traffic problems and increase park and recreation services.

Christian W. Keena, left, 40, attorney. Married, one child. Eight-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Mission Viejo Community Services District Board and the Municipal Advisory Council. Goal: To prevent tax increases and work toward preserving and improving park and recreation services.

Norman P. Murray, center, 69, businessman, Murray Supply in Huntington Beach. Married, three children. Seventeen-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Mission Viejo Community Services District Board and the Municipal Advisory Council. Goal: To prevent an increase in taxes and maintain a balanced budget.

Werner R. Raes, 35, detective, Anaheim Police Department. Married, two children. Four-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Orange County/Los Angeles County Burglary Investigators Assn. and the Anaheim Police Assn. Goal: To formulate a master plan to stimulate new business interests in Mission Viejo.

Robert H. Silverman, left, 42, investigator, Orange County Marshal’s Department. Married. Four-year Mission Viejo resident. Member, Assn. of Deputy Marshals of Orange County and California State Marshals Assn. Goal: To ensure adequate police protection and ease transportation problems.

Reid D. Steinbauer, center, 33, manufacturers field representative, Nordson Corp. Six-month Mission Viejo resident. Married, expecting first child. Goal: To have better traffic control and develop ways to cut municipal services costs.

Gary M. Tucker, 38, telemarketing sales representative, Caster and Wheel Co. of Orange. Four-year Mission Viejo resident. Married, two children. Former member, Santa Ana Human Relations Commission, and Santa Ana Mayor’s Transportation Committee. Goal: Against cityhood, plans to look at the options for annexing other areas of the nearby community to prevent duplication of services.