400 From Laguna Niguel Protest for Coastal Strip

Laguna Niguel residents--many of them dressed in red, white and blue, and toting signs and balloons--made the trek north to Santa Ana on Wednesday afternoon to tell the county that they want to be a city with a coast.

Sheriff’s deputies were called to control the nearly 400 people who packed the hearing room at the county Hall of Administration and frequently interrupted the meeting with applause and shouts of “We want to vote!” and “What about the rest of the people?”

At one point, County Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, who sits on the Local Agency Formation Commission holding the meeting, threatened to call the sheriff to have some of the more vocal demonstrators removed.

“You’re doing yourselves a disservice in my case,” he said.

The issue that caused the confrontation was a Nov. 3 advisory election in which residents of Laguna Niguel’s coastal strip, by a 65.5% margin, decided that they wanted to join the proposed coastal city of Dana Point to the south rather than remain part of the effort to incorporate with inland portions of Laguna Niguel.

“Was (a house with) an ocean view required to participate in the vote?” Richard Arduino asked the commission.

“All the residents are united to protect the coast, and we should work together to accomplish our common goals. We did not move to a metropolis but to ‘sea country,’ and now we may all end up to be losers . . . with no incorporation whatsoever and no local control.”

Several Laguna Niguel residents carried signs produced on personal computers with such slogans as “A more perfect union: freeway to coast.”

Before the meeting, one Laguna Niguel cityhood proponent led the crowd in cheers beginning with “Give me an L!” to spell out Laguna Niguel, and ending with chants of “Sea country, sea country!”

The phrase “sea country” has long been used by developers and real estate agents in Laguna Niguel to promote the seaside community.

The five-member commission--which recommends incorporation proposals to the Orange County Board of Supervisors--had scheduled the special meeting Wednesday to consider the advisory election results and to decide the boundaries for the proposed cities of Laguna Niguel and Dana Point.

But after two hours of public testimony and commission discussion, LAFC voted, 4-1, to postpone its recommendation for Laguna Niguel’s boundaries until May to allow time for financial feasibility studies to be completed.

The proposal before the commission is for a city of Laguna Niguel that includes the coastal area, stretching from the Pacific Ocean to Interstate 5 between Laguna Beach to the north and Dana Point to the south.

On several occasions, the commissioners had to ask the crowd to refrain from shouting and applauding.

At one point, LAFC Acting Chairman Donald A. Holt was telling his fellow commissioners that they should adhere to the vote of the people in the advisory election area, which prompted the crowd to boo and hiss.

“This is a fraud!” someone in the audience shouted.

Larry Porter, president of the Laguna Niguel Community Council, said after the meeting that if the commission comes back in May and recommends an inland city of Laguna Niguel for the November ballot, it will be a waste of the taxpayers’ time and money, because it would be defeated at the polls.

“The point that people are missing is that if they (LAFC members) proposed a Laguna Niguel without the coast, it’s a proposal that’s an orphan--there’s not support for that,” Porter said.

In May, LAFC called for the special advisory election after an informal poll of coastal Laguna Niguel residents showed that a majority would prefer to be incorporated with Dana Point. LAFC determined the voting area to stretch from Camino del Avion in the east to the Pacific Ocean and from Chula Vista Avenue south to the northern end of Emerald Ridge community.

The Laguna Niguel residents who packed Wednesday’s meeting said they thought the advisory election was unfair because they were not permitted to vote.

But the commissioners said they planned to take the advisory vote as a mandate, although they called for financial feasibility studies before they would approve a Laguna Niguel incorporation election without the coast.

The coastal strip--which includes the Ritz-Carlton luxury hotel--represents $2.5 million in revenues.

Holt voted against the motion to postpone action because “we’d be doing a disservice to Dana Point” by not being able to include the Laguna Niguel coastal strip in Dana Point’s incorporation boundaries.

In separate action, the commission voted to postpone any boundary decision on Dana Point until the next LAFC meeting, Dec. 2, because the community first needs approval from the state Lands Commission, which is scheduled to hear the proposal today.

Commissioner Roger R. Stanton told Dana Point’s representatives that the commission may still decide in December to postpone the Dana Point decision until May, along with the Laguna Niguel decision.

Dana Point cityhood proponents were dismayed by the delay. Spokeswoman Judy Curreri reminded the commission that in the time from May to the November election, Dana Point had completed financial studies for a city with or without the advisory vote area. She also said cityhood proponents have always been willing to proceed with their original proposal of a Dana Point city without the Laguna Niguel coast.

Both Dana Point and Laguna Niguel cityhood proponents had been looking toward April, 1988, incorporation elections.