Orange County Executives Split on Growth Initiative

Orange County business leaders have emerged as surprisingly strong backers of the proposed slow-growth initiative, with nearly half of the chief executives participating in a recent survey supporting the measure even though they believe it will hurt business.

The survey by UC Irvine showed that 46% of the corporate leaders questioned about the initiative supported it, while 54% were opposed.

The study also found that 74% of the executives questioned believe that passage of the initiative will result in “a more desirable community.”

A total of 144 executives were questioned about the initiative as part of a larger survey of the business attitudes of chief executives of 190 of the county’s largest employers.

The “nearly equal” split between supporters and opponents of the measure was found in all business sectors, from manufacturing to construction, said Jone Pearce, an associate professor of administration. Pearce’s study was conducted from September through December.

Pearce said the survey points to a widespread belief among business leaders that the measure would improve the quality of life in Orange County.

That belief, she said, appears to override many executives’ concerns about the initiative’s potential impact on the business climate.

Some Orange County business leaders contacted Friday said the survey shows that the interests of the community are a top priority. Others said they were bothered by the apparent business support for the slow-growth initiative.

“I live here. I’ve got a kid in school. So I’ve got an obvious interest in the community, in education,” said Henry Schielein, general manager of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Laguna Niguel. Schielein said he generally supports the objectives of the slow-growth measure.

But Frank J. Feitz, president of American Businessphones in Irvine, said he was disappointed in the business community support for the movement.

“I’m surprised that so many business people would be in favor of this,” Feitz said. “The growth issue affects us all. Construction is important to real estate, which is important to service businesses.”

Neither Schielein nor Feitz participated in the UCI study.

Negative Impact

Almost all of the survey respondents agreed that the measure will have some negative impact on business.

And while the initiative would tie new development in the county to improvements in the transportation system, only 50% of the business executives said they believe the measure will help reduce traffic congestion.

Supporters hope to qualify the initiative for the June ballot. If approved, it would take effect in 1989.

Pearce said the executives not only have their businesses in Orange County, they also live here. As a result, many apparently are willing to give up a certain measure of business opportunity in return for what they believe will be an improved living environment.

Property Value Rise Seen

Additionally, most of the executives interviewed own homes in Orange County, and some own business properties as well. Fully 90% of the respondents said they believe passage of the measure will increase property values in the county.

In all, 190 business leaders, most of them chief executive officers of their companies, were interviewed in the UCI study, part of the university’s 1988 Orange County Business and Economic Studies program. Only 144 were questioned about the slow-growth measure because the others said they did not know about it.

In answering other questions about the measure and its anticipated impact, 85% of the respondents said they believe it will reduce the total amount of housing available in the county, and 79% said it will decrease the amount of affordable or moderate-income housing. That means, said 78% of the respondents, that the pool of available employees in the county will shrink.

Additionally, 61% said passage of the measure would make it more difficult for them to expand their businesses within the county, and 57% said it would reduce the number of customers for their products. Meanwhile, 55%--heavily clustered in the retail, service and construction sectors--said it would decrease their sales.

Business Competition

Only 34% of the respondents said approval of the initiative would cause them to change their business plans. And 63%--again heavily clustered in the retail and service trades--said passage of the measure would reduce their business competition by making it harder for new business to start here.

Opponents of the proposal have argued that its passage would be severely damaging to the county’s economy.

And while a previous UCI-sponsored survey showed that the general populace supports the slow-growth measure by a nearly 4-1 margin, the general perception seems to have been that the county’s business community largely opposed it, Pearce said.

Backers of the proposed slow-growth initiative saw the UCI study as a welcome boost. “That’s very encouraging. . . . It supports what we have felt all along,” said Gregory Hile, the Tustin attorney who helped draft the initiative.

Fear of Ostracism

“I have talked to a lot of people, including developers and bankers, and they tell me privately that they support the initiative but that they can’t come out publicly because of fear of being ostracized in their profession.”

Hile also said he believes that backers of the initiative, formally titled the Citizens’ Sensible Growth and Traffic Control Amendment, have now collected the 66,000 signatures needed to qualify it for the ballot. Workers are gathering additional signatures as a “fudge factor” to cover signatures that are disqualified for various reasons, he said.

Brea businessman Wayne Wedin, a leader of the move to defeat the measure, said Friday that the findings of the UCI survey do not surprise him “because they only show the general temper of people based on the information they had at the time” the questions were asked.

Intensifying Campaign

“What this tells me is that we have a lot of work to do . . . to make sure that people have information from both sides,” Wedin said.

John Erskine, executive director of the county chapter of the Building Industry Assn., agreed with Wedin.

The association, he said, opposes the measure but knows “that not everybody in our industry is on board. . . . We clearly recognize the work we’ve got to do to educate our industry and then the entire business community.”

Times staff writer John Charles Tighe contributed to this story.