Dana Point Wins Again in Battle for Coastal Area

Dana Point once again has won the battle over a lucrative one-mile stretch of Pacific coastline.

A county agency Wednesday, after hearing four hours of testimony, decided to stick with its original decision to let the residents of coastal Laguna Niguel become part of the proposed city of Dana Point/Capistrano Beach--which is their preference.

In a meeting attended by about 400 residents, the Local Agency Formation Commission voted 3 to 0, leaving the proposed city of Laguna Niguel to fight in court if it wants to stake its historic claim to that part of the coast.

Lafco--the agency that recommends incorporation proposals to the Board of Supervisors--scheduled Wednesday’s meeting to re-hear public testimony for the proposed incorporations on the advice of Lafco’s legal counsel.

Election Endorsed

By its action, Lafco is recommending that the Board of Supervisors schedule an election for June 7 for residents in Dana Point, Capistrano Beach and coastal Laguna Niguel to vote on incorporating as one city.

But leaders of inland Laguna Niguel said they hope to thwart that election and fight in court for what is historically theirs.

“We’re going to go to the mat on this one,” Niguel leader Bruce Rasner said after the meeting. “I think Dana Point is celebrating a little early. Now we will seek all the available remedies in court.”

Three weeks ago, commissioners decided they would re-conduct public hearings on both cityhood proposals. Niguel leaders say they were not legally notified of a Dec. 2 meeting when Lafco discussed the coastal strip and gave it to Dana Point. The Brown Act requires governmental agencies to provide public notice of meetings.

Lafco officials once again spoke of their commitment to uphold the results of a Nov. 2 advisory election, when 61% of the coastal area residents voted to incorporate with Dana Point, rather than remain within the proposed city of Laguna Niguel.

Commissioners said Wednesday that they had a difficult time making their decision, having fielded hundreds of telephone calls from residents in all the affected areas.

“Unfortunately, you’re not a tube sock and one size isn’t going to fit all of you,” Commissioner Evelyn Hart told the audience.

Lafco chairman Donald Holt said the vote may only have been advisory, but the commission can’t ignore an election after 65% of the 3,444 voters in the area went to the polls.

Although 400 people overflowed the meeting room in the county’s administration building in Santa Ana, they were relatively quiet compared to a Nov. 18 meeting where hundreds of Laguna Niguel supporters showed up with banners and led cheers before the commission.

Nearly 30 people spoke before the commission Wednesday, each staking some claim to the coastal area, which consists of 13 exclusive gated communities and subdivisions between South Laguna and Dana Point, ending at Del Avion in the east. It also includes the lucrative Ritz-Carlton Hotel, representing about $2.5 million annually in revenue.

Robert W. Moore, who lives in the coastal community of Monarch Bay Terrace, told Lafco that he and his neighbors “are not just a few dissidents in the coast, and we will not be badgered or forced to become part of Laguna Niguel just so some developer’s slogan . . . can be realized.”

He was referring to the “Sea Country” slogan, which developers have used for 20 years to promote Laguna Niguel’s access to the coast.

Newport Beach attorney Alex Bowie, representing Laguna Niguel, handed the commissioners letters written by planners and engineers with the original developer of the area, the Laguna Niguel Corp., who stated that the community historically was planned with an ocean orientation.

“It (Sea Country) is not just developers’ hype, it’s been there as a matter of law,” Bowie told the commission.

But Dana Point’s Mike Eggers reminded commissioners that the coastal residents had spoken through a legal election.

“The fat lady has sung,” Eggers said, “and while Laguna Niguel may not have liked the tune, the voters of the coastal zone--not Dana Point, not Capistrano Beach and not inland Laguna Niguel--brought the curtain down on that opera.”

Lafco continued Laguna Niguel’s proposal--now without the coast--until its meeting Feb. 3, when it will discuss with Laguna Niguel’s petitioners what to do with the remaining proposal. The original plan called for a city that would stretch from South Laguna to Dana Point bounded by the San Diego Freeway and the ocean.

“I don’t know what they accomplished today, but that they listened to everybody. Listening is not enough,” said Rasner, adding that the group’s attorneys will be working on their next legal step.

Rasner said his group will try to stall Dana Point’s election, “or at least put a cloud over the results of any election.”

The Laguna Niguel task force already has filed a lawsuit against Lafco for alleged violations of the California Government Code, which requires Lafco to consider how an incorporation will affect the areas adjacent to the proposed city.

The inland residents also claim that the boundaries for the advisory election were arbitrarily decided and that the entire Laguna Niguel community should have been allowed to vote.

But Eggers believes Laguna Niguel doesn’t have any legal recourse after Wednesday’s meeting.

“The way (Wednesday’s) hearing was held made sure every technical avenue that could be attacked legally has been addressed, and I’m looking forward to voting on June 7,” Eggers said.

Chairman Holt said he would rather not see taxpayers’ money wasted in court.

“I hope Laguna Niguel will return at the next meeting with the intent of moving ahead toward incorporation,” Holt said after the meeting.