Slow-Growth Foes Appeal Pro-Initiative Court Decision

The Building Industry Assn. of Southern California and its allies fired another shot at the Orange County slow-growth initiative Wednesday, this time asking the state Court of Appeal in Santa Ana to knock the measure off the June 7 primary ballot.

That request was an appeal of Superior Court Judge John C. Woolley’s ruling Tuesday that the initiative should stay on the ballot.

In documents filed late Wednesday afternoon, the builders asked for a ruling from the 4th District Court of Appeal by Friday, without a formal hearing. Sample ballots that are to be sent to county voters before the primary are to be printed by mid-April.

The appeal drew a strong response from supporters of the initiative.

“They’re certainly persistent in their desire to take away citizens’ right to vote,” said Tom Rogers, a leader of the slow-growth movement. “It’s incredible to me that they’ve pursued it this far, and I predict a strong voter backlash because of it.”

“We are not attacking the people’s rights,” Don Steffensen, president of the Building Industry Assn. of Southern California, said in a written statement. “We are simply using the correct procedures to prevent an action that seems so clearly unconstitutional.

“And we want to do this in all the appropriate ways available in our free society. We would hope that everyone in our community, even those with different opinions, would support our right to proceed.”

Nevertheless, the builders are said to be privately pessimistic about the chances for their appeal. But they say that, should voters pass the initiative, they also intend to pursue court action against it again after the June election.

Polls show that voters, frustrated with traffic jams, overwhelmingly favor the initiative.

The measure, known as the Citizens Sensible Growth and Traffic Control Initiative, would link new development to traffic flow and acceptable levels of public services in unincorporated areas of the county.

It was put on the ballot after slow-growth activists gathered nearly 96,000 signatures in a petition effort that ended in February.

The builders have argued that the measure would pose an unconstitutionally harsh restriction on the rights of property owners and therefore should not even be on the ballot. They also said the initiative would shut down construction in the county in violation of state regulations on building moratoriums.

But in a six-page opinion issued Tuesday, Woolley wrote that he found those arguments “less than persuasive.”

Previous court decisions say that if an initiative’s language isn’t clearly unconstitutional or contrary to state law, it should stay on the ballot, Woolley said.

Belinda Blacketer, a lawyer for the citizens group sponsoring the initiative, said she believes it is unlikely that the appellate court will agree to rule on the case.

The BIA of Southern California, the Orange County Chamber of Commerce and the Commercial Industrial Development Assn. earlier this month filed the lawsuit that led to Tuesday’s ruling. It was filed against the citizens group that gathered the petition signatures, the registrar of voters and the Board of Supervisors, which voted to put the initiative on the ballot after the successful petition effort.

Both the board and the registrar have remained neutral, however, refusing to defend the initiative in court.

Another developer, a partnership called Marblehead, which has sued the city of San Clemente over the same issues, had its case incorporated into the builders’ suit earlier and also filed an appeal Wednesday.

Lawyers for the two groups of plaintiffs did not return phone calls Wednesday.