Council Blocks Citywide Vote on Arnel Plan in Costa Mesa

The Costa Mesa City Council late Monday night voted against placing on a citywide ballot a citizens’ group referendum aimed at blocking construction of the Arnel Development Co.’s $90-million Metro Pointe project.

The council voted 4 to 1 against putting the referendum to a citywide vote, and instead voted to seek a Superior Court ruling on the legality of the measure, which was drafted and sponsored by Costa Mesa Residents for Responsible Growth.

“I truly believe that this is a deliberate attempt to thwart the will of the people,” said Bob Cole, one of the more than 5,000 signers of the referendum petition.

During a contentious meeting attended by a mostly hostile audience of about 30 people, the City Council also postponed action on a second referendum, this one on another massive commercial development project. And it was expected to delay action on a citywide slow-growth initiative.

Measures Had Qualified

All three proposed ballot measures had qualified with enough signatures for a citywide vote.

Before acting on the Metro Pointe referendum, the council voted 4 to 1 to postpone until May 16 any action on C.J. Segerstrom & Sons’ controversial 94-acre Home Ranch project, a $400-million complex of offices and retail stores along the San Diego Freeway. The council majority cited a pending court ruling as the reason for delaying a final vote on that measure.

The council late Monday also was expected to delay putting to a citywide vote the Citizens’ Sensible Growth and Traffic Control Initiative, a measure similar to a county initiative to be voted on in June, that ties future development in unincorporated areas to road and public service improvements.

City staff members had recommended circulating the traffic initiative for public review before a council vote.

Members of the citizens’ group argued Monday night that by not immediately placing the measures on the ballot or calling a special election, the council was ignoring the public in favor of developers. But it was the council’s move to throw out the Metro Pointe referendum that drew the harshest criticism.

“I don’t believe the city should step into the shoes of Mr. Arnel,” said Scott Williams, an attorney and member of the citizens’ group. “He wears a pretty big shoe.”

City Atty. Thomas Wood advised the council that the Metro Pointe referendum was an invalid interference with administrative functions of the city, and, therefore, illegal.

Wood’s Argument

Wood said that because the city had rezoned the land in 1984 for commercial development, Metro Pointe could be built. In fact, one phase of Metro Pointe already had been built. The only remaining question then, according to Wood, was whether the proposed second phase met city zoning requirements, an administrative decision, not a matter that could be put to voters by referendum.

Councilman Dave Wheeler, who has consistently opposed both Metro Pointe and Home Ranch, disagreed with Wood’s interpretation. He said the zoning ordinance puts no limit on the density of the Metro Pointe project, and that is something that voters should be able to decide in a referendum.