Dukakis Wraps It Up; Measure A Defeated : Slow-Growth Chief: Spread Is ‘Too Great’

The leader of Orange County’s controversial slow-growth initiative conceded defeat late Tuesday after a count of votes in more than three-fourths of the precincts showed Measure A losing heavily.

“No question, we’re going to lose,” said a disappointed Tom Rogers, co-founder of the group that sponsored the Citizens’ Sensible Growth and Traffic Control Initiative.

“There’s no way we’re going to pick that up,” he said, referring to the large margin against the initiative in north Orange County.

“The disparity is too great. . . . The money (spent by opponents) bought the confusion. It was one election that was purchased.”

“It’s going to be tough, that’s for sure,” said UCI professor Mark Baldassare, who conducted pre-election polls for The Times. “The opponents succeeded in getting a message to people that this may not be the solution to traffic problems in Orange County. . . . The real problem in the last month is that the initiative backers were not able to reach people after they were bombarded with information against the initiative.”

Initiative supporters were watching the returns on television at the Red Lion Inn in Costa Mesa.

But Lynn R. Wessell, campaign manager for Citizens for Traffic Solutions, the main anti-initiative group, said, “We got our message across and we won.”

Meanwhile, a similar slow-growth measure in the city of Seal Beach was running at nearly a dead heat, with most of the precincts counted. Voters in San Clemente were approving their own slow-growth ordinance. There were 75 people gathered at the “No on A” headquarters in an office building near John Wayne Airport. Among those munching pizza and cheering as results came in were Santa Margarita Co. President Tony Moiso and Building Industry Assn. Executive Director John Erskine.

Considered one of the most far-reaching growth-control measures proposed in the nation, the county initiative would have tied future growth to the ability of developers to meet strict traffic, flood-control, parks and public-safety standards.

The stakes were so high that opponents outspent backers more than 33 to 1, garnering nearly $2 million compared to the $48,000 raised by supporters. Most of the opposition money came from major south county developers such as the Irvine Co., Mission Viejo Co. and Santa Margarita Co.

The money helped fuel a hard-fought, months-long boisterous campaign that deluged voters with a flurry of mailed material, radio commercials and news conferences.

The initiative was sponsored by an unusual coalition of conservative Republicans, such as former county GOP chairman Rogers, and liberal Democrats, such as Irvine Mayor Larry Agran.

They argued that the initiative was necessary because the Board of Supervisors routinely approves developers’ projects over the objections of residents concerned about the quality of life.

Developers countered that the initiative would reduce construction jobs and weaken the economy. They also charged that the initiative would slow efforts already under way to build new roads and planned toll ways.

But from the beginning, the issue was always traffic.

With polls showing that Orange County residents rank traffic as the county’s worst problem, more than 96,000 registered voters signed petitions between August and February to get the Citizens Sensible Growth And Traffic Control Initiative on the ballot.

Early public opinion surveys showed that the initiative, little-understood by many voters, commanded a 73% voter approval rating.

But after hedging for several months, Orange County’s developers and builders decided that too much was at stake in the election to ignore it.

With ads proclaiming that the initiative will cost billions, raise taxes and make traffic worse, Citizens for Traffic Solutions--the main opposition group--was able to cut the initiative’s lead substantially.

In a poll taken in mid-May, voter support for the measure was pegged at 54%, with much of the shift going to the undecided ranks.

Each side accused the other of sending fraudulent campaign messages to voters.

The Building Industry Assn. earlier this year filed a lawsuit in an unsuccessful bid to keep the measure off the ballot.

While voters went to the polls Tuesday, county officials were completing a contingency plan that assumed a Measure A victory.

Under the plan, county officials this morning would begin to distribute a new information packet to developers who seek approvals for their projects. Any project that would obviously fail to meet the initiative’s standards would be sent back to the drawing board.

A second part of the plan involves a meeting today of an 11-member, ad-hoc citizens advisory committee created by county supervisors in March. The panel, chaired by former Supervisor Bruce Nestande, is supposed to continue working on a “safety-net” growth-management program that would take over in the event of the initiative’s demise either at the polls or in court.

The “safety-net” proposal, similar to Measure A, is not yet completed.

Meanwhile, the cities of Laguna Beach, Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach will vote on slow-growth initiatives in November and in San Juan Capistrano next April.

The success of the signature-gathering and the intense frustration shown by motorists has already changed how the county will deal with future growth.

Said Board of Supervisors Chairman Harriett M. Wieder before Tuesday’s vote on the initiative, win or lose: “We will work to ensure the integrity of the initiative . . . so that the goals of the initiative will be achieved.”

Times staff writers Dianne Klein and Michael Flagg contributed to this report.