County Puts Its Final OK on Gypsum Canyon as Jail Site

The Board of Supervisors cast a final vote Wednesday designating Gypsum Canyon as the site for a new Orange County jail, despite protests from area residents and the cities of Anaheim and Yorba Linda.

The 3-2 majority, identical to the original vote to select Gypsum Canyon for a jail in 1987, had been expected by opponents. Only four people spoke during the public hearing, and there was none of the sign-waving or chanting that accompanied previous decisions.

“I feel the whole process was basically set in concrete,” said Rick Violett, president of Taxpayers for a Centralized Jail, a group that has qualified an initiative for the June, 1990, ballot aimed at preventing construction of the Gypsum Canyon jail.

‘No Matter What’

“You knew it, I knew it; no matter what happened, it was going to go through,” Violett said.

Wednesday’s vote approving the environmental impact report represents the final government approval needed in designating the site for a massive, 6,720-bed jail--double the capacity of the county’s three existing jails. But significant hurdles for the project are certain to delay the start of construction for at least a year and possibly much longer.

The vote cleared the way for opponents to file suit, and officials on both sides of the issue said they expect that to happen within 30 days. Also, county officials don’t know how they are going to pay the construction costs, estimated at more than $700 million. They are hoping that voters will pass a half-cent sales tax on the June, 1990, ballot.

As before, Supervisors Gaddi H. Vasquez, whose district includes the jail site, and Don R. Roth, who represents adjacent Anaheim, voted against the jail. Supervisors Thomas F. Riley, Roger R. Stanton and Harriett M. Wieder approved the environmental impact report as well as a provision to rezone the area, now open space, for a public facility.

“I am concerned that the county is committing itself to build a white elephant,” Vasquez said at the meeting. “I still have some serious concerns. . . . I guess what the EIR is saying is, ‘Don’t worry, be happy.’ ”

Riley said, “I really sincerely do believe Gypsum Canyon is the best. . . . I think it has been a fair hearing; they’re going to sue us, but I’m sure they would sue us if we had the good Lord do the EIR.”

Opponents criticized the environmental impact report for saying the jail would have little or no effect on crime, property values or traffic in the surrounding communities.

Pierce O’Donnell, an attorney representing Anaheim, said, “This is the worst environmental impact report I’ve read in 11 years of environmental law practice.”

‘See You in June’

O’Donnell noted that the county has recently lost court decisions on its environmental impact reports for two other proposed jail projects.

A frustrated Violett said: “If the intent of the board is to approve this EIR whether it is flawed or not, so be it. We will see you in June,” when the citizens initiative and the half-cent sales tax are expected to be on the ballot, along with elections of three of the five supervisors.

Opponents also complained that county officials were trying to rush the project through the approval process because they reduced the time allowed for public review of the thick environmental document from the normal 45 days to 30 days--even though the report took two years to prepare.

County officials said they legally shortened the review time because the supervisors had to vote before a deadline on legislation pending in Sacramento that would authorize a half-cent sales tax to pay for the jail.

O’Donnell still charged that the reduction in review time was illegal. He lashed out at the supervisors: “It’s a sad day when lawmakers become lawbreakers. We have no doubt you’ll be hauled into court.”

Maximum Capacity of 9,024

Clearly angered by the statement, Board of Supervisors Chairman Riley told O’Donnell his time for comment had ended, saying, “If you don’t want me to get a sheriff here, you better wind up.”

Under orders from a judge, the environmental impact report also included an analysis of the jail’s impact if it became overcrowded. The report said the facility would be built to hold 6,720 inmates, but in overcrowded conditions its maximum capacity could be 9,024.

In such circumstances, the report also said, the jail might be forced to release up to 500 prisoners per day from the Gypsum Canyon site, even though the supervisors have ordered that all inmates be released through the Santa Ana jail.

County officials and Riley said the plan shouldn’t be judged by such extraordinary conditions. But Violett said, “All it takes is a 3-2 vote any time in the future and (Gypsum Canyon) becomes a release site.”

Roth added, “There could be 500 pretty hard-core inmates wandering around Anaheim Hills trying to hitchhike on the freeway.”

Orange County has had a serious jail overcrowding problem for more than 10 years. At one point, a federal judge ordered the sheriff and supervisors held in contempt of court for not resolving the problem. The county still is operating its main jail under a population limit set by the judge.

Project Already Year Behind

Following the judge’s orders, which were prompted by a suit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the supervisors approved several jail expansion projects. Gypsum Canyon is the cornerstone of those future plans.

Construction on the Gypsum Canyon jail was expected to start as early as last spring, with the first phase opening in 1991. But largely due to the problem with financing the construction, the project is already more than a year behind schedule.

The Orange County Grand Jury recommended recently that the supervisors not spend any more money on the project until they acquire the land from the Irvine Co., which has been reluctant to sell. So far, the county has spent $7 million preparing the Gypsum Canyon plans.

“We are not really prepared to take this action today,” Roth said. “I hope we will stop and take a breath today and that breath is common sense.”

SIZING UP THE PROPOSED JAIL The proposed county jail in Gypsum Canyon: Capacity: 6,720 under normal conditions; 9,024 under crowded conditions Cost: more than $700 million for construction; $90 million per year to operate Size: 225-acre facility, 2,000 acres affected; 3.98 million square feet in building Employees: 3,426 under normal conditions; 4,698 under crowded conditions Current county jail capacity: 3,199 rated beds. Jail population on Aug. 13: 4,597 THE ARGUMENTS By proponents and opponents of the proposed Gypsum Canyon jail

PRO: Existing county jails are severely overcrowded, and projections show a need for more than 7,000 more spaces for inmates over the next 20 years. Gypsum Canyon is a “remote site,” where a jail would have the least impact on residential areas. CON: Buses carrying prisoners from jail to the courts in Santa Ana and elsewhere will add to congestion on the Riverside Freeway. Crime in the area might increase, or an inmate might escape. Property values will suffer. The Irvine Co., which owns the site, is reluctant to sell. WHAT SUPERVISORS HAD TO SAY ABOUT ACTION ON NEW JAIL

Harriett M. Wieder

“There would not be any good place for landfills, jails, dog parks whatever. A jail is needed in this county. There’s a history of jails being built in the heart of an urban community, and this is certainly not an urban area.”

Thomas F. Riley

“I really sincerely do believe Gypsum Canyon is the best. I think it’s been a fair hearing. They’re going to sue us, but I’m sure they would sue us if we had the good Lord do the EIR.”

Roger R. Stanton

“To not continue now would open up this board to criticism which may in fact be justified. I don’t think we’d be left anywhere if we denied the action today; I think we’d be out of alternatives all together.”

Don R. Roth

“We are not really prepared to take this action today. I hope we will stop and take a breath today and that breath is common sense.”

Gaddi H. Vasquez

“I am concerned that the county is committing itself to build a white elephant. I still have some serious concerns. . . . I guess what the EIR is saying is, ‘Don’t worry, be happy.’ ”