ORANGE : Referendum Drive May Come Up Short

Organizers for a referendum against the Irvine Co.’s proposed 12,000-home development in east Orange said they feared they might not get the 5,400 signatures needed by the 5 p.m. deadline today.

The drive is expected to fall short about 1,000 signatures, said Dorothy Hudacek, one of the referendum organizers. She said that signature gathering was hampered by rainy weather and “intimidation” by pro-development activists who on occasion confronted organizers and videotaped their efforts.

“We only had 2 1/2 weeks to gather the signatures, and last weekend it rained, so people couldn’t walk the neighborhood,” she said.

Pro-development activist Robert Walters, a homeowner in east Orange, admitted Wednesday that twice he videotaped opponents’ meetings and activities that were being held at a public park. However, he denied confronting organizers.

Walters was instrumental in an agreement reached after years of negotiations between the Rural Orange Coordinating Council, composed of 10 homeowner groups, and the Irvine Co. The compromise aims to preserve the area’s ridgelines, provide miles of horse and jogging trails and help relocate a proposed industrial park, among other things.

The referendum drive has been an emotional issue. To qualify for the June ballot, City Clerk Marilyn Jensen said, organizers need 5,408 signatures from voters in Orange.

Organizers, who had set a goal of 7,000 signatures, began their drive Dec. 30 to protest the City Council’s approval of adopting a General Plan amendment that included the Irvine Co.’s 7,100-acre development.

The proposed development area is in the county. But the amendment would allow annexation later as each phase of the project is completed.

Traffic problems, increased density and fears that the development would jeopardize the city’s quality of life were cited by referendum organizers.

But Mayor Don E. Smith said: “We have held hundreds of meetings on this development in the past 3 1/2 years. I do feel they have a right to a referendum, (but) they also have had many opportunities to express their opinions at our meetings.”