FULLERTON : Petitioners Dispute Initiative Summary

A group of Fullerton residents filed a lawsuit against the city Wednesday in an attempt to force the city attorney to rewrite his summary of their proposed ballot initiative.

The summary is biased and inaccurate, said Mary B. Homme, president of the Save Our Bastanchury residents group. The case was set for a hearing on March 22 in Orange County Superior Court.

The group was formed last year to stop the widening of a one-mile stretch of Bastanchury Road. But their proposed ballot measure would prevent the city from widening or improving any street if current or predicted traffic noise would rise above the levels outlined in the city’s general plan.

The group’s six-page measure is still in its infancy. Once the group begins circulating the petition, its members must gather about 6,000 signatures to qualify it for the ballot. A majority of Fullerton voters would have to approve it before it can take effect.

City Atty. R.K. (Kerry) Fox’s summary, which must appear at the top of each petition, states that because existing noise on most arterial roads already exceeds the maximum allowed by the initiative, “the practical effect . . . would be to prevent the city from improving traffic circulation and safety on a number of existing arterial streets and highways.”

But that statement isn’t a summary, said Thomas M. Jones, a Costa Mesa attorney who filed the suit. Election law requires Fox to write a summary of the measure, not an analysis, Jones said.

Fox said writing a mere summary of the measure without including its actual effects “does a disservice to voters.”