Canyon Bond and Schools Generate Heat : Measure H is expected to bring a huge Laguna Beach turnout--perhaps 85%--on the $20-million proposal aimed at preserving Laguna Canyon.

Not since August, 1971, when voters here approved new height restrictions on city buildings, has a local election drawn so much interest.

And just as that earlier election was considered a milestone in the city’s environmental movement, so is Tuesday’s balloting in which voters will be asked to approve Measure H, a $20-million bond proposal aimed at preserving picturesque Laguna Canyon.

Voter turnout is expected to be high, even by Laguna Beach standards. City Clerk Verna Rollinger estimate that 85% of the city’s 15,800 voters will cast ballots--compared to the record 78.6% turnout in the presidential election two years ago.

Also arousing voter interest are hotly contested races for three seats on the City Council and three seats on the local school board.

But most of the recent debate has focused on the bond measure and its complicated $78-million plan to buy from the Irvine Co. 2,150 acres of canyon land located between El Toro Road and Interstate 405 on either side of Laguna Canyon Road.

If the bond measure is approved by two-thirds of the voters, a home with an assessed value of $200,000 would pay an average of $59 more in property taxes each year for 20 years.

The money would help meet the first year of a 5-year payment plan negotiated between the Irvine Co., the city and environmental groups, and freeze the developer’s plans to build 3,200 new homes on the canyon’s hillsides, with accompanying retail centers, a school and a private golf course. The Laguna Laurel development was expected to add an estimated 36,000 auto trips each day to already congested Laguna Canyon Road.

Proponents of Measure H have argued that the investment is worthwhile--the city’s last chance to stop suburban encroachment on the small village of 25,000 citizens and keep as open space one of the last undeveloped coastal canyons south of Malibu.

But opponents, led by the Laguna Beach Taxpayers’ Assn., say the purchase is not such a great deal, considering the development plan called for two-thirds of the land to be set aside for the golf course and open space. They also maintain that in addition to the $20-million bond issue and another $5-million bond sale that would be backed by revenues from parking meters, the interest in those bonds will bring the city’s total financial commitment to $45 million. The city’s money, they say, would be better spent on basic services.

Paul Freeman, campaign manager for the Committee to Save the Canyon, said that while sentiment may be on the side of saving the canyon, the challenge will be to get voters to the polls to ensure the required two-thirds majority.

“This is our best and last chance,” Freeman said.

If Measure H proponents lose the election, it will not be for lack of money. The campaign committee is expected to spend about $50,000--2 1/2 times what has been spent by successful City Council candidates in recent years. The single largest campaign donor, according to the latest campaign finance report, was the Irvine Co., which contributed $15,300.

Backed by the hefty war chest, the campaign has used eye-catching signs along Laguna Canyon Road, advertising in local weekly newspapers and slick brochures mailed to all households with registered voters.

In the final days before Tuesday’s election, the Committee to Save the Canyon has targeted property owners with its direct mail campaign, with messages from real estate agents telling them that property values could go up because of the preserved open space; and to senior citizens, reminding them that their tax increase may be low if they have lived on their property since before 1975, when Proposition 13 took effect.

The pro-Measure H committee has also used an emotional appeal, inviting citizens to tour the property and asking them to imagine what three additional stop lights on Laguna Canyon Road would do to the average commuter. The committee also has invoked the memory of Jim Dilley, a longtime resident and bookstore owner who conceived the idea of a greenbelt around Laguna Beach.

“Jim Dilley died 10 years ago. But on Tuesday, Nov. 6th, you can bring his vision to life,” a campaign brochure reads.

On the other side of the issue, the Laguna Beach Taxpayers’ Assn. has portrayed itself as David against the mighty Goliath and planted enough doubts to create concern among Measure H supporters. With a campaign fund of about $3,500, the association has used a series of newspaper advertisements in the local weekly newspapers to raise questions about the deal.

“Where does the rest of the money come from (to buy the canyon land)? That’s easily answered, although not quite easily communicated,” Freeman said of the confusion over the financing package, which includes a mix of county, state and private sources expected to be tapped to meet the $78-million price tag. While bond supporters are optimistic that those funds can be secured, they have not been guaranteed.

One of the newspaper advertisements by Measure H opponents implied that the city’s money would be better spent on basic services, although technically, Measure H proceeds can only be used for the open space acquisition.

The City Council reacted to the criticism by promising that the city’s capital improvements fund would be used only for such undertakings as fire stations, streets and drainage projects, and not for the canyon land purchase.

“If you believe that, you believe in the tooth fairy because their history has been of taking funds from one place and moving them to another,” responded Laguna Beach Taxpayers’ Assn. President Jack Hefti.

The association’s last advertisement Thursday drew the ire of Freeman because of several misleading items, including one claiming that three-fourths of the land would remain as open space under the development proposal, even though the actual figure is closer to two-thirds.

“That is clearly a bald-faced lie, and Jack Hefti knows it,” Freeman said angrily.

Hefti said later that he thought his source of information was reliable and apologized, but he added that there was not much difference between the two figures.

The association was also forced to defend the accuracy of another claim in the same advertisement, which said that if the bond issue is approved, monthly rents will increase by $100 per month.

“If their (property owners’) taxes go up $60, the probability is they are not going to raise the rent just $60,” Hefti said. “They have to cover themselves to make sure they don’t lose money on it and they are not going to raise the rent by $60, but by $100. I sure would.”

If nothing else, however, Hefti said the association has created a debate on the issue.

Although Freeman said the election is too close to call, Hefti said that getting one-third of the voters to turn down Measure H will be difficult, given the sentiment attached to the canyon.

“I do not think we have an easy task,” Hefti said. “But we are not going to be brokenhearted if it does go through.”