Can You Envision a Far-Thinking Panel to Pilot County Into Future? : Progress: An Orange County 2000 group could possibly identify the issues and problems and then try to steer toward a solution, some proponents say.

OK, Orange County has its share of problems--chronic traffic congestion, crowded jails, a worsening gang problem--and a recent poll shows that many residents fear life will only get worse in coming years.

But what do you want Orange County to be like in 20 to 30 years? And how would you mold that vision into reality.

The Foundation for Consensus in Orange County, which campaigned for the successful Measure M sales tax, may set up an “Orange County 2000” organization in an effort to deal with such questions.

The foundation last month heard a presentation by Jane Pisano, president of the LA 2000 Partnership, a group in Los Angeles that has enjoyed some success in focusing attention on education, transportation and housing dilemmas that will affect life in the Los Angeles area early in the next century.

“The first task would be to identify the issues and then try to find a vision and a direction,” said Norm Grossman, a Laguna Beach aerospace engineer and environmental activist who chairs the foundation.

“If we proceed, we will probably call a meeting and invite people who are interested to attend, and then ask them to take it from there,” Grossman said.

Proponents of the Orange County 2000 concept say it is worthwhile because public officials tend to react to crises rather than trying to prevent them by planning for the future. As a result, they sometimes lose touch with what people really want.

While it may be hard to divine exactly what it is that people want, it is clear that many residents are unhappy with the way things are progressing. The 1990 Orange County Annual Survey shows that 44% of residents think that Orange County will become a worse place to live, primarily because of traffic problems and lack of affordable housing.

“There is not a sufficiently strong organization in the county composed of private citizens to make any particular impact on elected officials,” said Leland Oliver, president of the Orange County Chamber of Commerce and a foundation board member. “We need one, and it’s got to be a real grass-roots organization consisting of people who really want to be involved. It should not be a splinter-group type of activity, and it shouldn’t have any government affiliation.”

But others, including former county Supervisor Bruce Nestande, contend that such efforts often fail because “they involve just another organization issuing reports.”

“I’m not against commissions that have a very tight agenda,” Nestande explained. “They have to be very focused, know what they’re looking at, make recommendations and then disband. If a new organization wants to do that, fine, but self-appointed groups often aren’t sufficiently focused.”

The Foundation for Consensus in Orange County grew out of the debate over Measure M, the half-cent sales tax for traffic improvements and growth controls approved by voters last month. Foundation members, including Grossman, participated in the drafting of Measure M’s provisions.

Grossman, a slow-growth activist, was never convinced that the ballot measure’s growth-management regulations were tough enough, but the foundation became a place where environmentalists and business executives could meet and agree on general principles.

During the Measure M campaign, the foundation was headed by Reed Royalty, a Pacific Bell executive who is retiring. Not willing to let the organization fall apart, about 30 active members have proposed new missions, among them establishment of Orange County 2000 and a long-term effort to eventually place an open space bond measure before county voters.

But Grossman recently acknowledged that much depends on finding corporate sponsors to support the organization. Until now, contributions from firms such as the Irvine Co. and from the Chamber of Commerce have kept the foundation afloat.

In 1986, the LA 2000 group embarked on a lengthy effort that brought together 60 community leaders to find a vision for Los Angeles. In late 1988, the organization issued its report, which highlighted the need to restructure education and better provide social services to children. It also recommended regional growth and transportation management.

LA 2000’s Pisano now heads a follow-up effort with a 60-member “2000 Partnership” group that is seeking to implement the earlier organization’s recommendations through legislation. For example, the privately funded group is supporting a bill written by Assembly Speaker Willie Brown that would mandate regional growth and transportation planning.

City and county officials here eye the legislation skeptically, fearing loss of their autonomy.

Aware of the county’s fears about regional government, Pisano said it is not the goal of the proposed legislation to create a central authority. She said she would like to work with an Orange County 2000 group in order to foster regional cooperation.

“We all have at the forefront of our minds the question of how can we achieve growth and maintain environmental quality. . . . You don’t create a czar or central control. That doesn’t work.”

There have been previous efforts to examine and fashion Orange County’s future.

In 1970, the Board of Supervisors appointed the Citizens Direction Finding Commission, which for the next 11 years advocated a variety of policy changes, including placing a cap of 2.9 million people on the county’s population in the year 2020, and warning against new development without adequate roads.

But many of the panel’s recommendations went unheeded, members said. The Board of Supervisors set up a development-monitoring program, but critics described it as too little, too late.

County supervisors shut down the commission in 1981 after it successfully fought for various political reforms, including creation of the county’s Fair Campaign Practices Commission.