Umberg Floats Plan to Break Jail Stalemate : Legislation: Assemblyman stuns supervisors with proposal that would require only three votes to condemn land for massive Gypsum Canyon facility.

Dropping a bombshell on local politicians, Assemblyman Tom Umberg (D-Garden Grove) said Wednesday that he intends to introduce legislation that would make it easier for Orange County to condemn land for a massive new jail in Gypsum Canyon.

Umberg’s bill, still in draft form and yet to be officially introduced, would relieve a major political bottleneck to the project by allowing a simple majority of the five-member Orange County Board of Supervisors to approve condemnation--a process used to acquire land from an unwilling seller.

Supervisors Thomas F. Riley, Roger R. Stanton and Harriett M. Wieder favor Gypsum Canyon as a jail site and have said they would support condemnation if necessary. Supervisors Don R. Roth and Board Chairman Gaddi H. Vasquez oppose a jail in Gypsum Canyon.

Because of the four-fifths requirement, Roth and Vasquez have successfully prevented the rest of the board from moving to condemn the land. The county currently has no money to pay for it in any case. But Umberg’s controversial proposal--which one of his legislative colleagues predicted would encounter strong opposition in the Legislature--would remove the political barrier by requiring only three votes.

“To get the four-fifths vote, it means any two supervisors could block it,” Umberg noted Wednesday. “This bill would permit, if three supervisors were in agreement, a jail to get built. It’s going to make it easier.”

County officials reeled at the news that Umberg was considering such a bill, some moving quickly to endorse it and others accusing the freshman legislator of improperly butting into local affairs.

“I’m always disturbed by any legislation that would interfere with the ability of local government to function,” Vasquez said. “I don’t think that’s good public policy.”

Vasquez said Umberg had not discussed the issue with him. “I’ve only had one conversation with Tom Umberg, and that was before he was elected,” Vasquez said.

Stanton, on the other hand, welcomed the proposal. While conceding that it would be an “extraordinary action,” he said the board’s own stalemate has made drastic measures necessary.

“It isn’t good government for this board to be deadlocked in a 3-2 vote for all these years,” Stanton said. “If Assemblyman Umberg could be of service to the county in this way, I’d be absolutely delighted.”

Umberg’s proposal comes as county officials face an important crossroads in the long jail debate. The board on Tuesday activated a commission that will meet next week to consider calling a special election on the issue of a half-cent sales tax increase to build a jail and other law enforcement facilities.

Sheriff Brad Gates, a leading proponent of a Gypsum Canyon jail, has led the charge for a May 14 special election. He says he believes that the revenue from such a tax would be enough to cover construction and operations of the proposed jail. Estimates vary widely, but county officials predict that building the first phase of the facility would cost roughly $500 million, with at least $100 million a year in operating costs.

Expansion of the jail to its full, 6,720-bed configuration would double the construction costs and also raise the operations estimates.

Buying the land is the third major expense, and there again, estimates are nebulous. The Irvine Co. owns the property and has said it wants it for home construction, not a jail.

As long as the board does not have enough votes to condemn the property, the Irvine Co. is under no obligation to sell it.

Umberg’s proposal would dramatically change that. Although he said he has not consulted with any of the supervisors, he has discussed his proposal with Gates, who said he would back Umberg’s measure as a last resort.

“I would prefer to see the purchase of the land from the landowner,” Gates said. “And if not that, I’d prefer to have the four votes to condemn it. But if that’s not possible, we still need to solve the problem, and I’d be conceptually in favor of something that would help us do that.”

Umberg agreed.

“This is a concept right now,” the assemblyman said. “My idea is to make it (change in vote) pertinent to Orange County and only the jail. . . . Although it’s in the embryonic stage, it’s going to be a tough nut to crack, but it’s one that cries out for attention in Orange County.”

But one major proponent of the jail--state Sen. Marian Bergeson (R-Newport Beach)--predicted that Umberg’s measure would never survive the Legislature, where it would draw the ire of those concerned with preserving private property rights.

“It probably stands as much chance as I would be safe and secure standing in the middle of the jail parking lot,” quipped Bergeson.

“People are very, very sensitive to fundamental property rights. The taking of property is so important that there would be very strong resistance to changing the vote on that for whatever reasons. That’s why it has been the two-thirds vote,” she said, adding that she would oppose the Umberg measure.