COMMENTARY ON TRANSPORTATION : Residents Must Play a Role in Shaping the County’s Future : Only by agreeing on a shared vision of our future can we effectively control how we are governed.

It is time for the residents of Orange County to take an active role in determining our future. The functions and powers of both city and county governments face dramatic changes in the coming months. Unless the leaders of this county, both elected officials and private-sector representatives, can reach agreement on a coordinated response to these changes, Orange County residents may have outside agencies imposing their will by fiat.

The last several decades have seen tremendous growth in both California and Orange County. Although this growth has created a vibrant local economy, some residents believe that this economic health comes with a price tag, a perceived loss of “quality of life,” especially in air quality, traffic, schools, jails and financing. Many residents and elected officials believe that the existing institutions have not effectively attacked these problems and that new government structures are required.

Some residents perceive the current government structure as both unresponsive and incomprehensible. One problem is that the local governmental structure of city councils and advisory commissions is overlaid with strata of county, state and regional boards, commissions and legislature. Many of the issues that appear to be local in nature are directly affected by regional, state and federal regulations.

The county’s approach to transportation provides an excellent example of how a multitude of public agencies are involved in attempts to solve the large problems associated with a growing population. The local planning and funding are coordinated through the Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC). The arterial highway system in the county is coordinated through the county’s Environmental Management Agency (EMA). Mass transit is controlled by the OCTC and the Orange County Transit District (OCTD). The Transportation Corridor Agencies’ (TCAs) boards oversee the development of three planned transportation corridors.

On top of these local agencies, there are requirements set for projects by the Southern California Assn. of Governments (SCAG), the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the California Department of Transportation. The federal government becomes involved with clean-air regulations. Conflict between the various agencies is almost inevitable, especially since some are established to solve a specific problem only. This conflict has been apparent recently in the disagreements between the transportation and air quality agencies on the size of highway improvements.

This multitude of players leaves the average citizen, and many involved in the system, pondering where, and if, sensible policy is made. There is a frustration in dealing with an alphabet soup of agencies--OCTC, TCAs, SCAG, SCAQMD, OCTD, without one person or agency having the final responsibility for the solution.

There are a number of solutions regarding the restructuring of government being suggested at both the state and local levels. These solutions generally involve the consolidation of power to allow a more effective approach to problem solving. One state approach seeks to break the state into large regions, independent of city and county boundaries. The regional authorities created theoretically would be able to attack the problems in an integrated fashion, working on air quality and transportation, not one or the other. This is seen as an improvement over some existing regional authorities that are either created for a single purpose, such as the South Coast Air Quality District, or lack the authority to enforce decisions. The idea of regional authority is backed to some degree by both Gov. Pete Wilson, who has created a Growth Management Committee, and Speaker of the Assembly Willie Brown, who has introduced legislation for creation of regional authorities.

On the Orange County level, there has been an effort to create a more coordinated county approach to problems. Currently, the Orange County Transportation Commission and transit districts are being combined. In January, Supervisor Don R. Roth suggested that the county become a charter county to gain more control over financing and authority.

Unless the leaders of this county become actively involved in the reorganization of government, we face the possibility of seeing a basic change in the way we govern ourselves occurring without our input. If changes are coming, we must have a mechanism available for influencing those changes.

In Los Angeles, the approach was to form a broad-based citizens group called the Los Angeles 2000 Committee, which worked for two years to determine the needs and goals for the city. This group has formed a follow-up organization to implement the recommendations and that organization is having input in Sacramento on how legislation is being crafted. The group has the ability to make itself heard because it represents a consensus from a broad range of residents. The San Francisco Bay Area’s BayVision 2020 is a similar effort. Both models are directly applicable to Orange County. The best way for this county to be heard is for the residents, through community leaders, to reach agreement on a future for the county and methods to achieve that goal. This can be done with an Orange County 2000 program.

A six-month program has been suggested by the Foundation for Consensus in Orange County. The foundation is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group formed in 1989 to help eliminate community conflict and create a vision of our future. Members represent a coalition of leaders of local businesses, homeowners’ associations, environmental organizations, industrial associations, growth management groups and grass-root concerns.

The suggested program would begin with an Opinion Leaders Forum, bringing together leaders representing many constituencies and perspectives. People from other communities would share their experiences, and participants would seek a shared sense of what this county is and the issues and actions that need to be identified.

Then a strategic-issue committee would be established to meet with experts and study other communities’ approaches. Specific recommendations would be presented at a second forum of opinion leaders. The final report would serve as a road map to chart the county’s future and our response to the issues of regional authority.

To create an Orange County 2000, the foundation needs support. The participation of the public and private sectors is critical. Groups and individuals must recognize that only by agreeing on a shared vision of our future can we effectively control how we are governed. Orange County 2000 also demands a financial commitment to make it a reality. The Los Angeles 2000 Committee was financed by private firms that realized that their viability was dependent on having a coherent vision of the future. BayVision 2020 has similar support. Orange County needs to demonstrate similar vision and care about our future and take its place with the other leaders who have recognized what is at stake.