Irvine Will Join El Toro Agency : Planning: Council sets aside reservations and votes to go along with Board of Supervisors on forming governmental body that would oversee conversion of the air base to civilian use.

The Irvine City Council, setting aside last-minute reservations for the sake of resolving a six-month political fight, voted Tuesday to join the County Board of Supervisors in forming a new governmental agency to oversee planning for the conversion to civilian use of the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station.

By a unanimous vote, the council approved a compromise proposal, tentatively hammered out by Irvine and the county last month, that three representatives from Irvine and one from Lake Forest join with the five supervisors on a board of directors that will wield decision-making authority over the planning process.

Irvine’s decision marks the closest the county has come to beginning the task of developing a base conversion strategy, with the first meeting of the newly created board tentatively scheduled for Jan. 26.

Lake Forest council members, who are expected to take up the issue at their meeting Tuesday, previously stated a reluctance to officially join the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority until they see documents outlining its structure.

But following the Irvine council vote, Mayor Michael Ward said he expected Lake Forest to join the agency, “because I think they realize that if they want to be part of the process, it behooves them to come along.”

County Administrative Officer Ernie Schneider said the agency board would hold its first meeting with or without Lake Forest.

“It’s the feeling of the Board of Supervisors that this process needs to move as expeditiously as possible,” Schneider said.

In approving the new partnership with the county, the Irvine council backed away from a staff recommendation issued Friday that Irvine insist on written guarantees from the supervisors about several issues covered during secret negotiations, notably Irvine’s demand that it be allowed to annex the area occupied by the base when the Marines abandon the base.

The city staff report listed a host of written commitments Irvine was seeking from the county, including an issue that was critical to Irvine’s acceptance of the deal: a “commitment to allow the annexation . . . prior to January, 1999.”

Instead, the council accepted a letter from Schneider stating his belief that the supervisors would be able to “agree to seriously discuss the city’s future annexation of all portions of the base not designated for public benefit conveyance or negotiated sale to the County of Orange.”

Schneider’s letter imposed three conditions on the annexation negotiations: they will begin only after federal officials approve a redevelopment plan for the 4,700-acre site; Irvine must consider sharing all tax revenue, including property, sales and hotel occupancy taxes and vehicle license fees; and, if the agency converts a portion of the base into a commercial airport, the county will retain control of that area.

Irvine City Manager Paul O. Brady Jr. recommended Tuesday that the council accept the county’s conditions with one key exception. Irvine will agree to discuss sharing only property tax revenue when the annexation discussions get underway, since that is all that the city is required to negotiate under current state law, Brady said.

Councilman Barry J. Hammond also clarified that while annexation of the base property must wait until a redevelopment plan is completed, Irvine will move ahead on annexation of other land surrounding the base that is within the city’s legally defined sphere of influence.

Irvine and the county are the only two jurisdictions that share land use authority over the 4,700-acre site, so the city’s participation is crucial if the base conversion plan is to win the Defense Department’s approval.

Irvine council members hardly discussed the agreement, apparently anxious to get the planning underway with no further controversy.

But for Irvine, the compromise was not a perfect solution. Irvine negotiators gave up their demand for two additional seats on the El Toro governing board in exchange for some guarantee that the county and the city would begin working on the annexation issue.

A firmer commitment from the county on annexation was not legally possible at this time, county officials said before the vote.

The county also held a trump card: If the agreement with Irvine fell apart, the county would consider a planning board sought by North County cities that favor using El Toro as a commercial airport. That proposal would broaden the board’s membership to include city representatives from each supervisorial district.

Following his council’s vote Tuesday, Ward said the long debate over membership on the planning board should now be put to rest.

“The North County cities, instead of trying to tear the plan apart, ought to take part in the planning . . . and give us their input and be part of it instead of trying to tear the process apart,” Ward said. “Let’s get to work.”

But in addition to North County cities, other critics of the plan are lining up.

Earlier Tuesday, the League of United Latin American Citizens protested to the supervisors that Orange County’s ethnic communities “are being excluded and barred” from the decision-making process.

Arturo Montez, president of the Santa Ana LULAC council, asked the supervisors to consider placing on the June primary ballot a referendum establishing a nine-member El Toro commission with commissioners elected by districts to serve four-year terms.

The supervisors did not respond to Montez’s proposal.

Community leaders who favor a new airport on the site also are considering a petition drive to place the El Toro issue on the November ballot, with a decision expected in a couple of weeks.