Business Leaders Seek Removal of 3 Supervisors

Some of Orange County’s most powerful business leaders have begun pressuring three members of the Board of Supervisors to resign or publicly declare that they will not seek reelection.

The movement to dump the supervisors who held office when Orange County filed for bankruptcy Dec. 6--Gaddi H. Vasquez, Roger R. Stanton and William G. Steiner--stems from a growing belief among business people, particularly developers, that they are an obstacle to solving the county’s financial mess, largely because of their refusal to consider tax increases that the financial community deems essential to any recovery plan.

The Orange County Business Council discussed the removal of the three supervisors during a meeting last Monday, according to business leaders who spoke on the condition that they not be identified. The council drafted the plan to settle with participants in the county’s failed investment pool, which was accepted by the supervisors earlier this week.

One executive said the council’s membership has become increasingly concerned that the supervisors will remain adamantly opposed to tax increases even if that is what is needed to keep the county government running. He also questioned whether they could be effective if they are constantly “looking over their shoulders” at real or imagined political opponents.

Board Chairman Vasquez confirmed Friday that Gary Hunt, executive vice president of the Irvine Co., telephoned him Thursday night to tell him that concerns were expressed by some of the Business Council members. Hunt, one of the three council leaders who announced the settlement plan, was unavailable for comment.

Vasquez said he is ignoring the pressure and instead focusing on getting the county out of bankruptcy. He said that speculation about him resigning “gets silly after awhile,” adding that his patience is running a little thin.

Stanton, already the target of a recall campaign that began a week ago, reacted even more strongly, declaring that narrow, financial, special interest groups were trying to bully the supervisors into imposing a tax increase.

“It’s not up to boardroom executives to decide who’s in office. It’s up to the public, and that’s where I’ll put my faith.”

Steiner, expressing outrage at pressure from the business community, complained that “these are the same people who have been telling me that they want to be partners with us in working through the fiscal crisis.”

Stanton and Vasquez are up for reelection next year, and Steiner, elected last year, began a four-year term in January. The two whose terms expire at the end of 1996 say they currently plan to seek reelection. Steiner remains undecided.

“The realities of political life are not lost on these folks. They know what the game is,” said Doy Henley, president of the conservative Lincoln Club. “It’s no use hurting anybody’s feelings by stating the obvious.”

Since the county’s Dec. 6 bankruptcy declaration, the supervisors have walked a political tightrope. Grass-roots citizens groups have threatened to launch recall elections of any supervisor supporting a tax increase, while well-financed business organizations have demanded that the supervisors consider boosting taxes to avoid loan defaults.

“This creates an impossible double bind for us,” Steiner said.