ORANGE COUNTY PERSPECTIVE : Santa Ana’s Opportunity

That urban redevelopment is under consideration at all in Orange County could surprise many who think of this sunny place as the stereotypical suburban alternative to cities. But even as new malls, shopping centers and housing tracts have redefined the landscape and created new “edge cities” for a high-technology economy, the older areas of the county are challenging traditional approaches to urban renewal. Santa Ana proposes over the next 10 years to match millions of dollars in federal grants with local private and public programs to shore up the community.

The opportunities to inject vitality into depressed neighborhoods are exciting. But there are ample lessons from around the country that the enterprise zone concept needs to be monitored carefully to make sure that all the dollars go where they should. Will this be a boon or a monument to government waste? The past failings of urban renewal programs around the country in older areas should strengthen the resolve of local officials for oversight.

Santa Ana has targeted three areas for expanded health care, business development, and youth sports leagues. Two are along the 1st Street corridor and there is an area east of downtown that lies west of the Costa Mesa Freeway and south of the Santa Ana Freeway. These places have been bypassed by the high-tech economy that has benefited south and coastal sections of Orange County.

In a study done several years ago for the United Way and various business and social agencies, the urban planner Joel Kotkin noted that Orange County constituted a “new kind of giant metropolis.” At the same time, he found that many were not sharing in the benefits of the expanding economy. This group, which includes areas like those targeted in the Santa Ana program, can be identified largely by geography. It constituted the older central and northern areas of the county. He called this subregion a new “Orange Curtain,” threatened by becoming a two-tier society, divided from more prosperous areas by race, ethnicity and differences of income.

The urban zone is a strategy to address this problem. But it will be important to be sure that the Santa Ana project avoids the mismanagement, political infighting and other problems that have characterized other revitalization efforts. A lack of oversight by local officials and by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development has led to problems in cities around the country. In Los Angeles, HUD audited the Community Development Bank after finding it was failing in its mission of job creation, and that it was making bad loans.

Santa Ana is saying the right things about avoiding similar mistakes. For example, it already has identified in its application one community group with a budget too small to provide credibly the extent of services proposed.

New HUD reporting controls can go a long way, but community oversight is one of the most important elements. It is at this level that focus can be brought on programs that will really work for adult education, after-school programs, and reading and sports activities. Santa Ana is right to focus on education for addressing dropout rates and for shoring up families.

The preparation of the next generation for the new economic challenges is crucial. Having a broad-based board is important. Political infighting must be kept to a minimum. Santa Ana has economy of scale on its side, and should make the most of the opportunity.