Do We Trust the Planners or the People?

Head north on State College Boulevard past Cal State Fullerton and begin climbing the hill. Only as you get to the Bastanchury intersection, at the crest of the hill, do you see the full sweep of the view.

It’s a beautiful, panoramic scene of the Brea hills, a scene already dotted with various signs of development.

In a way, the view provides the backdrop for a recurring question in this Orange County election season: Whom do you trust?

Do you trust city planning commissions and city councils to pass judgment on major developments? Or should a city’s voters take matters into their own hands at the ballot box?

In Newport Beach and Brea, some residents want voters to be the final guardians. With different details but the same philosophy, proposed initiatives in both cities would let voters decide the fate of certain kinds of projects. A similar San Clemente initiative would thwart housing developments in a part of town unless a traffic-easing road were built.

In this interactive age, the public wants its say. After all, if viewers nationwide can telephone a TV network with an opinion on whether New York Yankees pitcher Roger Clemens should have been suspended from the World Series, why can’t Brea voters decide the fate of certain projects in their own city?

When George W. Bush says he trusts people and not the government, is this what he means?

I hope not.

“Government by initiative is not my first choice,” Claire Schlotterbeck says. She’s one of the leaders of Measure N, the Brea initiative.

As such, she quickly adds the second half of her sentiment: “Developer intimidation is my last choice, and that’s the way it’s been and continues to be.”

Developers bombard council members with contributions and “expert” opinions, Schlotterbeck says, leaving the public out of the loop unless it rounds up its own experts. However, she says, the system isn’t set up to give the public equal access.

The driving force behind Measure N was the ill-fated Olinda Ranch project of a few years ago, Schlotterbeck says. Although much hillside land was bulldozed, various problems led to the project, which had been approved on a 3-2 council vote, being stalled before any houses were built.

The council’s approval convinced many residents it couldn’t be trusted to protect the hillsides, Schlotterbeck says.

Ah, the trust thing.

That’s what rankles Brea Councilman Roy Moore. Now in his first term, he wasn’t on the council when Olinda Ranch was approved, but questions why he need serve at all if the public has the final say on some projects.

“I’m not willing to abdicate my responsibility that was given to me by the people to make these decisions,” he says. Conceding that the Olinda project had problems that perhaps should have been identified before approval, Moore still says that doesn’t warrant supporting Measure N.

What’s wrong with a public plebiscite on such projects?

“No. 1, you don’t need a council then,” Moore replies. “Just go to the Planning Commission and let the people vote.”

He says he spends 100 to 200 hours a month studying issues, and doubts the average citizen “is going to study like that and come up with an informed, intelligent decision.”

“I can see the emotion in this already, like ‘Vote Yes on N because developers have spent $270,000 to fight it.’ That’s an emotional thing.”

I remind Moore that voters were smart enough to elect him. He good-naturedly concedes the point. “It’s nice that they voted for me, so I’d like to think they know everything, they’re so smart,” he says. “But the truth is on Measure N, it’s gone very emotional.”

It so happens I take Moore’s side in this, but it has nothing to do with whether the Brea hillsides are imperiled or whether present or past Brea councils sold out.

Call me old-fashioned, but I side with elected councils making decisions like this. If voters think council members are in developers’ pockets, vote them out.

That can’t always be done in a timely way, but I’m not convinced that vote-by-initiative is a better way.

Why not let the people decide, I ask Moore again. “They did decide,” he says. “They voted for me. I cherish that and work hard for these people.”

But Schlotterbeck, whose group collected 4,500 signatures in two weeks to qualify the measure for the ballot, calls initiatives the wave of the future. About 50 growth-related measures are on California ballots this year, she says.

“It has caught on,” she says. “It’s a reflection of people’s sense of loss and frustration that the current process simply isn’t working.”

Over the phone, I can hear Moore sighing. “I understand what they’re trying to do,” he says. “But when I talk to them, they say I still don’t believe them. We’re going to have to sit down at the table and reason together.”

*

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by calling (714) 966-7821 or by e-mail to dana.parsons@latimes.com