Annexation Consternation

* Re “Annexation Foes May Be Waging a Flawed Fight” (Sept. 10):

Sheila Day, co-chairwoman of the petition drive to block annexation of the contested Aliso Viejo neighborhood by the city of Laguna Hills, is quoted in your article as saying: “It never occurred to me we wouldn’t become part of Aliso Viejo” if her petition drive succeeds.

Excuse me?!

Shouldn’t the people trying to block the Laguna Hills annexation have understood the serious consequences of their actions before proceeding? Remaining unincorporated county territory--outside the boundaries of both Aliso Viejo and Laguna Hills--is the consequence, and this will hurt the neighborhood tremendously.

Speaking of the possibility of a future annexation attempt by the future city of Aliso Viejo, Carmen Vali, president of Aliso Viejo’s cityhood committee and city council hopeful, states: “I would absolutely vote for it.”

Excuse me?!

LAFCO reported in August that the future city of Aliso Viejo will lose $1.7 million over the first 10 years if it provides city services to the contested neighborhood. This for a city whose projected finances look barely viable to begin with.

Is Vali really willing to risk the financial future of her city because she “feels” this neighborhood should be part of Aliso Viejo?

This decision must be made based upon clear thinking and sound facts. The emotionalism and the lack of understanding of the consequences as demonstrated by the petition organizers should give pause to the residents of the contested neighborhood who are being asked to sign the petition, and be reason enough to reject the petition completely!

DAVID WOODWARD

Laguna Hills