‘89 Wetlands Settlement Disputed

An Orange County Superior Court commissioner indicated Friday that he will probably order the Amigos de Bolsa Chica to enter arbitration with Bolsa Chica landowner Signal Landmark to see if the environmental group violated a settlement agreement. A formal ruling is expected next week.

The company asked for arbitration in late February, saying its longtime environmental foe had violated the terms of a confidential 1989 lawsuit settlement.

Signal attorney George Soneff of Santa Monica said Amigos had agreed to end its lawsuit and to support a development plan for Bolsa Chica in exchange for a $1.2 million payment.

“This was a peace accord and they violated it,” he said.

Amigos President Linda Moon said the group never agreed to support the developer forever. She said they only agreed to back a conceptual planning agreement known as the Coalition Plan that the would-be developer abandoned four years later.

“Their argument is specious. It’s just absurd,” she said. The company is using arbitration as “a tool for harassment. They want to put us out of business.”

She said the group is fighting arbitration because Signal’s lawyers failed to specify how the group violated the agreement, which is required under California law. She also said the nonprofit wanted to avoid lengthy, costly arbitration behind closed doors.

Superior Court Commissioner F. Latimer Gould said in court Friday before and after hearing oral arguments that his “tentative decision” was to compel Amigos into arbitration. Attorneys expect Gould to issue a written ruling next week.

The case is only the latest twist in the tortured tale of Bolsa Chica. The coastal stretch between Seal Beach and Huntington Beach includes the largest wetlands complex in Southern California and is a key stopover for migrating birds on the Pacific Flyway. More than 1,200 acres of wetlands has been saved in what has become one of the most costly restoration efforts in state history.

In 1970, Signal’s predecessor, Signal Bolsa Corp., bought about 2,000 acres at Bolsa Chica for about $20 million. Since then, Signal and its affiliates have spent about $90 million trying to develop the land. The state bought 880 acres of wetlands for $25 million in 1997.

The project was once envisioned as a marina, hotels and 5,700 homes on 1,547 acres, but it has been dramatically scaled back due to repeated court challenges by Amigos and other activist groups. Since the 1989 agreement, Amigos has not sued to stop development at the site.

In November, the California Coastal Commission ruled that development must be restricted to a 65-acre upper tier of a 230-acre mesa.

That decision is being challenged in court by Signal, which still owns the land, and a sister company, developer Hearthside Homes, who claim the Coastal Commission illegally “took” the property by so severely restricting what could be built that development is no longer feasible.

The case has been moved to San Diego County because Orange County has approved development at Bolsa Chica, potentially a conflict of interest. No court dates have been set.

Huntington Beach recently passed a resolution to seek funding to purchase the Bolsa Chica mesa. Assemblyman Tom Harman’s (R-Huntington Beach) bill requesting $25 million in state funds to buy the mesa will be heard April 24 in the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Ongoing Land Battle

A Huntington Beach environmental group may be forced into arbitration with Signal Landmark, the company that owns the Bolsa Chica property.

Source: California Coastal Commission