Court Victory Thrills Santa Ana

Following the advice of its staff, the state Judicial Council voted without objection Friday to build a $17-million state appellate courthouse in Santa Ana instead of at UC Irvine, where officials had hoped it would boost interest for a law school.

UCI officials said afterward they would still press for a law school, which they proposed last year to UC President Robert Dynes.

Construction of a state courthouse at UC Irvine “would have brought us greater visibility as a legal center,” said Michael Clark, UCI’s associate executive vice chancellor for academic planning. “In some circles, it would have brought more attention to the fact that we proposed a law school.” But Clark said he didn’t think the absence of a courthouse would influence a decision about a law school.

Friday’s decision capped a five-year effort by Santa Ana to keep the 4th District Court of Appeal. It currently operates in a leased building so crowded that two of the eight justices maintain offices in other buildings.

The university had proposed that the state buy 2.5 acres at its industrial park alongside the campus for $2.4 million. Desperate to keep the court, Santa Ana offered 2.47 acres for $1, and promised to build a parking structure.

City officials were beaming Friday afternoon.

“We will work with you to make sure it is a grand building esteemed by the community,” said Mayor Miguel A. Pulido, who appeared before the Judicial Council in San Francisco to extol the city’s assets.

Santa Ana officials feared losing the courthouse would erode the city’s stature as a government seat. UCI officials wanted the courthouse to add luster to their campus and boost their proposal for a law school to serve students frustrated by what they say is a paucity of prominent law schools in Southern California.

The decision Friday “is not a significant setback,” said UC Irvine criminology and law professor William Thompson. “But that’s not to say we don’t need this law school. There is a strong need for a high-quality school to serve the local community and the high-tech sector.”

The council voted 18-0 to adopt the Santa Ana site, with three members absent.

Council members said they feared that linking the court to the university might create a perception that the court favored university students over others who seek internships and opportunities at the court.

They said they preferred Santa Ana because it is closer to other courts, the Orange County Bar Assn., public transportation and law enforcement agencies including the FBI and the Santa Ana Police Department.

Court of Appeal Presiding Justice David Sills, a former Irvine mayor, told the council that a majority of the bench preferred the campus location because it has “the image that the court of last resort should have.”

Sills said the Santa Ana site would leave the court in the shadows of taller buildings, but panel member Richard E. L. Strauss said the money saved by not having to buy the UCI parcel could be spent in Santa Ana to construct “something ... inspirational ... that will be a real showpiece.”

Assemblyman Tom Umberg (D-Garden Grove), who spoke at the meeting, said afterward that the council weighed the importance of keeping the court in the county’s civic center. “It was the logical choice in terms of accessibility, taxpayer costs and symbolism. Courthouses should be where the public has access and people can see justice being administered,” Umberg said.

Santa Ana Councilman Jose Solorio said the decision “is one more reason why you create a civic center and why it’s important ... for public structures to be in an accessible area.”