Supervisors Won’t Appeal El Toro Ruling

The Orange County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday decided not to appeal a judge’s ruling that voided petitions with about 128,000 signatures on an initiative that calls for a sprawling urban park rather than a commercial airport at the closed El Toro Marine base.

The initiative, if successful, could block plans for an airport at the mothballed base. Tuesday’s 3-2 vote mirrors the historic split on the board in favor of an airport there.

Supervisor Chuck Smith, an ardent airport advocate, made the motion directing the county counsel not to appeal the judge’s ruling--even though County Executive Officer Michael Schumacher and County Counsel Laurence M. Watson recommended doing so.

Smith was joined in his vote by board Chairwoman Cynthia P. Coad and Supervisor Jim Silva. Opposed were Supervisors Tom Wilson and Todd Spitzer.

Sponsors of the initiative were dealt a setback two weeks ago when Superior Court Judge James P. Gray invalidated the petitions.

The judge ruled that the ballot title and summary--both prepared by the county counsel’s office--were faulty and misleading. As a result, the roughly 128,000 signatures gathered to qualify the ballot for the March election were voided.

A coalition of nine South County cities has appealed the judge’s ruling and is gathering more signatures.

Proponents of a “Great Park” must meet a Sept. 18 deadline to get the initiative on the March ballot.

Smith said that with the proponents’ appeal already filed, there was no need for the county to “waste money” and duplicate the effort.

Spitzer had argued a week ago that the initiative’s organizers had no recourse under the law to depending on the county counsel’s office. They had to submit their initiative to that office for review, and the office was responsible for drafting the initiative’s title and summary. Spitzer did not comment after Tuesday’s vote.

Voting on the same question last week, the board split 2-2 because Smith was out of town on county business.

“The county is under no obligation to appeal,” Coad said in a prepared statement after Tuesday’s vote. “The county has nothing to gain from an appeal.”

The county counsel is already redrafting the title and summary and is holding meetings with interested parties, Coad said.