OC Register - Councilman says he regrets vote on open-space agreement

[Jim Reardon]

The OC Register carried a nice article online tonight that described Lon Uso’s position on the CLC / Schuller deal.  Lon did well, in my opinion.  Find it here:  http://www.ocregister.com/articles/city-mou-development-2510654-agreement-retirement .

The article contained a confusing juxtaposition of the MOU and the Option Agreement.  I’m sure this mix-up occurred at the OC Register.  But even so, why not correct it?  To do so, I posted the article below on the sluggish ocregister.com website:

As Dr. Uso has written, it is important to keep matters straight. The agreement between the City and the developer is an Purchase Option Agreement that sets forth numerous expensive obligations to be borne by City, and indirectly, by County taxpayers. Aside from the $10 million land purchase option, the City is obligated to participate in numerous improvements to the property and underwrite perpetual water expenses of the CLC development.

On the other hand, the MOU is a document arising from secret efforts by the City's Open Space Committee and staff who negotiated an exchange of favors with OCTA. In return for OCTA support for public access over railroad tracks to the planned retirement development, OCTA gained City support for extending second main railroad track into the center of our historic town.

The secrecy associated with the Option Agreement approval is the subject of a formal Brown Act complaint. Yet the City Council has continued to meet in secret session to discuss the subject -- even after receiving the complaint. It is a great relief to learn that at least one City Council member has committed not to participate in future secret meetings on this subject.

The MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) was never placed on the agenda of the City Council until residents complained that it had been formally approved by the OCTA Board. In fact, those involved in the City's Open Space Committee and staff clearly had no intention of bringing the MOU to the City Council for approval. On June 29, eight days before the Council, under pressure from residents, met to consider the MOU, City staff, the developer, and members of the City's Open Space Committee, led by former OC Sheriff Brad Gates, attended a project "Kick-Off" meeting at OCTA based on the understandings contained in the MOU -- including the extension of a second main railroad track into the heart of San Juan Capistrano.

How is all of this done in the name of open space preservation? This would seem a reasonable question to ask, but there are no answers. No aspect of the Option Agreement or the underlying development project details have ever been brought before a public meeting of our City Council.

Mayor Nielsen's statements are off point. In any significant development project, the City Council is the final authority. After the project goes through the normal planning process (including public input), our Planning Commission makes a recommendation to Council which is free to approve, modify or deny it. However, in this instance, the planning process for a 750,000 square foot development has been rendered moot by the Option Agreement already approved by the City Council.

In effect, the Council by its approval has made a pre-planning commitment that will limit the scope of any later action of staff, the Planning Commission, or the public. Even if the City never acquires the land in question, this commitment remains.

If Mayor Nielsen is so certain the City can get out of the Option Agreement, he should explain how that works to the public. In the meantime, he should commit that no more City funds and staff time will be spent helping this developer solve his problems with the railroad.
7/28/2009 10:52:31 PM

Let us hope the OC Register keeps their attention on this matter!