Irvine Election Results In, but City’s Future Remains Very Much Undecided

Irvine is a city divided. Less than 1 1/2% of the votes cast in (the Nov. 5) election separated the opponents and proponents of more development in Irvine. Proponents of Village 38 narrowly squeaked out a victory for the Irvine Co. this time around.

Is the outcome of the election a mandate for even more growth? Is it a stunning reaffirmation of Irvine’s master plan? Hardly. Should the results of the election tell Irvine’s elected officials anything about voter response to either question? Absolutely. But, only if they are willing to listen and only if they understand that elections are not entirely like sporting events.

Elections serve two functions in a representative democracy. First, elections legitimately determine political outcomes. Like a football or baseball game, in an election, when it comes to determining the outcome, it doesn’t matter by how many points or votes you win. A win is a win, by one home run or one vote. The outcome is decided. In Irvine, this means 3,850 new homes will be built in Planning Area 38. The people who voted have spoken. Debate over whether Village 38 should be built came to a decisive and legitimate end on Nov. 5.

But elections also have another function. They are one of the only ways a large number of citizens have to collectively send a message or instruction to their elected representatives. While the outcome of Tuesday’s election is unequivocal, its message is much less certain. Dare I say, it’s up to the wisdom of the City Council to interpret and understand what the voters of Irvine are trying to tell them through their votes on Election Day.

Two messages seem very clear, given the current division in Irvine over the question of development, indiscriminately amending or altering the General Plan would be ill-advised. Likewise, rapidly approving new development does not seem a very prudent course of legislative action.

What Irvine needs from its City Council right now is careful deliberation, thoughtful reflection, sensitivity to the views of half the Irvine electorate, and a commitment to bridge the abyss that now divides Irvine’s body politic. Having won the election, this is a challenge the mayor and City Council can afford to take up. Before the division in the city deepens and widens even further, it is an opportunity they cannot afford to squander.

MARK P. PETRACCA, Irvine