Santa Ana Heights wary of annexation

Noaki Schwartz

SANTA ANA HEIGHTS -- Newport Beach’s proposed annexation hasn’t even

gained momentum yet and already some Santa Ana Heights residents are

suspicious of the city’s motivations behind the move.

“Why after having thumbed your nose at us on several occasions --

indicating that we didn’t meet your qualifications and standards as a

community -- why now do you want to annex us?” said Roger Summers,

chairman of the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan Advisory Committee,

repeating some of the residents’ comments at a recent meeting with Dave

Kiff, Newport Beach deputy city manager.

On Sept. 27, the Newport Beach City Council voted to take the first step

toward annexing Santa Ana Heights, Newport Coast and Bay Knolls. As part

of this decision, Kiff went to Santa Ana Heights to discuss the matter

further with residents.

“Generally, they’re interested enough to listen more and learn more,”

Kiff said. “They’re not actively in support, but not actively hostile.”

Kiff wanted community members to know that the rural character of the

community would remain the same despite the annexation. He also tried to

explain some of the benefits of joining Newport, which include a better

menu of city services and a stronger political voice.

While Kiff did concede that there is little financial incentive for the

city to annex the Heights, the economic upswing made it more favorable to

do so now.

In addition, city officials said they had always intended to annex all

the remaining unincorporated areas surrounding the city. And absorbing

all three at the same time would be more economical in terms of

consulting fees, staff time and applications with the Local Agency

Formation Commission -- the state-created body that governs incorporation

and annexation.

Kiff’s talk, however, did not entirely pacify residents’ concerns.

Summers maintains that the Heights would not drastically benefit from

Newport’s city services in terms of water, sanitation, police and local

government because the service level the area gets from the county is

adequate.

He believes that Newport has an ulterior motive - that the real reason

Newport wants to absorb Santa Ana Heights is to gain a louder voice in

the fight for the continued limited use of John Wayne Airport.

“The bottom line is: [they are] saying to us ‘we’re now feeling that

because of your proximity to the airport, maybe we want to have you

because you might play some pivotal part in the airport,”’ Summers said.

The other reason why residents are not yet convinced that the annexation

is a good idea is that their community could potentially be split between

Newport and Costa Mesa.

Based on the way the Local Agency Formation Commission has outlined where

communities would go in the future, the area west of Irvine Avenue would

be in Costa Mesa and the area east of it would be part of Newport Beach.

The majority of Santa Ana Heights’ residents have voiced their preference

to be part of Newport as opposed to Costa Mesa, Kiff said.

While these lines can be changed, the commission tends to respect the

wishes of the cities over the desires of the unincorporated islands, Kiff

said.

Costa Mesa City Manager Allan Roeder said that simply preferring one city

over another is not reason enough to reposition the lines.

“At this point in time, we would not support a change in the city’s

sphere of influence,” Roeder said.If Santa Ana Heights community members

are motivated enough to oppose the annexation, they can protest it under

the Local Agency Formation Commission guidelines.

If more than 25% of the registered voters in the area to be annexed

decide against it, the matter will go to election next spring.

In the meantime, Newport Beach city officials are hoping to persuade

residents that the annexation is in their best interest.

However, council members have stressed that they do not want to force any

communities to become part of Newport if they aren’t interested.

The council is expected to file a formal request for annexation after a

public hearing on Oct. 25.