Council cancels Act V meeting

Barbara Diamond

The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to cancel a public meeting

scheduled for Saturday on the proposed relocation of the Maintenance

Yard.

Opponents of the project, who had requested the meeting, suggested

delaying or supported canceling it rather than proceeding with it as

proposed.

“At the Sept. 21 council meeting, the Laguna Canyon Conservancy

submitted a request for a community workshop,” conservancy President

Carolyn Wood said. “Now, we understand the [meeting] plans are not

quite what we understood.”

Opponents of the relocation to Act V did not want the meeting

limited to the same presentations made by them and by city staff at

the California Coastal Commission project appeal hearing -- each side

taking about 15 minutes, not counting public comment.

“Rehashing the coastal commission hearing would not be

productive,” former mayor and project opponent Ann Christoph said.

The planned meeting was not on Tuesday’s agenda, which meant

little public input on the merits of the procedures or delaying it

for modifications. However, Wood said the conservancy would not make

a presentation if the meeting were held.

“I suggest you continue the [Nov. 20] meeting and modify the

procedure to go beyond issues raised at the coastal commission,” Wood

said.

She suggested Jan. 8 as an alternative date, but failed to get

council backing.

“I thought the workshop was supposed to be for the public to hear

what was presented at the coastal commission,” Councilwoman Elizabeth

Pearson said.

The council had appointed Pearson and Councilwoman Toni Iseman at

the Sept. 21 meeting to a subcommittee to work with Village Entrance

project consultants, Studio One Eleven, to seek compromise solutions

that would satisfy all factions. Iseman opposes the project. Pearson

supports it.

Pearson had requested at the September meeting that the workshop

be televised so an even broader audience would have the opportunity

to hear the presentations. Councilman Wayne Baglin also supported a

public hearing on the coastal commission presentation.

On Tuesday Baglin said that Councilwoman-elect Jane Egly should be

informed about the project before a public meeting was held.

Egly, who is on the board of Laguna Greenbelt Inc, which opposes

the relocation to Act V, denounced the proposed relocation project

during the election campaign. Egly’s victory and the re-election of

Mayor Cheryl Kinsman ousted Baglin from the council, but did not

change the 3 to 2 division on the council.

“I’d come in with a broken wing -- in fact I think I have

something else to go to,” Baglin said Tuesday. “It would be a waste

of my time, the staff’s time and the public’s time.”

Baglin said his absence did not signal a step back from

participation in public affairs.

“It was an in-your-face protest,” Baglin said.

Pearson would have preferred holding the meeting Saturday, as well

as a facilitated meeting in January, at which, she said, the public

could submit constructive ideas.

“We need positive ideas, instead of attacks,” Pearson said. “Ann

Christoph is one of the best at that. She comes to us and says, we

have a problem: here is a possible solution.”

The council could take no action Tuesday until it voted that the

proposal to cancel the meeting came up after the agenda was published

and was subsequently added.

Councilman Steve Dicterow made the motion to cancel the meeting,

with no future date set until sub-committee members Iseman and

Pearson come back to the council with a firm proposal for a

facilitated meeting and to allocate up to $5,000 to pay for the

facilitation. He said if expenses exceeded the limit, staff could

request additional funding.

“Let Toni and Elizabeth design a meeting that everyone wants it to

be, aimed at bringing us all together,” Baglin said.

Iseman and Pearson were directed to report back on their progress

to the council in three weeks.

The maintenance yard relocation to Act V has bounced around for

about a decade with little give on either side to date. Opposition is

to the proposed site on the fringe of the greenbelt, not to

relocation. Almost everyone favors a more aesthetically pleasing

layout on the highly visible corner next to City Hall, dubbed the

Village Entrance.

“I hope something can be worked out for Act V,” said Kinsman, who

supports the relocation. “I thought the proposal made 10 years ago by

the Village Entrance Task Force was the compromise.”

She said both sides of the issue have polls that show the public

favors the relocation two-to-one.

“If it needs to be a referendum ... so be it,” Kinsman said.

The city has not requested a definite date to resume the Coastal

Commission hearing on the appeal of the project approval, pending a

city-sponsored workshop, although a March date is anticipated.