DANA POINT – Key arguments by proponents of Measure H, an effort to get voter approval on any development changes in the city’s Lantern District plan, have been removed from June sample ballots due out this week after supporters of a competing initiative asked a judge to review the measure.
The Lantern District plan, approved in 2008, seeks to transform Dana Point from a sleepy, beachside town into a contender for tourism dollars with neighboring Laguna Beach and San Clemente. New sidewalks, street signs and medians were constructed between Blue Lantern to the north and Golden Lantern to the south. Del Prado and Pacific Coast Highway were changed into two-lane roadways.
But the plan also proposes to retain the family-oriented beach community feel of the city – something traditionalists view as part of the city’s heritage.
Dana Point Residents For Responsible Development – Lester Hill, Debra Lewis, Sandie Iverson, Betty Hill and Roxanne Watrous – support the 2008 city-approved-plan that sets height restrictions and parking requirements to an area that would add restaurants, shops and homes.
But after changes, such as the approval of a 109-unit apartment complex by the City Council in 2014 and a reduction in planned parking in 2015, they said they believed the city’s original plan would not be implemented. In 2015, they gathered 4,240 signatures to get Measure H, which seeks to limit building height and to provide ample parking, on the ballot.
Measure H backers argue that the Lantern District plan gives the public no voice to override changes by the council, has cost more than $20 million from the city’s reserves and that it “ironically” includes an impartial analysis from the city attorney.
But at the request of supporters of Measure I, a competing initiative by a group of residents and business owners to keep the Lantern District plan moving forward as is, Superior Court Judge Robert Moss recently reviewed the points made by Measure H supporters.
Moss ruled in April that the public has had sufficient input on the plan through dozens of Planning Commission and City Council meetings. He said he found no evidence that $20 million of the city’s reserves were spent on the plan and found that the city attorney was required by law to perform an impartial analysis.
“The City Attorney merely complied with this statutory mandate when it issued the official Impartial Analysis – and it was illegal, false and misleading for the backers of Measure H to suggest otherwise,” Moss ruled.
Moss ordered the statements on the Measure H ballot summary be removed before sample ballots are sent out. He found that the statements were in violation of the elections code because they were false and/or misleading.
“As far as we’re concerned, they lied on all four points,” said Scott Hart, who is managing the “No on H, yes on I’ initiative.
Measure H is opposed by a majority of the Dana Point City Council and by Bill Brough, a state assemblyman and former Dana Point councilman.
Debra Lewis, a Measure H supporter, said her group didn’t intentionally mislead voters.
“We were trying to tell people that the city attorney who helped the city write its measure is the person who wrote the impartial analysis for our piece,” said Lewis, who was the first mayor for Rancho Santa Margarita before moving a block from the Lantern District. “He’s not impartial; he represents the city and the City Council.”
Lewis said the group formed in 2014 after city and staff continued to ignore the concerns of residents in favor of developers.
“Measure H people want development but we want to control height limits instead of seeing that slip away to giving variances on heights and parking,” she said. “Measure H requires voter approval to any major change in the plan. As opposed to now, where we’re relying on a council majority.”
Orange County Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley said court-ordered changes to ballot text and/or arguments happen almost every election.
“A court-ordered change does not have an effect on the signatures since the changes generally effect the arguments that are not seen by the voter when they sign the petition,” Kelley said.
Contact the writer: 714-796-2254 or eritchie@ocregister.com or Twitter:@lagunaini
