HomeMy WebLinkAbout28 - Santa Ana Heights Country Club & South Mesa Drive AnnexationCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item 28
February 26, 2008
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: City Manager's Office
Homer Bludau, City Manager
9491644 -3000 or hbludau @city.newport- beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE
ANNEXATION OF THE SANTA ANA COUNTRY CLUB AND SOUTH
MESA DRIVE UNINCORPORATED AREAS IN SANTA ANA HEIGHTS
ISSUE:
Does the City Council want staff to complete a Property Tax Sharing Agreement with
Orange County, which would complete the Country Club /South Mesa Drive annexation
application and get the issue before the Orange County Local Agency Formation
Commission ( LAFCO) Board for an annexation decision?
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct the City Manager to take no action to negotiate a property tax sharing agreement
with the County, with the understanding the application will remain incomplete and will
fail to be acted upon by the LAFCO Board before April, when the application will expire.
Background: East Santa Ana Heights has always been in the Sphere of Influence (SOI)
of Newport Beach. As such, it was annexed in 2003. West Santa Ana Heights was in
the SOI of Costa Mesa; however, recognizing that East and West Sana Ana Heights
were bound by a County redevelopment area and by other commonalities, Costa Mesa
allowed the Sphere of Influence to be changed to Newport Beach and LAFCO allowed
its annexation to Newport Beach on January 1, 2008.
LAFCO has a policy of attempting to work with cities to gain annexation of
unincorporated areas in order to ensure these areas receive better services than could
be provided to scattered, isolated areas by the County. Two geographic areas that
remain a part of the County but are within the Costa Mesa SOI are known as the "South
of Mesa" (Drive) area and the Santa Ana Country Club (SACC). The residents of
South of Mesa and the membership of the SACC have expressed strong desires to be
detached from the Costa Mesa SOI, be added to the Newport Beach SOI, and be
annexed to Newport Beach.
When Costa Mesa attempted to annex these two area in 2002, sufficient signatures
(over 90% of registered property owners) were obtained to prevent that annexation (in a
City Council Direction to Staff regarding Annexations
February 26, 2008
Page 2
reorganization area that contains more than 12 registered voters, State law allows
50 % +1 valid signatures of registered voters in the area to reject the reorganization)
Numerous residents from these areas, at numerous LAFCO meetings, have sought to
be annexed to Newport Beach.
In 2007, these residents gained many significantly more valid signatures than required
to petition LAFCO to consider their request to be annexed to Newport Beach. The
residents fulfilled all annexation application requirements they could fulfill; however,
LAFCO does not consider an annexation application complete unless it has an
agreement between the County and the city as to how property tax revenues are to be
shared. Typically, we used the "Master Property Tax Sharing Agreement" to
accomplish our annexations — doing so reflects a roughly 51 %-49% sharing of available
property tax revenues between the County and the City.
To date, City staff has made no attempt to negotiate a new agreement nor to propose
using the Master Agreement. Such a negotiation would not prove difficult to
accomplish.
A Newport Beach City Council has never taken the position it will support the
annexation of these two areas; however, it has never taken the position it would not
oppose these annexations.
The City Manager is bringing this issue to the City Council so the residents of the
affected areas and LAFCO can obtain some certainty of what will happen to the
application. The City Manager understands that two significant hurdles are in the way
of some residents' desires to annex South of Mesa and the SACC to Newport Beach:
1. Costa Mesa is likely to strongly oppose the SO[ change and any subsequent
annexation to Newport Beach. LAFCO typically gives great deference to the opinion
of the city undergoing a detachment, even a SOI detachment.
2. LAFCO could still deny the annexation, as legal findings need to be made that
Newport Beach is the jurisdiction which can best serve these two areas. Costa
Mesa can reasonably make the claim that it can serve the area as well or better than
Newport Beach can.
Since the City appears to be entering a period when it will be dealing with issues
(Banning Ranch, OCTA's Route 55 Alternatives Study, JWA growth pressures, etc.) that
will require partnerships with Costa Mesa's elected officials and staff, the City Manager
believes the Newport Beach City Council should direct the City Manager to take no
action at this time to support the annexation application submitted by South Mesa Drive
and Santa Ana Country Club residents and interests. Doing so will cause the residents'
application before LAFCO to expire.
Fiscal impacts: None
2
City Council Direction to Staff regarding Annexations
February 26, 2006
Page 3
Environmental Impact: None.
Public Notice: This agenda item may be noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in
advance of the public meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
Submitted by:
Ho ertn Bludau
City Manager
3
THIS PAGE
LEFT BLANK
INTENTIONALLY
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
October 2, 2006
TO: Affected Agencies and Interested Parties
ORANGE COUNTY
CHAIR
rivate
P pp Y The territory is developed and includes an approximately 74 - private
3O
ROBERT 1 be,
FROM: Bob Aldrich, Assistant Executive Officer
Cry or Laguna Woods
VICECHAIR
SUBJECT: Proposed "South Mesa /Santa Ana Country Club
BILL CAMPBELL
or
Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach (RO 06-30)
Thi,d
D hirC Dhmc[
ExKum Office,
In accordance with Government Code Section 56828(b), 1 am notifying you
PETER HERZOG
eowcft p.w,
that LAFCO has received an application from area residents foi,a sphere
Ciry W Izke PoreN
of influence change and concurrent annexation of approximately 134 acres
ARLENE SCHAFER
of unincorporated territory to the City of Newport Beach.
Dimc[a
Costa Mesa
saniwy Disma
your comments regarding this application are important to us and will
SUSAN WILSON
help LAFCO to fully evaluate this proposal. Please submit any
Represwom of
comments to LAFCO by no later than Monday, October 16, 2006.
am Public
Comments may be submitted in writing or via email to
TOM WILSON
baldrich@orange.lafco.ca.gov.
Supen %o,
FiRh [)Wia
APPLICANT
JOHN WITHERS
By registered voter petition.
Di ecror
Whe RaMh Wafer o9ria
PURPOSE OF PROPOSAL
ALTERNATE
PATSY MARSHALL
Registered voters residing with the South Mesa /Santa Ana Country Club
Cotmcilmember
Cityoffluena Par%
area have initiated a sphere of influence amendment and concurrent
annexation of approximately 134 acres of unincorporated territory. The
ALTERNATE
RHONDA MCCUNE
subject territory has been located within the City of Costa Mesa sphere of
Repraerxe0we of
General Public
influence since 1973. The proposal, if approved by LAFCO, would: (1)
change the territory's sphere of influence from the City of Costa Mesa to
ALTERNATE
JAMES W.31LVA
Newport Beach, and 2 concurrently annex the property to the City of
p () Y P P Y tY
Su econd ol,d D
S Dania
Newport Beach.
ALTERNATE
rivate
P pp Y The territory is developed and includes an approximately 74 - private
CHARLEY WILSON
olreaa
g olf course /county club facility and approximately 60 acres of single and
r
Snta MMgaa
Wafer Damn
multiple family residential units. In addition, there is small neighborhood
commercial center on the southwest corner of Mesa. Drive and Irvine
JOYCE CROSfHWAnrE
ExKum Office,
Avenue.
12 Cnric Center Plaza. Room 235. Santa Ana CA 92701
(7 14) 834 -2556 • FAx (714) 834 -2643
httpylwww.orange.lafco.ca.gov
5
September 21, 2006
RE: RO 06 -30 (South Mesa/SACC Reorganization)
Page 2
The resident - initiated application lists the following primary reasons for the
sphere of influence change /annexation request:
The area has social, geographic and governmental ties to West and East
Santa Ana Heights
The area will receive better services through the City of Newport Beach
The entire area has historic ties to the community of Santa Ana Heights
LOCATION
The 134 -acre South Mesa /Santa Ana Country Club area is generally located
south of John Wayne Airport, west of Irvine Avenue, east of Newport Boulevard
and north of Bay View Terrace (see attached location map on page 4 of this
report).
PROPERTY TAX
Property tax exchange resolutions will be required to be adopted by the County
and the City of Newport Beach prior to consideration of the proposal by LAFCO.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
LAFCO, as lead agency under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act),
will be required to complete the appropriate environmental review of the project
prior to consideration by the Commission.
Again, I am interested in your comments on this proposal. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me directly at either (714) 834 -2556 or by
email at baldrich@orange.lafco.ca.gov.
Attachment: Location Map
Distribution:
Cal McLaughlin
Paul Watkins, SACC
Allan Roeder, City of Costa Mesa
Kimberly Brandt, City of Costa Mesa
Homer Bludeau, City of Newport Beach
Dave Kiff, City of Newport Beach
Philip Bettencourt
Barbara Venezia, SAHPAC
Paul Jones, IRWD
Robin Hamers, CMSD
Diana Leach, MCWD
10
September 21, 2006
RE: RO 06 -30 (South Mesa/SACC Reorganization)
Page 4
e 0 0.125 0.25
i
4
0.5 MIIeS
0
ur.a
N- MROHr -eE'XH
RO06 -30
South Mesa/
.Santa Ana Country Club.
Reorganization to the
City of Newport Beach
7
Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission
\ 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235
Eeaafi' Santa Ana, CA 92701
TEL(714)834 -2556
FAX(714)834 -2643
This form is to be used for applying to the Orange County Local Agency Formation
Commission for a city or district annexation, reorganization, detachment, or a sphere of
influence amendment. To facilitate your preparation of the required materials, a pre -
application meeting with LAFCO staff is encouraged. The meeting can be used to address
applicant questions, Commission polices, timing, boundaries, and other application issues.
LAFCO staff looks forward to assisting you with your project.
Please fill out this application completely. If a question does not apply to your proposal,
indicate "N /A ". Orange County LAFCO is a "paperless" office. It is important that you list all
email addresses where indicated on the application. Correspondence, staff reports,
resolutions and other LAFCO forms and mailings, whenever possible, I b r rib�e qp r�
electronically. l'� V E D
APPLICATION FOR: (check all that apply) I�Jn(Sf SEP 1 1 2006
❑ Annexation to:
❑ Detachment from:
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
® Reorganization (2 or more changes of organization) of: The part of Area 7 that incluces
the Santa Ana Country Club and the Area south of Mesa Drive to be annexed to the City of
Newport Beach and removed from the Costa Mesa sphere of influence
❑ Other (explain):
❑ *Sphere of Influence Amendment for:
*If requesting a sphere of influence amendment, please answer the following three
questions:
1. Why is a sphere of influence amendment needed?
2. How would a sphere of influence affect the present and future need for services in
the project area?
3. How would a sphere of influence amendment impact social and economic
communities of interest in the project area?
S
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
What changes of organization are included? What agencies are involved? etc.
This proposal asks that the part of Area 7 that includes the Santa Ana Country Club and the
area South of Mesa Drive described in the attached mar) and legal description be detached
from the Sphere of influence of Costa Mesa and annexed to Newport Beach's corporate
limits.
STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION:
Explain the purpose of each request or change of organization. Explain how the proposal
provides more logical boundaries or improves the provision of service.
This remaining part of Araa 7 has social geographic and governmental ties to
West and East Santa Ana Heights The communities share borders, two
Redevelopment (RDA) Proiect Areas (Administered by the County of Orange),
impacts from John Wayne Airport The whole of Area 7 will receive substantially
better services once they are annexed to Newport Beach as detailed in section VII.
This whole area is what remains of the historic community of Santa Ana Heights
which was formed in the early 1900s served by the Santa Ana Heights Water
Company. When the Irvine Company decided to develop the Irvine Ranch they
made a decision to not use Santa Ana Heights but rather to create a new city,
Irvine nearer the center of the ranch This is described more completely in
attachment A
WHO INITIATED THIS PROPOSAL? Please select one from the drop -down list:
Registered Voters
Applications can be initiated by either: (1) a petition signed by five percent of the affected
landowners or five percent of the affected registered voters from the annexing area, or (2) a
resolution by the legislative body of an affected city, county or special district.
The following is attached to this application form:
❑ Resolution (please attach)
❑ Landowner Petition (please attach)
® Registered Voter Petition (please attach)
LOCATION AND ADDRESS OF PARCEL(S):
See Map and legal description and attachment B
LIST OF ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS: (Available from the Orange County Assessor)
Attached (Attachment B)
MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A map and legal description of the proposal, even if prepared by a private engineering firm,
must be submitted directly to the Orange County Surveyor for review and final approval. An
Q
application can be filed with LAFCO without a map and legal, but a proposal cannot be
scheduled for LAFCO hearing prior to receipt of a County Surveyor- approved map and legal
description. You may contact the County Surveyor at the Resources and Development
Management Department, Geomatics /Land Information Systems Division, at (714) 834 -4378.
Additionally, the map and legal description must meet the State Board of Equalization's
requirements. The BOE's "Change of Jurisdictional Boundary" requirements are available for
download at httn: &www.boe ca oov/prootaxes1sp�rl not htm. Please note, the BOE requires
an additional vicinity map that shows the project area in relation to a larger geographic area.
A map and legal description has been:
❑ Certified by the County Surveyor and is attached to this application.
❑ Submitted for review to the County Surveyor.
0 Other (please explain) Map and legal description is being prepared by the County
Suveyor.
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE rif any):
Name: Cal McLaughlin
Address: 2616 Redlands Drive Costa Mesa CA 92627
Phone: 949 -646 -5191 FAX: email: cal. @uci.edu
Contact Person: Title:
PROPERTY OW-NER(S):
If more than two property owners for proposal area, please provide the name, address and
contact information, on a separate page.
Name:
Address:
Phone: FAX: email:
Name:
Address:
Phone: FAX: email:
SUBJECT AGENCIES THAT WILL GAIN OR LOSE TERRITORY:
A "subject agency" means each city or district for which a change of organization or
reorganization is proposed. If more than three subject agencies, please provide the names
and information on a separate page.
Name: City of Costa Mesa (sph rg d9t9c ment)
Address: 77 Fair Drive
Phone: 714 -754 -5223 FAX: 714 - 754 -5330 email: ARoeder(Wci costa -mesa ca u
Contact Person: Allan Roeder Title: City Manager
1D
Name: County ofOrange (loss of unincorporated territory)
Address: 10 Civic Center Plaza 3rd Floor Santa Ana CA 92701
Phone: 714- 834 -3100 FAX: 714- 834 -2786 email: Thomas.Mauk @ocgov.com
Contact Person: Thomas Mau k Title: County Executive Officer
Name:
Address:
Phone: FAX: email:
Contact Person: Title:
AFFECTED AGENCIES IN PROPOSAL AREA:
An affected agency is a city or district with overlaying boundaries or spheres of influence. If
more than three affected agencies, please provide the names and information on a separate
page.
Name: Irvine. Ranch Water District
Address: Post Office Box 57000. Irvine. CA 92619 -7000
Phone: 949 - 453 -5300 FAX: email: iones@irwd.com
Contact Person: Paul D. ]ones Title: _General Manaqer
Name: CQSta Mesa Sanitary District
Address: 234E 17th St., Ste. 205 Costa Mesa. CA 92627
Phone: 949 -631 -1731 FAX: 949 -548 -6516 email: rhamersCa)crosdca.gov
Contact Person: Robin V. Harriers Title: Manaqer /Engineer
Name:
Address:
Phone: 949 - 631 -1206 FAX: 949 -574 -1036 email: Dianal-0mesawater.om
Contact Person: Diana M. Leach Title: General Manaqer
INTERESTED AGENCIES:
Interested agencies are cities or districts which provide the same facilities or services in the
proposal area that a subject agency will provide. If more than two interested agencies,
please provide name and information on a separate page,
Name: Orange County Fire Authority
Address: P.O. Box 57115 Irvine CA 92619 -7115
Phone: 714 -573 -6000 FAX: email: _
Contact Person: Chip Prather Title: Fire Chief
Name:
Address:
Phone: FAX: email:
Contact Person: Title:
PERSONS REQUESTED TO BE NOTIFIED:
If more than two names, please provide the names and information on a separate page.
Name: Cal McLaughlin
Address: 2616 Redlands Drive
Phone: 949- 6465191 FAX:
Name: Paul Watkins
Address: 535 Anton Blvd
Phone: 714 -556 -0800 FAX:
email: cal(Ouci.edu
email: Aaul@lawfriend,com
REGISTERED VOTER /PROPERTY OWNER MAILENG LIST:
Government Code Section 56661requires that landowners within the proposal area, and
registered voters both within the proposal area and within 300 feet of the exterior boundary
of the property, be notified of a LAFCO hearing at least 21 days in advance of the hearing
that includes a proposed reorganization., Orange LAFCO policy requires the applicant to
provide mailing labels, envelopes and appropriate postage as part of the application
submittal.
The following notification Information has been provided (check all that apply):
® Address labels for registered voters /property owners within proposal area and
within 300 feet of exterior boundary
® Mailing envelopes with appropriate postage
❑ Application does not require registered voter /property owner notification
Explanation:
SCHOOL DISTRICTS:
Please list school district(s) affected by the proposal.
School District: Newoort-Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD)
Address: 2985 -A Bear St Costa Mesa CA 92626
Phone: 714- 424 -5000 FAX: 714-424-8925 email:
Contact Person: Dr. Robert Barbot Title: Suaertendent
School District:
Address:
Phone: FAX: email:
Contact Person: Title:
QUESTIONNAIRE:
Please respond to all items in the following questionnaire. Indicate N/A when a question
does not apply. Any additional information pertinent to the application should be included
with the application at the time of submittal.
19
I. LANDOWNER CONSENT
Have all property owners involved with the proposal given their written consent?
❑ YES (If yes, please complete Property Owner Consent Form, Attachment I.)
❑ NO (If no, please provide the name, address, and Assessor's Parcel Numbers of
those property owners not consenting.)
II. LAND USE
Acreage of Proposal: 195.55 acres more or less acres
Site Information:
Surrnundina Land Uses:
LAND USE
PREZOIRMU IA
GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE
ZONING
DESIGNATION
NORTH:
Commercial
DESIGNATION
City:
Open Space
County:
County:
SOUTH:
Recreational,
Specific Plan
Specific Plan
Professional /Admin,
City:
City:
CURRENT:
REsidential Single
i
Family, Residential
City:
City:
Multi =- Family,
Commercial
Same land uses,
County:
County:
identical Specific
Plan components
City:
City:
Specific Plan
Single Family
Detached, Admin /Prof/
PROPOSED:
Financial, Commercioal
Multi - Family Residential,
Recreational and
Environmental Open
Space
Surrnundina Land Uses:
13
LAND USE
ZONING
DESIGNATION
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
Residential
County:
County:
NORTH:
Commercial
City:
City:
Residential
County:
County:
SOUTH:
City:
City:
Residential, Open
County:
County:
EAST:
Space Recreational
i
City:
City:
13
A. The proposal area is entirely or partially within the sphere of influence of all of
the following:
CITY: Costa Mesa
SPECIAL DISTRICTS: Irvine Ranch Water District, Costa Mesa Sanitary District,
B. Describe any land use entitlements or permits approved or pending for the
proposal area:
None known City and Countv would cooperatively address anypermits pending or
planned as the effective date approaches.
C. Describe any public easements /oil well operations /major highways /watercourses/
topographical features:
Known public easements are onlv for streets, storm drains and flood control
D. Number of acres considered Prime Agricultural Land *: 0 acres
*As defined by the Soil Conservation Services (i.e., being prime, unique, or of
statewide importance) AND by Government Code Section 51201(c) and 56064
E. Number of acres considered Agricultural Lands *: 0 acres
*As defined by Government Code Section 56016
III. DEMOGRAPHICS
A. Number /Type of Dwelling Units within the proposal area:
Existing:
Proposed:
B.. Is the proposal area considered "inhabited" (i.e. do more than 12 registered
voters reside on the territory/property)?
/.1
C. Describe how the proposal will assist the City and /or the County in achieving
their respective fair shares of the regional housing needs as determined by the
appropriate council of.governments (Government Code Section 56668):
IV. PLAN FOR PROVIDING SERVICES
Describe the services that are provided or are to be provided to subject property:
J'1
What effect will this proposal have on the type or level of services both within and outside
the proposal area?
WITHIN: All the services will either be the same for water. sewer, and schools or
substantially better. There will be faster response time for police and fire /EMS services.
Proposal should increase residents' ability to use quality library services recration services.
Jr. Lifegruard classes etc.
OUTSIDE: No significant change.
V. SPECIAL REVENUES
A. Do agencies whose boundaries are being changed have existing bonded debt?
❑ YES M NO
If yes, please describe:
B. Will the territory be subject to any new or additional special taxes, benefit
charges, or fees? ❑ YES M NO
If yes, please describe:
15
Describe
Approximate
Current
Service
Proposed
Service
Level/Range of
Service of Proposed
Date
will be
Method to
Sei vice Water
Provider
IRVINE
SAME
SAME
Available
no
Existing fees
RANCH
interruption
WATER
DISTRICT
Sewer
COSTA MESA
SAME
SAME
no
Existing fees
SANITARY
interruption
DISTRICT
Police
COUNTY OF
CITY OF
SUBSTANTIALLY
upon effective
Existing tax
ORANGE
NEWPORT
BETTER
date of
base
BEACH
annexation
Fire
COUNTY
CITY OF
Fire /EMS services
upon effectie
Existing tax
COUNTY OF
NEWPORT
SUBSTANTIALLY
date of
base
ORANGE
BEACH
BETTER
annexation
Public
COUNTY OF
CITY OF
SUBSTANTIALLY
upon effective
Existing tax
Works
ORANGE
NEWPORT
BETTER
date of
base
BEACH
annexiation
Parks &
COUNTY OF
CITY OF
SUBSTANTIALLY
upon effective
Existing tax
Recreation
ORANTE
NEWPORT
BETTER
date of
base
BEACH
annexiation
Other
Library:
City of
SUBSTANTIALLY
upon effective
Existing tax
Services
County of
Newport
BETTER
date of
base
(list)
Orange
Beach
annexiation
Code
Enforcement
County of
Orange
Animal
Control:
County of
Orange
What effect will this proposal have on the type or level of services both within and outside
the proposal area?
WITHIN: All the services will either be the same for water. sewer, and schools or
substantially better. There will be faster response time for police and fire /EMS services.
Proposal should increase residents' ability to use quality library services recration services.
Jr. Lifegruard classes etc.
OUTSIDE: No significant change.
V. SPECIAL REVENUES
A. Do agencies whose boundaries are being changed have existing bonded debt?
❑ YES M NO
If yes, please describe:
B. Will the territory be subject to any new or additional special taxes, benefit
charges, or fees? ❑ YES M NO
If yes, please describe:
15
C. Is the city /district requesting an exchange of property tax revenues as the result
of this proposal? ® YES ❑ NO
If yes, is a master property tax exchange agreement applicable to this
jurisdictional change? ® YES ❑ NO
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A. Who is the "lead agency" for this proposal? 1AFC0
B. What type of environmental document has been prepared?
❑ None - Categorically Exempt - Class:
❑ Environmental Impact Report (If an EIR has been prepared, attach the lead
agency's resolution listing significant impacts anticipated from the project
mitigation measures adopted to reduce or avoid significant impacts, and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations, if adopted.)
® Negative Declaration (please attach)
❑ Mitigated Negative Declaration (please attach)
❑ Subsequent Use of Previous EIR:
L'tf1 11 a d 4L I a(;# (OIA a COU
As part of this application, the applicant is required to sign an Indemnification
Agreement which is included as Attachment 2. Until this agreement is signed,
LAFCO cannot formally schedule a proposal for Commission consideration.
VII. FINAL COMMENTS
A. Describe any terms and /or conditions that should be included in LAFCO's
resolution of approval.
B. Provide any other comments or justifications regarding this proposal.
Note any changes in the approved project that are not reflected in these
materials. Attach any pertinent staff reports and supporting documentation
related to this proposal.
The following supplemental documentation is attached.: '�? t ,R
!lo
VIII. CERTIFICATION
I certify, under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of California, that the information
contained in this application is true and correct. I acknowledge and agree that the Orange
County Local Agency Formation Commission is relying on the accuracy of the information
provided and my representations in order to process this application proposal.
signature:
Name: Calvin S McLaughlin
Title: Ph.D.
Date: 9/612006
1�
ATTACHMENT 1
Property Owner Consent Form
(All legal owners must sign a consent form or submit a letter of signed consent.)
I,
consent to the annexation /reorganization of my property located at
(or Assessor Parcel Numbers
) to the City of Newport Beach
[agency(ies)].
Signature:
Address:
City, State, Zip:
Date:
lg
FEB - -'75 -2008 17 :19 P.02
February 25, 2008
CITY PFf`COST4 MESA
CALIFORNIA S=B•1200 - ` ! -- j P.O. BOX 1200
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE �AVOf} PRINTED:"
1
VIA FACSIMILE: (949) 644 -3020
City of Newport Beach
Honorable Edward D. Selich, Mayor
PO Box 1768
Newport Beach, California 92658 -3309
Subject: CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE
ANNEXATION OF THE SANTA ANA COUNTRY CLUB AND SOUTH
MESA DRIVE UNINCORPORATED AREAS IN SANTA ANA HEIGHTS
Dear Mayor Selich and Council Members:
At your meeting of February 26, 2008, the Newport Beach City Council will consider
whether to enter into a Master Property Tax Sharing Agreement with the County of
Orange for two unincorporated areas currently within the Sphere of Influence of the City
of Costa Mesa. The two unincorporated areas — the Santa Ana Country Club (SACC)
and the area south of Mesa Drive to University Drive /Santa Ana Avenue to Irvine
Avenue — have requested the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) allow
these areas to be annexed to the City of Newport Beach. Absent action by the City of
Newport Beach on the tax sharing agreement, the requested applications cannot be
legally processed.
The City of Costa Mesa strongly opposes any action that permits a change in the
existing S01 and the future annexation of these areas to Newport Beach. Our position
Is well documented, consistent, and In accordance with State law. While our City
cooperated on a change In the $01 for West Santa Ana Heights in recognition of its
being part of the larger Santa Ana Heights area already within Newport Beach and as
part of the County's redevelopment project area, those facts are not elements of the
request before you at this time. Even upon LAFCO's decision to support the annexation
of West Santa Ana Heights, we asserted our position that such cooperation should not
be taken in any way as an accommodation for future annexations of SACC or the area
south of Mesa Drive. That fact was underscored by LAFCO's September 12, 2007
action reaffirming the S01 for the City of Costa Mesa, including these two areas.
Beyond the specific action before you is the larger and much more important need for
cooperation by our two communities as noted in your staff report. As appropriately
pointed out by City Manager Homer Bludau in your staff report, our two cities are
entering a period when critical issues will require a strong partnership. These issues —
whether pressures on expansion of JWA, the future of Banning Ranch, extension of Rt.
55 or other matters — are complex measures demanding trust and cooperation on all
77 ONR DRIVE
PHONE: (714)7545255 - FAY.' (714)7545330 • TOD: (774)754.6244 • WWW.G.0Wt2- MQS2Z2.U8
FEB25 -2008 17 19 P.03
sides. Our confidence in the ability of our two cities to worts together to solve problems
that confront. both communities rests with mutual respect and integrity. Action to
support any approval of this Master Property Tax Sharing Agreement clearly damages
that confidence and trust.
We respectfully urge the City Council to reject approval of the Master Property Tax
Sharing Agreement so that we can not only put the matter of these annexation requests
to rest but focus positively on the matters of greater importance to our respective
communities.
Sincerely,
Eric R. Bever
Mayor
/cg
c. Newport Beach City Council
Newport Beach City Manager
Newport Beach City Clerk
Costa Mesa City Council
Costa Mesa City Manager
Costa Mesa City Clerk
Supervisor John Moodach
TOTAL P.03