http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-disney15aug15,0,5500383.story?coll=la-home-center



David Koenig, a Disneyland-watcher and author, called the dueling initiatives a "giant, out-of-control game of chicken."

"What they [the developer and Disney] want is so diametrically opposed," he said. "Maybe this being decided out of their hands, by citizen mediators, is the only way to settle this."




This is the SunCal backed initiative, that would require voter approval for the Strawberry Fields (aka land for the Third Park).

The problem I have is the fact the City Council is thinking about not requiring SunCal and its backers to get 10% of the Anaheim registered voters to sign petitions to place it on the ballot, but just having 3 council persons to approve it. The article states that now Ms. Galloway and Mr. Hernandez are in favor of placing it on the ballot, and that Ms. Kring is quoted in the article as saying "I don't like doing business like this, but I haven't made up my mind yet."

If this is placed on the ballot, it will once again show the fact that the council is playing favorites with SunCal. First off, all the initial rezoning stuff was done and paid for by the City of Anaheim, instead of the normal way, in which the Developer submits the plans and pays for the initial studies. Now they are possibly waving the costly act of gathering signatures for the initiative for SunCal.

And for what reason? If SunCal is required to get the required amount of signatures it will take time (and money) and more than likely would not be placed on the same ballot as the SOAR initiative and referendum, both of which are ready to be placed on the ballot.

One of the purposes of the CPDA ('The Coalition to Protect and Defend Anaheim', a SunCal backed group of supporters for the housing project) initiative is to confuse the issue in regards to the 2 SOAR based measures. So the only real way for this to happen is for the City Council to wave the signature requirements.

Of course, if that happens, it will show that the City Council is not just doing what is best for its citizens, but what is best for SunCal and their own interests.

Can someone (darkbeer?) provide a little primer on the issues at hand? I'm familiar with Disney's governmental "arrangements" in central Florida but far less so for Anaheim. What's the gripe, who has it, and what are the implications for Disney?

Can someone (darkbeer?) provide a little primer on the issues at hand? I'm familiar with Disney's governmental "arrangements" in central Florida but far less so for Anaheim. What's the gripe, who has it, and what are the implications for Disney?

OK, here is the basic lowdown...

SunCal, a large developer got the rights to purchase 2 Mobile Home Parks near the corner of Katella and Haster, which is located right across the street from the current Katella Cast Member Parking Lot, which is strongly rumored to be converted into a Third Theme Park for Disney in Anaheim in the future. (SunCal just got the rights to develop the old Alameda Military base, and has done a lot of other major projects in California and elsewhere.) Also note, SunCal has not purchased the land, they just have the rights to do so if they want to.

SunCal approached one of the city council members, Ms. Galloway, who claims her primary reason for being on the council is to help build more low cost housing. SunCal knew this and came up with a high density project for the land (about 1,500 units) of which 15% would be low cost housing.

The normal procedure is for SunCal to draw up final plans, and then submit environmental reports, etc. and apply to the City Zoning Committee to get the project approved.

Instead, Ms. Galloway asked the council and the zoning department to come up with environmental reports, etc. for a "generic" project that match the idea SunCal came up with, but without any details. (Basically using the City's money, instead of SunCal's.) The Zoning commission did not approve the project. So Ms. Galloway brought the project to the full City Council for an appeal.

The first vote for the appeal was a 2-2 deadlock, as Council person Lucille Kring did not vote, due to the fact that Disney brought up a conflict of interest due to Ms. Kring's involvement with a Wine Bar scheduled to be built in the Anaheim Garden Walk project (resort area). The conflict was presented in front of the State board, who stated it was not a conflict, and then the measure was brought up again in front of the council, where the zoning change was passed 3-2.

Once the SunCal project was brought up in front of the zoning commission, Disney and other businesses in the Anaheim Resort Area formed S.O.A.R. (Save Our Anaheim Resort) and started an Initiative that would require the citizens to vote on any zoning changes to the resort area that were non-commercial. They started to gather signatures in March.

Once the city council voted for the zoning change, SOAR started the process of a referendum to overturn the zoning change. They had 30 days to gather 10% of the registered voters in the City of Anaheim to either have the council reverse the decision, or to place the item on the ballot for the citizens to vote. One main reason why SOAR did this was to stop a loophole, in which the city allowed SunCal to break ground prior to the Initiative to require voters approval anywhere in the resort area (Grandfathered). SOAR did get the signatures and they were validated to have enough signatures, even though a SunCal backed group, CDPA tried to confuse the issue and gathered signatures on a non-binding idea. Once the Referendum was found to have enough signatures, the zoning change was placed on hold and will only be "approved" if it goes to the ballot and less than 50% plus 1 voters decide to vote to reverse the decision.

So the City Council needs to make a decision due to the Referendum that was submitted, either revoke the zoning change, or place the measure on an upcoming ballot (they have until November 2008 to do so, though they could decide to place it earlier, more than likely as part of the currently scheduled February or June ballots). They have postponed the decision twice, hoping for a compromise between Disney and SunCal (so they could save face and have the issue disappear). Disney announced recently that they are deadlocked and no compromise is coming.

SOAR has not yet submitted the initiative signature yet, but they have a 6 month time limit, and should do so shortly. They decided to hold back as a negation tool, since they are not required to submit them. If they got an agreement without going to the ballot, they could just throw them away. (Election campaign costs money, usually a lot of it).

So what is next?

The City Council is scheduled to take up the Referendum (the one project getting cancelled) next Tuesday, August 21st. They can once again postpone the decision, or either rescind the decision, or decided which ballot the measure will be placed. SOAR is really pushing for no more postponements.

Shortly, SOAR should submit the Initiative (and zoning change to the Resort area) to the Register of Voters for signature verification, they have gather more signatures than required, but that is normal, as some signatures will be found not valid (not a voter, has signed twice, or not an Anaheim citizen, etc.) If it is found to have enough signatures, then once again, the City Council will have to decide which ballot to place the measure on (presumably the same one as the referendum).

CDPA is trying to get their own initiative (which is what the LA Times article is discussing) to be placed on the same ballot as the two SOAR measures. As stated earlier, if they had to submit an Initiative for approval (wording) and then have up to 6 months to gather the signatures, more than likely it wouldn't be submitted in enough time to be placed on the same ballot as the two SOAR issues. And to SunCal, they need it to be on the same ballot, as the current polls have SOAR winning both measures with about 70% of the vote. The only way SunCal can win is an expensive campaign and confusing voters by using the 3rd measure to make claims and try and convince folks to vote the same on all three measures.

Now why does SunCal care. well, currently Commercial Zoned land is worth about $2 million an acre in Anaheim, while Residential Zoned land is worth $5 million. With the project being over 22 acres, that is a $66 million profit prior to all the money they will make on the actual building of the 1,500 units, even with 225 units being low-cost, so less profit, still leaves over 1,200 units they can sell at a good sized profit.

And it is also interesting to see and watch the political groups get involved.

For example, when the measure was first placed in front of the council, the unions came out in favor of Ms. Galloway (who had the unions support when she ran for the council seat), and in fact many union members were paid to come out and speak in front of the council. Since then, the building unions have sided with SOAR and the need to keep commercial projects in the area (helps keeps union jobs in the area). In fact, the head of the AFL-CIO came out and spoke in front of the council in favor of rescinding the zoning change. This disappointed Ms. Galloway, who addressed the issue at the July council meeting, who stated that some unions still support her.

Also, there is a religious group of churches (Orange County
Congregation Community Organization, a coalition of 20 mostly Catholic churches) that is also campaigning for low cost housing in Anaheim, but they have not took any stance in regards to the SunCal project, as many of them support SOAR. They are actively campaigning for Low Cost Housing to be part of the Platinum Triangle project, which is building housing around Angel Stadium.

So currently, IMHO, SunCal is losing the battles and I am surprised they are still fighting for the project to be approved, and trying to get the "Strawberry Field" Initiative on the ballot is proof they are still fighting.

So we should see the 2 or 3 measures on an upcoming ballot, and a lot of money spent by Disney and SunCal (support funds for SOAR and CDPA) to convince voters to vote for or against the measures.

The one plus for Disney fans around the world, as part of the campaigning for the measures, Disney will have to discuss their future plans for the current Disneyland Resort and plans to expand, including a third park.

But also expect a lot of nasty ads and campaign mailers to come out if the measures go to the ballot.

SOAR has updated its website...

http://www.soaranaheim.com/



Will the Anaheim City Council support the Public’s interest or will they support the Special interests on August 21?

More than 21,000 Anaheim residents signed petitions to demand a vote on the city council’s decision to approve high-density housing in the Anaheim Resort District.

The referendum qualified for a public vote in late June, nearly two months ago.

What was the council’s response? Three times they have delayed a decision to place the item on the ballot – as required by law – so Anaheim voters can express their views about this issue.



More at the link...

Will the Anaheim City Council support the Public’s interest or will they support the Special interests on August 21?

Isn't it just a teeny bit disingenuous for the Disney-backed "citizen's committee" to be crowing about "special interests"?

Interesting to note that Disney has donated $1.6 million so far to SOAR.

Here is a link to the Second Quarter Campaign Statement.

http://www.ocblog.net/Disney_SOAR_report_6_30_2007.pdf

And SunCal has donated over $400,000 to CDPA...

http://209.234.149.20/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=85374

And SOAR has had to gather over 50,000 signatures for their two measures, while CDPA hasn't had those expenses. Plus while SOAR has over $200,000 in the bank (after taking in account its debts), CDPA is about $100,000 in debt.

Here is something I just posted over at the OC Blog, where I found the SOAR campaign statement. The writer "Jubal" does admit to be working for SunCal...

http://www.ocblog.net/ocblog/2007/08...sneyheim-.html (http://www.ocblog.net/ocblog/2007/08/the-disneyheim-.html)


Darkbeer][/B]

This post got me interested, so I went to Anaheim.net and looked in the City Clerk records for the Form 460 for the Committee to Defend and Protect Anaheim for the April thru June period.

http://209.234.149.20/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=85374 (http://209.234.149.20/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=85374)

SunCal has donated over $400,000 to CDPA

And SOAR has had to gather over 50,000 signatures for their two measures, while CDPA hasn't had those expenses. Plus while SOAR has over $200,000 in the bank (after taking in account its debts), CDPA is about $100,000 in debt.

Now CDPA/SunCal is trying to get the initiative they favor (Voters need to approve "Strawberry Field" Zoning changes) without the time or expense that SOAR had to by getting the City Council to waive the requirement.
What will this do, save SunCal up to $500,000 which would normally be needed to pay petition circulators. Money they can spend instead on campaigning on the ballot measures.

And of course, SOAR had a lot of extra expenses due to the fact that CDPA/SunCal persuaded the City Council to "codify" the Zoning Change that the city council approved. This required the SOAR petition gatherers to carry around the entire Anaheim Municipal Code when getting signatures, and since the code is about the size of a large phone book, pretty much prevented petitions to be mailed to registered voters and door to door campaigning. How much extra money did Disney have to donate to SOAR to cover the more expensive way of gathering signatures, and paying for those copies of the Municipal Code to be printed?

I am all for CDPA/SunCal being allowed to propose their "Strawberry Field" Initiative, but not with the City Council waiver. They should have to go through the same time and expense as SOAR had to do to gather signatures on its two measures.

And who knows, CDPA might not even be able to get 10% of the Anaheim registered voters to sign the petition. But if they do, then it should be placed on the ballot, as the citizens requested it. If they can't get the 10%, then it should stay off the ballot.




Also, he wrote a second post on the same subject in the last 24 hours...

http://www.ocblog.net/ocblog/2007/08...s-carouse.html (http://www.ocblog.net/ocblog/2007/08/disneys-carouse.html)

Recommended reading, and of course, you can always leave your comments there...

Thanks, darkbeer, that was a great summary. Of course I'm biased as a Disney fan, but I certainly hope SOAR comes out on top. This sounds like a classic case of corporate greed and back-room political deals doing an end-around the people and established processes.