Loading...
Agenda Packets - Board - 2006-07-06Costa Mesa jv District ... an Independent Special District Greg Woodside Vice President AGENDA Jim Ferryman President Art Perry Secretary Arlene Schafer Dan Worthington Director Director Special Meeting — Thursday, July 6, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER — 12:00 p.m. — 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Director Schafer III. INVOCATION — Director Woodside IV. ROLL CALL V LAFCO Hearing - "West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach" A. Consider Plan for Services and Position by District VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS VII. ADJOURNMENT Protecting our community's health by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. crosdcaAov COSTA MESA SaNr7�'DzszRrcr Memorandum To: Board of Directors ... an Independent Specia[District From: Joan Revak, Board Secretary/Program Manager /Clerk of the District Date: July 2, 2006 Subject: LAFCO HEARING RE WEST SANTA ANA HEIGHTS REORGANIZATION On Wednesday, July 12, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. Orange County LAFCO will hold a public hearing to consider the City of Newport Beach's application for the West Santa Heights Reorganization. Newport Beach has submitted an application to LAFCO to annex the Santa Ana Country Club and other areas on the westerly side of Irvine Avenue. By way of email from Allan Roeder, the City of Costa Mesa requested the elected. officials on the CMSD Board join the cause of opposing the proposal based on the resultant illogical City of Costa Mesa /City of Newport Beach boundary line. Many statements have been made to the underlying reasons for the annexation including higher property values and the ability of the City of Newport Beach to then acquire $30 million in redevelopment funds. From a CMSD standpoint, the proposal states the CMSD will remain as the sewer service provider after annexation; however, the proposal does not indicate the CMSD will remain as the trash collection provider for the residences currently being served by the CMSD that would be annexed to Newport Beach. This is being considered a simple, but important, omission as the CMSD remained as the trash collection provider for the East Santa Ana Heights area after it was annexed to the City of Newport Beach. A call has been placed to Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager of Newport Beach, requesting a correction to the City's application to LAFCO. From the standpoint that the CMSD Board of Directors are also citizens residing inside the CMSD boundary and that the proposal from Newport Beach creates haphazard boundary lines, the Board of Directors may want to formally state its position. Rob has already prepared, but not yet sent, a strongly worded reply to LAFCO objecting to the City of Newport Beach proposal. Protecting our community's health by providing solid waste andsewer collection services. costamesasanitarydistrict.org LAFCO HEARING RE WEST SANTA ANA HEIGHTS REORGANIZATION July 2; 2006 Page 2- If the CMSD Board desires to meet prior to the LAFCO meeting to formalize a response and consider attendance at the public hearing, the Special Meeting would have to be held on either Thursday, July 6, at noon, Thursday, July 6, at 6:00 p.m., or Monday, July 10, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. Please email both Joan and Rob with your preference to meet or not meet and your availability on the three dates. Rob's email is robh2 @cox.net and he is available by cell phone at (714) 293 -2727 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Blank Page 1 of 2 Thomas Fauth From: Joan Revak Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:56 PM To: 'James Ferryman'; 'Greg Woodside'; 'aperry @nmusd.us'; 'acschafer @comcast.net'; 'Dan4mwdoc @comcast.net'; Joan Revak Cc: 'Rob Hamers'; Thomas Fauth; Wendy Davis Subject: FW: On Behalf of Allan Roeder, City Manager - City of Costa Mesa Attachments: Sample letter of Support #1.doc; Sample letter of Support #2.doc; maps.pdf J ae ,Poaa.E Board <S'ecretaf� /Praasranr /Liaaaper &e4 /L%8a �anitard �irtrict 949- 645 -8400, act, ?Z3 949 -650 -1153 l JR, 714 -296 -=5 (CCU) From: SHELTON, KELLY [mailto :kshelton @ci.costa- mesa.ca.us] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:24 PM To: Joan Revak Subject: FW: On Behalf of Allan Roeder, City Manager - City of Costa Mesa June 29, 2006 Jim Ferryman, President & Board of Directors Costa Mesa Sanitary District 628 W. 19th Street Costa Mesa, California 92627 Dear President Ferryman: It's not often that the City of Costa Mesa asks for the assistance of those in our community. Yet we face an upcoming decision that will affect Costa Mesa for decades to come, and we need your help. As an important member of our community, we are asking a few minutes of your time in communicating the following to appointed officials in Orange County. The City of Costa Mesa needs your support regarding an upcoming action before the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO). On Wednesday, July 12, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. the LAFCO Board will consider two applications affecting County unincorporated areas adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. These include 83 acres on the Eastside of Costa Mesa and 369 acres adjacent to the City's Westside. LAFCO will be considering the future of these areas and whether they ultimately will become part of Costa Mesa or Newport Beach. Prior to this hearing, I am requesting that you prepare a letter of support for the City of Costa Mesa's position. Attached are two sample letters to assist you with your letter. Please do the following: 1. Review both sample letters and select the version that is best for you; 6/30/2006 Blank Page 2 of 2 2. Change the letter to include information on who you are or who you represent and why it is important to you - please personalize your letter so the Board of LAFCO does not receive multiple copies of the same correspondence. 3. Mail the letter to the address on the sample letter by July 9th or Fax the letter to 714 - 834 -2643. The LAFCO staff will then make copies of this letter for distribution to the entire Board; and 4. Mail a copy of the letter to Allan L. Roeder, City'of Costa Mesa, 77 Fair Drive, P.O. Box 1200, 92628 -. 1200 or Fax the letter to 714- 754 -5330. If you would like additional information on the City's position, please go to the City website at the following link http: / /www.ci. costa - mesa. ca. us / council / agenda /2006- 03- 07 /030706BanningRanch pdf. In addition, the LAFCO website has more information on its mission and it will shortly have the agenda and LAFCO staff reports related to this meeting. The LAFCO site is http:// www. oclafco.ca.gov /acienda/index.htm Finally, the LAFCO Board Meeting will be held in Building 10, Planning Commission Hearing Room at the Orange County Hall of Administration, 10 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701. If you can attend and speak in support of your community, we would be honored. If you have any questions, please feel free to call meat (714) 754 -5328. Thank you for considering this request. Sincerely, Allan L. Roeder City Manager Attachments THE CITY IS ALSO PROVIDING YOU WITH A HARD COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT VIA U.S. MAIL INCLUDING THE MAPS AND STAMPED, PRE - ADDRESSED ENVELOPES FOR YOUR USE. 6/30/2006 July , 2006 Chair Robert Bouer and LAFCO Commission Members Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 SUBJECT: Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment (SOI 06 -20) and West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach (RO- 06 -25) Dear Chair Bouer and Members of the LAFCO Commission: . On July 12, 2006, you will consider two amendments affecting unincorporated territories adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. I (We) urge your support of an equitable solution to the long -time annexation issues that exist between Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. As Commissioners, you are well aware of the leadership consistently demonstrated by Costa Mesa in the fair and equitable processing of annexations. _There has to be a resolve that is equitable to both cities. Your staff has done an excellent initial job of establishing a level and open playing field — we need you to insure that is maintained throughout this process so that both communities are equitably served.. I (we) urge you to consider an equitable and comprehensive solution to the proposed territory changes and end the debate once and for all. Sincerely, July_, 2006 Chair Robert Bouer and LAFCO Commission Members Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 SUBJECT: Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment (SOI 06 -20) and West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach (RO- 06 -25) Dear Chair Bouer and Members of the LAFCO Commission: On July 12, 2006, you will consider two amendments affecting unincorporated territories adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. I We urge your support of an equitable solution to the long -time annexation issues that exist between Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. Much of the current debate over annexation stems from the piecemeal approach that has occurred over many years. Specifically, I we believe that if West Santa Ana Heights, which has been historically within Costa Mesa's Sphere of Influence, is to be reorganized to be a part of Newport Beach, such a change can only be approved with appropriate conditions that make this change equitable to both cities. Those conditions include the establishment of municipal boundaries on Santa Ana Avenue and on Mesa Drive to limit future annexation to West Santa Ana Heights only and to eliminate the 1 -foot municipal boundary between the City of Costa Mesa and the Banning Ranch property. The City of Newport Beach has expanded its initial interest in ultimately annexing West Santa Ana Heights only to now also include the unincorporated Santa Ana Country Club and the area south of Mesa Drive, both of which have been historically in Costa Mesa's Sphere of Influence. Yet Newport Beach opposes any consideration of eliminating the 1 -foot "spite" strip around Banning Ranch based on historic precedence. I We believe that Newport Beach cannot have it both ways by requesting territory changes that fit their current objectives, while relying on precedence to preserve their boundaries around Banning Ranch. While the Costa Mesa City Council acknowledged the redevelopment commonalities of West Santa Ana Heights and East Santa Ana Heights, no such commonality exists with respect to the Santa Ana Country Club, the area South of Mesa Drive or the Banning Ranch property. Do not use Costa Mesa's leadership in the furtherance of your goals and in support of State law as an invitation to permit other changes in the City's SOI. The future of the remaining County areas of Banning Ranch, the Santa Ana Country Club and the area south of Mesa Drive all have very significant impacts on Costa Mesa - far more so than in the City of Newport Beach in virtually every regard. It is for this reason that the Commission needs to address all of these areas together in an impartial manner. I (we) urge you to consider an equitable and comprehensive solution to the proposed territory changes and end the debate once and for all. Sincerely, F-71 m X 4 u ii City of Nawport Smac►) CM"Y DF ZADSTA NUA VrY OF %L-iVP0Frr BEAC-0 t.ftMCORPORATM —A.-.& --C-JMT*l -::rrY OF AJlW71MGll31t 4EAU 11 oism, buvon A ueaqc iz POLITICAL BOUNDARIES -dd THE NEWPORT BANNING RANCH TAYLOR WC40ROW .. .6 Costa Mesa Eastside Annexation Island Number 7 V 4P 4 F 0 `_J Q 47�77 Figure I John Wayne Runway Protection Zone LEGEND City of Costa Mesa City of Newport Beach Annexation Area Costa Mesa City Boundary Costa Mesa Sphere of Influence f/ �r July_, 2006 Chair Robert Bouer and LAFCO Commission Members Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 SUBJECT: Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment (SOI 06 -20) and West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach (RO- 06 -25) Dear Chair Bouer and Members of the LAFCO Commission: On July 12, 2006, you will consider two amendments affecting unincorporated territories adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. I We urge your support of an equitable solution to the long -time annexation issues that exist between Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. Much of the current debate over annexation stems from the piecemeal approach that has occurred over many years. Specifically, I we believe that if West Santa Ana Heights, which has been historically within Costa Mesa's Sphere of Influence, is to be reorganized to be a part of Newport Beach, such a change can only be approved with appropriate conditions that make this change equitable to both cities. Those conditions include the establishment of municipal boundaries on Santa Ana Avenue and on Mesa Drive to limit future annexation to West Santa Ana Heights only and to eliminate the 1 -foot municipal boundary between the City of Costa Mesa and the Banning Ranch property. The City of Newport Beach has expanded its initial interest.in ultimately annexing West -Santa Ana Heights only to now also include the- unincorporated Santa Ana Country Club and the area south of Mesa Drive, both of which have been historically in Costa. Mesa's Sphere of Influence. Yet Newport Beach opposes any consideration of eliminating the 1 -foot "spite" strip around Banning Ranch based on historic precedence. I We believe that Newport Beach cannot have it both ways by requesting territory changes that fit their current objectives, while relying on precedence to preserve their boundaries around Banning Ranch. While the Costa Mesa City Council acknowledged the redevelopment commonalities of West Santa Ana Heights and East Santa Ana Heights, no such commonality exists with respect to the Santa Ana Country Club, the area South of Mesa Drive or the Banning Ranch property. Do not use Costa Mesa's leadership in the furtherance of your goals and in support of State law as an invitation to permit other changes in the City's SOI. The future of the remaining County areas of Banning Ranch, the Santa Ana-,Country Club and the area south of Mesa Drive all have very significant impacts on Costa Mesa - far more so than in the City of Newport Beach in virtually every regard. It is for this reason that the Commission needs tg address all of these areas together in an impartial manner. I (we) urge you to consider an equitable and comprehensive solution to the proposed territory changes. and end the debate once and for all. Sincerely, JUN -27 -2006 12:35 RobHamers • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING C7 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION NOTICE iS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County to consider Municipal Service Reviews, a Sphere of Influence amendment and a Reorganization concerning the following agencies: MUNCIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS City of Costa Mesa (MSR 06 -26) City of Newport Beach (MSR 06 -28) SPHERE OF INFLUENCE (SOI) AMEN77MENT Banning; Ranch (SOL 06 -20) REORGANIZATION OF WEST SANTA ANA HEIGHTS (RO 06 -25) Sphere of influence change from Costa Mesa SOI to Newport Beach SOI and annexation of saine to the City of Newport Beach The hearing will be held on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. at the Orange County 1 -Lail of Administration, 10 Civic Center Plaza, Planning Commission Hearing Room, Santa Ana, CA 92701. On the basis of Initial Studies prepared for the projects, it was concluded that the projects will not have a significant effect on the environment, and Categorical Exemptions or Draft Negative Declarations have been prepared for each of the earned projects. At the hearing, the Commission will consider oral and written testimony by any interested person or affected agency and the report of the Executive Officer. The proposal file, along with copies of the environmental determinations, may be examined at 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235, Santa Ana, CA 92701. For more information, please call Bob Aldrich, Assistant Executive Officer, at (714) 834 -2.556. JOYCE CROSTHWAITE Exccutive Officer Dated_ June 21, 2006 P.03/03 TOTAL P.03 TI M --)' --)Mr-AC 1 ^7 • 7C OQ % P R7 JUN -27 -2006 12 :35 RobHamers P.01 /03 "FCO Local Apticv Fornic-aiiin Commission Orange County CERTIFICATE OF FILING PROPOSED "WEST SANTA ANA HEIGHTS REORGANIZATION TO THE CITY .OIH NEWPORT BEACH (RO 06 -25T I, Joyce Crosthwaite, Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Ccammission of the County of Orange, do hereby certify that: The application referenced and described below has been submitted to me and has been found to be in the form prescribed by the Orange County Local Agency-Formation Commission. 2. The application contains the information and data requested and required by this Commission and applicable provisions of State law and has been accepted for filing on. 3_ The subject proposal and all related documents are on file in the office of the Local Agency Formation Commission, 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235, Santa Ana, CA 92701, and may be examined by any individual person upon request. Application Title: West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Reach (RO 06 -25) Applicant: City of Newport Beach Address: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Reach, CA 92663 General Location: The approximately 83 -acre property is bounded by Mesa Drive on the south, Santa Ana Avenue to the west, the City of Newport Beach's boundary to the east, and the Santa Ana /Delhi Flood Control Channel to the north. Date of hearing: July 12, 2006 Subject Agencies: City of Newport Beach, City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange Affected Agencies: Irvine Ranch Water District, Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Mesa Consolidated Water District This certificate of filing is issued pursuant to Section 5681-8 of the Government Code, State of California. All time requirements and limitations for processing and consideration of this application specified by state law and/or rules and regulations of the Orange County local Agency Formation Commission shall become effective on the date of issue of this certificate. JUN -27 -2006 12:35 9e% P.01 • JUN -27 -2006 12:35 RobHamers Date: June 22, 2006 Joyce Crosthwaitc Executive Officer P.02 /03 JUN -27 -2006 12:35 98% P.02 Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 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, will be distributed electronically, APPLICATION FOR: (check all that apply) ❑ Annexation to: ❑ Detachment from: ® Reorganization (2 or more changes of organization) of: West Santa Ana Heights by the City of Newport Beach ❑ 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? GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: What changes of organization are included? What agencies are involved? etc. This proposal asks that West Santa Ana Heights (the area bounded by Mesa Drive to the South, Santa Ana Avenue to the West, the City of Newport Beach's boundary to the East, and the Santa Ana /Delhi Flood Control Channel to the North and East) 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. The community of West Santa Ana Heights (WSAH) has social geographic and governmental ties to East Santa Ana Heights (ESAH). ESAH was annexed to Newport Beach in July, 2003. The two communities share borders, a redevelopment (RDA) project area (administered by the County of Orange). impacts from John Wayne Airport and a residents committee linked to the RDA that in effect serves as a community association for both neighborhoods. For these reasons, alignina the two sides of Santa Ana Heights into one city appears sensible. WHO INITIATED THIS PROPOSAL? Please select one from the drop -down list: City Council 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): The area bounded by Mesa Drive to the South Santa Ana Avenue to the West, and the Santa Ana /Delhi Channel to the North and East. 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 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 hMg.11 www. boe .ca.gog /proptaxes /sprdcont.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. ® Other (please explain) Map and Legal Description is being prepared by the County Suveyor. APPLICANT`S REPRESENTATIVE (if any): Name: City of Newport Beach Address: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949- 644 -3002 FAX: 949 - 644 -3020 email: dkiff @city.newport - beach.ca.us Contact Person: Dave Kiff Title: Assistant City Manager PROPERTY WNER(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 (sphere detachment) Address: 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California 92626 Phone: 714 - 754 -5223 FAX: 714- 754 -5330 email: ARoeder @d.costa- mesa.ca.us Contact Person: Allan Roeder Title: City Manager Name: County of Orange (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 Mauk 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: jones@irwd.com Contact Person: Paul D. Jones Title: General Manacier Name: Mesa Consolidated Water District Address: Post Office Box 5008, Costa Mesa, CA 92628 -5008 Phone: 949 - 631 -1206 FAX: 949- 574 -1036 email: DianaLOmesawater.orq Contact Person: Diana M. Leach Title: General Manager Name: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Address: 234 E. 17th St., Ste. 205, Costa Mesa: CA 92627 Phone: (949) 631 -1731 FAX: (949) 548 -6516 email: rhamers @crosdca.yov Contact Person: Robin V. Hamers Title: Manager /En iq neer 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: Chin 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: Address: Phone: FAX: email: Name: Address: Phone: FAX: email: REGISTERED VOTER /PROPERTY OWNER MAILING 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 districts) affected by the proposal. School District: Newport-Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD) Address: 2985 -A Bear Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone: (714) 424 -5000 FAX: (714) 424 -8925 email: Contact Person: Dr. Robert Barbot Title: Superintendent 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. 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 1.) ❑ 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: 64 acres Site Information: Surroundin PRE • • GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION DESIGNATION County: Open Space County: County: Recreational, Specific Plan Specific Plan Professional /Admin, City: City: Residential Single ' CURRENT• Family, Residential City: City: ' Multi - Family, Residential /Kennel, Horticultural /Nursery. Includes Specific Plan. Same land uses, County: County: identical Specific Plan components. City: City: Specific Plan Single Family Detached, PROPOSED: Admin /Prof /Financial commercial, Multi - Family Residential, Recreational and Environmental Open Space Surroundin Land Uses: LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION DESIGNATION Residential County: County: NORTH: City: City: Residential and County: County: SOUTH• Retail /Commercial ' City: City: 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, Mesa Consolidated Water District. B. Describe any land use entitlements or permits approved or pending for the proposal area: None known. City and County would cooperatively address any permits pending or planned as the effective date approaches. C. Describe any public easements /oil well operations /major highways /watercourses/ topographical features: The Santa Ana /Delhi Channel is a major drainage that would be the northern and eastern boundary of this reorganization. There are no major highways within the territory nor oil well operations. Known public easements are only 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: Approximately 725 total Dwelling Units (218 single family detached, 507 attached units) Proposed: No change LAMP V!SE DESIGNATION DESIGNATION Office /Commercial, County: County: Golf Course, some Business Park Specific Plan residential City: City: EAST• ' Business Park, Admin /Prof /Financial Specific Plan commercial, Recreational and Environmental Open Space Golf Course County: County: WEST: City: City: 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, Mesa Consolidated Water District. B. Describe any land use entitlements or permits approved or pending for the proposal area: None known. City and County would cooperatively address any permits pending or planned as the effective date approaches. C. Describe any public easements /oil well operations /major highways /watercourses/ topographical features: The Santa Ana /Delhi Channel is a major drainage that would be the northern and eastern boundary of this reorganization. There are no major highways within the territory nor oil well operations. Known public easements are only 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: Approximately 725 total Dwelling Units (218 single family detached, 507 attached units) Proposed: No change B. Is the proposal area considered "inhabited" (i.e. do more than 12 registered voters reside on the territory /property)? ® YES ❑ NO 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): Reorganization action would not affect regional housing needs allocations either negatively or positively. IV. PLAN FOR PROVIDING SERVICES Describe the services that are Provided or are to be provided to subject property: What effect will this proposal have on the type or level of services both within and outside the proposal area? Within Proposal Area • Reorganization may lead to slighly faster response times for Fire /EMS and Police services Proposal should reduce the amount of automatic aid calls to the area Describe Approxirnate Current Proposed Level/Range of .. Service Service Service of Proposed will be Method to Service Water Provider Mesa .- Mesa Potable water and, in no Existing fees Consolidated Consolidated some cases, interruption or IRWD or IRWD reclaimed water for irrigation Sewer Costa Mesa Costa Mesa Wastewater Services no Existing fees Sanitary Sanitary interruption District District Police OC Sheriff NB Police Law Enforcement upon effective Existing tax services date of base annexation Fire OC Fire NB Fire Fire /EMS services upon effective Existing tax Authority Department date of base annexation Public County of City of roads, streets, upon effective Existing tax Works Orange Newport sidewalks, date of base Beach streetlights, drainage annexation Parks & None City of recreational upon effective Existing tax Recreation Newport programs, aquatics, date of base Beach more. annexation Other Library: Library services, upon effective Existing tax Services County of Code & Water date of base (list) Orange City of Quality Enforcement annexation Code Newport Services, and animal Enforcement: Beach control services. City of Newport Beach 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 Proposal Area • Reorganization may lead to slighly faster response times for Fire /EMS and Police services Proposal should reduce the amount of automatic aid calls to the area for Fire /EMS and Police services. Proposal should increase residents' ability to use quality library services, recreation services, Jr. Lifeguard classes, more. Outside Proposal Area: No significant change. V. SPECIAL REVENUES A. Do agencies whose boundaries are being changed have existing bonded debt? ❑ YES ® NO If yes, please describe: B. Will the territory be subject to any new or additional special taxes, benefit charges, or fees? ❑ YES ® NO If yes, please describe: 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? City of Newport Beach 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: VII. INDEMNIFICATION 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. NA B. Provide any other comments or justifications regarding this proposal. C. 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. NLA The following supplemental documentation is attached: Attachment A: City's Resolution of Application Attachment B: List of APNs, AddrQrzses of APNS. Attachment C• Additional comments an 12 zoning and General Plan Designation from City of Newport Beach's Council Agenda report Attac Ment D. Negative Declaration (January 13, 24941 Attachment 1: (not applicable) Attachment 2: Indemnification Agreement 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: Title: Date: Assistant City Manager AEI 4. 2006 ATTACHMENTS TO LAFCO APPLICATION City of Newport Beach West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization Attachment A: City's Resolution of Application Attachment B: List of APNs, Addresses of APNs. Attachment C: Additional comments on pre- zoning and General Plan Designation from City of Newport Beach's Council Agenda report Attachment D: Negative Declaration (January 13, 2004) Attachment 1: (not applicable) Attachment 2: Indemnification Agreement June 29, 2006 Jim Ferryman, President & Board of Directors Costa Mesa Sanitary District 628 W. 19th Street Costa Mesa, California 92627 v� Dear President rark CITY OF COSTA MESA P.O. BOX 1200, CALIFORNIA 92628 -1200 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER RECEIVED JUN 3 0 2000 COSTA MVI;A SANITARY DISTRICT It's not often that the City of Costa Mesa asks for the assistance of those in our community. Yet we face an upcoming decision that will affect Costa Mesa for decades to come, and we need your help. As an important member of our community, we are asking a few minutes of your time in communicating the following to appointed officials in Orange County. The City of Costa Mesa needs your support regarding an upcoming action before the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO). On Wednesday, July 12, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. the LAFCO Board will consider two applications affecting County unincorporated areas adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. These include 83 acres on the Eastside of Costa Mesa and 369 acres adjacent to the City's Westside. LAFCO will be considering the future of these areas and whether they ultimately will become part of Costa Mesa or Newport Beach. Prior to this hearing, I am requesting that you prepare a letter of support for the City of Costa Mesa's position. Attached are two om pie letters to assist you with your letter. Please do the following: 1. Review both sample letters and select the version that is best for you; 2. Change the letter to include information on who you are or who you represent and why it is important to you — please personalize your letter so the Board of LAFCO does not receive multiple . copies of the same correspondence. 3. Mail the letter to the address on the sample letter by July 9th or Fax the letter to 714 - 834 -2643. The LAFCO staff will then make copies of this letter for distribution to the entire Board; and 4. Mail a copy of the letter to Allan L. Roeder, City of Costa Mesa, 77 Fair Drive, P.O. Box 1200, 92628 -1200 or Fax the letter to 714 - 754 -5330. If you would like additional information on the City's position, please go to the City website at the following link http: / /www.ei.costa -mesa ca us /council /agenda /2006 03 07 /030706BanningRanch pdf. In addition, the LAFCO website has more Information on Its mission and it will shortly have the agenda and LAFCO staff reports related to this meeting. The LAFCO site is http://www.oclafco.ca.gov/agenda/index.htm Finally, the LAFCO Board Meeting will be held in Building 10, Planning Commission Hearing Room at the Orange County Hall of Administration, 10 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701. If you can attend . and speak in support of your community, we would be honored. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (714) 754 -5328. Thank you for considering this request. Sincerely, �J Allan L. Roeder City. Manager iachments 77 FAIR DRIVE PHONE: (714) 754 -5327 • TDD: (714) 754 -5244 • FAX: (714) 754 -5330 • www.d.costa- mesa.cams • July , 2006 Chair Robert Bouer and LAFCO Commission Members Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 SUBJECT: Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment (SOI 06 -20) and West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach (RO- 06 -25) Dear Chair Bouer and Members of the LAFCO Commission: On July 12, 2006, you will consider two amendments affecting unincorporated territories adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. I We urge your support of an equitable solution to the long -time annexation issues that exist between Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. As Commissioners, you are well aware of the leadership consistently demonstrated by Costa Mesa in the fair and equitable processing of annexations. There has to be a resolve that is equitable to both cities. Your staff has done an excellent initial job of establishing a level and open playing field — we need you to insure that is maintained throughout this process so that both communities are equitably served. I (we) urge you to consider an equitable and comprehensive solution to the proposed territory changes and end the debate once and for all. Sincerely, .® July , 2006 Chair Robert Bouer and LAFCO Commission Members Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 SUBJECT: Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment (SOI 06 -20) and West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach (RO- 06 -25) Dear Chair Bouer and Members of the LAFCO Commission: On July 12, 2006, you will consider two amendments affecting unincorporated territories adjacent to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. I (We) urge your support of an equitable solution to the long -time annexation issues that exist between Newport • Beach and Costa Mesa. As Commissioners, you are well aware of the leadership consistently demonstrated by Costa Mesa in the fair and equitable processing of annexations. There has to be a resolve that is equitable to both cities. Your staff has done an excellent initial job of establishing a level and open playing field — we need you to insure that is maintained throughout this process so that both communities are equitably served. I (we) urge you to consider an equitable and comprehensive solution to the proposed territory changes and end the debate once and for all. Sincerely, L� d° •i a Figure 1 John Wayne Runway f ' Protection done LEGEND City of Costa Mesa City of Newport Reach M Annexation Area !' v Costa Mosa City Boundary Costa Mesa Sphere of Influence . • • 0 tit City of N&-wpgrt Scoi:A'i cry OF ZCGTA W-3A QTY OF ,4e6VP0Rr DEA,"k Ukr4CORPORATFn lMA4Ge:.Ckjf4T', OF F#.lNTfMG!llK:lEAUM N POLITICAL BOUNDARIES d ddf THE NEWPORT BANNING RANCH TAYLOR WOOORCW 7 -PR 0 J E C T 0 9 E 9 V 1 f-W W 0 V F 9 1 E R 11 9 1 , POLITICAL BOUNDARIES d ddf THE NEWPORT BANNING RANCH TAYLOR WOOORCW 7 -PR 0 J E C T 0 9 E 9 V 1 f-W W 0 V F 9 1 E R 11 9 1 , SAWpq�� �� G bbb CC ADO � M'esa ita ast-rict V if' OW an Ifloepenbent, Special Disn,-Ict Board of Directors James Fernwia a Greg li bodside .art Pe r, _y Arleiie S.:hcifc r Dart W>rthiagton stq ff Rubin B. Ham.ers Manager District Engineer (949) 631 -1731 Thomas A. Faith Assistant Maanager. Joan Revak Board secretary Pmyrzam Manager Clark of the District Alan R. Burns begal Counsel Wends Hooper Danis treasurer Phone (949) 645 -8400 Tax ('949) 650-22j3 July 3, 2006 Commissioners Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 r West Santa Ana H Newport Beach Dear Honorable of Thank you for the opportunityto commen`ton, the above proposal. Should the proposed reorga i tj,on be successful, the City of Newport Beach and City of Cost lUbsa boundaries will be inconsistent with the logical and orderly deuelopm .,U of government agencies and reflective of special interests Each.an dpvery City of Newport Beach staff member, appointed +official, and each and every LAFCO official in support of dreconsiderrendering their service to government as the y line locations are driven by motives that are contrary to, in, honest and true government. Should this proposal be rs meaningless all future sphere of influence studies and eyiews (MSRs) by Orange County LAFCO. Robin B. Harriers Manager /District Engineer �Q.I;� tca,II hr �re+l' tr ��.Of sc,,Vi'cc �jaSe0l Address cc: Allan Roeder, City Manager, City of Costa Mesa 628 W, 19th street CMSD Board of Directors l' Costa Mesa, CA Staff Ci �( H 92627 -2716 04,E Printed o n Protecting our communitv�Is health 6N provibing solib waste ano sewer collection services. Recvcled Paper crosaca.gov r, Daily Pilot.com I Front: Annexation plans concern homeowners Page 1 of 2 Print Tpgi,71 Close Window Pilot Da"ly fVmport Bowl) and Costa Mesa, CaNtomda Annexation plans concern homeowners The possibility of Newport Terrace becoming part of Costa Mesa has some locals worried. By Alicia Robinson (Published: July 10, 2006) Concerned homeowners of about 280 condos in Newport Terrace may flock to a Wednesday annexation hearing after Newport Beach City Manager Homer Bludau warned them their addresses could be changed from Newport Beach to Costa Mesa. Newport Terrace won't be on the table when the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission meets Wednesday to talk about annexations, and officials said it would be all but impossible for the area to be removed from Newport if residents object. But the neighborhood is connected to Newport Beach by a one - foot -wide strip of land that is part of the annexation discussion, and residents' fears illustrate the complexity of the issues involved. The commission will consider Newport's request to annex West Santa Ana Heights and Costa Mesa's petition to put an unspecified amount of Banning Ranch under its aegis, a prelude to possible annexation. Commission staff members last week recommended the West Santa Ana Heights annexation, with a condition: that Newport detach roughly 2,400 feet of a 9,800 -foot long, one -foot wide strip of city property that runs along the upper east side of unincorporated Banning Ranch. Detaching the strip would allow Costa Mesa to talk about annexing part of Banning Ranch's largely undeveloped 412 acres. At a glance, the situation of Newport Terrace and Banning Ranch is a complicated mess The one -foot strip -- which runs around the western, northern and part of the eastern edges of the Banning Ranch property -- would never be approved today. In fact, Newport Beach Mayor Don Webb said it was annexed to the city in 1950 as a way to ensure that outlying properties such as Newport Terrace -- which was then a city landfill -- would stay connected to the city. Three years later, the Newport Terrace property was annexed, and Costa Mesa became a city. Strip annexations were outlawed by state legislators around 1956. The strip connects Newport Terrace to the city of Newport Beach in two places. Under the commission staff recommendation, one of those connections would disappear. That has residents like Richard McFadden worried that they could be forced to become part of Costa Mesa, the city that nearly surrounds them now. A June 6 letter to residents from City Manager Homer Bludau suggested the commission might go in that direction. http : / /www.dailypilot.com /front/v- printer /story /50210p- 76899c.html 7/11/2006 Daily Pilot.com I Front: Annexation plans concern homeowners Page 2 of 2 McFadden works in real estate and estimates Newport Terrace property values would drop by $100,000 to $150,000 if the area changed to a Costa Mesa zip code. He also said he fears the city might want to dump his neighborhood because the methane recovery system under the former landfill needs to be replaced. "The problem is that the system has deteriorated to the point that it has to be done," McFadden said. "I know it's been a thorn in the city's side for some time." But officials said there's no reason for Newport Terrace residents to fear. For one thing, they always have the right to a protest vote that would block an annexation they don't like. Newport also would have to agree to de -annex the area, and that probably won't happen either. "It's not even a subject of discussion as far as I'm concerned. Those folks are part of Newport Beach," said Newport Beach City Councilman Steve Rosansky, whose district includes Newport Terrace. Somewhat less clear are the other annexation issues, such as the future of Banning Ranch and two other unincorporated areas not included in these talks -- a neighborhood south of Mesa Drive and the Santa Ana Country Club. Costa Mesa officials have pressed for comprehensive annexation talks, and county officials have said they ultimately want all unincorporated islands to become part of cities. But all that will hardly be resolved at Wednesday's meeting, considering the discussions have been going on for at least three decades. A newspaper article on a 1973 commission meeting notes that Newport and Costa Mesa officials were asked to meet to talk about Banning Ranch "in the hopes of reaching a compromise acceptable to both sides." Print Page Close Window Print This Story http: / /www. dailypilot.com/front/v- printer /story /50210p- 76899c.html 7/11/2006 Thomas Fauth From: Rob Hamers [robh2 @cox.net] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 5:40 PM To: James Ferryman Cc: Joan Revak; Thomas Fauth Subject: Re: LAFCO Hearing Jim, Thanks for the kind words! Will be done Monday A.M. Rob On Jul 7, 2006, at 10:11 AM, James Ferryman wrote: > Rob: You do good work my friend. Lets mail it out. Jim Ferryman >> From: Rob Hamers <robh2 @cox.net> >> To: Jim Ferryman <ferry54 @msn.com> >> Subject: LAFCO Hearing >> Date: Fri, 7 Jul 200'6 06:11:40 -0700 >> Hi Pres, >> Here is a draft letter for your review and comment. The letter from >> me to the Commissioners will likely be centered around the correction >> to the Plan for Services. As we discussed, there was no mention of >> our trash collection in West Santa Ana Heights. >> Jim, please either call or email your comments. >> Thanks, >> Rob Hamers >> Manager /District Engineer >> Costa Mesa Sanitary District >> (949) 631 -1731 office ph. >> (714) 293 -2727 Rob's cell >> (949) 548 -6516 fax robh2 @cox.net home office email >> rbhinc @pacbell.net work office email >> << LetterfromJim.doc >> 1 Page 1 of 2 Thomas Fauth From: Joan Revak Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 6:35 AM To: 'James Ferryman'; 'Greg Woodside'; 'aperry@nmusd.us'; 'acschafer @comcast.net'; 'Dan4mwdoc @comcast. net' Cc: Thomas Fauth; Wendy Davis; Sherry Kallab; Debbie Bjornson; Denise Gilbert; Karl Dulake Subject: FW: LAFCO - West SAH Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach FYI. � %aa �eoa,��i'aa�cl <Sec�t: �a��� �'nro�r rttm 1�zra�ew coe'dA"a fa,rtaI�J,I%etw( 949 -645 -8400, e, 223 949 - 650 -2253 Front: Rob Hamers [mailto:robh2 @cox.net] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 4:58 PM To: Joan Revak Subject: Fwd: LAFCO - West SAH Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach Joan, Please forward to Board and Staff. Rob Begin forwarded message: From: "ROEDER, ALLAN" <ARoeder @ci.costa- mesa.ca.us> Date: July 7, 2006 9:57:47 AM PDT To: "Rob. Hamers <robh2 @cox.net> Subject: RE: LAFCO - West SAH Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach '•E This is very good news .... my thanks to the Board for their support. Last night, the Water District took similar action. We have just about completed our one on one meetings with all of the LAFCO Commissioners and while they cannot make commitments upfront, I believe they are very supportive of our message. We have a meeting with Supervisor Campbell on Tuesday that I view as being especially important as he is a key figure on the Board. I think we're in good shape for next Wednesday's meeting even though it looks to be a marathon LAFCO agenda. We have both residents and institutional leaders scheduled to speak as well as members of our City Council. I have cautiously reminded people that this is likely to just be "Round 1" in the more formal deliberations before LAFCO - but a very important Round if we're to move forward. Thanks again, Allan PS -My apologies for the uproar over the District's assessment proposals - I heard about it at the City Council meeting just like everyone else. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Rob Harriers [mailto:robh2 @cox.net] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 6:47 AM To: ROEDER, ALLAN 7/10/2006 Page 2 of 2 Subject: LAFCO - West SAH Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach Hi Allan, We had a special meeting yesterday at noon to discuss the LAFCO hearing and the Board voted 5 -0 against the West SAH Reorganization proposal while supporting the SOI amendment. Very nice letter coming from our President Jim Ferryman to LAFCO that supports Costa Mesa. It will be finalized Monday and delivered to LAFCO with cc to you and Diana Leach. Jim will attend the hearing and speak on the matter as well. Second letter to LAFCO coming from me, but, unfortunately, I probably won't be able to attend the hearing. We all recognize the ridiculous WSAH proposal for what it is and the reasons behind it. Good job on rallying the troops. Arlene is in your camp and Jim is making phone calls to a few Commissioners. Arlene stressed the need for Costa Mesa citizens to speak against the proposal. Please call if anything else is needed. Thank you, Rob Hamers Manager /District Engineer Costa Mesa Sanitary District (949) 631 -1731 office ph. (714) 293 -2727 Rob's cell (949) 548 -6516 fax robh2@cox.net home office email rbhinc @pacbell.net work office email 7/10/2006 Costa Mesa sanotayN Varict till h-u)e.xnbent Special District July 10, 2006 Board of Directors Jcancs (errrrnc ?,z U;'!'-_ WooC15i a,-r tie,,.; Honorable Commissioners Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Re: 1. West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach Staff 2. City of Costa Mesa Proposed Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Roba,, B. l ainers Amendment Manager � Dear Commissioners: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the above proposals. The Thomas A. F11141/1 Costa Mesa Sanitary District considered the matters at a special meeting of the Board Asslstaw Alana,,,e,. of Directors held July 6, 2006. West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach Joaaa Revak Board seer tc ?, ,' The Costa Mesa Sanitary District recognizes that it will continue providing sewer service and trash collection service whether the West Santa Ana Heights area Clerk ( ?f the DistrtCi remains in the unincorporated territory of Orange County or becomes annexed to either the City of Newport Beach or the City of Costa Mesa, however, the Board of I'llon R. Ennis. Directors has serious concerns with the proposal. Lego/ Counsel Should the proposed reorganization be successful, the City of Newport Beach and City of Costa Mesa boundaries will be inconsistent with the logical and orderly iwercj) froopei-Da14s development of government agencies and this should be the overriding factor in the Trea.mrcr LAFCO Commissioners' consideration of the matter. Government should never allow special interests to sway decisions. An example of inconsistent boundaries is the City of Newport Beach Island on Phone Sundance Drive north of the intersection of West 19th Street and Whittier Avenue in (949) 645 -e400 Costa Mesa. The only access the Newport Beach residents have to arrive at their Fax island is all the way through the west side of the City of Costa Mesa. This isolated r`)49.) 650 -22'; island requires special utility lines, causes lengthy police and fire response, and causes inappropriate wear and tear on Costa Mesa streets by Newport Beach residents. Address The West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization is being driven by the relative r;28 i,ti, 19rh. Street differences in property values between the cities, the desire to have a Newport Beach Cona,�iesa. c.4 address, and other factors that should be dismissed in the decision making process. 92r�'7 -??16 9 p The areas westerly of Irvine Avenue belong in the City of Costa Mesa, as Irvine Avenue is the natural dividing line between the two cities. �a p Printed on Protecting our cmnmunitvp's %eal t6 bvq providing solid waste anb sewer cof f ection services. Recycled Paper crosaca.gov West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach July 10, 2006 City of Costa Mesa Proposed Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment Page 2 It is vitally important that LAFCO remain accountable to the people of Costa Mesa, Newport Beach and the remainder of Orange County. If the proposal is approved, it would cast a poor light on the role of government. For these reasons and more, the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Board of Directors voted 5 -0 against the West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach and urges the LAFCO Commissioners to reject the proposal. City of Costa Mesa Proposed Banning Ranch Sphere of Influence Amendment The Sanitary District Board of Directors understands the one -foot City of Newport Beach strip of land along the western edge of Costa Mesa and how it affects annexation and development. Once again, the CMSD Board urges the Orange County LAFCO Commissioners to base their decisions in this matter on the logical and orderly development of city boundaries. As included in the LAFCO Staff report, the City of Costa Mesa stated the following justification for their proposal: • Primary vehicle access to Banning Ranch will be through City of Costa Mesa streets and neighborhoods, specifically West 17th Street and West 18th Streets. • City of Costa Mesa Municipal services, including police and fire, can be logically extended o Banning Ranch from the City's existing street network and neighborhoods. This is the type of justification that is appropriate and the Sanitary District Board of Directors urges the LAFCO Commissioners to base their decisions on these primary factors. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, James M. Ferryman President cc: Board Staff Allan Roeder, City Manager, City of Costa Mesa Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager, City of Newport Beach Diana Leach, General Manager, Mesa Consolidated Water District ,LIT% o O Cone Samlar'v rct ORAT������ can znbepenbent Special District Board o /'Dir-eciors Jaynes 1-err 'v"nar? Greg II o Ls1ale Ar7 Pen Arlene Schfy'e'r Dan 1A0r;h.h?;tc-n SlaJJ Robin B. Harr,ers Alanager District L-'rrgirreer (9=19)6.;1 -1/31 July 10, 2006 Honorable Commissioners Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Re: West Santa Ana Heights Reorganization to the City of Newport Beach Dear Commissioners: Thank you for considering the enclosed comments that consist of two main points. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District requests the Plan for Services included in the City of Newport Beach proposal be corrected. Thomas A. Par.rlh ilssislam ma,rager The District is correctly shown as the existing sewer service provider and the proposed sewer service provider, however, the issue of trash collection was omitted. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District currently provides trash collection to the residents in dse Revak the reorganization area that use curb side service and should be shown as the a 13oaa1 Manage Prcr,��rrrnr Manage proposed trash collection service provider. This is consistent with the East Santa Ana of thcr,�,isnicl Heights annexation to Newport Beach where the CMSD remains as the sewer service and trash collection provider. Alan A. Burns City Boundary Lines Should Be Reasonable Lcr,al Curmsel Hopefully, the LAFCO Commissioners will rise above the political forces and special `verr;l� Hcr :}firer interests that are apparent in the reorganization proposal. City boundary lines should not jog in and out of certain blocks and streets but should be simple and practicable. si"Ier "' "7C/ The West Santa Ana Heights should remain in the City of Costa Mesa Sphere of Influence. Not only are the proposed boundary lines problematic, this is a precedent that LAFCO should avoid. Phone (9.19) 6=1.8.100 Sincerely, Eax (949) 650 -2253 Adih-ess Robin B. Harriers 628 VV 19th sneer Manager /District Engineer Costa Me,'---a, CA 92627-2716 cc: Board Staff Allan Roeder, City Manager, City of Costa Mesa Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager, City of Newport Beach Ofl Diana Leach, General Manager, Mesa Consolidated Water District UQ �9 Prinrcd on Protecting our community's 6 eaitla 6,,g proviOing solib waste anb server cof fection sen vices. Recycled Paper crosaca.gov