By Mark Orgill
We’re all in harm’s way when we let others set the agenda and do our thinking for us. But it’s hard not to. After all, there’s only so much time; we can’t diligently research everything. Thus we tend to rely on our trusted sources. Laguna has plenty of concerned citizens. Still I’m betting most voters will not be pouring over the text of Measure Q, also known as the Laguna Residents First initiative.
The idea behind it is more safeguards against overdevelopment. I’m sympathetic, though not supportive. My call on the initiative is by no means a vote of confidence in current management or leadership. Nor is it a vote for or against any group. I simply envision better ways—like properly enforcing the rules we have—to ensure broadly beneficial community development.
Just what that looks like, reasonable people can debate. Most pay a premium to reside here as they more or less like it. That’s a solid starting point. There are opportunities, and I believe it’s a good idea, to enhance the town’s distinctive character, especially where it’s tired around the edges. We can do this while streamlining and otherwise upgrading municipal operations.
We should not let one polarizing ballot measure deflect our attention from critical management and governance questions that warrant answers. Notable among these are record backlogs in code enforcement and planning, despite record staffing levels. Greater sustainability is crucial. So is more transparency. There should be a more revealing and instructive budget process.
So my hope is the concern about overdevelopment doesn’t steal all the available air time. Meanwhile, and understandably, the initiative is a big issue. My friends and family who are pro-initiative (guilt by association!) have lost faith in the public process altogether. Some have concerns about the town’s direction. I share their concerns. That’s why I’m running for Council.
It’s usually easier to get agreement on descriptions than prescriptions. That was evident when proponents and opponents of the initiative, and others eager to find a compromise, held recent and lengthy, albeit unsuccessful talks. Close but no cigar. I was in these discussions, and it was plain to see everyone made an earnest effort. It made me wish we had started sooner.
In the course of these discussions, I learned there are many voting “no” on the initiative who nevertheless are concerned about the City’s direction. And if you think the proponents are paranoid, read for yourself the new letter to the City from Mohammad Honarkar’s lawyers. Thinly veiled threats dress up objections to a clear height limit or anything else that constrains his ambitions.
Disclosure: I’ve worked with him. Yes, more guilt by association! We met by way of background when Honarkar purchased properties of mine in Laguna that I had owned, redeveloped and was operating, including Seven Degrees. Later, he asked me to work for him on other projects, and I did. I had hoped to make a positive contribution. Eventually, we went our separate ways.
Naturally there are questions—questions such as, would I be too hard on him; would I be too soft; would I be able to vote on his projects, whether or not he remains the controlling owner? These questions are fair and some require further examination. I will say this for now, and unhesitatingly: we do not share the same design sense; we conduct business very differently.
What I lament, but accept as a presently self-imposed problem, is the politics of guilt by association. Yes, I have friends in Village Laguna. Guilty. And yes I have friends in real estate. Guilty. Again, I’m in that business. No, I don’t agree with anyone on everything. Who does? I look forward to meeting more fellow citizens, and discussing with them what’s best for Laguna.
To reach Orgill visit MarkOrgill.com, email [email protected], or call 949-484-4641.
Mark is a 39-year resident of Laguna Beach and developer behind [seven-degrees], Sunset Cove Vilas, and the Civic Arts District.
