The Veterans Cemetery: What Should Irvine Do Now?

Current view of the original (ARDA) site for a veterans cemetery.

The voters in Irvine recently rejected Measure B. The issues now are what, in rejecting Measure B, did the voters really decide, and what should the Irvine City Council do in response to the voters’ decision.

Some argue that the rejection of Measure B means that the voters said that the proposed veterans cemetery should be located at the ARDA site that was originally selected by the City Council in July 2014, and that the City Council should begin immediately to build a veterans cemetery at that location.

But the actual language of Measure B said nothing about the original ARDA site, except that the development previously zoned for the strawberry fields site would be moved there.

Looking at the specific language of Measure B, what the voters said No to was “allowing the previously planned development for the Bake Parkway Site to be relocated to the intersection of Pusan and Irvine Blvd and allowing the development of a veterans cemetery near the intersection of I-5 and Bake Parkway.”

Thus, by its express language, the no vote on Measure B rejects that zoning decision, but does not authorize the city to place a veterans cemetery on the ARDA site.

Sign used by Measure B opponents warning of thousands more cars on Irvine roads if Measure B passed.

In addition, the City Council’s approval of the ARDA site in 2014 was based on the belief that the City would provide the land for the veterans cemetery, but the costs of construction and subsequent maintenance of the cemetery would be wholly paid by state and federal government.

Crucially, the City Council’s approval of the ARDA site also came several years before we learned that construction of the veterans cemetery at the ARDA site would cost nearly $80 million, mostly due to the need for decontamination of the soil and the decontamination and removal of numerous existing structures, and that in addition to providing the land, the City would have to bear a significant portion of these construction costs.

In particular, Measure B said nothing at all about approving the spending of tens of millions of dollars that are now earmarked for creating the features of the Great Park that residents have said they want – such as museums, botanical gardens, a new Wild Rivers Water Park, and a permanent amphitheatre for live music – and, instead, using that money for a veterans cemetery.

My belief is that the rejection of Measure B means that the voters did not want a zoning change that, as the No on B campaign said, would have allowed “massive development projects” at the ARDA site, add “812,000 square feet of development,” and “bring 10,000 more cars and trucks to Irvine streets and neighborhoods every day.”

For me, the lesson of Measure B is that the voters did not want to risk the possibility that the land exchange would lead to more development and more traffic congestion, as well as the voters believing that it was too favorable a deal for the developer.

In other words, I see the rejection of Measure B as a vote against more development and traffic congestion, and not a vote in favor of spending $40 – $80 million dollars on a veterans cemetery rather than building other popular features of the Great Park.

In a survey of Irvine voters I conducted from my blog and through email, the great majority said that they voted against Measure B because they did not want more development and traffic.

Even more significantly, 64% said that Irvine should not spend $40 to $80 million dollars for a veterans cemetery, compared to only 13.5% in favor.

Current view of the original (ARDA) site for a veterans cemetery.

In a new and promising twist to the veterans cemetery saga, the Orange County Board of Supervisors has now agreed to have its staff study and advise whether county-owned open space outside Irvine might be a feasible location for an Orange County veterans cemetery. The approximately 234-acre site is in the city of Anaheim, near the 91 and 241, adjacent to Gypsum Canyon.

This site would provide a larger veterans cemetery for Orange County veterans, at no cost to Irvine, and be free from the divisive politics that has characterized the veterans cemetery debate in Irvine.

In fact, many of the veterans who initiated the fight for a veterans cemetery now favor this site, because, as Marine Corps Vietnam War veteran Nick Berardino has said, it appears that “veterans are removed from the political equation, and are now heading in a practical, reasonable direction to give all the brave men and women a final resting place.”

If the Irvine City Council approves Jeff Lalloway’s motion to spend $40 to $80 million dollars to clean up the original site for a cemetery, it will deplete the Great Park budget for at least a decade.

As the Irvine City News noted, “It sounds noble when [Jeff] Lalloway, [Larry] Agran and their followers hold up the service of our veterans. But when you understand that the veterans still can’t get what they were promised without taking away the gardens, the museums, the music, the culture and the future of the Great Park, it puts Lalloway’s political power move in perspective.”

I have been a strong and consistent supporter of a veterans cemetery in Irvine.  But I have also been a strong supporter of fulfilling the promises that the City made to residents when it created the Great Park, and I am not in favor of giving up on those promises.

I believe the Great Park should have great gardens and a great museum, as well as other features for the enjoyment of all residents, and I do not believe that the City can afford to spend $40 to $80 million on a cemetery and continue with these other projects.

What do you think?  

Do you favor spending $40 to $80 million dollars to clean up the original site for a cemetery or should that money go to create other features for the Great Park?

The City Council will decide on Tues, July whether to approve Lalloway’s motion or whether some other course is more sensible and also responsive to the will of the voters and the needs of the community.

As always, the public is invited to attend and speak on these issues at the City Council meeting.

I also urge interested residents to contact the Mayor and the City Council by email and tell us in writing what you think we ought to do.

Here is how to contact the Mayor and the City Council:

Irvine City Council
949-724-6233 or irvinecitycouncil@cityofirvine.org

Mayor Wagner: donaldwagner@cityofirvine.org
Mayor Pro Tem Christina Shea: christinashea@cityofirvine.org
Councilmember Jeff Lalloway: jeffreylalloway@cityofirvine.org
Councilmember Lynn Schott: lynnschott@cityofirvine.org
Councilmember Melissa Fox: melissafox@cityofirvine.org

Thank you.

Why Did Measure B Lose? What Should Irvine Do Now? Take the Surveys!

[Take the surveys below at the end of this blog post.]

The voters in Irvine recently rejected Measure B.

The issue now is what, in rejecting Measure B, did the voters really decide.

Sign used by opponents of Measure B, warning that passage of Measure B would mean thousands more cars on every road in Irvine.

Some argue that the rejection of Measure B means that the voters said that the proposed veterans cemetery should be located at the ARDA site that was originally selected by the City Council in July 2014.

But the actual language of Measure B said nothing about the original ARDA site, except that the development previously zoned for the strawberry fields site would be moved there.

Looking at the specific language of Measure B, what the voters said No to was “allowing the previously planned development for the Bake Parkway Site to be relocated to the intersection of Pusan and Irvine Blvd and allowing the development of a veterans cemetery near the intersection of I-5 and Bake Parkway.”

Thus, by its express language, the no vote on Measure B rejects that zoning decision, but does not authorize the city to place a veterans cemetery on the ARDA site.

Map used by opponents of Measure B, warning that passage of Measure B would lead to massive development and 10,000 more car and truck trips every day.

In addition, the City Council’s approval of the ARDA site in 2014 was based on the belief that the City would provide the land for the veterans cemetery, but the costs of construction and subsequent maintenance of the cemetery would be wholly paid by state and federal government.

Crucially, the City Council’s approval of the ARDA site also came several years before we learned that construction of the veterans cemetery at the ARDA site would cost nearly $80 million, mostly due to the need for decontamination of the soil and the decontamination and removal of numerous existing structures, and that in addition to providing the land, the City would have to bear a significant portion of these construction costs.

In particular, Measure B said nothing at all about approving the spending of tens of millions of dollars that are now earmarked for creating the features of the Great Park that residents have said they want – such as museums, botanical gardens, a new Wild Rivers Water Park, and a permanent amphitheatre for live music – and, instead, using that money for a veterans cemetery.

My belief is that the rejection of Measure B means that the voters did not want a zoning change that, as the No on B campaign said, would have allowed “massive development projects” at the ARDA site, add “812,000 square feet of development,” and “bring 10,000 more cars and trucks to Irvine streets and neighborhoods every day.”

For me, the lesson of Measure B is that the voters did not want to risk the possibility that the land exchange would lead to more development and more traffic congestion, as well as the voters believing that it was too favorable a deal for the developer.

In other words, I see the rejection of Measure B as a vote against more development and traffic congestion, and not a vote in favor of spending tens of millions of dollars on a veterans cemetery rather than building other popular features of the Great Park

I would like to know what you believe the rejection of Measure B means, especially if you were among the majority in Irvine who voted against it.

Please take the surveys below:

 

The City Council must now decide whether, and how, to proceed with a veterans cemetery.  What do you want the City Council to do:

 

Please share these surveys with your Irvine friends and neighbors. I would like as much resident input as possible.

Thanks!

Melissa

UPDATE:

The surveys are now closed.

While the surveys are not scientific, I believe their results are straight-forward and present an accurate view of why Measure B failed.

The survey results show that the main reason people voted No on Measure B was opposition to development and traffic, rather than a desire to return the veterans cemetery to its original site.

These results should not be unexpected since the No on Measure B campaign focused almost exclusively on the claim that Measure B would lead to more development and traffic (“B = Thousands MORE Cars on THIS Road!”).

Further underscoring the conclusion that Measure B failed because of perceptions about development and traffic rather than preference for the original site, the survey results show that few residents are in favor of spending the $40 – $80 million required to build the veterans cemetery on the original site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Lesson of Measures B and D: No More Developer Giveaways!

The clear message sent by voters with the defeat of Measures B and D is that developers must not be allowed to continue runaway development without regard to our traffic, schools, and quality of life, and that Irvine residents must have a say in all future development decisions.

I agree.

I supported Measure B because I believed it would provide veterans with the best chance for a dignified military cemetery; that it would save Irvine taxpayers millions of dollars; and that it would reduce traffic congestion by restricting future development at the strawberry fields.

The voters, however, did not want to risk even the possibility that it would lead to more development and more traffic congestion.

In fact, Irvine residents are rightly concerned that runaway development and traffic congestion will forever change the character of our beautiful city – without their input or consent.  They are rightly distrustful of developers whose bottom line is their profit, not our quality of life.  I am distrustful as well, and I share the voters’ skepticism about giant developers and their motives. Developers spent millions of dollars trying to defeat me in the last election, and no doubt will do so again.

Here’s why:

As an Irvine City Councilmember, I have not voted for a single new entitlement or approved any new construction. The development that residents are now seeing all over town – from the Great Park neighborhoods to Quail Hill to Tomato Springs – was approved by prior City Councilmembers, and not by me. I have not approved any of it, and I was one of only two Irvine Councilmembers who voted against the Irvine Company’s proposed 1,960-unit apartment complex at the old Traveland USA site at the 5 Freeway and Sand Canyon. I opposed that plan because of its negative impact on traffic and schools, and I will not approve any future development without prior careful determination and consideration of its impact on our schools, traffic, and open space.

As an Irvine City Councilmember, I also voted against Measure D. I opposed Measure D because I believe that Irvine residents must have a strong voice in determining how our city grows.

Moving forward, I reaffirm my pledge to end runaway development. Irvine must return to its commitment to the wisdom of the Master Plan.  The current piecemeal approach to development favored by developers and some members of the City Council must end. Irvine needs to return to the principles of careful planning and measured, smart growth that not very long ago made Irvine the best place in America to live, work, and raise a family. There must be no more developer giveaways.  

Irvine needs an effective traffic reduction plan, and not just a congestion management plan. Irvine had long been recognized as a national leader in city planning and innovation. Unfortunately, Irvine has failed to properly plan for the tremendous increase in traffic caused by the city’s explosive recent growth. As a result, Irvine residents have been forced to contend with unprecedented traffic congestion and less safe streets and roads.  Our City Council now needs to do more than try to manage the traffic congestion that is already out of control. We need to say clearly that the current level of traffic congestion is completely unacceptable and must be reduced.

Irvine needs more police officers.  As Irvine has grown, the need for more police officers has become critical, not just for preventing crime, but also for enforcing our traffic laws, which are essential to keeping our children safe as they play and go to school in our neighborhoods. I will work to add more police officers to ensure that our residents are as safe in Irvine now and in the future as they were before Irvine began to grow.

Irvine needs more childcare. We know that our great schools, beautiful parks, and safe environment attract many families with young children.  We also know that a critical part of any thriving community is safe, professional, reliable, and affordable preschool and childcare. Developers must be held accountable for including childcare as part of an overall city development plan, just as they are required to build schools. Irvine must become truly family friendly. No more waiting lists!

Let’s build the veterans cemetery.  I have been fighting for a veterans cemetery at the former El Toro Marine Base since 2014 and will continue to do so. Our veterans deserve a veterans cemetery close to their families and loved ones. Now that Measure B has been defeated, we need to find a site that honors our veterans and is approved by Irvine residents.  I am firmly committed to that task.

Let’s finish building the Great Park. For far too long, the residents of Irvine were given nothing but empty promises about building our Great Park on the grounds of the old El Toro Marine Base.  As Vice Chair of the Great Park, I am proud that we have finally succeeded in creating a Great Park that residents can enjoy, with terrific sports fields, a magnificent new championship soccer stadium, and the best community ice-skating facility in the West already under construction — but there is still much more to do.  Our residents have told us that they want a new Wild Rivers water park, and we need to ensure that happens.  We also need to fulfill our promise to build a city-owned amphitheatre on the Great Park’s cultural terrace, so that a developer’s decision can not deprive us of live music again. I will also insist that we follow the recommendations of residents and build world-class botanical gardens, museums, and a lake to make Irvine the home of a truly Great Park. Getting that job done is one of my main priorities.

I love Irvine and will continue to work to ensure that Irvine remains among the safest and most beautiful cities in the nation.  As your Irvine City Councilmember, I will fight to ensure that the public interest – in preventing over-development, over-crowed schools, and traffic congestion, and in preserving the character of our communities – comes before the private interests of developers, no matter how big and powerful those developers may be.

Melissa

Congratulations to Community Services Commissioner Lauren Johnson-Norris on Award from Prevention Coalition on Behalf of Children and Families in Irvine!

Irvine, CA — Irvine City Councilmember Melissa Fox congratulates her appointee to the Irvine Community Services Commission, Lauren Johnson-Norris, on receiving the Outstanding Supporters of Prevention Award for 2018 from the Irvine Prevention Coalition for her “tireless advocacy” championing children and families in Irvine!

The Irvine Prevention Coalition (IPC) is a coming together of community partners representing more than 92 civic, business, school, faith, parent, school, youth and community based agencies who work together to support children, youth and families in Irvine. The Irvine Prevention Coalition meets regularly to coordinate our school and community based prevention and early intervention efforts.  If you live or work in Irvine and would like to get involved in alcohol, tobacco and other drug and violence prevention, we invite you to join by contacting them at info@icdp.org.

Each year, the Irvine Prevention Coalition recognizes individuals and programs or organizations that go above and beyond to make a difference in the lives of children and families in Irvine through their work supporting children and/or families in meaningful ways that prevent alcohol, tobacco and other drug use/abuse and/or promote mental health and resiliency in our community.

Councilmember Fox stated, “This award is so well-deserved. Lauren’s work as a child-advocate in situations where families are in crisis has prevented harm to children that would be at risk for dropping out of school, committing crimes, or becoming involved in unhealthy relationships. Thank you so much for your service to children and families of Irvine and the Orange County community.”

Watch Melissa Fox’s Great Park Town Hall Meeting — with Mandarin Translation! 市議員 梅利莎福克斯 介绍橙县大公园最新进展

I held a Town Hall Meeting on Saturday, April 21, 2018, in historic Hanger 244 at the Great Park.

The Great Park Town Hall Meeting was co-hosted by WeIrvine and featured translation by Mandarin translation by my friend Zhihai Li,  who is also my appointee to the Irvine Children, Youth and Families Committee.

I spoke about the history of the Orange County Great Park — of which I am the Vice Chair — and its future development.

We also spoke the veterans cemetery and why it is important to Vote Yes on Measure B.

I invite you to watch a video of the Town Hall Meeting.

Thank you to Zhihai Li, WeIrvine, and everyone who attended!

Melissa

Watch the video here.

在这里观看视频

Melissa Fox介绍橙县大公园最新进展

Join Me on the Ride of Silence on Weds., May 16, to Honor Bicyclists Killed or Injured and Promote Sharing the Road

Join us on Wednesday, May 16, for the annual Ride of Silence, as we meet once again at the Irvine Civic Center to remember and honor bicyclists who have been killed or injured while cycling on public roadways.

We will begin gathering at 6:00 p.m., assemble at 6:30, and start the ride at 7:00 p.m.

We ride to promote sharing the road and provide awareness of the rights and safety of bicyclists.  Our silent ride also commemorates those who have been killed or injured doing what each of us has a right to do – a right that, far too often, motorists fail to recognize, sometimes with deadly consequences.

Irvine is a wonderful city for biking, whether for commuting, exercising, or just enjoying the outdoors. We have more than 300 miles of on-street bike lanes and more than 50 miles of off-street bikeways.  Our bicycle trails are some of the most beautiful, and peaceful, places in Irvine.

Yet in Irvine, as everywhere else, motorists must learn to better share the road safely with bicyclists; that bicyclists have the same rights to the road as motorists; and that bicyclists are the most vulnerable users of the roadways.

Eight people were killed in Orange County in 2017 while riding their bikes. This year so far, six cyclists have been killed. These individuals were fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, husbands, wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, friends, co-workers, as well as bicyclists.

Irvine’s Ride of Silence is part of a larger, international movement to commemorate bicyclists killed or injured while riding on public roads and to raise awareness among motorists of the dangers they pose to vicyclists.

As a bicyclist myself, the mother of a bicyclist, an Irvine resident and an Irvine City Councilmember, and as an advocate for more active transportation as a way to cut pollution and our reliance on fossil fuels, I support the Ride of Silence as a way to honor bicyclists who have been killed or injured while cycling on public roadways and to urge the public (and local governments) to do more to protect bicyclists’ safety.

The Ride of Silence asks its bicyclists to ride no faster than 12 mph, follow the rules of the road, and remain silent during the ride.  Helmets are mandatory. There are no  registration fees. The ride aims to raise the awareness of motorists, police and city officials that bicyclists have a legal right to the public roadways. The ride is also a chance to show respect for and honor the lives of those who have been killed or injured.

As the organizers of the Ride of Silence have said: “A pack of single file – silent riders – pacing out for 8 to 10 miles. We will share this hour with each other, and know that thousands across the planet will also have marked the hour in their own time zone; but also raise awareness among the many local motorists who will be witnesses of our sombre parade.”

We must remember that bicyclists have legal rights to the road as do motorists and bicyclists are the most vulnerable users of the roadways.

We ride to show respect for and honor the lives of those who have been killed or injured.

We ride to promote public awareness of bicycling safety.

We ride so that no bicyclist is ever again killed or injured because of a motorist’s failure to share the road.

What: Ride of Silence

Where: Irvine Civic Center Plaza

When: Wednesday, May 16, 2018.  Gather at 6:00 p.m., assemble at 6:30 p.m., and start the ride at 7:00 p.m.

Route: Flat 10 mile loop around Irvine; on-street bike lanes and off street bike way.  Route map: click here.

Note: Helmets and lights required!

IMPORTANT UPDATE!!

The Irvine Ride of Silence has been cancelled.

Please join with riders in Orange (Civic Center; 300 E Chapman) or Fullerton (Fullerton Downtown Plaza; Fullerton Museum Center Plaza).

For more information, please see: Ride of Silence OC.

 

 

Join Me on Sat., April 21, for an Irvine Town Hall at the Great Park (with Mandarin Translation)

Please join me for an Irvine Town Hall Meeting on Saturday, April 21, starting at 11:00 a.m., at the Great Park.

The meeting will be held inside historic Hangar 244 at the Orange County Great Park (near the Palm Court) and is being co-hosted by WeIrvine.

I will be answering questions from the community about the Orange County Great Park — of which I am the Vice Chair — and future development.

Mandarin translation will be available.

普通话翻译可用

There will also be representatives from the Irvine Police Department‘s Mounted Unit available to answer any questions as well.

Light refreshments will be provided and families are welcome.

If you would like more information or to RSVP, please contact Allison Binder by email at abinder@cityofirvine.org or by phone at 949-724-6226.

See the Facebook event page here.

I hope to see you there!

来大公园参加市民大会,听尔湾市议员 Melissa Fox 介绍橙县大公园最新进展

4月21日星期六,尔湾市议员,同时担任大公园副主席的 Melissa Fox 将和大家见面,向大家介绍大公园的最新进展,并和大家一起讨论有关大公园的各种话题。有中文翻译现场为大家口译。

尔湾警局的骑警代表也将出席会议,对大家感兴趣的问题予以解答

普通话翻译可用