Dana Point-Laguna Niguel Strife Renewed Over Park Site

A fight between Laguna Niguel and Dana Point over a 1.5-mile-long coastal strip flared up again Wednesday when a Laguna Niguel services district voted to accept control of a large, undeveloped park lying within the boundaries of soon-to-be incorporated Dana Point.

Dana Point cityhood activists, who already are being sued over the disputed coastline by residents of unincorporated Laguna Niguel, charged that the move grew out of vindictiveness prompted by Dana Point’s successful incorporation vote on June 7.

Voters in Dana Point, Capistrano Beach and the disputed strip--which includes the Sea Terrace Community Park formally claimed by Laguna Niguel Wednesday--voted overwhelmingly to incorporate as the city of Dana Point effective Jan. 1, 1989, becoming Orange County’s 28th municipality.

‘Every Way to Harass Us’

Residents of Laguna Niguel, who claim historical rights to the coastal strip, are to appear before the county’s Local Agency Formation Commission on Aug. 17 to petition for a cityhood election of their own.

“They (Laguna Niguel residents) just look for every way they can to harass us in our progress towards becoming a city,” said Jack Hollingsworth, chairman of the Coastal Communities Council, which represents 13 homeowner associations in the disputed strip. “We don’t like it and we think it’s wrong.”

Board members of the Laguna Niguel Community Services District, which provides and maintains parks for its coverage area, said they were merely exercising their right to claim the land under a 7-year-old agreement between Orange County and a developer who plans to build a resort hotel complex next to the park.

“I don’t understand the problem at this point,” said Pat Bates, chairwoman of the Laguna Niguel Community Services District.

Under the agreement with Hemmeter Corp. of Honolulu and the Stein-Brief Group of Laguna Niguel, 26.8 acres of ocean-view property was set aside at the corner of Coast Highway and Niguel Road for use as a park. The park, now covered with weeds, is to be developed when Hemmeter breaks ground for a hotel complex in January.

While the agreement originally had been made with county officials, rights to maintain and control the parkland were passed on to Laguna Niguel when it formed a community services district in January, 1987.

The Laguna Niguel district board voted 4-1 Wednesday night to formally accept the agreement to become the owner of the parkland. Board member James W. Smith cast the dissenting vote.

About 100 people packed the meeting, split between Dana Point area residents opposed to takeover of the park and Laguna Niguel residents who favored it.

Dana Point residents charged that Laguna Niguel had no ethical right to the park, even if it did have legal entitlement.

Lynn Dawson, a member of the Dana Point Task Force, said the park ought to be controlled by Dana Point residents because it lies within the boundaries of their new city. “They (Laguna Niguel Community Services District representatives) are going directly against the will of taxpayers,” Dawson said.

Laguna Niguel residents, however, said they supported the board action because of what they termed a need for more parks.

“If you approve this resolution, you will be very responsive to the people of Laguna Niguel,” Laguna Niguel resident Cindy O’Neal said.

Patricia Ashley, a Laguna Niguel housewife, warned that the district needed to act before developers get hold of the vacant land. Turning to the audience, she added emotionally, “I am angered and outraged that people who are politically motivated are asking the board to deny this action.”

However, Judy Curreri, Dana Point council member-elect, said the land could not be developed as anything other than a park because that is the agreement originally made with the county.

Dawson said that Laguna Niguel’s action will serve to do little more than “muddy up the waters” for Dana Point, which she predicted would get control of the park in the end.

The Capistrano Bay Park and Recreation District has already sent a letter to LAFCO indicating it wants to extend its boundaries to include Sea Terrace Park, said the district’s attorney, William M. Wilcoxen.

If such a boundary extension is granted by LAFCO, the county agency would place that district in charge of Sea Terrace Park and remove it from the Laguna Niguel district’s control, said LAFCO Executive Officer Jim Colangelo.

Colangelo said he has sent a letter advising the Capistrano Bay district to wait until after the city of Dana Point comes into being before requesting a boundary extension. But he added, “If they want to go ahead, we will help.”

Hollingsworth suggested that Laguna Niguel took control of the park to give it leverage in a lawsuit challenging Dana Point’s inclusion of the disputed coastal strip in its proposed city boundaries, a charge disputed by the Laguna Niguel forces.

The suit, filed in April by the Laguna Niguel Citizens Task Force for Incorporation, asks a judge to nullify LAFCO’s December decision to include the strip in Dana Point’s election and, instead, make it available to Laguna Niguel. LAFCO took that action after it called an advisory election of residents in the disputed strip and 61% of them sided with Dana Point.

The coastal strip is sandwiched between Dana Point and South Laguna and includes the highly coveted Ritz-Carlton Laguna Niguel hotel, which generates $2.5 million in annual tax revenue.