JOSEPH N. BELL -- The Bell Curve
- Share via
It’s been open season in the Newport-Mesa area for the past year on
developers, what with the effect of Greenlight and the controversy over
the Home Ranch project and the Koll Center. So when a developer initiates
something clearly, substantially and, for the most part, unselfishly in
the public interest, it surely merits equal time.
In the midst of a period of steady growth when it seems that every
commercially desirable open space in this once-pristine area is being
sized up for development, the Irvine Co.’s chairman, Donald Bren,
announced that 11,000 acres of the most beautiful, valuable and
environmentally diverse land on the Irvine Ranch will be reserved in
perpetuity as open space and for recreational use by the public. This
will be added to almost half of the 93,000-acre Irvine Ranch already set
aside for that purpose.
Tom Scott, a natural-resources specialist with the UC system, calls
this gift “a treasure trove of biodiversity.” Michael Pinto, president of
the Laguna Canyon Foundation, wrote in the Los Angeles Times: “This
stunning act of generosity . . . brought forth unashamed tears of joy.”
The whole land package thus protected will be known as the Irvine
Ranch Land Reserve, and it will be under the stewardship of the Nature
Conservancy, to whom Bren has set aside $30 million to improve and
preserve the habitat and provide for public access. All of this was
announced at a bash for several hundred community leaders, where Bren
provided the capstone when he said: “Our vision is to leave more than
half of the ranch in permanent open space, greenbelts and recreation, and
we will accomplish that with this historic action.”
If you wonder how “historic” all this is, go take a look at Anaheim or
Santa Ana or almost any other urban center and recognize that without the
enlightened land management and wilderness protection in the unique piece
of geography we enjoy -- resulting from the determined efforts of both
public and private bodies in this area -- that would be us.
We’ve all had our problems with the Irvine Co. during the transition
of Orange County from an agricultural to a burgeoning commercial,
industrial and residential area. Along with its vision of an idyllic
planned community, there has been arm-twisting and arrogance, and the
company has profited enormously through the development of its land
holdings. But there has always been the long view as well. And it was
from this perspective that Bren made his announcement. When the time came
to turn away from the commercialization of this highly developable 11,000
acres, it was done with real class.
In the resulting press coverage of this action, Larry Thomas, who is
Bren’s senior vice president for public affairs, told the Pilot that
there was no “quid pro quo” involved. The gift, he said, came without
strings.
This comment seemed especially interesting in relation to the debate
over the propriety of Segerstrom & Sons making a $2-million contribution
to Costa Mesa schools, contingent on city approval of the Home Ranch
project. The business unsophisticates like me who raised this question
have been advised rather brusquely to get with it. This, we were told, is
how business is conducted. You give a little in order to get a little --
or a lot.
Last week, I shared a lunch table with Ray Watson, who is vice
chairman of the Irvine Co. Board of Directors. I asked him if this is,
indeed, the way business is conducted, and he allowed as how it was “as
long as the sunlight rule is observed.” Sunlight, he explained, means
that the trade-offs must be on the table in clear public view.
It occurred to me that if this is the only prerequisite to become a
player in a high-stakes business deal, then there is virtually no limit
to the inducements that might be sought or offered. Why, for example,
couldn’t either party have put a new starting pitcher for the Angels into
the Home Ranch mix? The school contribution could stay in place, and
funds set aside to acquire a pitcher would win over the baseball crowd. I
could certainly get behind that.
Watson said patiently that this would be inappropriate because
baseball had no connection with the Home Ranch project. When I argued
that the schools had no real connection with the project, either, he
countered that there were degrees of appropriateness that had to be
assessed in structuring the trade-offs in any business proposal. He
considered schools more appropriate than a pitcher for the Angels, a
dubious position to be sure, but he not only wasn’t brusque but downright
good-natured about all this.
Even armed with this explanation about how business works, I’m very
glad that the Irvine Co. gift came without strings. It would have seemed
ungracious to grouse about trade-offs in this instance.
It has become clear that we have arrived at a stage of development in
Newport-Mesa where increased friction between the developers and groups
such as Greenlight has become the order of the day. That doesn’t have to
mean an impasse if both sides respect the contributions of the other. In
the long run, that might be the greatest benefit of all from the Irvine
Co. gift: the establishment of a role model to bridge this divide.
* JOSEPH N. BELL is a resident of Santa Ana Heights. His column
appears Thursdays.
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.