Marina Cityhood Hits Roadblock in Capitol

After an especially bitter debate, the Senate on Thursday narrowly passed a controversial bill that could short-circuit a drive to incorporate Los Angeles County-owned Marina del Rey.

The action capped months of fierce lobbying, which pitted marina landlords, fearful that cityhood would result in tough rent controls, against marina tenants, who contend they want to have direct control over their waterfront community.

The bill by Sen. Joseph Montoya (D-Whittier) was approved on a 22-11 vote--one vote more than the simple majority required--and sent to the Assembly where another tough fight is expected.

Opponents said that while the bill did not cite the marina by name, it clearly was aimed at the area. Montoya’s proposal would prevent any area in the state with more than 50% of its land in public ownership from becoming a city.

804-Acre Area

The county-owned 804-acre marina, with boat slips, shops and apartments wedged between Venice and Playa del Rey, was created by the county nearly 30 years ago. It enjoys the image of an affluent oceanfront community for young professionals.

The county receives about $12 million a year from leasing the land to developers on a long-term basis. County rent controls have been in place but are being phased out.

One of the leaseholders is a partnership that includes Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys). Robbins was not present during the debate and did not vote. He previously said he would abstain because it would be a conflict of interest for him to vote on the measure.

In addition to the Marina del Rey Lessees Assn., the bill was backed by Los Angeles County and the Marina del Rey Chamber of Commerce. It was opposed by the League of California Cities and tenant groups.

The incorporation drive was started last year by a tenants group called Marina del Rey Cityhood Inc.

A preliminary staff review of the proposal issued in March by the Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission said a new city with more than 10,000 marina residents would face a first-year deficit of nearly $2 million because it would not raise sufficient tax revenues.

Probable Deficit

Thursday’s raucous Senate debate focused on the impact Montoya’s bill would have on the marina and whether Montoya should carry a measure affecting the district of another lawmaker, in this case Sen. Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles).

Watson, who unsuccessfully attempted to exclude the marina from the bill, angrily said, “I am terribly offended” about the way the issue has been handled. She referred, in part, to the way the measure was first introduced by Sen. William Lockyer (D-Hayward) who recently abandoned it. It then was picked up by Montoya.

“I am shocked that the lobbying interests circumvented the representatives of the area,” she said.

But Montoya said Watson made no effort to discuss the issue with him. During a recent encounter in a hallway with Watson, he said, “I got what was in essence a growl from her.”

Backers of the Montoya bill disputed the notion that the affluent marina needs rent control. For example, Sen. William Campbell (R-Hacienda Heights) said, “There are no really poor people who live in the marina.”

However, Watson contended that the marina contains a wide range of residents including the poor and the rich. “It’s not Beverly Hills,” she said.

For months, the bill has received critical attention in the Capitol as a special-interest measure for marina landlords, who hired lobbyist Jerry Zanelli to push the bill. Zanelli is a former chief assistant to Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles), who did not vote on the bill.

Montoya said that after Lockyer dropped the bill, he agreed to carry it as a favor to Zanelli. Montoya said he and Zanelli were classmates at UCLA.

Montoya said he was concerned that the marina might become a “new rent control enclave which could stall future development.”

The cityhood drive was started after the successful campaign to make West Hollywood a city. The dominating issue in that campaign was the desire to establish rent controls.