Fallbrook Incorporation Plan for Districts May Be Hard to Sell

The Local Agency Formation Commission has approved a Fallbrook incorporation plan for voters to consider in June, but incorporation boosters fear that the seeds of defeat may already have been sown.

Fallbrook Incorporation Coalition members say the plan approved late Wednesday night may be hard to sell to voters because it requires the new city to take control of three politically popular districts that have provided water, sewers and road maintenance in parts of the rural community for decades.

“These are three very, very good districts, and people are going to be naturally concerned if service will be as good with a new, inexperienced city,” said incorporation backer Dr. Roy Hiscock.

“It will be difficult enough to sell one issue, and this will make it even more difficult,” he added.

Coalition members may ask LAFCO directors to reconsider their approval of the LAFCO staff recommendation that the new city take control of the Fallbrook Public Utilities District, the Fallbrook Sanitary District, and the Morro Hills Community Services District.

“The people of this community are entitled to vote yes or no on incorporation alone, and then if the vote is yes, the new town council is the proper body to tackle local issues such as the three special districts,” coalition spokesman Al Fuller said.

Spokesmen Protest

LAFCO staff analyst Joyce Crosthwaite, who prepared the Fallbrook proposal, noted that state law guiding incorporation efforts calls for eliminating service districts whenever possible to reduce costs and increase efficiency.

The three districts have independent boards of directors, which would be eliminated within a year of cityhood. All three sent spokesmen to Wednesday’s meeting to protest the LAFCO recommendation.

Incorporation boosters have reason to worry about their chances of success at the polls.

First, while cityhood won easily in Encinitas, Solana Beach, Poway and Santee in recent years, Fallbrook voters in 1981 rejected the idea by a margin of 4-1, the fourth defeat for incorporation.

The 1988 incorporation effort could be hurt by opposition from the service district boards, which include some of the community’s most prominent citizens.

Second, the LAFCO report has already raised a cautionary flag about the level of public services under cityhood.

The LAFCO fiscal analysis says that the city would be financially feasible but would not have enough money to expand services over what Fallbrook currently receives from the county government and the special districts.

A plea by incorporation boosters to increase the amount of tax revenue the county would shift to the new city, and thus make incorporation more attractive to voters, was rejected by LAFCO directors at the three-hour meeting at Fallbrook Elementary School.

The coalition is sensitive to LAFCO’s less-than-rosy financial forecast and asked that the official ballot statement be more upbeat, a decision that will be made by county election officials.

With services not likely to be expanded, the main attraction of cityhood would be local control of land-use decisions, according to the LAFCO report.

While incorporation boosters want the districts kept independent to increase the chances of voter approval for cityhood, Fallbrook resident Jack Wireman said that this would undercut the new city’s clout in land-use matters.

In fact, Wireman says the new city should also control the Rainbow water district, which serves part of Fallbrook. LAFCO staff said this is impossible because much of the Rainbow district is outside Fallbrook.

“We can say that sewers and water should not be used as planning tools, but the fact is that unless you control sewers and water, you can’t control growth,” said Wireman, a member of Friends Of Rural Lifestyles, which has been against density increases.

Wireman hinted he might oppose the incorporation drive unless the special district issue is resolved. “I don’t want to buy a pig-in-the-poke in the ballot box,” he said.

The boundaries of the proposed 41-square-mile city would stretch south of California 76 to the San Luis Rey River flood plain and east to Interstate 15, and in several key development areas would extend beyond I-15.

Looking After Best Interests

“It’s time for the bird to leave the nest,” said Fallbrook resident G.A. Moudry. “We are a community of 35,000 people. We have ample people capable of handling things up here as well as the people in San Diego (where the county government is located).”

“I’m tired of driving down to San Diego (to discuss Fallbrook issues),” said Fallbrook Planning Group chairman David Lowery. “We have to look after our own best interests.”

Michael McDade, attorney for several large landowners near the California 76-Interstate 15 intersection, argued unsuccessfully that the area be removed from the proposed city and left under the control of the Board of Supervisors.

“I can see why citizens of Fallbrook, looking at their parochial interests, might want to control as much land as possible,” said McDade, as members of the audience hissed. “But I think this is a logical area for well-planned growth.”

Under state law, there is a 30-day period following a LAFCO incorporation vote in which to file an appeal asking for modification of the proposal. Fallbrook coalition members plan to meet Monday night to discuss such an appeal on the issue of the three districts.

After 30 days, the matter will go to the supervisors to formally place the issue on the June 7 ballot. The supervisors cannot change any of the boundaries, financial details or jurisdictional arrangements.

In the failed 1981 incorporation vote, the Fallbrook sewer and water districts were to be merged but still kept separate from the city. The Morro Hills Community Services District, which provides maintenance on several miles of private roads in an exclusive part of the community, was to be left untouched.

Wednesday’s vote approving the new incorporation package was 5-3, with San Diego Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer, Borrego water district member John Sasso, and Alpine fire district member Marjorie Hersom opposed.

Along with the issue of the special districts, Fallbrook Incorporation Coalition members may also petition LAFCO directors to change their mind on one other point: that Fallbrook be called a town rather than a city.

Incorporation boosters prefer the rural sound of town and say it would be more palatable to voters.