Bill to Change LAFCO Gains Senators’ Favor

Charging that the government agency overseeing cityhood incorporation efforts has abused its power, local officials from throughout the state urged a state Senate committee Wednesday to approve a bill drastically changing the way cities are formed.

The measure by Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia) would give the state more control of Local Agency Formation Commissions, which are now tied closely to counties.

After a more than two-hour hearing, a majority of Local Government Committee members indicated they favored the bill, with some minor amendments. They agreed to vote on a modified version April 13.

Sen. Newton R. Russell (R-Glendale) told Davis he agreed that LAFCO is skewed against the cities.

The legislation would shift the source of LAFCO funding from counties to the state and prohibit LAFCO offices from being housed in county buildings. It would require any county supervisor whose district includes a community seeking incorporation to join the LAFCO board for rulings regarding the cityhood application. Most LAFCO boards have five members, two of whom are county supervisors.

Citing incorporation experiences in Agoura Hills, Calabasas and Santa Clarita, Davis told the committee that he sees abuses in the incorporation process--particularly in the way boundaries of new cities are drawn.

Los Angeles County’s LAFCO unfairly eliminated all areas that were to be developed in Agoura Hills, he said. Davis and other critics contend that developers prefer to do business with counties rather than cities because local governments generally are more restrictive on growth.

In Santa Clarita, where the proposal for a 95-square-mile city was reduced to less than half that size, Davis said: “Every developer who wanted out got out. There, you have 110,000 very angry people.”

Calabasas’ unsuccessful attempt at cityhood is “truly a horror story,” Davis said. In February, after cutting the proposed city’s size from 26 square miles to 10, LAFCO voted 5 to 2 to deny Calabasas residents a chance to vote on an incorporation proposal because, the commissioners said, the new city would not be solvent. The LAFCO action came after more than 2 years of efforts by cityhood proponents.

“The process for seeking freedom has become a difficult process,” he said, adding that, when a LAFCO allows a city to be born, “sometimes you have a twisted dwarf come out.”

Speaker after speaker from six counties--Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Orange and Sacramento--spoke in favor of Davis’ bill.

Santa Clarita cityhood leader Connie Worden said LAFCO “simply removed populous canyons without any explanation.” Councilman Carl Boyer III said cityhood leaders were given no documentation on budget figures. Boyer said his appearance before the committee had unanimous City Council support.

“LAFCOs have to have some kind of accountability,” said Bruce Rasner of the proposed city of Laguna Niguel in Orange County.

In that community, Paul Christiansen, another cityhood proponent said, the local LAFCO drastically reduced the size of the proposed city, although experts called it well-planned.

Davis’ bill also would require analysis of a cityhood proposal by an independent consultant.

Testimony opposing the bill came from LAFCO officials, representatives of the California Building Industry Assn. and the County Supervisors Assn.

Robert Braitman, LAFCO executive director in Ventura County, said the bill would permit more state intrusion into local affairs.

Sen. Ruben S. Ayala (D-Chino), responded: “LAFCO is an arm of the state, not a local agency.”

The Legislature created the LAFCO system in the early 1960s to plan and regulate the boundaries of cities and special districts.

Susan Rainey, chairman of the California Assn. of LAFCOs, called Davis’ bill too drastic.

A provision of the bill to make it easier to challenge a LAFCO decision in court “invites more lawsuits,” she said.

San Diego County Supervisor John MacDonald, a member of that county’s LAFCO, said he feared the bill would lead to revenue losses to counties as more communities incorporate and take a larger share of property and sales taxes.

Ruth Benell, executive director of LAFCO in Los Angeles County, attended the hearing but did not testify. She has said that she opposes the bill.

A provision that would have required a legislator who represents the area seeking cityhood to sit on the commission was deleted, with Davis’ approval.

Davis said he believes the bill has a good chance of being approved, at least by the Local Government Committee. He said three committee members--Ayala, Russell and Sen. Quentin L. Kopp (I-San Francisco)--have agreed to serve as co-authors.

If approved, the measure will go to the Appropriations Committee, which would consider state financing to pay for operation of LAFCOs.