Spending, Planning Issues to Be Decided by Lawndale Voters

Lawndale voters on Nov. 7 will decide on four ballot measures that focus on major city financial and planning issues.

One measure deals with the use of federal or other outside funds to build public facilities in Lawndale. The other three deal with the city’s General Plan and whether it should be subject to voter approval.

The spending measure would allow the City Council to take advantage of federal or other outside funding to build public facilities costing more than $1 million. Under a 1988 initiative, the council cannot do so without submitting the plan to voters.

Voter Approval for Public Projects

In April, 1988, city residents by a 3-1 margin approved an initiative requiring voter approval for all public projects costing more than $1 million in city funds. In that same election, voters rejected City Council plans for a $5-million civic center renovation that critics called a “Taj Mahal.”

The spending measure was proposed by Councilwoman Carol Norman so that if federal funds should be made available to cities, Lawndale could meet the typically short deadlines for applying for such funds. If the city had to go to the voters, it would take so long the city would miss out, she said.

The measure was approved Thursday by Norman, Mayor Sarann Kruse and Councilman Dan McKenzie, with Councilman Harold E. Hofmann dissenting because he wants voter control over all spending in excess of $1 million. Councilman Larry Rudolph was absent.

The council voted 4-0 in favor of the three ballot measures relating to the General Plan.

The measures are intended to resolve confusion over Ordinance 82, which was adopted by the City Council in 1963 in response to a citywide petition drive. The law requires the city to seek voter approval for the General Plan, which governs all zoning and development in Lawndale.

Reversal Stunned Officials

A 1974 state attorney general’s opinion said the ordinance was unconstitutional, so the council adopted the General Plan in 1976 without putting it before the electorate.

Last December, at the request of local activists Steve Mino and Herman Weinstein, the attorney general’s office reviewed the 1974 opinion and found it “erroneous.”

The reversal stunned local officials and raised the question of whether Lawndale has a valid General Plan, since it was not adopted by the electorate. State law requires every California city to enact a General Plan.

To resolve the quagmire, City Atty. David J. Aleshire drafted three measures for the November ballot.

One, endorsed by the Planning Commission, asks voters whether they want to repeal Ordinance 82. If voters approve the measure, the power to approve the General Plan would rest with the City Council. If they reject it, the General Plan would have to be submitted to a citywide vote.

Revise Flawed Ordinance

Another ballot measure would revise Ordinance 82, which Aleshire said is “fundamentally flawed” because it contains no provision on whether General Plan amendments would have to be submitted to the electorate. Last year’s state opinion declared that Ordinance 82 did not cover plan amendments.

Mino made line-by-line criticisms of Aleshire’s proposed wording, urging that amendments should not be allowed that would “loosen up” the General Plan’s development restrictions.

The ballot measure sets forth definitions of “major” amendments, which would be subject to voter approval, and “minor” amendments, which would not.

The distinction between the two is necessary to avoid having to hold an election on relatively minor changes, such as statistical updates on population or traffic counts, Aleshire said.

Proposed Changes

Under the measure, the following would have to be submitted to voters:

The adoption of any of the three most important elements of the General Plan: land use, housing or circulation (traffic).

Changes in land use that would require the rezoning of more than five lots.

Amendments to the housing element that would change the number of housing units by 10% or more, or amendments that “would substantially affect their affordability.”

Changes in the circulation element that would increase traffic volumes by 10% more than planned.

1976 Plan

Another measure approved Thursday by the council asks voters to approve the 1976 General Plan. This is to forestall any possible legal challenges to the plan based on the fact it was not submitted to the voters, Aleshire said.

Meanwhile, the city is preparing an update of the General Plan. It will take at least a year to conduct the necessary public hearings on the document, according to City Manager Jim Arnold.

Local activist Nancy Marthens urged that a deadline for updating the plan be included in the ballot measure to ensure that the city would proceed speedily on the long-awaited revisions.

LAWNDALE BALLOT MEASURES The Nov. 7 ballot in Lawndale will ask voters:

If the City Council should be able to spend, without submitting the plan to voters, federal or other outside funds on public facilities costing more than $1 million.

If Ordinance 82, requiring the city to seek voter approval for the General Plan, should be repealed.

If Ordinance 82 should be revised to require voter approval for “major” changes to the General Plan, but not “minor” ones.

If they approve the 1976 General Plan.