Congress May Make Land-Swap Decision : Cheeseboro Canyon: A House panel will determine whether the Park Service or legislators will have the final say in trading parkland.

A congressional subcommittee reviewing a controversial land exchange involving Cheeseboro Canyon and property owned by entertainer Bob Hope will consider whether the trade should be acted upon by the National Park Service or by Congress, where it would receive broad public scrutiny.

Shifting the decision to Congress would be a partial victory for opponents of the trade, many of whom believe parks officials are poised to give approval.

The subcommittee on environment, energy and natural resources of the House Government Operations Committee headed by Rep. Mike Synar (D-Okla.) is addressing the general question of whether federal agencies should approve large land swaps without the scrutiny that Congress brings to legislatively approved transactions.

Synar plans to hold a hearing on the Cheeseboro Canyon plan and a separate land-swap proposal involving Elsmere Canyon near Santa Clarita, which is owned by the Forest Service. Los Angeles city and county are moving to obtain Elsmere for a landfill.

Federal law generally authorizes agencies responsible for land management to approve an exchange of lands within a single state, providing that the federal government gets fair market value and the trade is in the public interest.

Synar could pressure the Park Service and Forest Service--whose budgets are controlled by Congress--into deferring to Congress, participants and House committee aides said. Synar has indicated that congressional approval would mean far greater public scrutiny.

A senior aide to the subcommittee said this week that “Mike has never hidden his feelings that controversial issues deserve the fullest public participation and debate.” Synar declined to comment in advance of the hearing.

If the Forest Service defers to Congress on Elsmere, it would give added leverage to Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City) in his negotiations with the county over the terms of the transaction.

Berman, who has introduced a bill authorizing the swap, wants the county to take steps to offset the environmental damage caused by the dump. In particular, he wants Mission, Rustic and Sullivan canyons in the Santa Monica Mountains preserved as parkland.

“The result of Synar’s efforts will mean that, if there’s not a very broad consensus behind an administrative transfer, there will be a very great reluctance to engage in it,” said Berman, who is expected to participate when Synar’s panel reviews the Elsmere proposal.

Synar’s criticism of past land transfers arises, in part, from his belief that the Reagan Administration gave valuable federal land to private interests at “fire-sale rates,” aides said.

The swaps stem to some extent from cuts in federal funds for land acquisition in the past decade. Those reductions have forced public agencies to trade land to obtain environmentally sensitive property.

“There needs to be reform in the whole area of land exchanges,” said a senior staff member on another House subcommittee involved with land management issues. “It’s inherently a process that’s not real open and lends itself to abuse.”

Synar’s subcommittee, which has been gathering information for weeks, will hold its first hearing May 3. It had planned to focus on the Cheeseboro and Elsmere swaps, but Synar recently decided to move up a hearing on a controversial exchange involving land in Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming.

Cheeseboro and Elsmere will be the subject of a second session which probably will be held later in the month, a subcommittee aide said.

Critics of the Cheeseboro proposal have been working behind the scenes for months to persuade Synar that he should discourage the Park Service from proceeding. For instance, Donald J. Hellmann, an attorney for the Wilderness Society, brought the proposal to the subcommittee’s attention when he learned that Synar was looking at land swaps.

Hellmann and other opponents say the swap would violate the Park Service’s mission by encouraging real estate development. They contend that lobbying by Cheeseboro advocates has politicized the process.

Joseph T. Edmiston, executive director of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and architect of the proposal, maintains that it would allow his agency to acquire thousands of acres of environmentally sensitive property that would otherwise be financially out of reach.

The proposal calls for the Park Service to donate 59 acres in Cheeseboro to Potomac Investment Associates in exchange for 864 acres on the nearby Jordan Ranch in eastern Ventura County, including a scenic area of oak meadows called China Flat.

Potomac, which has an option to buy the 2,308-acre Jordan Ranch from Hope, plans to build 750 homes and a golf course on remaining Jordan Ranch property, but needs the Cheeseboro parcel for a road to provide access to the development.

Under terms of the plan, if the Cheeseboro swap is approved, Hope would sell 5,700 acres in the Santa Susana and Santa Monica mountains to the conservancy for $20 million, an amount that is considered lower than Hope could get from developers.

Synar and subcommittee staff members visited Southern California on April 15 and 16 to tour the land-swap sites and meet with proponents and opponents of the Cheeseboro proposal.

Edmiston said that, based on comments by Synar and his staffers, he came away from the visit convinced that Synar will act to shift the responsibility for approving the swap from the Park Service to Congress.

“I think what Synar will do is say that the depth of public feeling on this issue is such that it requires a full congressional airing,” Edmiston said. “He will say the same thing on Elsmere.”

But Potomac general partner Peter Kyros, as well as some opponents of the trade, said their discussions with Synar did not indicate he was predisposed to shift the responsibility to Congress.

Synar’s subcommittee will also review the question of the Park Service’s legal authority over the Cheeseboro trade.

Hellmann said he has questioned the agency’s authority to approve the Cheeseboro exchange because it would mean changing boundaries of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, an action that requires approval of Congress.

In addition, Hellmann also argues that a 1977 amendment to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, which governs land swaps, prohibits the Park Service from trading or selling land acquired with land and water conservation funds after 1977. Cheeseboro Canyon was purchased with such funds in the early 1980s.

Peter Kirsch, an attorney representing Potomac, responded that both arguments are based on an outdated map of the recreation area. Part of the Jordan Ranch was added to the area when the maps were revised in 1988, according to Kirsch.

“There is no boundary change, so the issue is moot,” he said.

He added that the 1977 amendment to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act applied only to trades that change park boundaries, which would not be the case in the Cheeseboro deal.

Will Kriz, chief of the Park Service’s Land Resources Division, also disputed Hellmann’s arguments. “That’s not to say the exchange is legal or not legal,” Kriz said. “I don’t think we can tell you that we’re absolutely convinced one way or another about our authority.”