I had the opportunity to attend the West Ranch Town Council meeting last week. My motivation for doing so was to hear Carl Boyer speak. Although Mr. Boyer stated he didn’t think the west ranch communities had enough population or revenue to be able to incorporate, he encouraged the west ranch town council to fully look at the incorporation option to determine if it was feasible. Then make a move one way or the other: annex or incorporate, but get out of from under county control. He emphasized that it is up to the west ranch residents to pursue local governmental control in one form or another.
Bossert.
Mr. Boyer also pointed out that there is a revenue drain – tax revenues generated in the west ranch communities are not spent entirely in the west ranch as the county can spend these funds anywhere within the county’s jurisdiction.
City officials were also in attendance, pledging to have a representative of the city attend future town council meetings to improve communication and relations between the city and the west ranch communities.
I do agree with Mr. Boyer that the needs of the residents would likely be better served by having local control. I have dealt with both the city and the county, and I found it much easier by far to deal with the city. I spent a day at Department of Regional Planning in downtown Los Angeles researching a county-approved development, and while I have nothing but praise for the staff that assisted me, the sheer size of the county administration is overwhelming. I was on the 13th floor of an office tower, 35 miles away in downtown Los Angeles. Some of the records I needed were never able to be found, despite the best efforts of the staff, and others were available in Norwalk if I cared to drive out that far to review them. I am not sure that many of the people who assisted me were even aware of exactly where Santa Clarita is located.
In contrast, I have found city hall unimposing and conveniently located right here in the SCV. The staff is friendly and has never failed to produce any documents I have requested. City council meetings and planning commission meetings are held in Valencia on alternating Tuesday evenings when most people would be available to attend. And when I went before city council regarding a traffic issue in my neighborhood, I was speaking to five city council members who live right here in my community and were able to understand all the nuances of the issue.
Supervisor Antonovich represents a population of over 2 million people living in the unincorporated county areas. His district includes not only the Santa Clarita Valley, but also the Antelope, Crescenta, Pomona, San Fernando, and San Gabriel Valleys. County Board of Supervisor meetings are held on Tuesday mornings in downtown Los Angeles. Supervisor Antonovich is but one member of a five-member governing body, and while you might be able to convince him of your case he must then go to the other four supervisors and convince at least some of them as well – not always an easy or even possible task.
Case in point: there was a letter in the Signal a few weeks ago from an Agua Dulce resident, thanking Mr. Antonovich for his efforts at attempting to prevent an expansion at their local airport. Apparently, he had chartered a bus to take the residents downtown on a Tuesday morning to speak at the public hearing regarding the airport expansion. The plan was passed 4-1 despite Mr. Antonovich’s efforts, which I have no doubt were sincere. I only bring this story up to emphasize the point that he is only one of five; and he still must persuade at least two of the other supervisors to go along with him in order to accomplish anything.
There is no doubt in Carl Boyers’ mind, nor mine, that the needs of the residents are best served by local control, whether that be by incorporation into a new city or by annexing to the City of Santa Clarita. But each of these two options presents its own challenges.
Incorporation is by far the most difficult and financially expensive of the two options. The first step in any possible incorporation is to have fiscal analysis done. These reports cost tens of thousands of dollars to prepare, with no money-back guarantee if the analysis proves unfeasible. This money would have to come from the residents themselves. But the financial hurdles don’t end there.
In order for a city to incorporate, it needs to be ‘revenue neutral’, which means that LAFCO must ensure that the county would not suffer substantially from revenue losses before any incorporation can proceed. Let us remember that the commercial revenue centers located west of I-5 are some of the biggest tax generators for Mr. Antonivich’s supervisory district, and any incorporation of the west side would surely have a fiscal impact on the county. If LAFCO were to determine that west side incorporation would substantially impact the county, and it’s highly likely that they would, then they must either deny the request or require the newly formed city to pay ‘alimony’ to the county government. Interestingly enough, this revenue-neutral requirement does not exist for annexation.
Further complicating the financial picture is the loss of extra funding for newly formed cities from the state government. When Santa Clarita was incorporated as a city in 1987, they received the vehicle tax revenues for all of the residents of the city for the first three years. Legislation has since been passed that no longer grants these additional funds, making it all the more difficult to incorporate.
A newly formed city has employees to hire, elections to be held, offices to be set up, and services to be provided. All of this takes money, lots of it, and whether or not there is enough revenue generated on the west side to pay ‘alimony’ to the county, as well as set up the necessary governmental infrastructure without the additional funding from the state to me seems highly unlikely, but I am just guessing here. Fiscal analysis might prove otherwise. Might.
Annexation to the City of Santa Clarita is another option, but again, there are road blocks to annexation as well. One of these is the Valencia Marketplace. When Newhall Land sold the developed commercial property, it included a provision in the sales document that stipulated that the new owners must not initiate or support any annexation effort, and if the matter were to ever come to a vote, Newhall Land retains the right to cast that vote. This does not necessarily preclude an annexation that would include the Valencia Marketplace, as long as the property was included as part of a larger, overall annexation of the area in which the majority of residents were in favor of annexation.
However, the biggest hurdle to overcome in order to make any governmental change, in my opinion, is a lack of political will. Hearing Carl Boyer speak at the West Ranch Town Council meeting the other night reinforced one recurring theme that others to whom I have spoken about recall about the formation of the City of Santa Clarita: they were highly motivated. The residents here were fed up with the county mismanagement of the valley. They were fed up with haphazard development without regards to infrastructure. They were fed up with seeing their sales tax revenue leave the area never to return. They wanted local control, and they were willing to fight hard for it. It took three times at the ballot box to achieve it. I don’t perceive a groundswell of anger and discontentment from the west ranch communities that would fuel and energize the community to make such a monumental change.
It takes an incredible amount of time and effort to rally a community – this I know from personal experience. It takes a group of passionate and dedicated people willing to put in a lot of hours and footwork to persuade enough residents to change the status quo. Apathy is always the hardest hurdle to overcome.
It is also pretty much a guarantee that the county will work hard to keep the west ranch communities in the unincorporated Los Angeles county. It was amazing how they showed up in force for the Stonecrest meeting – a community of only 630+ homes and no commercial revenue; imagine the show they’d put on to keep the west ranch communities under their jurisdiction.
Newhall Land has also signaled its intent by stipulating the owners of the Marketplace property cannot support annexation, and retaining the right to vote on the matter. Other developers would likely join in opposition to changing the status quo. These developers chose to remain outside the city boundaries when the original lines were drawn, perceiving, rather correctly, I think, that the county would be more developer-friendly. The combination of county resistance and developer resistance to any change in the status of the west ranch communities would likely create a spectacle that would make the Stonecrest annexation look like a preschool squabble in comparison.
So, what happens from here is up to the residents of the west ranch. I tend to agree with Mr. Bossert’s previous posts on his blog, stating that the west ranch residents aren’t that interested in annexation. Judging from the turnout at the meeting last week, they’re not that interested in incorporation, either. If there are motivated residents in the west ranch communities who want to make a change, now is the time to start attending the town council meetings and make your voice heard. Because the biggest hurdle for the residents to overcome if they want to make a change isn’t necessarily financial resources; it’s apathy.
And now I have some words for you, Mr. Bossert:
My reason for attending the WRTC meeting this week was not to confront you, but to hear Carl Boyer speak. I had no idea what reception I would receive from you if you were aware of who I was. Your internet persona leads me to believe you are a man of quick temper who is intolerant of your opposition and prone to emotional and angry outbursts. I had every reason to expect that such a meeting would not go well, and I had no desire to have any confrontation with you in front of your peers.
I took on the project of challenging you this summer because you said and posted some things that were blatantly untrue and completely outrageous. You post them out there on the internet with no way for anyone to contact you, question your thinking or present opposing points of view. Many people tend to believe what they read on the internet as always being true. I felt someone needed to challenge you, and since no one else was stepping up to the plate, I decided it would be me. You have a right to put out your opinion, a right which you have exercised liberally and unchallenged for some time now; I also have the right to present my opposing point of view, a right which I have also exercised freely.
During the course of the past few months, we have had many exchanges, but none directly. You have refused to meet me in any sort of responsive forum. I have attacked your viewpoints, and yes, I have engaged in word-play with your analogies. However, I have never attacked you personally, nor questioned your intelligence. The only thing I have ever done is call you an ‘elitist’, which, by the way, I believe you are. I feel I have acted in a respectful manner in attempting to engage you in some sort of factual debate, something which you have steadfastly refused to do.
Instead, you have resorted to attacking me personally on your blog – where I cannot respond or defend myself - calling me unknowledgeable, a communist, and a ‘snarky idiot’, to name a few. I’m sure there are more if I cared to go back and review. I can only assume that since you have no reasoning or facts to back up your opinions, you have chosen to attack me personally instead. I feel that you have very disrespectful to me, and it shows ill-manners and a lack of class on your part.
I showed up at the meeting and I kept to myself. I was respectful and I did not challenge you in front of your peers. And yet, you had to make the ‘communist’ remark again in your post. I guess it isn’t in your nature to be gracious, respectful, or even civil. I am tired of you calling me a communist, Mr. Bossert. It doesn’t apply and you know it. I want you to stop. If you are going to pick out a label for me, at least pick something that applies.
Disagree with my opinions if you want, Mr. Bossert - in fact, I invite you to do so. I might rather enjoy a meeting of wits if you have any, but not the onslaught of insults. If you disagree with so much of what I say, tell me why and back it up with some facts and some solid reasoning. Pick my argument apart on its merits. Present your point of view; take a real position. And for the record, “You’re wrong because I said so” is not a position. Attack my point of view, but don’t attack me.
It is possible to write entertaining blogs without being offensive or insulting. It is possible to disagree with someone else’s point of view without resorting to personal attacks. It’s called “tolerance” and “respect”, Mr. Bossert, and perhaps you should attempt to acquire some.
You are the one that broadcasts your point of view to the world over the internet. You are the one who has put your ill-manners, intolerance and boorish behavior on display for all to see. If you can’t tolerate opposing points of view and still be civil and genteel, then perhaps you shouldn’t put it out there. Maybe you should just shut up, Mr. Bossert!
Incorporation or Annexation, plus a message for Mr. Bossert
Incorporation or Annexation, plus a message for Mr. Bossert
Attributed to Jeff Wilson (editor-supplied)
Comments (5)