Deciding Dana Point Cityhood--and More
- Share via
Apparently, on June 7 we are voting on considerably more than the simple question of Dana Point incorporation.
The sample ballot reveals that the proponents are also asking for a $25-million appropriations limit in 1988-89 and the Local Agency Formation Commission, in another moment of erratic behavior, OKd it to go before the electorate.
You may ask, justifiably, why this exorbitant spending allowance is being requested. After all, the proponents’ balance sheet was released last week claiming they could operate the proposed city on some $1 million with revenues of over $9 million.
Here’s the gimmick: They want to be able to spend whatever they collect, and then some, circumventing the Gann law, which requires municipalities to return unappropriated surpluses to the taxpayers.
We reach two conclusions and one question from this maneuver: 1) The proponents don’t believe their own figures about the cost to operate Dana Point. 2) Giving the taxpayer a break was not on their agenda.
The question is: Are we to expect ethics like these from a new City Council?
JIM DAVY
Monarch Beach
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
