Oxnard Harbor District v. Local Agency Formation Commission

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 4th 259·19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 819·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 577·93 Daily Journal DAR 6897·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4028
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 2, 1993B066033California4,016 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stone, J.

Here we hold that the protest provisions of Government Code section 57075, subdivision (a)(3), allowing detachment of a large segment of the Oxnard Harbor District without voter confirmation by the registered voters within the affected territory, do not violate appellants’ constitutional rights either facially or as applied.

Oxnard Harbor District (District), Stanley J. Daily and Edward J. Millan appeal from a trial court judgment denying their petition for writ of mandate. They sought to have the superior court overturn the action of respondents which resulted in the detachment of a substantial portion of the area encompassed within the boundaries of the District. In a prior proceeding involving this same matter before the local agency formation commission (LAFCO), this court affirmed the trial court’s writ of mandate that LAFCO rescind its original resolution because it failed to exercise its discretion in deciding whether to recommend an election as a condition of its recommendation to the conducting authority. (Oxnard Harbor Dist. v. Local Agency Formation Com. (Aug. 7, 1991) B052235 [nonpub. opn.].) LAFCO rescinded its original resolution and adopted a new…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.