Bill to Extend Conservancy Clears Assembly Panel, 13-3

SACRAMENTO —  A bill to extend the life of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy sailed through an Assembly committee Wednesday despite Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich’s attempts to curb its powers and restrict its life span.

The Assembly Ways and Means Committee approved, by a 13-3 vote, a bill by Assemblyman Gray Davis (D-Los Angeles) to extend the life of the conservancy until July 1, 1990. None of Antonovich’s proposed amendments was included.

Without passage of Davis’ extension measure, the conservancy, which buys parkland in the Santa Monica Mountains and foothills bordering the San Fernando Valley, will go out of business on July 1, 1986.

After the hearing, Davis and Anton Calleia, chairman of the conservancy’s board, said they were delighted that the bill had easily won the committee’s approval, but Davis stopped short of predicting a victory. The full Assembly could vote on the bill as early as next Thursday, but the measure still faces committee action in the Senate, where Antonovich is expected to renew his fight.

“When victory is in sight, you should be most on guard,” said Davis, who said he has received strong bipartisan support for the conservancy extension. Davis withdrew a similar bill during the last session when it appeared that Gov. George Deukmejian would veto it as being premature.

Roy W. Donley, a conservancy member who represented Antonovich at the hearing, was in Sacramento to push for amendments to Davis’ bill, including one to limit the extension to two years instead of four.

“We feel this should not be accepted as a permanent agency,” Donley said. “They claim there is a lot of unfinished work, but our position is they never would finish. Fifty years from now they’d have a pipeline full of projects.”

Davis said he backed a four-year extension because it would take that long for the conservancy to plan and complete worthy projects.

Another proposed amendment sought by Antonovich would have stripped the conservancy of its option to buy surplus public land at the price the government agency landowner paid for it. Antonovich wants government entities, such as the Los Angeles Unified School District, to be free to sell their land at market value.

Donley said other government agencies should not have to suffer financially at the expense of parkland acquisition.

However, Davis said that the Legislature invested the conservancy with the power to buy surplus land at bargain prices because it recognized the need to preserve the dwindling open space in Los Angeles. He added that the conservancy does not steamroll over other agencies, but tries to work out compromises when purchasing land. For instance, Davis said, in 1982, the conservancy bought land from the Los Angeles Unified School District valued at $2.5 million for $840,000, but in turn the conservancy waived the right to buy three other parcels the district owned that were valued at $8 million.

Donley said he expected Antonovich to try again to amend the measure when it is taken up by the Senate Natural Resources Committee. Donley predicted that the amendment abolishing the conservancy’s right to buy land at bargain prices has the best chance of eventually getting incorporated into Davis’ bill.

Committee members also rejected a proposal by the Legislative Analyst that would have required the Conservancy to generate 30% of its yearly budget. None of the committee members took up the suggestion.