Mountain View Estates Q & A: Barry Groveman and James Bozajian

Mayor Barry Groveman and Councilman James Bozajian support annexing Mountain View Estates, but they say they would honor the community's decision to not move forward with the process.

The Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) could leave the decision to the residents of the 385-home gated community via a vote in the future.

The councilmembers recently spoke with Patch and said why they think Mountain View would benefit from being annexed and clear up some misconceptions about the motivation to do so.

Also, Bozajian responds to a

Calabasas Patch: What is your stance on the potential annexation of Mountain View Estates?

Bozajian: My position is this, I'd love to have Mountain View be a part of the city because I think it's a natural part of the city, it's right next to Calabasas and its surrounded by us pretty much. But I don't want to annex them if they don't want to come. If there's a super majority who's not interested in becoming a part of the city, I don't have any interest in forcing people into the city. That's my position. Once LAFCO does the plebiscite and takes a vote we'll see what the support level is. If the support level is not sufficiently high, I'm not going to be supportive of annexing it.

Groveman: It's not about sides, it's about letting everyone vote and deciding what the majority wants to do. That's the only side I'm on, maintaining the integrity of the vote. Unfortunately, there's a very small group of people who are …  spreading facts that aren't accurate. … We were invited by residents, many of them who want to do this for a number of reasons that I'm aware of, and I'm aware of it also because I used to live in that community many years ago, I built a house there.

Patch: What does the city stand to gain from the annexation?

Bozajian: Essentially, the most economic impact to the city is the tax revenue, property tax revenue, utility tax. There is not sales tax because [Mountain View Estates] is not a commercial area. Now, coming with that is a duty and we would have obligations that would exist that don't exist right now. Right now we don't do anything for Mountain View residents because they're not ours. We would assume the responsibility of providing municipal services, sheriff, fire, that kind of thing. … But there's other benefits. A great example is that Mountain View battle against Ahmanson Ranch. … They had to front their own money for all of those expenses associated with fighting Ahmanson Ranch, because they weren't part of the city. Had they been part of the city, our legal counsel would have been covering them.

Patch: How much money in property taxes would the city collect?

Groveman: It's very little. … The older cities, like South Pasadena, which is the same size as Calabasas, they get percentages like 26 percent of property tax revenues back to them as general fund money. We only get four percent. … Our money is made by things like business revenues, sales taxes, car dealers, a lot of business in our business section, That's where we make money, on our utility tax, we make things on money of that nature.

Patch: Please respond to this statement from Mountain View resident Marilyn Funari: "Joining the city would just add another layer of government bureaucracy without any tangible benefits to us."

Bozajian: I disagree with her. I think she's got it backwards. The county is a huge bureaucracy, the city is not. If her contention is that it would be easier to deal with the county by going downtown and dealing with all their different agencies as opposed to the city, where she can drive down a mile or two down the road to [Calabasas] city hall, to take care of business and to talk to a councilmember, talk to a city manager, talk to somebody in charge, I disagree with her. I think the opposite is true.

Patch: Some Mountain View residents say that a 2009 survey conducted by the city to gauge interest in annexation was misleading. How do you respond to that?

Bozajian: The survey was just a straw poll, it had no legal effect and it didn't really tell us very much. … It wasn't supposed to be a formal survey; it was supposed to be an informal look at if there was any interest in annexation. I'm not going to survey any weight.

Patch: So if Mountain View residents vote against annexation you would respect that decision?

Groveman: Absolutely. I have no stake in it nor do I benefit in any way. … A lot of the facts that are put out there are flat out wrong and misguided and deceptive. One example, that's a real inaccurate statement that's been made, is about open space. Calabasas is as protective of open space as any city you'll find in California. For that reason, the council passed an open space law about two-and-a-half years ago. What we did, we put something on the ballot, I believe it was Measure O. It passed, it was led by James Bozajian, and it froze all open space in the city, never to be touched in the city unless there's another vote by the people, so another council couldn't tamper with it. That's as forward thinking as it gets. Any argument that we're going to take open space is wrong and misguided.

Stay tuned for the next installment in our series on this topic, where we'll be getting the perspective of a Mountain View resident who wants to be annexed into Calabasas.