Coast annexation decision delayed until August 5 Coast annexation decision delayed until August 5 (July 28, 2004)

By Marion Softky
Almanac Staff Writer

Superior Court Judge Carl W. Holm plans to make his decision on the proposed annexation of 220 square miles of the San Mateo County Coastside to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District on August 5 -- the day before the final deadline to put elections on the November ballot.

After two days of hearings on the contentious issue July 22 and 23, Judge Holm set a schedule for winding up the case in time to put an election on the ballot -- if the protest has gained the 4,071 signatures to qualify for a vote in the annexation area.

Written arguments are to be submitted by July 30. Rebuttals are due August 3. On August 5, Judge Holm plans to hear oral arguments, then rule on a lawsuit brought by Coastside activist Oscar Braun and the Half Moon Bay Coastside Foundation seeking to block the annexation.

Judge Holm's decision may, or may not, be the culmination of a complex seven-year effort to expand the open space district so that it can buy and manage Coastside land for open space, agriculture and limited recreation.

Opponents, who fear the intrusion of any more government in their lives, had 60 days to collect signatures protesting the April action of the Local Agency Formation Commission approving the annexation. On June 11, they submitted 5,340 petitions. To trigger an election, they needed 4,071 valid signatures, one fourth of the 16,284 registered voters.

When the election department counted only 3,443 valid protests, Judge Mark Forcum was disturbed that one-third of the signatures were thrown out, and questioned the integrity of the counting process. He blocked the annexation, and called for a full hearing to see if the court should issue a permanent restraining order.

Judge Forcum also ordered a recount of the 1,757 invalid signatures. These were judged "insufficient" for a variety of reasons: 1,050 protesters were not registered, signed two or more petitions, or did not live in the annexation area; another 376 were modified by one of the collectors to clarify the information on the protest -- for example, the addition of a street address to a post office box.

Even taking the most lenient view, the recount came up with 64 more valid signatures, but 77 more duplicates, according to the chart provided by Elections Manager David Tom. The total was still well below the 4,071 valid signatures needed for an election.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.