David Mcewen

Attorney David McEwen has what some critics call a pretty sweet deal with the city of Lancaster. As the city's attorney, McEwen and his law firm earn several hundred thousand dollars a year performing legal chores for the city. As its separate counsel for redevelopment programs, McEwen and his firm are paid several hundred thousand dollars a year more.

Ruling in a long-simmering dispute, the state Fair Political Practices Commission has declared that Lancaster City Atty. David McEwen does not automatically have a conflict of interest by serving as the city's attorney and its bond counsel. Critics have taken issue with McEwen's dual role as Lancaster's contract city attorney. He is paid as the city's general redevelopment attorney to advise the city council on potential bond issues.

A Los Angeles law firm Tuesday filed a legal challenge against Lancaster's plan to build $24 million in roadway overpasses with housing funds and accused the city's attorney of a conflict of interest in the process. The challenge by the law firm of Kane, Ballmer & Berkman, which specializes in redevelopment law, claims Lancaster wants to illegally build two overpasses with redevelopment funds that state law says must be used for low- to moderate-income housing.

Attorney David McEwen has what some critics call a pretty sweet deal with the city of Lancaster. As the city's attorney, McEwen and his law firm earn several hundred thousand dollars a year performing legal chores for the city. As its separate counsel for redevelopment programs, McEwen and his firm are paid several hundred thousand dollars a year more.

Ruling in a long-simmering dispute, the state Fair Political Practices Commission has declared that Lancaster City Atty. David McEwen does not automatically have a conflict of interest by serving as the city's attorney and its bond counsel. Critics have taken issue with McEwen's dual role as Lancaster's contract city attorney. He is paid as the city's general redevelopment attorney to advise the city council on potential bond issues.

Labor fraud charges filed this week against a Lancaster contractor in connection with a recent public works project have raised concerns among Lancaster officials about the contractor's labor practices on five other city projects. Lancaster City Atty. David McEwen said Friday he plans to look into the possibility of further investigation and other legal options in the wake of the criminal case filed Wednesday against the owners of Paxin Electric Inc.

The Lancaster City Council has delayed a decision on a proposal to fund a new anti-crime program with fees that would be paid by the city's landlords. At a meeting Wednesday, council members postponed a vote on the issue until Dec. 9. They also asked the city staff to come up with alternate funding proposals for the Lancaster Community Appreciation Program, which would add eight new sheriff's deputies to fight crime and blight in and around rental properties.

A San Fernando Valley legal aid firm Friday filed suit against Lancaster's plan to build $24 million in roadway overpasses with money that state law mandates be reserved for low- to moderate-income housing, the second challenge in the past month. Meanwhile, the city disclosed it has paid its law firm more than $755,000 in the past five years--in addition to the city attorney's pay the firm collects--to advise it on 30 bond issues similar to those proposed for the overpasses.

Lancaster will spend $100,000 in public funds to advertise the city's new auto sales mall, following a decision by Palmdale earlier this year to spend nearly $2.5 million in much broader aid to that city's rival auto center. The Lancaster program, approved by the city's Redevelopment Agency on Monday night, is a legitimate use of public funds, according to outside experts. But, they said, the costlier Palmdale program raises the question of whether that city engaged in an illegal giveaway.

In response to citizen complaints, the Los Angeles County district attorney's office is reviewing the Lancaster City Council's decision in July to award most residential trash collection in the city to a subsidiary of the nation's largest trash hauler. Deputy Dist. Atty. Gail Ehrlich of the office's special investigations division said the review will focus on whether council members acted illegally in approving an agreement with a subsidiary of Waste Management Inc.

A Los Angeles law firm Tuesday filed a legal challenge against Lancaster's plan to build $24 million in roadway overpasses with housing funds and accused the city's attorney of a conflict of interest in the process. The challenge by the law firm of Kane, Ballmer & Berkman, which specializes in redevelopment law, claims Lancaster wants to illegally build two overpasses with redevelopment funds that state law says must be used for low- to moderate-income housing.

Lancaster officials who inadvertently left out a curfew for minors when they amended a loitering ordinance last November are expected Monday to reinstate a 10 p.m. curfew for those under the age of 18. City officials admit they made a mistake when they omitted all references to loitering teen-agers when they rewrote the original ordinance to comply with a Municipal Court judge's ruling that said the prohibitions against loitering were too vague.

A judge on Friday upheld Lancaster's right to spend $24 million in housing funds on building two highway overpasses, ruling the city's plan does not violate state redevelopment law or involve an illegal conflict of interest by the city's attorney. The ruling by San Fernando Superior Court Judge David Schacter was a first-round victory for the city.