San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission staff on Wednesday outlined a revised municipal service review for the Oceanside Small Craft Harbor District and recommended steps to clarify governance and liabilities.

The LAFCO analyst, Mikayla Peters, told the Harbors and Beaches Advisory Committee that the MSR identifies 18 recommendations for the Oceanside region, five aimed at the harbor district specifically. She said the proposals include asking the city to revisit its payment arrangement for a patrol vessel, recommending the district publicly distinguish itself as a separate agency, and formalizing the city–district relationship in a memorandum of understanding.

The MSR also notes that the harbor district informally deactivated its patrol and rescue power in February 2009 but retains legal authorization to provide those services. "To clarify service expectations and mitigate potential liabilities, Small Craft Harbor District should formally request divestiture approval under Government Code §56824.1," Peters said.

Dean Simons, LAFCO executive officer, and other staff described the 1995 decision that made the district dependent on the city and explained the options LAFCO can study. Simons said a governance study could assess alternatives such as restoring an independent district, creating a smaller jurisdiction focused on the 100-acre harbor, or retaining the current dependent arrangement.

Committee members asked for historical context about the 1995 boundary changes and pressed whether it is common for city council members to serve simultaneously on dependent district boards. Simons replied it is a common arrangement in some regions and that LAFCO has handled similar transitions elsewhere.

Peters and Simons advised residents and committee members to submit formal comments to LAFCO during the 45-day comment period, which the presentation established ends on September 19; the commission is scheduled to consider the final MSR on October 7. Peters said public comment may influence whether the commission authorizes a governance study.

The presentation was information-only; no formal votes were taken by the advisory committee. The next steps identified by LAFCO are public comment, possible commission action on Oct. 7, and—if authorized—a governance study to explore restructuring, funding and implementation issues.

Authorities cited in the presentation included the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act and Government Code §56824.1, which LAFCO staff said governs divestiture or activation of district service powers.