$250,000 BUDGETED FOR FIGHT AGAINST MINE.

Byline: Heather MacDonald Staff Writer

SANTA CLARITA - City officials have set aside $250,000 in next year's budget for the fight against a planned 56 million-ton mine in Soledad Canyon.

That compares with the $1.3 million the city spent in the past year to hire lawyers, compile research and analyze the potential impacts of Azusa- based Transit Mixed Concrete's plan to excavate gravel northeast of Santa Clarita.

But the drop in funding doesn't mean the city is giving up its battle.

``None of us has a crystal ball to know exactly what we will need in the next year,'' Deputy City Manager Rick Putnam said. ``But we anticipate that the fight won't cost as much money as it did this year.''

City officials have spent thousands of dollars contending that the mine will result in heavy truck traffic on area freeways, harm the sensitive ecology of the Santa Clara River, cause air pollution, damage the local economy and threaten the Santa Clarita Valley's water supply.

``The city is trying to be conservative, and I'm confident that if we need more money, they have enough money in the contingency fund,'' said Andrew Fried, the president of Safe Action for the Environment Inc., an organization formed to fight the mine.

TMC representatives say the gravel pit will not harm the environment and is necessary to avert a looming shortage of sand and gravel, which is used to make concrete. Two city-sponsored studies dispute the need for new sources of aggregate.

The City Council has struggled in recent weeks in deciding which projects to fund in next year's budget, scheduled to be adopted June 26. Rising energy prices and flat revenues have pinched the $127 million budget.

Putnam said he planned to ask the City Council in December for at least $250,000 more when the budget is reviewed halfway through the fiscal year, which begins July 1.

``By then, we'll have a better idea what we will need,'' Putnam said.

Also on June 26, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors will hear a report from the county's regional planning staff on a list of changes the city would like to see made to the mining plans. Those changes would reduce the size and scope of the mine by about 80 percent, city officials said.

In April, the supervisors voted to reject TMC's current proposal and consider the city's requests. City and county officials expect the supervisors to take a final vote on the project after hearing the staff's findings.

Both city officials and TMC representatives have vowed to file suit if they lose the Board of Supervisors vote. City officials said it was more than likely that the tussle over the mine would move to the courts after the supervisors act.

``We are very serious about this fight,'' Putnam said. ``We are adamantly opposed to the size and scope of this mine.''

If the city is forced to fight against the mine in court, that will change what resources will be required, Putnam said.

``The fight is shifting, and we don't quite know how that will play out,'' Putnam said.

The city's formal appeal of the federal Bureau of Land Management's approval of the mine is pending. TMC will pay the BLM, which controls the rights to the minerals, $28 million over the 20-year contract.

The city has also filed suit against the BLM, claiming that its approval violated federal administrative law and the Endangered Species Act.

``We'll continue to be active and aggressive, there is no doubt about that,'' Putnam said.