ANNEX UP TO COUNTY PANEL PROTESTS COULD FORCE LOCAL VOTE.

Byline: JUDY O'ROURKE Staff Writer

SANTA CLARITA -- Residents of a Canyon Country neighborhood slated for annexation may not know the outcome for a month or more.

By Wednesday, the agency that had initially approved the annexation received enough protest letters to potentially trigger a vote on it -- and also enough protest withdrawals to let the annexation proceed.

City officials are pushing to annex the Stonecrest neighborhood to form a connection to city property above a 56.1-million-ton sand and gravel mine planned in nearby Soledad Canyon, which it has spent years and more than $6 million battling.

``It's clear the residents of Stonecrest see the benefit of annexing and thus providing that land bridge for the future annexation of the city-owned property to the east,'' said senior city planner Kai Luoma.

Should the Stonecrest annexation be approved, the city's attempt to annex land it owns above the mine -- which was on hold -- would proceed immediately, said Sandor Winger, executive director of the county Local Agency Formation Commission, after the meeting.

``Until the protest process is completed, the area known as `Cemex' is not contiguous, but if the LAFCO action stands and the city annexes Stonecrest, we then have a valid application in our hands and by law must process the application,'' he said.

It could be a month before the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office verifies signatures on the competing sets of forms, and LAFCO compares dates and names to determine whether the withdrawals cancel out some protests.

Based on the number of forms, the options are proceeding with the annexation or requiring a vote on it. If the signatures on the withdrawals hold up and match those on protests, the annexation, preliminarily approved by LAFCO, would be approved.

In October, city planners filed forms to annex 1,885 acres in Soledad Canyon. The city already owns 906 acres -- 464 of which are occupied by the mine. Gaining jurisdiction over the land would not give the city authority over mining operations, officials have said.

In December, Cemex filed a lawsuit in state court challenging the environmental review in the annexation papers.

``We continue to watch this process with interest and continue to dialogue with the city,'' Cemex spokeswoman Susana Duarte said by phone after Wednesday's hearing.

On May 25, Rep. Howard ``Buck'' McKeon introduced a bill in Congress to cancel Cemex's lease and limit any future mining at the site to historic levels of 300,000 tons a year. But the day before introducing the legislation, he said its chances of passage are slim.

City officials held a community meeting in April, followed by a county-led meeting in May, to inform Stonecrest residents of the benefits they each offer. LAFCO officials declined the county's invitation to participate.

``We elected not to attend so as not to compromise our position,'' Winger said.

About 255 protests were received by LAFCO -- which is about 22 percent of the area's registered voters, well within the range to trigger a vote. The signers of the approximately 172 withdrawals submitted by city officials may or may not correspond with those on the protests. If the withdrawals are all valid, the number of protests could drop to 8 percent, below the 15 percent to 50 percent required for a vote. The forms were collected by community members.

The LAFCO commissioners expressed concern about forms being signed by residents and dated by others at the eleventh hour to assure they conferred the last word -- noting it would be unlawful to do so. An attorney for the city said no date was needed on the withdrawals, but LAFCO attorneys disagreed. The commission will reconvene in about 30 days to determine the next step. If a special election is warranted, if could be included on the November ballot.

judy.orourke(at)dailynews.com

[phone]