BUILDER BEING ASKED TO PAY MORE OF INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS.

Byline: Teresa Jimenez Daily News Staff Writer

As Ventura County officials and activists debate the merits of the proposed Newhall Ranch and effects of the project, which will bring 70,000 people to the Santa Clarita Valley west of the Golden State Freeway, local officials are trying to get the best deal they can out of the developer.

In the coming months, the William S. Hart Union High School District will continue to work with The Newhall Land and Farming Company, owner of the 12,000 acres, to get more funding per household to build new schools and provide classroom services for the expected influx of students.

The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy will continue to demand a better contract for providing public access to 6,000 acres of open space.

And the Los Angeles County library system will try to secure satisfactory funding for libraries in the proposed townlike development.

Newhall Land is accustomed to overseeing all aspects of a development, since it has planned all of Valencia, from the shopping malls to the houses. Newhall Ranch is expected to bring much of the same: 70,000 residents and 25,000 homes.

``Newhall, to their credit, has built a strong presence in this community, and they bring that to the table with them,'' said Bob Lee, superintendent of the Hart school district. ``It's different negotiating with Newhall Land than with other developers. Newhall is here for the long term, and they have a greater vested interest.''

No assurance of generosity

But what local officials said they have found is that Newhall Land's connection to the community does not make the company any more generous when it comes to mitigation fees that pay for the new schools, libraries, books and other services.

``It seems Newhall should be leading the pack by setting high standards for fees and holding other developers' feet to the fire,'' Lee said. ``We're not trying to get rich off the developer, but the developer should pay for future expenses.''

And that's what is at issue as the Newhall Ranch proposal goes, once again, before the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission on Wednesday.

The same unresolved issues that existed during the hearing in September will be addressed again, Newhall Land spokeswoman Marlee Lauffer said.

Officials on both sides of the negotiating table, however, say talks have progressed.

For example, the Castaic Union School District board is expected to approve a compensation agreement for the Newhall Ranch project in the coming weeks. And the talks between the Hart district and Newhall Land have progressed, Lauffer said.

Paying for school services 

At issue is whether Newhall Land should help pay for services at the new schools in addition to construction costs, Lauffer said. Newhall Land has offered $5,033 per single-family home built, which is more than the $4,800 needed to build a school that's the equivalent of Valencia High School, she said.

But school district officials have said Newhall Land should help cover additional start-up costs, such as books for the library and computers for the classrooms, Lee said.

The district is also asking for extra money to be used for basics such as trash cans and pencil sharpeners - and if there's money left from the $5,600-per-unit fee, it will build a much-needed football stadium, auditorium or swim complex, he said.

Lee said the additional development money simply collects a fee from future residents in advance, since the amount will surely be passed on to the home buyer.

``They have said that a quality high school district for the quality housing community they're building is what they want,'' he said. ``So, the school should have those things that the residents who have paid for a quality home will want. And those residents should pay for those things.''

But Lauffer disagreed. Facilities such as an auditorium, swim complex or football stadium would be used by residents throughout the valley, and should not be an expense passed on to Newhall Land, she said.

``We understand that it can cost more to build a school, but they want an aquatic center or a stadium,'' Lauffer said. ``I don't think we should pay for all those amenities that are available to all of Santa Clarita Valley.''

It's all part of the haggling that comes with trying to strike a deal, Lee said. Both parties want the best for themselves, he said.

``We continue to be hopeful that logic will prevail - and sometimes it's not logic, but the bottom line,'' he said. ``And we have two different bottom lines. We're concerned about the needs of the district and the needs of kids. They see a need to simply build schools.''

Complex open-space concerns

The issues surrounding the 6,000 acres of open space are more complex. Newhall Land has entered into an agreement with the Sacramento-based Center for Natural Lands Management, a nonprofit agency that oversees open space around the state.

``We were very impressed with their biota skills,'' Lauffer said. ``We really thought they had the same goals we had in mind - to preserve the sensitive areas.''

But officials with the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a public agency supported by the state, and community activists have protested Newhall Land's approach.

The company has presented the open space as a public contribution, said Rorie Skei, northern division chief for the conservancy. But the land is not being given to a public agency, but to the Center for Natural Lands Management, she said.

In addition, the land does not officially transfer to the center until 4000 housing units are built, Skei said.

As a result, conservancy officials are questioning Newhall Land's intentions.

Skei said she thinks Newhall Land, used to having complete control over its projects, wants to retain some control over the open space. The conservancy has mentioned several reasons for this concern: The company will pay the Center for Natural Lands Management to maintain the property, and a condition in the contract states that if the center ever folded, the land would revert to Newhall Land - not to the public.

In addition, it remains unclear whether Newhall Land is providing the open space as a gift to the public or as a required condition for development, Skei said.

The company would have to provide some kind of mitigation to address the concerns mentioned in the draft environmental impact report, Skei said. But if the land is a gift, it should be turned over the way parkland is traditionally given in development deals, she said.

``It's (being presented) as both a gift and a mitigation,'' Skei said. ``If it is truly a gift, it should be guaranteed to the public.

``We think there should be a dedication upfront. It should be off their books with the project approval. If it's a gift, give it now, and use it as a tax write-off.''

But Sherry Teresa, executive director of the Center for Natural Lands Management, considers the mountains conservancy's protest unnecessary.

Teresa said she is a former endangered species biologist with the state Department of Fish and Game. The center manages areas such as the 5,800-acre Lake Matthews in Riverside and the 20,000-acre Coachella Valley.

``There are significant biological resources on the property, and we have expertise in the area,'' Teresa said. ``That is why Newhall Land selected us.''

Skei didn't question the skills of the center. But she did question whether the land would be available to the public at large just as the conservancy's areas are accessible.

``It's not something where people in other parts of the county will come and use it,'' said Skei, who compared it to the type of park area that would exist within a homeowners association.

Skei added that the Center for Natural Lands Management does not have law enforcement capability. The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy uses park rangers, she said.

At the regional planning meeting in September, commissioners specifically requested that center officials be present at Wednesday's meeting. The commission is assessing the environmental impact report and the development agreement, which spells out the conditions involved in the open-space land transfer.

The meeting may bring the public comment portion to a close, giving Newhall Land an opportunity to respond to the complaints. Lauffer said she expects the Regional Planning Commission to issue a recommendation by the end of the year or early next year.

The parties involved hope they have come to agreements by then.