COMPANY'S MINING PLAN SET IN CONCRETE.

Byline: Angela M. Lemire Staff Writer

The mounting list of public figures opposed to Transit Mixed Concrete's proposed mining project in Soledad Canyon isn't steering the company from its present course.

Since winning the multimillion-dollar federal mining contract in 1990, following a competitive bidding process, TMC will continue to meet its contractual obligation and proceed undeterred throughout the permit process, which remains under public review, said spokesman Brian Mastin.

Despite the growing number of public figures and organizations opposing the project in recent weeks, TMC will wait until the public comment period expires Sept. 13 to issue its responses or address any new issues that might have arisen, he said.

``You can't make better and more informed decisions until you have all the information in, and that information isn't in yet,'' Mastin said.

As for those public figures and governing bodies who've taken a stance before the public comment period ends, Mastin responded, ``It's up to those individuals to make their own decisions.''

Opponents so far include the city of Santa Clarita; the Acton Agua Dulce Town Council; three school districts; the Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce; Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster; and Sen. W.J. ``Pete'' Knight, R-Palmdale.

Knight, the latest figure to announce opposition to the mining project this week, received two past $1,000 campaign contributions from TMC's parent company, Southdown Inc., based in Houston, Texas.

His spokesman, Cameron Smyth, said it's not surprising that Knight would take the stance, even with the campaign contribution.

``Senator Knight considers these issues on a case-by-case basis,'' he said.

Knight said his support will continue for the Southdown facility in the Victor Valley section of his district, but he will oppose the TMC proposal because of its foreseen environmental impact and because constituents near the site simply don't want it.

``Southdown maintains a well-received facility . . . and they have a solid reputation as a neighbor and employer,'' he said. ``Once I completed my research, it was clear this (TMC) project is not in the best interest of Santa Clarita and I am happy to offer my support and assistance.''

An aide said the senator received a ``flood of constituent letters and phone calls'' opposing the project. Knight's primary concerns are increased traffic, air quality problems, potential health risks and the mining operation's impact on the groundwater supply.

If approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the federal Bureau of Land Management, the plan would allow Transit Mixed to mine 83 million tons of material - mostly sand and gravel aggregates - from the hills just south of Antelope Valley Freeway. The material is estimated in value at $336 million. The 500-acre plan also includes a concrete batch plant, resulting in hundreds of daily truck trips and intermittent dynamite blasting.

One public figure who hasn't taken a position on the issue yet is Rep. Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon, R-Santa Clarita. However, his aides said McKeon is gathering public input and reviewing facts before making that decision.

McKeon will hold a special meeting today at 4 p.m. at Sulphur Springs Elementary School, 16628 Lost Canyon Road, to hear concerns from residents, according to spokesman David Foy.

If McKeon decides to oppose TMC, he could appeal to the federal Bureau of Land Management or look into special legislation options, Foy said.

McKeon's Democratic opponent in the November 2000 election, Sidney Gold, a Granada Hills psychiatrist, opposes the proposal for health concerns, its potential effects on the Santa Clara River and the outcry from residents near the project site. His health concerns stem from the presence of two nearby elementary schools downwind from the site, he said.

``I'm totally against it. It would be an environmental disaster,'' Gold said.

Although the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors needs to vote on the project, the final say will come from the federal Bureau of Land Management. But local officials expect that vote to follow suit with that of the county, since the federal government owns mining rights to the proposed project site.