RULING COULD POSTPONE EXPANSION OF LANDFILL.

Byline: Teresa Jimenez Daily News Staff Writer

A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge issued a tentative ruling Wednesday that could force the Board of Supervisors to reassess the issues surrounding expansion of the Chiquita Canyon Landfill.

Judge Paul Boland said he will make a final decision within two days regarding a lawsuit filed to fight the landfill, but gave a preliminary ruling that the environmental report for the project was inadequate.

A key issue for attorneys Joel Moskowitz, representing Val Verde residents who oppose the project, and Bob Crockett, representing USA Waste Services, is whether the environmental report thoroughly examined the effects of the dump's sedimentation ponds on local rivers and streams.

Discharges into the river could cause damage to fish, wildlife and local water quality, said Patricia Schifferle, a member of Clean Water Action, which also is represented by Moskowitz.

But Crockett, whose client USA Waste leases the property from The Newhall Land and Farming Company for use as a landfill, argued before the judge Wednesday that the EIR looks at several issues regarding water quality and other environmental concerns.

Boland, in his tentative ruling, denied 14 of the 15 causes in the lawsuit but agreed that the EIR should have provided more information regarding the sedimentation ponds.

Following arguments on the case, both sides declared early victory.

``We feel pretty comfortable that he'll put this issue to rest,'' said Rod Walter, district manager at Chiquita Canyon for USA Waste Services. ``We feel pretty confident in all 14 counts he denied.''

But Moskowitz said he only needed one victory to stall the Chiquita Canyon project, and the judge's criticism of the EIR could send the proposal back to the Board of Supervisors.

``The tentative ruling has us winning the case,'' Moskowitz said. ``He's saying the EIR is insufficient and needs to be re-evaluated.''

Still, Moskowitz on Wednesday repeated some of his concerns regarding the project that the judge had rejected.

One of those concerns is whether the county intentionally overlooked the traffic impacts on Val Verde once the dump opens and 70,000 people move into the proposed Newhall Ranch development nearby.

Moskowitz explained that the EIR studied the impacts of traffic on the area with the construction of the Newhall Ranch development until 2003. But only the first phase of the 24,000-home development will be complete at that time, he said. It does not take into account the four other phases, which will be complete before the dump is expected to close in 2022.

``Does the EIR consider any traffic impacts beyond 2003? Yes, but that analysis surgically omitted anything about Newhall Ranch,'' Moskowitz said.

``We want the Board of Supervisors to have the right information,'' Moskowitz said. ``We think they will rule in our favor if they have the right information. We think they will see that having 70,000 people collide with this dump and the people who already live there does not make sense.''

Crockett, however, argued that the EIR did not include the impact of Newhall Ranch on traffic for the area through its completion because only the first phase of the development was under consideration by the county.

Crockett added that impacts from a pending project cannot be considered in an EIR unless the developer has formally requested zoning changes or other approvals.

``Why was only phase one of Newhall Ranch considered?'' Crockett asked. ``Because the other phases were not undergoing environmental review. They're not planned or pending.''

Moskowitz and Schifferle of Clean Water Action blasted Crockett outside the courtroom for those comments. The Newhall Ranch proposal was approved in whole by the county Regional Planning Commission in December and will be considered by the county board in the coming months.

``They just flatly misrepresented facts to the court,'' Moskowitz said.

On July 23, the county board approved the expansion of the Chiquita Canyon landfill, just north of Highway 126 and west of the Golden State Freeway. The decision came after the Val Verde Civic Association and the landfill management company made a deal to pay the community more than $250,000 a year while the dump was operating.

While the deal seemed appealing to some Val Verde leaders, who considered offering scholarships and midnight basketball to youths with the money, other longtime residents, mostly Latinos, decided to fight it.

The residents formed a group called Lucha Ambienta de la Communidad Hispana - the Environmental Struggle of the Hispanic Community - and joined with Sacramento-based Clean Water Action to sue the dump operator and the county.

Five LACH members who attended the hearing Wednesday said they are concerned about health issues in their community.

``We don't know to what extent the landfill can effect our health, especially the children,'' said Maria Vega, a 19-year resident of Val Verde. ``We're worried about the water that goes to all the homes, and the air pollution.''