Santa Clarita Cityhood Vote Postponed Again

Still hoping to gain support from two of his colleagues, Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich on Tuesday again postponed a vote on whether to set a Nov. 3 election date on cityhood in the Santa Clarita Valley.

Antonovich delayed a scheduled vote on the matter last Thursday after Supervisors Pete Schabarum and Deane Dana opposed the November date on the grounds that a favorable vote would cost the county about $3 million in sales tax revenue.

Three “yes” votes from the five-member board are necessary to set the election. Supervisors Ed Edelman and Kenneth Hahn were absent from last week’s meeting.

Although Edelman was at Tuesday’s meeting, cityhood backers said they again urged Antonovich, who supports the November election, to postpone action until next Tuesday. Edelman, who had just returned from a trip abroad, had not indicated how he would vote.

Hahn’s Return Doubtful

Dan Wolf, Hahn’s press secretary, said his boss has sent a letter to his colleagues urging them to support the Nov. 3 date. Wolf said it is doubtful that doctors will allow Hahn, who suffered a stroke Jan. 11, to return to work in time for him to vote in person.

However, cityhood proponents remained hopeful that the postponement will give them and Antonovich time to enlist more support.

“I think the week’s delay will work in our favor,” said Connie Worden, spokeswoman for the Santa Clarita City Formation Committee.

“We’re still hoping Hahn will be back,” said committee member Jill Klajic.

Schabarum has proposed an April or June, 1988, election date so that the new city could not incorporate until near the end of the county’s fiscal year next June 30. A favorable vote in November would mean a December incorporation date, costing the county the sales-tax revenue.

No Sales Tax Agreement

Schabarum also has accused cityhood backers of reneging on an agreement to repay the county for sales taxes it will lose if the proposed city incorporates in December. But Antonovich has pointed out that it was the Local Agency Formation Commission that refused to allow that agreement to stand.

To hold the cityhood committee accountable for an action by LAFCO, an independent agency, is “unfair and irresponsible,” he said.

Cityhood backers said Schabarum and Dana have failed to take into account the revenues that would be derived from the new city, which would contract for services with the county.

“They’ve only looked at the expenses,” Worden said.

LAFCO approved an agreement between the county and the cityhood committee obligating the new municipality to pay back $2.7 million in costs for services the county would incur if the city is allowed to incorporate in December.