County Warned That Santa Clarita May Sue Over Fees for Services

Santa Clarita won’t become a city until Tuesday, but its officials are already planning to sue Los Angeles County as one of their first official acts.

Carl Newton, acting city attorney, said it is “very likely” that the new city will turn to the courts to avoid paying millions of dollars for county services that it maintains should be free.

At a stormy meeting of the Board of Supervisors Tuesday, Newton and another attorney representing Santa Clarita accused the county of breaking a state law that allowed cities to obtain free services from counties during their start-up periods.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who represents the area, bitterly accused the attorneys of “doing a complete disservice to the legal profession and the residents of the Santa Clarita Valley.”

The catalyst for Tuesday’s debate was a proposed contract the county wants the City Council members to sign. It would require Santa Clarita to reimburse the county for such services as road maintenance, law enforcement, fire protection and animal control until the county begins its next fiscal year July 1.

Newton asked the Board of Supervisors to delay approving the contract until the City Council could negotiate with the county over this and other provisions the council opposes, but the supervisors unanimously approved it.

By law, no new cities in Los Angeles County have had to pay for any services until the start of the county’s new fiscal year because it was recognized that fledgling cities don’t have much money.

Hesitant Pledge

But during a turbulent incorporation process, the board extracted reluctant promises from cityhood backers that they would pay for the county’s costs during the city’s first seven months of existence. Earlier, the county estimated that its bill would be about $2.7 million, but a final figure has not yet been determined.

Supervisors angrily accused the city on Tuesday of reneging on those promises.

“You two lawyers should be ashamed of yourselves,” said Supervisor Pete Schabarum. “The board and the incorporators clearly entered into an agreement.

“The board is dead serious about exacting what was agreed upon,” added Schabarum, who has been a vocal opponent of Santa Clarita incorporation.

But Santa Clarita’s attorneys suggested that the agreement violated the state law allowing cities to obtain free services during start-up periods. That law was revised this year to allow counties to recoup their costs, but it took effect too late to have an impact on Santa Clarita.

Additionally, Newton said, “I think there is a substantial question whether incorporators can bind a city that hasn’t been formed.”

During the board meeting, county officials discussed what would happen if the city refuses to sign the contract at its first meeting. Richard B. Dixon, the county’s chief administrative officer, said the county could provide services, in deference to good public policy, without losing any money.

County Counsel DeWitt W. Clinton explained how this could be done: The county, he said, could confiscate city revenues, which are first funneled through the county.