Panel Approves Bill to Preserve Landfill Sites as Open Space

The Assembly Natural Resources Committee voted Monday to set aside $9.5 million to buy landfill sites in Mission, Rustic and Sullivan canyons in the Santa Monica Mountains and preserve them as open space.

The measure, by Assemblyman Terry B. Friedman (D-Los Angeles), was approved 7 to 4 and now goes to the Ways and Means Committee, which last year shelved a more far-reaching Friedman proposal to prohibit development of any new landfills in the Santa Monica Mountains.

At stake is whether the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy should be allowed to acquire for open space some 2,300 acres owned by Los Angeles County, or whether the county should be allowed to continue to hold the land for future landfills.

The canyons are south of Mulholland Drive and east of Topanga State Park. Mission Canyon on the west side of Sepulveda Pass was used for a landfill before 1965, but the other two canyons, both north of Pacific Palisades, have not been used as dumps.

Friedman told the committee that the purchase is necessary “for the 10 million people who have very little space” in the Los Angeles area.

More Pressure on Elsmere Canyon

The assemblyman acknowledged that if the three canyons are purchased, the action could intensify pressure to establish a landfill in Elsmere Canyon, between Los Angeles and Santa Clarita near the interchange of the Golden State and Antelope Valley freeways. It is scheduled to be developed as a dump.

Supporters of the Friedman bill also argue that Mission, Rustic and Sullivan canyons are environmentally significant and that landfills would bring odor, visual blight and eventual air and water pollution to homes that adjoin the sites. Supporters include the Federation of Hillside and Canyon Assns.

Opponents include the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and the administrative office of the county Board of Supervisors, which argue that the county faces a trash crisis and the canyons must be used to dispose of rubbish.

As drafted, the $9.5 million would come from state tideland oil revenues. But if voters approve a $776-million park bond issue on the June ballot, known as Proposition 70, the money would come from those funds instead.

The $9.5 million is the same amount the county paid for the land about two decades ago. The conservancy said the property is worth only that much today because zoning restrictions have limited development potential on the canyons’ steep

slopes.

However, Stephen R. Maguin, spokesman for the county’s Sanitation Districts, estimated that the fair market value is closer to $35 million. The final price would be subject to negotiation.

“It was bought with public solid waste funds for the purpose of solid waste management,” said Maguin, who added that once the canyons are filled--even though they would no longer be pristine--they still could be used for open space recreation.

Jack Michael, a lobbyist for the county, minimized the need for the bill. “It’s a local issue. The Legislature shouldn’t be dealing with it.”

Friedman expressed optimism about the outcome of his bill. He said that because it is more moderate than last year’s proposal, “its chances of success are better.”