Judge Paves the Way for a Vote on Cityhood : Malibu: Supervisors are ordered to stop delaying the incorporation election. Backers see the ruling as a turning point.

In a victory for Malibu cityhood supporters, a judge on Wednesday ordered the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to stop delaying a long-sought incorporation election, clearing the way for the election to be held in June.

Superior Court Judge Dzintra Janavs gave the supervisors until Feb. 27 to conclude a hearing on cityhood that the county officials had indefinitely postponed in November. The hearing, required by law so proponents and opponents of cityhood have a public forum for their views, represents the final step that must be completed before an election date can be set.

Jubilant cityhood backers called the ruling a major turning point in their two-year struggle with county officials for the right to vote on whether Malibu incorporates.

“It’s the best news we’ve had in a long while,” said Walt Keller, co-chairman of the Malibu Committee for Incorporation, one of two groups that filed suit against the supervisors to force them to set an election.

Although the county is expected to appeal the decision, Assistant County Counsel Bill Pellman was noncommittal. “That’s something that the supervisors will have to decide,” he said.

A majority of supervisors has resisted Malibu incorporation for years, insisting that an extensive sewer system be approved before a cityhood election takes place.

Cityhood supporters, many of whom regard the county’s sewer plans as a prelude to widespread development of the seaside community, filed the lawsuit in December. They accused the supervisors of violating a state law that sets a 60-day limit on the duration of a hearing before an election date is set.

Although the supervisors began hearing the matter last Oct. 19, they voted 4 to 1 in November to indefinitely postpone a decision on incorporation--and thus conclude the hearing--until construction permits are issued for the sewer system.

In siding with cityhood backers, the judge rejected the county’s argument that the state law set guidelines recommending--but not necessarily mandating--the 60-day limit on concluding the hearing.

When it approved a bid last May by Malibu residents to vote on cityhood, the Local Agency Formation Commission stipulated that the county be allowed to retain control over the sewer system for up to 10 years after incorporation.

Last November, the state Coastal Commission approved a sewer plan that opponents said would result in a sewer system 25% to 40% smaller than what the county had insisted upon. But county officials have said it could take a year before the commission approves the construction permits.

However, county officials, fearing that a newly elected Malibu government would mount a legal challenge to that provision, want to make sure that a sewer they consider adequate is under way before Malibu residents vote on cityhood.

Pellman raised the concern before the judge on Wednesday, saying that if cityhood were approved by voters before the sewer system is under construction, “the same people advocating cityhood will seek to prevent the sewer plan from ever being implemented.”

As proposed, the 20-square-mile city would stretch along Pacific Coast Highway from Topanga Canyon to Leo Carrillo State Beach, and nearly one mile inland.

A Malibu developer, the Adamson Cos., joined the county in asking the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, saying that if Malibu incorporates before the county installs a regional sewer system there, it could wreck the firm’s plans to develop a $60-million seaside hotel.