L.A., Landfill May Be Close to Settlement : Waste: Sunshine Canyon operator may drop $400-million lawsuit against city. Bernson vows to oppose all deals.

The city of Los Angeles and the owners of the Sunshine Canyon landfill may be close to reaching a settlement that could end a messy legal battle and set the stage to reopen the controversial dump near Granada Hills, officials said Monday.

Although neither side would comment on the details of the deal, sources said Browning-Ferris Industries Inc. is willing to drop a $400-million lawsuit against the city in exchange for the city allowing it to use a vital access road into the dump.

But the settlement must get final approval Wednesday from the City Council, where it is expected to run into strong opposition from Councilman Hal Bernson, who represents Granada Hills and has been a vocal opponent of the project.

“Regardless of what the proposal is, I’m opposed,” said Bernson, who said he has yet to hear details of the settlement. “I’m going to continue my fight against it.”

Similar settlements have been considered and rejected by the council over the past few months, but city officials say this latest offer seems to have a good chance of being accepted.

The 215-acre site straddles the boundary between the city and the county. The landfill on the city side was closed after its operating permit expired in 1991, but Browning-Ferris has since sought to open a dump on the county side.

In March, the city’s Board of Zoning Appeals prohibited garbage trucks from using the private road, citing zoning laws and what board members considered a questionable record by Browning-Ferris when it operated the city’s portion of the dump. The panel was also under pressure by neighbors of the landfill and Bernson, who testified against allowing Browning-Ferris to use the road.

*

Browning-Ferris attempted to have the board’s decision overturned by the council but was unable to get the necessary 10 council votes.

BFI responded by filing a lawsuit against the city seeking about $400 million in lost revenue.

Arnie Berghoff, a Browning-Ferris spokesman, declined to discuss the settlement offer but said that once his company has access to the road, it can complete construction of the site and begin accepting trash within six months.

The potential settlement has raised the ire of nearby residents who have fought for years to keep the dump closed.

An attorney for the North Valley Coalition of Concerned Citizens, a group opposed to the landfill, criticized the proposed settlement, saying the city should fight the Browning-Ferris lawsuit in court.

The attorney, Rosemary Woodlock, said the Browning-Ferris lawsuit is legally unsound and would not succeed in court. “That’s what makes this whole thing so stinky,” she said.

*

A City Hall source close to the negotiations said the city feels it can defeat Browning-Ferris in court but officials know they cannot guarantee a victory.

“Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti thought he had a good case againsJ. Simpson, so you never know,” said the source, who asked not to be named.

The lawsuit is scheduled for a court hearing on Jan. 26.

However, Browning-Ferris may get access to the road even without the council’s support.

On Thursday, the county Board of Supervisors is scheduled to consider a proposal from Browning-Ferris requesting that the county take title of the road and then lease it back to Browning-Ferris. Under county ownership, the road would not have to abide by city zoning laws.

In a development Monday on another controversial landfill, a new city report estimates that the city of Los Angeles can save $47.2 million over the next five years by keeping the Lopez Canyon Landfill open until 2001.

The report, jointly written by the city’s chief legislative analyst and city administrative officer, was drafted in preparation for a scheduled council decision next week on the fate of the city-owned dump.

The landfill’s operating permit expires in February but because the dump has space for more trash, sanitation officials have recommended keeping it open for another five years.

The latest report by the CLA and CAO essentially confirms the conclusion of two previous studies: That it is much cheaper to continue operating Lopez Canyon than it is to send the city’s trash to a private firm.

But a representative of Councilman Richard Alarcon, who represents the Lake View Terrace area and opposes the dump, criticized the latest study, saying the savings have been miscalculated.

Woody Hastings, Alarcon’s environmental deputy, said the latest study overestimated the cost of taking trash to a private firm.

Once the error is corrected, he said the cost of using the private firm drops to about $39 million. That figure could drop even more if the city were to negotiate a 15-year contract with the firm instead of a five-year agreement, Hastings said.