County Ordered to Halt Work on Dump : Sunshine Canyon: The judge rules that the environmental report on the project above Granada Hills is faulty.

A Superior Court judge Friday ordered Los Angeles County to suspend development of the Sunshine Canyon dump above Granada Hills, saying the project’s environmental impact report is faulty.

The dump in the Santa Susana Mountains, long the target of complaints by neighbors, is the subject of an involved court battle pitting both the landfill’s owner--Browning-Ferris Industries--and the county against the city of Los Angeles, which sued to block the county’s plan to expand the landfill by 200 acres .

The 71-page ruling by Judge Ronald Sohigian requires Browning-Ferris to prepare a corrected Environmental Impact Report for the proposed landfill development and present the report to the County Board of Supervisors for review.

The supervisors also must vote again to approve the EIR before the project can proceed, all parties to the litigation agree. Sohigian’s ruling overturned the board’s vote in February, 1991, certifying that the EIR on the controversial project was sufficient.

The judge held that the EIR had dismissed objections from Los Angeles Councilman Hal Bernson, who represents the area near the dump, when it should have given them “high importance.”

Bernson has long been a bitter foe of the landfill’s operations. In another case, he sued Browning-Ferris for $40 million, contending that the company defamed him in its efforts to drive him from office. The suit is pending.

Sohigian, citing a California Supreme Court case, faulted the EIR for failing to present to the supervisors a sharp critique of Browning-Ferris’ dealings with the city that Bernson sought to put into the environmental record.

Bernson and city zoning officials claimed that Browning-Ferris had a checkered history of compliance with city permit conditions when it operated a dump in the part of Sunshine Canyon that falls within the city limits.

The city boundary cuts through the canyon, and the county government has jurisdiction over Browning-Ferris land north of the line, where the company is trying to build the controversial new dump. The company’s dump on city land closed in September, 1991, and currently there are no dumping operations anywhere on the site.

It might have made a difference to the supervisors if they had been fully aware of the city’s alleged problems with the firm, Sohigian said. But they were not informed because the EIR dismissed Bernson’s commentary as “irrelevant and thus did not deal with it in a good faith, reasoned way, giving it the centrality and high importance which it deserved,” the judge ruled.

Also, the judge faulted the county for sidestepping its own environmental process. That process required that a special panel of advisers--set up expressly to review projects proposed in significant environmental areas, such as the site of the planned landfill--review the EIR before making a recommendation on the project to the county’s Planning Commission, Sohigian said.

But, in fact, that panel did not review the EIR before making its recommendation, the judge said.

The full effects of the judge’s decision were in dispute late Friday by the opposing parties in the lawsuit.

“The city has taken their best shot and lost on the major issues,” said Steven Weston, attorney for Browning-Ferris. “At best, they have slowed us down for 30 to 45 days.”

The city’s most serious challenges to the EIR were not upheld by the judge, including an allegation that the county’s EIR exaggerated the imminence of a dump-space shortage to justify the need for the project, Weston said.

“We’re very happy with this decision because it means only a matter of a few months of delay,” said Dean Wise, district manager for Browning-Ferris.

But the project’s foes were guardedly optimistic about Sohigian’s ruling and the opportunities it presents for re-arguing their case before the Board of Supervisors for a sharply reduced project--particularly one that keeps the landfill project from destroying a large oak forest.

“Anytime we can stop them it’s a victory,” said Greig Smith, chief deputy to Los Angeles City Councilman Hal Bernson. Bernson, who could not be reached for comment, has been a bitter foe of the project for more than a decade.

Both Smith and Mary Edwards, a leader of the North Valley Coalition, a Granada Hills-based group that also opposes the landfill, said they hope that a key change in the makeup of the Board of Supervisors may now help them during a second round before that body.

Former Supervisor Pete Schabarum--the project’s most forceful advocate--has resigned from the board since it last considered the matter, both observed.

Still, the board voted 4 to 1 to approve the project last year, with Supervisor Mike Antonovich casting the sole dissenting vote. Supervisor Gloria Molina, Schabarum’s replacement, has not indicated that she would, if given a chance to vote on the item, vote down the project.

The supervisors were in Washington Friday and unavailable for comment.

David Elson, a private attorney hired by the city to challenge the county’s approval of the landfill, said Sohigian’s decision will require that the supervisors be informed of Bernson’s allegations against Browning-Ferris.

“The failure to include that information was a fundamental defect in the EIR,” Elson said. “It can be cured by putting that information about Browning-Ferris’ record into the EIR. That may be easy. But what its effect will be on the supervisors to have that information is unknown.”