Santa Clarita / Antelope Valley : Ritter Ranch Builder Sues Council : Leona Valley: Development firm accuses officials of fraud in the five-year battle over the 7,200-home project.

The folks planning the 7,200-home Ritter Ranch development have apparently had enough. After five years of unrelenting opposition from the Leona Valley Town Council and three lawsuits attempting to alter the project, Ritter Park Associates is fighting back.

The development company has filed a lawsuit of its own in Los Angeles Superior Court against the Town Council and five of its current and former members, accusing them of using fraud and deceit in an effort to stop the project.

The suit seeks more than $3 million in damages that Ritter Ranch said it has suffered as a result of the Town Council’s actions plus punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.

“This action arises out of defendants’ campaign of fraud, deceit, harassment and intimidation designed to stop development of the Ritter Ranch project,” according to the suit.

Those named in the suit say harassment is exactly why it was filed. Town Council members believe they have been hit with what is known as a SLAPP suit, short for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.

Mark Goldowitz, an attorney and director of the California Anti-SLAPP Project, said the purpose of a SLAPP suit is to squash public participation.

“To succeed, the filer doesn’t expect to win in court,” he said. “The purpose is to divert and divide and distract, bludgeon into submission an opponent.

“Even though it doesn’t belong in the courts. The purpose of it is to chill.”

Ritter Ranch General Manager Peter Wenner declined to comment on the suit, saying only, “The lawsuit speaks for itself.”

But after reviewing the 12-page complaint filed Tuesday by Ritter Ranch, Goldowitz said he believes it to be a SLAPP suit. Under anti-SLAPP legislation that took effect Jan. 1, 1993, he said the Town Council can ask a judge to declare the complaint a SLAPP suit.

If the judge agrees with the Town Council about the nature of the case, Ritter Ranch would have to show there is a probability it would prevail in the court or the case is thrown out.

But if quelling the opposition was Ritter Ranch’s intent in filing the suit, Town Council members said it will not succeed.

“The community is still behind this,” said Mary Ann Floyd, a former Town Council member and one of the five people identified by name in the suit. Floyd said the people she has talked to about the lawsuit are “outraged.”

The suit states, “Defendants have engaged in acts of intimidation and harassment, have published brochures and advertisements, and have harangued local residents with lies and scare tactics about alleged environmental and other effects of the Ritter Ranch project.”

Floyd said she and the others named in the complaint “unequivocally deny the allegations in the suit.”

She said that in two cases, the statements may have been made, but they were done so at least two years ago and were based on information that was correct at the time.

“We have done everything by the book,” she said. “We have never gotten into mudslinging. It has never been our intent to cause the project to go away. The council has always stated their only concern is the compatibility of (Ritter Ranch) in the Leona Valley area.”

In a written statement, Town Council President Bob Mallicoat, also named in the complaint, said the suit contains “wild allegations” and that it is “frivolous and without merit.”

Among other charges the developer alleges in the suit are that the Town Council and the five others named as defendants told residents and others that Leona Valley residents would “be assessed a 30-year mortgage to pay for Ritter Ranch”; residents’ farm animals would be killed by the development; wildlife in the area would be harmed, and that the developer’s water wells would drain those of well-dependent residents.

*

The Town Council has waged a tireless campaign against Ritter Ranch, seeking, among other things, to have residential lot sizes in the Leona Valley portion of the project a minimum of 2.5 acres.

The council has filed three lawsuits against Ritter Ranch, all of which were decided in the developer’s favor. Appeals have been filed in two of the cases and the council is still considering whether to file an appeal in the third case.

Although in the past Ritter Ranch officials have said the trio of suits had not affected the progress of their development, in the suit filed Tuesday, Ritter said that is not so. Delays caused by the lawsuits have cost more than $3 million, according to the complaint.