Weste’s proposal to oust Lite raises questions on commissioner expectations
The Santa Clarita City Council has just one meeting remaining before its summer break, and the July 8 session promises to bring a continuation of the drama that played out this week, when Mayor Pro Tem Laurene Weste made the unexpected request that her fellow council members help oust Denise Lite from the Planning Commission.
The request raises questions about the roles of city commissioners and their expected levels of interaction with, and subservience to, the council members who nominate them.
It was Weste who originally nominated Lite to the Planning Commission, as part of the council’s arrangement in which each council member essentially appoints one member of each of the city’s advisory commissions, subject to ratification by a council vote.
When Councilwoman Marsha McLean asked why Weste was calling for Lite’s ouster on Tuesday, calling the request “unusual,” Weste said she hasn’t been able to communicate with “my planning commissioner,” and didn’t see how she could serve her constituents that way.
Lite came in fourth place in the 2022 City Council election with just over 25,500 votes, trailing Weste (32,886), Miranda (32,306) and McLean (28,352) in the race for three seats.
In September, Lite was nominated to the commission by Weste, who cited her unique understanding of the law as an attorney. Lite filled a vacancy created by the resignation of longtime commissioner Dennis Ostrom.
Lite said Tuesday during her public-comment response to Weste’s request that, since her nomination, she has received one phone call and one email from Weste, and she responded to both. Lite argued the move was retaliation by Weste because she questioned deals Weste had made.
In a phone interview Wednesday, Mayor Bill Miranda said he ultimately was agendizing the discussion for the next meeting, because he didn’t want to set a troubling precedent of denying an opportunity to discuss an issue.
And, he joked, he might “sell tickets” to the meeting.
Role of the commission
Tuesday’s discussion, particularly Weste’s verbiage in reference to “my planning commissioner,” left many to question those roles and expectations of a city commissioner, which are spelled out in Chapter 2.26 of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code.
The listed duties and responsibilities cover all the ways recommendations are to be made by the Planning Commission to the City Council, including through hearings on permits, plans and projects, for items that may or may not end up in front of the council depending on the matter.
But in terms of council member-commissioner expectation, that’s not exactly spelled out.
Councilman Jason Gibbs, who was the lone council member to express an objection to Weste’s request, did not elaborate further on why during Tuesday’s meeting, and he did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
Miranda said he didn’t have any expectations for how his appointed commissioner, Pam Verner, is to vote on an item. Prior to that, it was now-Councilwoman Patsy Ayala, he said, and he appreciates the perspectives they offer.
“I wouldn’t have them lean one way or another. I trust their opinions, and I trust that their hearts are in the right place. But I do like to have communications,” he added. “I like to know what’s going on in the city, what projects are coming up, because as I go around and represent the city in various communities, I want to be informed.”
Neither Ayala nor Verner were immediately available Wednesday for comment.
Miranda said communication among the council members was important, too, and that he was not aware Weste was negotiating on behalf of the city with respect to The Hartwell project in Newhall, which was a move that drew a fair bit of controversy to the council earlier this year.
Lite contends her questioning of that deal when it was before the commission, which is part of the commission’s spelled-out responsibilities, is why Weste is trying to give her the boot from the commission.
After Tuesday’s meeting, Weste has declined to respond to Lite’s comments but said she would talk about her concerns during the council’s discussion.
Codes, transparency
Each council member gets the opportunity to nominate one member to each of the Arts, Parks and Planning commissions, according to the city’s bylaws, and those choices are usually confirmed by the council as a matter of course, with rare exceptions.
There’s been even less precedent for a council member to attempt to remove their own nominee in the middle of a term.
Previously, only Linda Townsley, a Clyde Smyth appointee to the Planning Commission in July 1994, had been removed before the end of her term. She was ousted by a 4-0 council vote with 18 months left in her term. There was no express reason given by Smyth, according to past news coverage of the events, other than a statement by Smyth that it was “time to make a change.”
Commissioners’ appointed terms typically run concurrently with those of the council members who nominate them. Lite’s term is scheduled to expire in December 2026.
In Chapter 2.26, the duties of the Planning Commission are listed to include: “Investigate and make recommendations to the City Council upon reasonable and practical means for putting into effect the general plan … that it will serve as a pattern and guide for the orderly physical growth and development … for the efficient expenditure of funds relating to the subjects of the general plan.”
Lite says that’s what she was doing during a March hearing on The Hartwell, a planning recommendation from the city staff that involved a negotiated developer donation “for historic preservation.”
The planning staff recommendation called the $750,000 a mitigation fee to allow the project to demolish a historic courthouse and build more condos.
“There was no expert report submitted by the developer as to the specific cost of relocation of the historical building,” Lite wrote, as a way to explain why she was questioning the deal, calling her concerns common-sense and necessary.
Questions later came up as to whether it was appropriate for Weste to have negotiated a fee that would largely benefit the Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society, for which she sits on the governing board. She ultimately recused herself from the council’s approval of the deal in May.
On June 17, Lite said she questioned a second similar “developer donation” that she wanted to go to a Newhall parking structure, but the developer said he intended the money to be for William S. Hart Park.
Lite said her retribution by Weste for questioning the deal was swift: On June 18, Weste sent a letter asking for her resignation.
