Our View | Get Those Slingshots Ready, Santa Clarita

By The Signal Editorial Board It’s David vs. Goliath. And we’re David. Santa Clarita against the state of California: The Judicial Council of California has decided it wants to drop an eight-story monstrosity of a courthouse right across the street from the Valencia Town Center mall. The massive 4-acre courthouse complex, with two dozen courtrooms and a parking structure with more than 300 spaces, is planned to be built at the former site of The Greens miniature golf course, at 26501 McBean Parkway. It’s directly adjacent to the city’s McBean transit center, a 9-iron shot away from the Valencia Country Club and the Hyatt Regency Valencia. Nearby are schools, paseos, long-standing suburban residential neighborhoods and, of course, one of the Santa Clarita Valley’s primary gathering places, the Valencia mall. It’s not a good place for a major courthouse hub that will draw criminal defendants and their supporters from all over the vast L. A. County. Live near there? Kiss your hard-earned quality of life goodbye. The new courthouse, which would be by far the tallest building in the otherwise carefully planned SCV, would replace not just our existing community courthouse adjacent to the Valencia Library, but also the juvenile court facilities in Sylmar and Superior Court facilities in downtown Los Angeles that specifically handle some of the county’s most egregious felony cases in which trials are expected to be lengthy. The state of California has made clear that it has no patience for local control of planning decisions. In its zeal to promote construction of affordable housing, the Democrat supermajority in Sacramento and Gov. Gavin Newsom have passed laws that neutered local governments, stripping away their ability to make land use decisions on projects that meet affordable housing targets or are near public transit. While the Judicial Council’s plan is not directly related to those efforts, it continues the theme of the state “dumping on” local communities like Santa Clarita and offering them no recourse. That much was evident on Nov. 12, when the Judicial Council hosted a “community meeting” that basically amounted to a couple hours of state officials telling local residents and government leaders to go pound sand. Indeed, the bullies came to town and didn’t seem to care much what the SCV had to say. There’s some debate over the interactions over the past couple of years between the Judicial Council and the city of Santa Clarita as the state looked for a local site for a new courthouse. City officials say they provided the state with lists of many other potential sites, and that none of those lists included the McBean Parkway site. State officials say they told the city repeatedly that all of those sites were unsuitable, for one reason or another. There’s clearly a disconnect between Santa Clarita and the Judicial Council. Our own mayor says he first learned of the Judicial Council’s plans when he read about it in The Signal. If we’re taking sides, though and we are we are taking Santa Clarita’s. This week, the city issued a call to action, asking the community to stand up and make its voice heard on the state’s plan to burden the SCV with the entire region’s criminal justice issues. “The city of Santa Clarita has serious concerns regarding the project proposed by the state Judicial Council for an eight-story courthouse on the property on McBean Parkway,” read the city’s call to action sent by Carrie Lujan, the city’s director of communications. “The state Judicial Council did not notify, or consult with, the city on their selection of the site.” The city statement added: “The location is unsuitable, due to anticipated impacts to traffic circulation and given its proximity to residential, commercial and retail areas. Moreover, the project scope directly conflicts with the community and economic characteristics within that corridor.” Further, the eight-story behemoth would dwarf most other courthouses in similar-sized communities: the San Fernando and Antelope Valley courthouses are both four floors. City Manager Ken Striplin said in a phone interview with The Signal that the McBean Parkway location was definitely not on the list of sites the city deemed acceptable for the courthouse. Striplin said the city had identified three locations as acceptable: one was off Golden Valley Road, and two were on Sierra Highway. The city manager added that the city’s staff is preparing to present the City Council with all of its options. For obvious reasons, he can’t go into detail on what those options are. But, don’t be surprised if the courthouse question ends up in . court. Meanwhile: The city is asking residents to provide comments to the State Judicial Council, which must be received by Nov. 26. The city asked residents to direct written comments to Kim Bobic, the Judicial Council’s courthouse project manager, at: Judicial Council of California; Facilities Services; 2860 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95833-3409; or, by email at [email protected]. The Santa Clarita Valley has been in this position before. Toxic waste dumps. State prisons. Massive, world-record-size landfills. All of these and more have been proposed, at one time or another, to be dumped on the SCV, and the spunky underdogs of this community have risen up and defeated many of them. We’re the underdogs again, Santa Clarita. Will we prevail? There are no guarantees, but we can guarantee defeat if the community collectively sits on its hands. This is an all-hands-on-deck situation, requiring the whole of the SCV: Government leaders, activists and residents who may normally stay on the sidelines. If we want our voices to be heard, we need volume. Get your slingshots ready.
https://signalscv.com/2025/11/our-view-get-those-slingshots-ready-santa-clarita/

You may also like

Why you may soon see low-flying planes in Missouri and Illinois

2025 年 11 月 22 日

Second-half surge lifts Leominster

2025 年 11 月 22 日

SHIB Price Prediction: Oversold Bounce to $0.00001139 Expected by December 2025

2025 年 11 月 22 日