In Santa Clarita, corporations count and people don't. That was obvious at Tuesday's City Council meeting.

In front of packed council chambers in opposition to having a for-profit limited liability corporation from Maryland take over our public libraries, the council voted to approve this proposal. It voted against the wishes of the roughly 200 people there in opposition, the 51 who spoke in opposition and asked to at least delay the vote and the 5,000 who signed petitions against this proposal.

To his credit, Councilman Bob Kellar was once again the lone voice asking for a delay to investigate the questions brought up by the public. Thank you for listening, Bob.

Speakers gave glowing accolades to our county libraries and librarians. No one voiced a complaint. The old saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" (or "don't break it") was often repeated.

The City Council claims it is doing this to save money.

However, with hazy verbal promises of services and no actual contract available for public review, it's hard to tell. Unlike the free availability we currently have to more than 7 million county library materials, fees will be charged to access books not in the much smaller city system. Council members were promised that these fees will be covered. Estimates of postage and fees charged by other libraries to transfer material were not included in cost estimates.

Will volunteers want to give their time to increase the profits of a private corporation, or will their thousands of donated hours now become minimum-wage jobs paid for with our taxes?

The contract fees, while low at the beginning, like any loss-leader sales pitch, go up substantially over time. It is fairly obvious to anyone in business what will happen the next time this private corporation's contract comes up for renewal. The city will not be able to return to the county system. It will have no choice but to agree to higher fees or to cuts in services.

The council seems to be relying on some dubious advice from the city attorney.

The 1997 ballot question passed by two-thirds of Santa Clarita residents to establish a library parcel tax clearly stated that the tax would fund the county library system, and the resolution by the Board of Supervisors states that the county will no longer collect the tax upon withdrawal from the county system. This loss of revenue, some $1.4 million, was not calculated into the cost of operating the library by a private corporation. (Incidentally, the whole argument for the proposal is that we will save $1 million).

It is unlikely in the current tax atmosphere that voters would approve a new parcel tax.

Then there is the enormous expense of purchasing the books and property owned by the county. It appears from the staff report by City Treasurer Darren Hernandez that this will be funded in part by a $33 million bond without a public vote. That money could also be used to fund the Newhall library.

While council members denied it, it seems likely that all this has a lot to do with the huge and expensive $25 million Newhall library that has yet to be built.

The county has said it cannot staff or stock such a huge facility. It seems odd to many of us that no agreement with the county was reached on these problems before the project moved forward at taxpayer expense.

Why would a conservation and planning group like SCOPE be concerned with libraries? Because schools, libraries and other public services are the foundation of a well-planned and educated community.

That's why SCOPE included library services when we brought our first public-interest litigation in 1993. At the time, our valley was growing so rapidly that our schools were overcrowded and on double session. The county added new housing without adding books or library space to our local libraries.

The court ruled in our favor and agreed that the county must abide by its development-monitoring system. Existing residents should not suffer a reduction in services such as schools and libraries because new housing is built. A library-assessment fee on new development was established to ensure this did not happen in the future.

But after Tuesday night, Santa Clarita will no longer receive the benefit of that assessment fee. The loss of this income was also not calculated in the financial evaluation.

With so many questions left unanswered, it appears that financial problems and a reduction in services to benefit a for-profit limited liability corporation may be on the horizon in spite of overwhelming public opposition.

Could that be why the public chanted "recall!" as they exited the Council Chambers?

Lynne Plambeck is president of the Santa Clarita Organization for Planning and the Environment (SCOPE) and a Santa Clarita resident. Her column reflects her own views and not necessarily those of The Signal. "Environmentally Speaking" appears Thursdays in The Signal and rotates among local environmentalists.