KHTS Radio Santa Clarita Radio – Santa Clarita News
In a clear case of political backlash, Councilmember Laurene Weste has demanded the resignation and removal of Planning Commissioner Denise Lite, only nine months after the City Council’s unanimous decision to appoint Lite to the Planning Commission.
Weste cites alleged communication failures by Lite, yet Lite has consistently responded to Weste’s single email and all phone calls within minutes over the past nine months. This accusation appears to be a fabrication.
Weste’s demand is broadly perceived by the community as retribution for Lite’s unintentional role in revealing Weste’s private $750,000 impact fee deal with Hartwell developer Jason Tolleson—a negotiation Weste concealed, triggering significant public outcry.
Members of the public are already clamoring on social media to support Lite by speaking at the next City Council meeting July 8, 2025 at 6pm to reject Weste’s call to action.
Key Events Timeline:
September 24, 2024: Weste nominates Lite for the Planning Commission, lauding her as a “highly qualified attorney” and a “respected community advocate” dedicated to enhancing Santa Clarita’s quality of life. Councilmember Miranda praises Lite as a “exceptional selection.” The City Council votes 5-0 to confirm Lite’s appointment.
Video: City Council Meeting at 1:10:15–1:11:38
March 18, 2025: During a public hearing on the Hartwell project in Downtown Newhall, developer Jason Tolleson mentions a “negotiated” $750,000 impact fee for removing a historic structure. Lite’s inquiry asking for clarification on “a negotiated fee?”—leads Tolleson to disclose that the fee was pre-arranged “with a councilmember”, outside public channels.
Video: Planning Commission Meeting at 36:40–37:15
Note: The staff report (agenda packet, page 12) omits details on the fee’s basis or calculation. The draft condition (packet page 12) ambiguously requires a $750,000 donation for “historic preservation efforts.” A February 28, 2025, letter from the Santa Clarita Historical Society (packet page 62) pushes for an impact fee tied to the courthouse but lacks specifics. No expert analysis on relocation costs was submitted. Lite’s questions were essential and appropriate.
Agenda Packet: Hartwell Project
April 2025: Journalistic investigation by KHTS and other news outlets identify Weste as the councilmember who secretly negotiated the fee with Tolleson, bypassing public oversight. Media coverage and social media postings explode, railing Weste for her backdoor dealings.
April 22, 2025: Under growing public pressure, Weste recuses herself from the Hartwell project vote, stating “an abundance of caution” due to her previously hidden negotiations with Tolleson.
June 17, 2025: At a Planning Commission meeting, a developer offers a $325,000 donation to Hart Park “for historic preservation”. Lite and other commissioners challenge the proposal, recommending the funds be allocated for a parking structure in Downtown Newhall and that the donation is redirected to the City for optimal use benefiting residents.
Video: Planning Commission Meeting at 1:02:50
Video: Planning Commission Meeting at 1:02:50
June 18, 2025: Weste emails Lite, “requiring” she resign by June 20, 2025. Lite promptly replies, requesting an explanation. Weste provides no response from June 20 to June 24. Lite refuses to resign.
June 24, 2025: Weste seeks to schedule Lite’s removal at a City Council meeting citing lack of communication.
Why Weste’s Actions Are Unwarranted:
Weste’s private $750,000 negotiation, initially linked to a Historical Society she is associated with, raises troubling questions about transparency and potential conflicts, given her dual roles as a councilmember and preservation advocate.
Denise Lite served the public by asking straightforward, critical questions that unexpectedly exposed Weste’s undisclosed dealings. Lite’s actions promoted accountability, not discord.
Weste’s attempt to oust Lite seems designed to divert scrutiny from her own conduct and stifle oversight, eroding public confidence. Suppressing officials who raise valid concerns undermines democratic principles. Cases like former Los Angeles Councilmember Jose Huizar (serving 13 years for corruption), Mark Ridley-Thomas (incarcerated for bribery), and Orange County Supervisor Andrew Do (sentenced to 5 years for bribery) highlight why government transparency is vital.
“As a public servant, I fulfilled my role: I prepared diligently, asked relevant questions, and acted honorably, inadvertently uncovering an issue the public had a right to know,” Lite stated. “Santa Clarita residents deserve full transparency to uphold trust in our government.”
Conclusion:
Councilmember Weste should be called to account for her actions and her efforts to penalize Lite for fostering openness. Lite has done nothing wrong.
If Weste is targeting fellow officials with retaliatory tactics, one must wonder how long such conduct has persisted and whether it extends to City staff in private settings.
Santa Clarita needs principled leaders who value accountability and prioritize the public’s interest over political maneuvering.
Ed. Note: The above information was provided to KHTS by Planning Commissioner Denise Lite.
Sponsored Articles
KHTS FM 98.1 and AM 1220 is Santa Clarita’s only local radio station. KHTS mixes in a combination of news, traffic, sports, and features along with your favorite adult contemporary hits. Santa Clarita news and features are delivered throughout the day over our airwaves, on our website and through a variety of social media platforms. Our KHTS national award-winning daily news briefs are now read daily by 34,000+ residents. A vibrant member of the Santa Clarita community, the KHTS broadcast signal reaches all of the Santa Clarita Valley and parts of the high desert communities located in the Antelope Valley. The station streams its talk shows over the web, reaching a potentially worldwide audience. Follow @KHTSRadio on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
denise lite hasnt looked like that in 25 years can we get an updated photo please
even though shes on her ozympic journey now she doesnt even resemble that photo
Exactly what I was thinking.
Similarly why the purpose of the Dockweiler Dr road extension should be more transparent.
Laurene Weste needs to GO she is the snake in the garden sneeking around public oversight to back door negotiations and bribes and payouts you sure her maiden name isnt biden
So much for unbiased reporting, KHTS.
Absolutely agree. Given how significantly KHTS benefited financially from the Downtown Newhall development—and how the station convinced many residents to show up at a City Council meeting in emotional support, only for it to be revealed that KHTS had already secured a side deal beforehand—there’s an unmistakable conflict of interest in its reporting. This is especially true in its coverage of Lite’s misplaced sense of entitlement to a role she holds only “at the pleasure” of the City Council member who appointed her. The selective framing by KHTS calls its objectivity into serious question.
Laurene West – This isn’t the first time your actions have been called into question. Maybe it’s YOU who needs to be dismissed. Denise Lite has a duty to the public to ask these types of questions.
Let’s see if KHTS will censor this again, as it can’t handle the truth: Planning Commissioners in California serve “at the pleasure” of the City Council or are appointed by individual Council members. Councilmember Weste’s authority over her appointee is clear—and just as clear is that “Lite” has no guaranteed claim to her seat. Her continued presence on the Planning Commission carries about as much weight as the outdated publicity photo KHTS uses to portray her. The station’s coverage has been noticeably biased, presenting Lite as a victim—which she is not. If Councilmember Weste no longer wishes Lite to serve as her representative on the Planning Commission, she is entirely within her legal right to request and accept Lite’s resignation. Anything beyond that is simply Lite’s misplaced sense of entitlement following her soundly rejected, bombastic campaign.
Denise Lite was in the right. Laurene Weste was in the wrong, deceitfully demanding that “donation” to serve her own purposes, then not disclosing it publicly. To then attack and try to remove Denise Lite is wrong, and is not ethical. Laurene Weste is the one that needs to go.
Someone should politely remind Laurene that Denise Lite is not “her” planning commissioner; Denise Lite is OUR (the citizens’) commissioner. Denise Lite is doing right by speaking up against back door deals and questionable negotiating positions.
Laurene’s been on the Council too long and think she owns it and controls the city. Enough!
Public oversight?
“The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them knows anything about the subject” – Marcus Aurelius
Sounds to me like Weste did a great job negotiating $750k for the cities historic preservation efforts. The fact that it wasn’t vetted to people who have no clue and would ask a lot of dumb questions is a big nothing burger.
Lite is a big MAGA cult member so her being out of local government would be a plus
Sounds like a TDS response where it lives inside your head rent free. I guess it was Trump’s fault for the bullet train money being laundered. It was his fault the homeless money was laundered. Of course, it sounds like that to you that one council person did such a fantastic job of negotiating when you don’t know anything about the subject. Oh yeah, KHTS it’s your fault for reporting it, good grief! The logic vacuums in the comment sections strikes again.
Looks like Santa Clarita has grown too big to trust “City Hall.”
Denise should change her name to Denise Not-So-Lite-Anymore.
Get rid of that cross-eyed conflict of interest bastion.
Lite appears to be treating the position as though it is owed to her, when in reality, she serves at the discretion of the appointing Councilmember and the full City Council. If she no longer represents the priorities or perspectives of that Councilmember, it is well within their right to seek her removal. That is the process, and that is the authority granted.
Her recent actions—drawing undue attention to herself—undermine the integrity of the role and do a disservice to the community. A principled individual would have stepped down quietly and respectfully, rather than creating a public spectacle. Unfortunately, this is not new behavior from Lite, who previously spent $100,000 on a failed City Council campaign—another example of her prioritizing visibility over effectiveness.
Regarding the funding Weste attempted to secure, it was directed to the City of Santa Clarita’s General Fund, with plans to allocate it toward historic preservation or the construction of a much-needed second parking structure in Downtown Newhall—an initiative tied to a $15 million bond. The funds were never intended for personal use by any individual. The Old Courthouse was slated for demolition regardless, so negotiating a benefit from the developer for the community was a pragmatic and responsible course of action. Weste worked to secure $750,000 for the City. After Gibbs intervened, the final amount dropped to less than half that—a costly result for Santa Clarita residents.
Denise Lite is correct and those criticizing have an obvious bias. I left the city of Los Angeles due to Council members pulling tricks like this. So disappointed in Weste!