The deceptions by pro development politicians and what their political power base, (the PARENTS), doesn’t know.
Malibu’s fight for the preservation of open space reached a fever pitch recently when the pro-environment slate of Skylar Peak, Rick Mullen and Jefferson Wagner voted down the City funding for the proposed Environmental Impact Report for Bluffs Park. This was a critical move to preserve one of the last remaining coastal bluffs in Southern California.
While this can arguably be chalked up as a win for environmentalists who voted the slate in by a landslide last November, ( largely based on their Save Open Space platform), it also triggered panic and a swift backlash from the Little League/AYSO parents who have been perpetually shell shocked by the empty promises made by local politicians over the last two decades.
However, mayor pro-tem Rick Mullen made good on yet another campaign promise recently by taking the lead at the May City Council meeting suggesting the La Paz property for the long anticipated skatepark. This is the first attempt made by any Council to take action in securing and formally designating a property – and one that can be fast tracked – specifically intended for the recreational needs of the City of Malibu.
While preservationists hoped this gesture made by Council would relieve some of the pressure off Bluffs Park, it seems the controversy to win the power over this precious open space is far from over.
Which leads us to ask some very important questions…
Why is The Machine trying to subvert the will of the majority of Malibu constituents who voted for the open space slate council members?
Why is The Machine distorting the results of the Bluffs Park survey to suit the minority and shrinking Little League lobby?
Why is The Machine conjuring up complete fabrications and why are they in total denial of the council vote to reject the EIR, as well as the substantial geological deficiencies for the Bluffs, despite all printed, oral, and visual evidence to the contrary?
And the most important unspoken question is…
Why won’t they just take NO for an answer?
Ready for the cold water?
It’s never been about the kids.
It’s always been about POLITICS, POWER AND PAYBACKS.
And it’s a strategy The Machine has been cultivating for a decade.
Now it’s time for the community reads between the lines:
2012 – Malibu City Council members hold secret, back-door meeting to gain control of Bluffs Park by giving away Malibu’s 535 acre Charmlee Wilderness Park to SMMC. A leaked in-house SMMC email confirms a secret meeting was held by then Mayor Lou La Monte and Mayor Pro Tem Joan House. They offer SMMC Director Joe Edmiston a swap.
2013 – A second secret meeting is held between SMMC’s and Malibu City’s legal teams “to hammer out the details” of the swap. Edmiston, so assured of Council backing, recommends his two Boards approve the swap and approve a coastal development permit application for new campsites at Charmlee.
This second meeting occurred on January 7th – a full week before the City Council’s first open public meeting on the proposal.
NO PUBLIC NOTICE WAS SENT OUT TO RESIDENTS WHO WERE AFFECTED BY THIS SWAP.
At the January 14th City meeting, Council goes ahead to authorize the swap. Moving at warp speed, they direct Malibu City Attorney to “negoti- ate agreements and implement documents”.
Residents fill city hall to overflowing capacity to protest the swap. They demand that if the City planned to give away over 500 acres of City owned land, it must go to a ballot. City Council denies the request and forges ahead.
CALIFORNIA STATE LAW VIOLATED: State law and City policy require three Council members (a majority), to approve a City action at an agendized public meeting, yet these negotiations occurred before any public meeting was scheduled. Before December 2012: (a) at least two of the Council members conducted undisclosed negotiations on behalf of the City, and (b) at least three Council members had secretly obtained shared knowledge of the swap proposal promoted by council members House and La Monte.
The underlying legal drama? This is a willing violation of the Brown Act. California state law requires government business to be conducted in an open forum so the public may participate and offer timely input on local government decisions. Due to this impropriety, The Malibu Town- ship Council (MTC) requested that the City Council set aside its actions. The Council rejected the request to set it aside, and subsequently a Brown Act Violation lawsuit was filed by Malibu Township Council in L.A. Superior Court. The suit named council members Laura Rosenthal, Lou La Monte, John Sibert and Joan House. Realizing that the first approval was illegal, the council set aside its action, and then five minutes later reinstated it. The judge declared the council’s reversal action was a complete misdirection. This lawsuit is still in the courts today. It has cost taxpayers $1.5 million to date, and continues to accrue additional costly legal fees.
A few months later in 2013 – An undeterred City Manager, Jim Thorsen, along with Council members Rosenthal, La Monte, Sibert, and House, made statements in person and in print, expressing new and creative ways the City plans to develop Bluffs Park, claiming that the Bluffs uses are “unlimited”. (Malibu Surfside News, 2-21-13).
Local environmental activists confronted the City on the fabrications perpetuated by the City Manager and council members.
Preserve Malibu Coalition sent out a citywide email informing the Council, and residents, of the these facts about the 83 acres of Bluffs Preserve:
1. Per City rules: City of Malibu’s Local Coastal Program unequivocally states that building uses are NOT PERMITTED on the open Bluffs acres. 2. Per the CCC: Developing Bluffs for sports fields is appealable to California Coastal Commission, allowing for lawsuits.
3. Per the City’s own statements: The majority of Bluffs is ESHA, with wildlife constraints and is not developable.
What’s the bottom line? The City has been fully aware since 1985, that the development of Bluffs is an environmental impossibilty. If it were attempted, it would get a quick slapdown by the Coastal Commission with the likelihood of lawsuits filed by pro-preservation and homeowner groups.
In a recent agendized council meeting City staff admitted in print that only 5.3 acres in their opinion, can be developed even with their broad definition of ESHA.
The Machine’s unprecedented lack of leadership executing the needs of Malibu’s youth has been in play for more than 20 years. They continue to pay lip service to the parents, suggesting the Slow Growth Advocates are stopping them from making good on their promises of more ball fields for the kids.
They have been most effective by riling up their power base. They have been leading them off their intended course of supporting the acquisition of approriate land for recreational uses. Instead, enticing them to believe that Bluffs Park is the best and most suitable option.
All the the lies, contradictions and deceptions can’t hide the fact that multiple opportunities have been presented to past Councils. Parents have been lobbying Councils for a decade to create the perfect venue for urban park amenities. Yet former Councils have either passed on, or com- pletely ignored every single one of them – and have not led a single action to acquire other properties for youth recreational activites. For The Machine, it’s Bluffs Park or nothing.
A recent example; in 2008, City Council passed on the opportunity to purchase 10 open acres of land on PCH for $2 million from then owner Zan Marquis. Instead, City Council left the door wide open for developer Don Stirling to purchase it.
The decision by Council to forgo purchasing the property was after the ad hoc committee called the Blue Ribbon Task Force. The commitee included council members Jefferson Wagner and Pamela Conley-Uhlich, who evaluated and reccomended the property. This was an ideal fit for park amenities and was sizeable enough to fit everything in one place; ball fields, a skatepark, senior center, teen center, additonal gardens etc… located in the most densly populated area of Malibu who have families with young children. For many, this was a heartbreaking decision.
Council member Laura Rosenthal who has been advocating for public schools, a solid supporter of AMPS and the creation of Malibu’s independent school district, neglected to consider or inform residents of the additonal 40 acres at Malibu High School currently being leased by the City as a potential venue for additonal ball fields.
The potential public open space could soon by owned by the City, should Malibu hopefully become our own school district.
Council members Peak, Mullen and Wagner have demonstrated their commitment to pursuing available properties suitable for youth sports. Their criteria is to ac- quire property that can be developed for these purposes during their terms.
The moral of this story?
If you aren’t trying to win – for the kids – and for the environment…
DON’T PLAY.
Follow Us