From the Publisher/Arnold York
For two full days last week, 12 California Coastal commissioners, the City of Malibu, the County of L.A. and coastal staff battled long hours over their conflicting visions of what they see as Malibu’s future. And in a showdown that surprised even some seasoned Coastal Commission watchers, they ended up in a 6-6 tie on many of the most significant issues.
In the past, Coastal Commission Chair Sarah Wan, Coastal Commission Executive Director Peter Douglas and several of the more environmentally extreme coastal commissioners had always been able to muster up the necessary seven votes to overrule the desires of the City of Malibu, and, often, also the wishes of Los Angeles county and, sometimes, even the desires of Malibu’s political leaders, such as Sen. Sheila Kuehl, Assemblymember Fran Pavley, county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and the Malibu City Council. But this time, something changed. Observers varied in their interpretation of what happened, but there were a few things on which most agreed.
For one thing, the City of Malibu appears to be learning the game and this time struck a much less contentious tone. It also did its homework-preparing detailed alternatives to the Coastal Commission staff’s plan-and then went on the road to meet with individual coastal commissioners to explain the city’s position before the critical meeting last week. The presentations at the commission hearing by Mayor Jeff Jennings, City Manager Katie Lichtig and city staff were smooth and knowledgeable. When questioned by the commissioners, they were often equally as knowledgeable as the Coastal Commission staff, with the specifics very much at their fingertips.
For another thing, the composition of the Coastal Commission has changed somewhat and the new assembly speaker, Herb Wesson, has made some new appointments who appear to be more open to different ideas than some of the former commissioners.
Even for those commissioners who have been on the board a long time, the climate appears to have changed, and many seemed to be mindful that it takes seven votes to pass anything. They were clearly more attentive to what the other commissioners, even those they disagreed with, had to say. They also appear to be aware the opposition to the staff-driven plan is coalescing.
In addition to the local Malibu political leaders, the county Fire Department, the county Department of Regional Planning, the horse interests, who have long been a part of the Santa Monica Mountain culture, the farming, vineyard and orchard interests, the real estate associations, both local and statewide, and two citizen’s groups, the Californians for Local Coastal Planning and the Recreation Trust, have grave reservations about the proposed staff plan for the Malibu LCP. They want major changes and are raising funds and politicking locally and in Sacramento for changes.
Lastly, the relationship between some of the coastal commissioners and their own staff, which includes Douglas and all those under him, appears to be in transition. Initially, months ago, the commissioners were confronted with voluminous documents for the Malibu draft LCP. The they were almost totally dependent upon staff to explain and interpret what everything meant, or try to read several hundred pages of highly technical and frequently obtuse material, which was difficult to understand and often even more difficult to interpret. But over the intervening months, since early January and after coastal meetings and a series of workshops and site visits, they are clearly becoming more knowledgeable and beginning to challenge some of the staff’s assertions.
It is also apparent to the most casual observer that personal tension exists among some of the commissioners. A number of the commissioners, who in the past sat quietly, have begun to assert themselves, often to the obvious discomfort of the chair and the commission staff. It was obvious that several of the commissioners are fast losing patience with some of the commission staff, who tend to dole out information in ways that appear only to support the staff’s position.
What happens next is the staff is to come back to the commission in August at the San Luis Obispo meeting with a detailed briefing, which is to encompass many of the changes suggested by the commission at the last Huntington Beach meeting. That briefing is in preparation for the final showdown meeting in September. At that meeting, the commission must comply with bill AB 988, vote for and certify a Malibu Local Coastal Program, which includes a land use plan and an implementation plan, which then becomes the land law of Malibu. The city is expected to enforce it thereafter. After that it’s probably a referendum and then the courts.
See accompanying story on page A1 for details of the decisions almost made