Malibu Park residents vehemently oppose any night light use at Malibu High School’s athletic fields, even after the school district reduces proposed night lighting by more than half.
By Nora Fleming / Special to The Malibu Times
A frequently seen cast of characters crowded into Malibu High School’s library Monday night for a contentious meeting where Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District officials offered a compromise in proposed school athletic facility enhancements, particularly permanent field lighting, that are part of an overall bond-backed, campus improvements project at the school.
Though cast as a workshop to generate ideas for the district’s new proposal for the athletic facilities, speakers used the forum to hammer their opposition to permanent lights at Malibu High, and to a school district they believe is untrustworthy, due, they said, to the district’s violation of a coastal development permit during the past several years.
Neighbors of the school said the proposed lights would interfere with the purity of night skies and cause a substantial environmental impact, while other residents and school district officials say the lights are necessary to meet student demand for a competitive athletic program at the school.
Malibu Park residents said they can’t support the district’s compromise in reducing the projected number of nights the lighting would be used on the school’s athletic field from 203 nights a year to 50 to 82 nights a year.
“Part of the problem is that you have gone beyond what BB was intended to do,” said Lucille Keller in addressing the district’s new proposal. “You have to stay within BB purposes and I don’t think lights are included in that. You should remember that you need to keep the trust of the community and I don’t think you have it now. If you ever want to get a bond measure passed in this community again, you have to rethink what you are doing right now.”
The district’s proposal, which will be voted on by the board Thursday, requires that it develop an operating and enforcement plan and take into account the best lighting practices, while dismissing any use of the school’s field by the city, a plan which could be reevaluated every five years.
The original estimate of 203 nights of permanent lighting per year, proposed at a meeting in January, included usage of the field by the City of Malibu, which has a joint use agreement with the district to use school facilities for an annual fee. The current agreement to use the school facilities does not extend to the athletic field, and officials said Monday that they will no longer look into expanding the agreement to allow the city to use it, as was previously proposed.
The 50 to 82 estimated nights for permanent lighting would, however, include games and practices for football, girls’ and boys’ soccer, boys’ lacrosse and, if established at the school, girls’ lacrosse. These numbers are based on current demands, possible playoff games and Title 9 compliance.
The school district would also have to obtain an amendment to an existing CDP issued in 2000 for Measure X, another district construction project bond, which prohibits permanent and temporary lights at the school.
District officials sought to alleviate Malibu Park residents’ concerns that if the athletic component goes through, they doubt the district would enforce keeping the number down to 50 to 82 nights a year, due to the school’s use of temporary lights during the past several years to light home football games.
“I think one of the things that is critically important to the district as we move forward is that we restore some of the trust that I’m obviously hearing is at risk here, and non-existent in some cases,” said Jan Maez, district assistant superintendent, in response to the residents. “But should the needs of the school change, we recognize that it would clearly require a change in the permitting process and we are committed to live by what we say and by what the board ultimately approves.”
Three high school students present at the meeting said they were dismayed at what they believed was rude and inappropriate behavior on the part of some of the neighbors who seemed unwilling to compromise or offer alternatives to what was offered by the district.
“I have to say I’m surprised at the way a lot of the members of the community have conducted themselves at this meeting, particularly the disrespect to certain members of the administration and [school Principal] Dr. [Mark] Kelly,” said Malibu High School student Sam Malamud. “Either way [this turns out] life will go on, but it’s important that each side of any conflict compromise. People have compromised on much bigger issues and I don’t think this is any different.”
The project at Malibu High School, which includes classroom upgrades, traffic improvements, public safety and sustainability features, is part of an overall district improvements project supported by Measure BB, a bond measure passed by Santa Monica-Malibu voters in 2006.
Board of Education members voted at their Feb. 5 meeting to apply for an amendment to an existing CDP for temporary portable lights to use for next football season. In August of last year, the board agreed to apply for a permit for the permanent lights, but this application cannot go before the California Coastal Commission until the proposal for the lights and environmental review of the project, including the lights, is complete.
On Thursday night, the board will reexamine further developments with the Measure BB project at Malibu High School. Some of these additions include parking, traffic and wastewater system scoping and upgrades, totaling $5,888,000, in addition to the athletic facility enhancements for artificial turf, bleachers, tennis courts and the permanent lights at $2,559, 655.
The Board of Education agenda for Thursday night’s meeting is available at www.smmusd.org.