A representative on the Contract Cities Association board says the 28-0 vote of the organization’s Los Angeles County cities to support Malibu in its conflict with the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy was necessary to “make sure local control still remains intact.” An SMMC official calls the vote “unfortunate.”
By Jonathan Friedman / Assistant Editor
The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy last Wednesday received its biggest criticism so far in its plan to enhance three Malibu parks when representatives of 28 Los Angeles County cities voted to support the city of Malibu’s opposition to the proposal.
“We believe that this issue could have a significant impact on our members within our cities, and we need to make sure local control still remains intact,” said Mike Gipson, a City Council member from Carson and chair of the California Contract Cities Association’s Resolutions Committee.
The Contract Cities is a lobbying group representing more than 70 cities statewide that contract out some of their services. A Contract Cities official said although all the members were eligible to vote on the resolution, only representatives from Los Angeles County did so.
The SMMC has proposed a plan to enhance its properties in Ramirez Canyon, Escondido and Corral canyons. The plan includes bringing more people to the parks through the creation of a trail system and providing opportunities for overnight camping, as well as other enhancements. The proposal has been criticized by Malibu city officials and Ramirez Canyon property owners for several reasons, including that the SMMC calling the proposal a “public works plan” makes it so that it only needs approval from the California Coastal Commission, not the city of Malibu.
Rorie Skei, chief deputy director of the SMMC, said this week that the Contract Cities’ vote was “unfortunate.”
“We think it’s based on incorrect information. Our plan is only applicable in the coastal zone,” said Skei, pointing out that most of the cities that voted are not in the coastal zone.
SMMC Executive Director Joe Edmiston, who could not be reached for this article because he is vacationing in Europe, said last week that the reason he is avoiding going through the city permitting process is because if the Malibu City Council rejects the project, it cannot be appealed to any other legislative body. And, Edmiston said, the council has already made it clear through its opposition to including a “regional park” definition in the Malibu Local Coastal Program, that it would not approve the SMMC project.
SMMC officials have said Malibu’s opposition to the project stems from Ramirez Canyon homeowners not wanting the general public to access the conservancy parkland there.
“We have a duty to provide access to these parks,” Skei said.
Mayor Ken Kearsley, who cast the vote for Malibu at the Contract Cities meeting, said this week that the vote created one strong voice in opposition to the SMMC plan. He said the city would be approaching the League of California Cities, a statewide organization representing California’s municipal governments, about supporting Malibu’s opposition to the parks proposal.
“We’re going to everyone and their grandmother,” Kearsley said.
Kearsley said his biggest concerns about the project are the environmental issues, including what he said were the building of trails too close to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and pollution to the city’s watershed.
“He [Joe Edmiston] wants to go around our environmental laws,” Kearsley said. “Joe is asking to bypass the city review, and the city is held accountable [for the environmental problems].”
The SMMC board is expected to vote either next month or in November on the plan. It will then be sent to the Coastal Commission for review. Steve Amerikaner, an attorney representing Ramirez Canyon property owners, said last week that a lawsuit “certainly is on the drawing board” if the plan is approved.