The City Council deadlocked on several motions that would have resulted in the city taking a stance for or against the Malibu Lagoon Restoration Project, before ultimately deciding to remain neutral.
By Knowles Adkisson / The Malibu Times
After several hours of raucous speeches and presentations by both sides of the Malibu Lagoon Restoration Project, the Malibu City Council Monday night decided to remain neutral on the issue after failing to agree on a position to take. The debate over the project became so heated at one point that a council member asked that a Sheriff’s deputy be called to evict speaker who began a shouting match with Mayor John Sibert.
In response to the city’s neutral stance, the Members of the Wetlands Defense Fund, which opposes the project, issued a press release Tuesday stating that it filed a preliminary injunction in state Superior Court to delay the start of the project, which is scheduled to begin in June. The organization had already filed a lawsuit against the California Coastal Commission’s approval of the project several months ago.
Opponents of the lagoon project, clad in green shirts, showed up at the meeting Monday night to urge the council to send a letter to Gov. Jerry Brown requesting he stop the project. The project, approved in October 2010 by the California Coastal Commission, seeks to improve the function of the Malibu Lagoon ecosystem by using bulldozers to recontour the lagoon slopes and channels, and remove non-native plants.
Supporters and opponents were each allowed to make a 10-minute presentation at Monday’s meeting. Suzanne Goode of California State Parks showed slides of dead birds and overgrown plumes of algae, which she said lowers oxygen in the lagoon to unacceptable levels. Project opponents Marcia Hanscom and Roy van de Hoek spoke, maintaining that the lagoon is healthy and showed slides of plant life to demonstrate their points. Hanscom said since the project had been approved during former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s tenure, the new governor might be willing to change it.
Before public comment began on the item, Mayor Sibert said there had been more than 100 requests to speak. Sibert also refused a request by opponents of the project that he recuse himself from the vote because he has a seat on the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, which helped author the restoration plan.
“The bias I have is toward sound science and truth, and I think my entire record shows that,” Sibert said. “Because I know something about the science doesn’t mean necessarily I shouldn’t be allowed to speak to that or make my opinion known.”
Mark Gold and Liz Crosson, the directors of Heal the Bay and Santa Monica Baykeeper, respectively, both spoke in favor of the project.
Crosson said that while Santa Monica Baykeeper and the City of Malibu often disagree about pollution, “this project is an opportunity for many organizations and stakeholders to come together behind a viable and defensible, and extremely proactive restoration plan.”
Brian Miller, who said he has surfed in Malibu since 1975, warned the project would change the waves on Surfrider Beach, and that State Parks’ timing of the project during the summer would hurt local businesses that rely on tourism.
“Gidget founded Malibu basically; surfers are the ones that put this place on the map,” Miller said. “And you’ve decided to do this between June and October, right when Malibu happens. So I think more research needs to be done.”
While each of the council members admitted to disagreeing with the specifics of the plan, they all agreed the lagoon was unhealthy and needed some kind of restoration plan. But each had different concerns related to endorsing an official city position.
Sibert wanted to avoid the possibility of a lawsuit from either side of the project if the city was to take an official position.
Councilmember Lou La Monte said, “The only thing I care about in that lagoon is water quality.”
Councilmember Jefferson Wagner wanted to see the restoration plan altered, while Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich endorsed the opponents’ position. Mayor Pro Tem Laura Rosenthal was absent from the meeting.
City Attorney Christi Hogin characterized an appeal to the governor as “a Hail Mary pass.”
“It doesn’t seem to me, personally, that it takes you anywhere to tinker with the design at this point or discuss how you would have liked to do it better, because really the only question is, is it going to go forward or is it going to get stopped,” Hogin said.
Two motions to settle on a position died when the council could not reach a consensus. Wagner’s altered restoration plan was voted down 3-1 by the rest of the council, and a second proposition endorsing the concept of a restoration plan but requesting more of a focus on water quality resulted in a 2-2 stalemate. The council members resolved to write private letters to the governor stating their individual concerns.
Temperatures ran high at the meeting. Opponents of the project frequently interrupted and jeered project supporters and council members while they talked. When a supporter noted that the California State Parks owns the lagoon, one woman shouted, “We own it!” drawing a sharp rebuke from Sibert not to interrupt speakers. Later, an angry outburst by surfer Andy Lyon directed at Sibert almost resulted in Lyon’s removal by Sheriff’s deputies.