Large parts of the state of Texas are practically under water. When the rain finally stops, it’s going to take Texas a long time and lots of federal money to clean up Houston as well as all the other cities and towns that have been devastated. Many Texas Republican state office holders, who voted against giving assistance to New Jersey and New York after Hurricane Sandy (both Texas senators and 20 Texas congressmen voted “no,”) because it would increase the national debt, are going to be twisting and turning to explain why Hurricane Harvey is somehow different. The arguments are, of course, total hypocrisy and as much as it would make me feel good for all of the Democrats to vote “no” on aid to Texas, it would be wrong and counterproductive. One of our strengths as a country is that we have each other’s backs. This year, it’s storms in Texas and Louisiana; next year, there could be an earthquake or tidal wave in California, or a twister in the Midwest. We fought a war to keep our Union intact. Being a unified country is the bedrock on which America is built and we shouldn’t destroy it because we’re all angry at each other now. The anger will pass and we’re still all Americans, not Democratic-Americans or Republican-Americans—just plain Americans.
• • • • •
Locally, the Malibu City Council has been very busy and, as the old saying goes: “None of us is safe when the Congress is in session,” the same might be said for our city council. First, some on the council had an idea that it might be good for Malibu to become a charter city, like Los Angeles or Santa Monica, since it might help us break off from the school district and get us an independent school district. The problem is that becoming a charter city is very expensive and fraught with peril. Currently, we, as a general law city, are governed by a set of rules created by the legislature that has been tested over time. The rules are followed in most small cities like ours. Charter cities get to make (within certain limitations) their own rules and their own mistakes. All those little cities in Los Angeles, where scandal appears to be everywhere, often have first become charter cities, and later council members start drawing big salaries. Competitive bidding goes out the window and corruption comes in the door. It doesn’t necessarily have to happen but it is certainly an unnecessary invitation. For the first time in ages, the frequently polar opposites—Council Member Lou LaMonte and Planning Commissioner John Mazza—were in total agreement at the council meeting that a charter city was a bad idea and it apparently died at the council meeting. Underlying the move was a belief that the journey to get our own school district, in process for several years, was stalling and something had to be done. There is a growing hope that the Santa Monica-Malibu School Board, which we thought has been on board with the idea from the beginning, is having doubts and is stalling. Time alone will tell if the stall is temporary. Perhaps we’ve gotten tied up in the politics of the City of Santa Monica or of the school board, but there are several paths available to becoming an independent district. Previously, the Malibu Unification Negotiations Committee (six members, with three from Santa Monica and three from Malibu) spent endless hours in meetings, working out what essentially was a divorce agreement and the property settlement. Splitting up a school district is complicated and is, in many ways, like splitting up a marriage with a lot of assets, liabilities and considerable finger pointing. Hopefully, it can be done amicably but it may need a push.
The other major matter before the council was that of creating neighborhood standards. Perhaps the thought was to avoid “mansionization” or to give neighborhoods a consistent charter but, innocuous as it might sound, it impacts every homeowner in Malibu. In certain ways, it may be financially devastating to many homeowners. A simple example might be someone who has a 50-year-old house on a nice piece of property that, in our market, would normally sell for several million dollars. However, that new buyer, who is going to be spending several million dollars, doesn’t want to live in a 50-year-old house. The buyer wants to renovate and expand it, which the zoning code would allow him to do. However, if we have a neighborhood standard, that would effectively limit what could be done and rob many older homes of millions of dollars in value in effect. It’s out for study now and coming back to the council later. If you own an older home, or hope to retire someday and sell your house to pay for your retirement, you should be at that council meeting when the issue comes back. We will keep you posted.