City attorney says Township lawsuit ‘premature.’
By Olivia Damavandi / Staff Writer
Contrary to a May 7 report by another local newspaper, City Attorney Christi Hogin on Monday stated that the City of Malibu has not turned down the possibility of settlement regarding a lawsuit filed last month against it by the Malibu Township Council over the Trancas Canyon Park Project.
MTC attorney Frank Angel said what is called a toll settlement included in the lawsuit is intended to freeze litigation for 90 days to help facilitate a resolution and prevent the city from having to pay attorney fees. Hogin said the suit is a tactic to strong-arm the city into doing what park oppositionists want regarding the design plans.
The suit challenges the city’s March approval of the environmental impact report for the Trancas Canyon Park Project, a public, seven-acre park to be built on a 13.5-acre site approximately a half-mile north of the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Trancas Canyon Road.
The MTC, along with park oppositionists, says the Trancas Canyon Park EIR inadequately assesses the project impacts, which include: excessive grading beyond what is allowed by city code; allowing construction on slopes steeper than what is allowed by city code; water quality and supply concerns; noise; fire hazards; grading in an environmentally sensitive habitat area; impacts to views; and depletion and disturbance of wildlife and natural resources.
“MTC wants to direct how this community asset is used and City Council said, ‘Look, we’re in the middle of a controversial debate, we’re not going to change the rules and give MTC a different vantage point from which to participate,” Hogin said.
“The people who are most affected by what goes on in that neighborhood are the residents who live there,” she continued. “And they have been showing up to city-hosted meetings. MTC comes along, files a lawsuit and basically wants to hook the city in a backroom, light some cigars and negotiate settlements.”
According to the report, Hogin allegedly rejected the toll settlement via a May 7 voicemail to Angel.
Hogin, however, said on Tuesday that her voicemail to Angel merely confirmed receipt of the offer.
“If one counsel calls another, they call back and communicate,” Hogin said. “But using a voicemail to trigger a press release is usually not how lawyers resolve things. That’s just more evidence that the Trancas lawsuit is political.”
Angel, in a telephone interview on Tuesday, responded, “Obviously they [the city] have not agreed to it [the toll settlement] because if they did, I would have it back. Maybe they are undecided, but they certainly haven’t agreed to it.”
Hogin called the lawsuit “premature” because final park plans will not be decided until May 26, when the council will vote on how much community input offered by residents in a city-hosted workshop last month will be incorporated into the final plans.
Angel agreed, but said the filing of the lawsuit was not premature because the MTC waited until the last day it could to legally do so, and that litigation going forward is dependent on the council’s May 26 decision.
“If it [the city council] goes in the direction of input received at the workshop, the township council sees a possibility the lawsuit could go away and we could settle with the city,” Angel said. “But if the majority of the council does not take to heart the many proposals for changes, then there’s little likelihood the lawsuit could be settled.”
The originally approved, $3.4 million development plan for Trancas Canyon Park includes a multiuse (practice-only) sports field, a basketball half-court, picnic area, tot-lot, dog park, a restroom/maintenance building, storage building, shade structures, onsite wastewater treatment system, parking area and a storm water detention basin, all on a 13.5-acre site.
However, the park plan price tag jumped to $3.7 million on April 13 when the city council voted to incorporate $300,000 changes to spare 27.5 feet of grading of a local ridgeline situated above the park property that many residents have sought to protect.