The council will also vote on whether to approve developer Brian Sweeney’s private access road, new development standards for basements, and whether to grant city sponsorship for December’s Malibu Marathon.
By Jonathan Friedman/Staff Writer
The City Council will vote at its meeting on Monday whether to increase the maximum amount a person can contribute to a City Council candidate’s campaign from $100 to $500. The proposal comes from the Campaign Watch Commission, which heard complaints and made recommendations on ethical issues during the recent controversial council campaign. According to a report from City Attorney Christi Hogin, the commission members felt the $100 threshold was unrealistically low. Also, they said it created a perception that an uneven playing field was created because independent committees not directly associated with a candidate’s campaign were not limited in how much money they could spend.
The $100 spending limit led to controversy during this year’s council campaign when property rights advocate Wade Major alleged that Malibu CAN activist Ozzie Silna was an agent of two of the candidates’ campaigns, and therefore was limited to the $100 threshold. Silna said he was not an agent of their campaigns and was therefore not limited in how much he could spend. Major unsuccessfully attempted to get a temporary restraining order to limit Silna’s spending to the $100 threshold. Silna went on to spend a significant amount of money in support of the candidacies of John Mazza, Jay Liebig and Walt Keller.
Judgment Day on Sweeney road
With only a week to spare before a court-ordered deadline to make a decision, the City Council will vote on whether to grant developer Brian Sweeney variances so he can build a 20-foot-wide, 1,660-foot-long private access road connecting the end of Sweetwater Mesa Road to five parcels of undeveloped mountain property he owns above Sweetwater Mesa.
The council had already denied granting Sweeney a permit in 2002 to construct the road, which needed variances because the applicant said it required more grading, higher retaining walls and construction on slopes greater than the municipal code allows. Sweeney later sued the city, and earlier this year, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Patricia Collins ordered the council to either approve his application for the variances or conduct further proceedings and render a new decision. The city and Sweeney were ordered to appear in court on July 19 to tell the judge what has occurred since her decision.
The item was then presented to the council at the June 14 meeting. During the meeting, it came to the council’s attention that the county had already granted Sweeney an approval in concept for the construction of five homes on his property. Sweeney’s planning consultant, Don Schmitz, said it had always been known that it was his client’s intention to build five homes. The councilmembers said they were unaware of this, and declined to vote on the variance request until the staff presented them with information on the county approvals.
However, a 2001 city document obtained by The Malibu Times from 2001 states that the purpose of the road would be to “service five, future single-family residences” on Sweeney’s property.
Malibu Marathon sponsorship request-Take Two
The council will once again on Monday be asked to grant city sponsorship for the Malibu Marathon. Resident Glen Steele, who is organizing the event, had sought the city’s sponsorship at a council meeting in May. The council declined to vote on it before receiving a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission. Earlier this month, the commission voted 3-0 to recommend the City Council approve the sponsorship.
The race is planned to take place on Dec. 5, and would include a marathon and half-marathon, and be part of a weekend of other community activities. Steele and his company, Malibu Marathon LLC, would be responsible for the planning and expenses involved for the event. The city sponsorship would provide Steele with a city staff liaison and assistance in securing the necessary state permits needed for the event, including one to close a portion of Pacific Coast Highway.
Prior to seeking city sponsorship from the city in May, Steele had already listed the city as a sponsor on the marathon’s Web site. Steele told the Parks and Recreation Commission that the Web site listing was due to a misunderstanding, and the statement has since been removed from the site.
Although Steele’s company is for profit, he said he would donate 10 percent to 12.5 percent of the net revenue to five local charities: the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, Heal the Bay, The Wellness Community, the Malibu High School Shark Fund and a special fund dedicated to city land acquisition for parks. However, Steele told the Parks and Recreation Commission that the chance of making a profit on the marathon was low. But he said charities could still make money if the competitors sought sponsors.
Basement bonanza
The council will consider a proposal to revise development standards for basements. The Planning Commission had approved recommendations for new basement standards about a year ago with the intent to limit the visual impact of exposed basement walls, limit the size of basements and specify the differences among basements, subterranean garages and cellars. The recommendations then went to a subcommittee and finally appeared before the council on May 10, at which time it made further recommendations.
Vision 2020
The council will vote on whether to have the city manager solicit bids from professional firms to be hired as a consultant for the Malibu Vision 2020 Team. The City Council has already dedicated $75,000 for this fiscal year and another $75,000 for next year toward the team’s project to create a long-range plan for Malibu. The project has been criticized by some who say it is an unnecessary attempt to rewrite the General Plan.