The following letter was read at Monday’s special City Council meeting.
It is vitally important that Malibu citizens believe in the city’s commitment to due process of law. When Ms. Roney decided to ignore our Assistant City Attorney’s warning that it was outside the Planning Commission’s jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a building permit that was duly and lawfully granted over two years ago, she called into qucstion cvery permit that has been granted since we became a city. The two-year-old permit in question was granted in good faith, not only by the City of Malibu, but also by the Coastal Commission after two hearings.
Residents must have the assurance that, at some point, they are safe in the belief that their government has acted in good faith and with finality. If the city were now to entertain an appeal with the possibility of revoking a lawfully granted permit, the city could be liable for enormous damages, resources I’m sure Ms. Roney would agree would be better spent on schools and youth programs. While my major concern is for the rights of the citizen, it is also for the financial safety of the city. To call into question a two-year-old permit jeopardizes both.
I am also disturbed by the apparent violation of the Brown Act, which ensures everyone the opportunity to hear and participate in the democratic process. Appealing the two-year-old permit was not on the agenda, and, as she should have known, it was unlawful to take any action on the matter. It is also troubling that pertinent information was withheld from the public. By Ms. Roney’s admission, she is a personal friend of Mrs. Lou Adler, who appeared before the Planning Commission as the aggrieved party and who was asking the Planning Commission to hear an appeal on the permit in question. Also, I have learned that Ms. Roney had previously hired Drew Purvis as a facilitator, and told Mrs. Adler that she was extremely pleased with his work. Mr. Purvis then became the Adlers’ representative. Subsequent to that, Ms. Roney had conversations with Mr. Purvis and others regarding this matter prior to the Planning Commission meeting. While there may be no laws against having such relationships and conversations, there is an expectation that those conversations and relationships be disclosed to the public.
Without such ex parte disclosure, the public is deprived of its right to hear all the information that the Commissioners have heard. When I discussed that concern with Ms. Roney, she resisted the suggestion that such behavior was unlawful at worst, improper at best, and invites a perception that “back room deals” and “influence peddling” are at work. Ms. Roney rejected that notion, stating that she had done nothing wrong. I respectfully disagree. The public must have absolute faith that our process is above undue influence and favoritism.
I know Ms. Roney to be a hard worker and I appreciate the service she has rendered in the past. That is why it was particularly difficult to remove her as my appointment to the Planning Commission. However, in the interest of maintaining the residents’ trust in our democratic process, I felt I had no other choice.
Sharon Barovsky