From the Publisher / Arnold York
Three ball fields sit atop part of the 90-plus acres of Malibu Bluffs Park, and have for about 20 years. On any weekend there are Little Leaguers or Pony Leaguers or soccer players running around on a few acres the park, playing games. There are also a walking track around the perimeter, some picnic benches and a gorgeous coastal view. And, in the center sits the tiny Michael Landon Center building for meetings and some staff offices.
The California Department of Parks and Recreation, which owns most of the Bluffs Park land, wants the ball fields off its land because it’s on the part of the bluff with the best view, and, it is said, State Parks officials want to build a visitors center at that spot.
The problem is there are no new fields for the children, and in the 20 years since the ball fields first arrived at the bluffs, the population of children in Malibu has exploded from 1,000 or so, to well over 2,000. And, apparently, that number is on its way up to 3,000.
The city is desperately short of playing fields and is hanging on to the Bluffs Park anyway it can, while trying to find other space, but it’s difficult. It takes large, level land, with adequate parking, for a ball field. And it’s expensive to build out competition-quality ball fields properly. Also, most neighborhoods aren’t exactly delighted to have ball fields next to them.
But there is a heavy array of guns aligned against Malibu. It’s not only the California Department of Parks and Recreation that is pushing, but it’s getting an assist from several other state agencies including the California Coastal Commission (CCC), which wants the ball fields out in its proposed Malibu Local Coastal Plan, and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, which has seconded the CCC’s recommendation for the ball fields to go.
State Parks’ position is simple-It’s our land, which we let you use temporarily, and we want it back.
The problem is, it’s not quite that simple, because there is a story that goes with the Bluffs Park ball fields.’
Twenty-plus years ago, the fields were located at the bottom of the hill where the Malibu Lagoon and nature preserve are. The state told the Little Leaguers to leave, and in typical Malibu style, they balked and everyone sued. Consequently, the state, the Little League and the Coastal Commission engaged in a series of related lawsuits. These being Malibu kids, they understood the value of good PR, so they went downtown in their Little League uniforms and picketed-and the TV camera’s got wonderful footage for the 6 p.m. News. Needless to say, the State Parks bureaucrats were uneasy and the politicians were damn unhappy. At some point, then governor Jerry Brown sent his then chief of staff, a young man named Gray Davis, to Malibu to see if a settlement could be worked out. Davis apparently sat down in the living room of the Little League president and they worked out a deal. The Little League agreed to leave the lagoon forthwith, and the ball fields would be moved to Bluffs Park. The state agreed to help build the fields. Everybody signed a settlement agreement, which a judge approved, and then the Legislature had to actually pass a special law to make it doable, which it did and everyone was happy, at least for a while.
Recently, someone sent me a copy of that settlement agreement. It was very interesting. For one thing, in the settlement agreement it says the California director of Parks and Recreation shall, as part of the settlement:
- Designate part of the bluff as an urban
day-use facility
- Prepare a plan to that effect
- Provide funding to bring in water (which
was needed for the fields)
- Define urban day-use facilities in a manner
that includes youth sports activities, including
Little League baseball
And then, it says in the settlement agreement, “It is the mutual belief of the parties that Malibu Bluffs may provide a suitable site for future youth sports activities in Malibu, including Little League baseball,” and in another part of the settlement, the site is described as the “permanent Bluffs Park site.”
Legally, does that mean the state made a deal in 1982 and is now stuck with it? I can only give you a lawyerly answer, which is maybe. The truth is, none of us knows how this will play out, but there appears to be something to talk about. So I’m not so sure we just have to roll over for the State Parks deal for the bluffs unless they make it worth our while.
P.S. In case you’re wondering why State Parks signed off on the original settlement, I believe it’s because the lagoon restoration was its No. 1 priority at the time, and when the Little League agreed to get off immediately, the state agreed to bend over backwards to make the Bluffs Park deal work.
PPS The reason for all the uncertainty is there were coastal permits and some legislation passed, and it all may bear on the question as to whether the Bluffs Park ball fields were to be permanent. But we may hear from State Parks or the Attorney General’s office about that.