Lawyer opposes P

    0
    183

    I am a 28-year resident of Malibu, and have been practicing law for 40 years specializing in litigation involving constitutional, real estate and land use issues. Prior to the existence of the Coastal Commission, I represented many Malibu groups in pro bono litigation designed to stop development.

    I have been asked why I oppose measure P on the Nov. 7 ballot.

    My answer is simple:

    1) Measure P is unconstitutional insofar as it delegates to citizens the power to make “administrative” decisions. Under our constitution, citizens can make laws but we cannot enforce those laws, such as granting individual use permits and/or variances when necessary. That is left to the City Council.

    2) Measure P appears to violate the State of California “Permit Streamlining Act;” therefore, it may promote rather than restrict development.

    3) Finally, it is basically unfair.

    Suppose you owned a piece of property and you decided to build on it. You spend many months of your time and substantial amounts of money complying with all the laws and rules and regulations imposed by the city. You get the necessary geology reports, surveys, and inspections. You design a project the city wants and obtain approvals from the Coastal Commission, the City Planning Dept., the Building Dept., Planning Commission and City Council.

    You are now told that under measure P all the approvals and consents you received mean nothing without voter approval of your project at a general election which may not occur for two years and that the voters can veto your project for any reason or no reason at all.

    How would you react?

    I submit that such a procedure is unfair and makes no sense because you cannot know or find out why the voters turned you down.

    In similar cases, Federal and California Courts have held that there must be due process of law, which is guaranteed by both Constitutions and which requires notice, a hearing and factual findings (reasons) to support the decision. Measure P does not give you the protection, nor provide for any reasons for denying the project. That is neither fair not legal.

    The courts have held that when a city’s action (and this would include the voters’ action) results in an arbitrary denial of a property owner’s right to develop his property that the city has “taken” the property and/or has violated the property owner’s “civil rights.”

    The damages can be an amount equal to the then current fair market value of the property.

    In Malibu, that could easily be millions of dollars.

    There is no reason for us to vote to assume that kind of risk.

    Those are some of the reasons why I oppose Measure P.

    Alvin S. Kaufer