On Saturday morning, I was not surprised to find a flyer from former mayors on my front gate. I was also not surprised to find wild assertions about Measure R that were far from the truth. But I was surprised to find an outright falsehood that could not have been a mistake or a misinterpretation of the facts.
The “former mayors” claimed, “Under Malibu’s present law, a commercial landowner can only develop 15 percent of his land (actually, it is 20 percent) … but with voter approval, the sky is the limit and the increased density could be enormous.”
This disturbed me since I have been on the Malibu Planning Commission for more than six years and know that the maximum density is determined by the California Coastal Commission at 20 percent. I also know that Sharon Barovsky, Joan House, Jeff Jennings, Andy Stern, Ken Kearsley and John Sibert were part of the team that negotiated that limit when our coastal plan was enacted in 2002. I also know that our city attorney specifically told Laura Rosenthal and Lou La Monte — along with the sitting City Council — in her written report on Measure R, “Currently, the general plan and the LCP regulate commercial and mixed use projects … the initiative does not change the land use policies or development standards applicable to such projects.”
Yes, I should expect falsehoods from politicians, but this is a very important election for the future of Malibu and I would expect, at the very least, a discussion of facts, not falsehoods. John Sibert purports to be a scientist and he should know that an argument based on falsehoods does not follow the scientific method, which he learned early on. Which are you, John, a scientist or a politician?
I guess when you do not have a valid argument, you have to resort to trying to mislead the voters with outright falsehoods into believing Measure R is all about increasing development in Malibu. The argument is absurd and the 2,400 citizens who signed the initiative petition know that.
John Mazza