Last week you reported that the City Council blamed the Malibu Township Council for the Malibu Local Coastal Plan written by the Coastal Commission. Let’s put the record straight. MTC’s lawsuit was filed many months after the State Legislature passed a special law, AB988, giving jurisdiction to the Coastal Commission to write the Malibu LCP. The subject of MTC’s lawsuit is the lack of public participation and notice in preparation of the City’s “Hogin” draft LCP. Contrary to erroneous allegations, MTC has never advocated, condoned or supported any LCP other than the one prepared by the Malibu consultant and Council appointed LCP Committee.
The time for the City to act was before the Legislature made its decision — but the bill passed with no recorded opposition. A draft LCP prepared by the City’s consultant and LCP committee was submitted by the Planning Director to the Coastal staff for comment in March 2000, five months before AB988 was considered. If the Council had used that draft LCP to prove to the legislators pushing the bill that a Malibu LCP had already been prepared and submitted, the City might not be in the position it is now. Why wasn’t it done? Probably because a new City Council was elected in April 2000, and a new Planning Director was hired who had no coastal experience. He told the Council Land Use Committee that he did not support the 2000 draft. We believe that opinion reached Coastal staff who weren’t about to waste their funds evaluating an LCP the Council would not support. Coastal regulations establish a procedure for responding to a city’s draft LCP. It is a negotiation process with Coastal recommending modifications and the City stating what they are willing to include. LA County took four years to complete this process with their 1986 LCP. Malibu could have been in the second year of negotiation with the 2000 draft LCP, instead of just starting the process with the Coastal Commission’s LCP which no one really wanted.
There are portions of the Coastal Commission’s LUP we oppose and hope to change. The Crummer site adjacent to Bluff Park was rezoned CV-2 allowing a hotel. However, it is in an earthquake zone and we expect that fact will preclude a hotel. Mr. Hasse’s comment that the Coastal Commission LCP is a return to County zoning is far from true. For example, the zoning Coastal gave the Chili Cook-Off site provides for less intense use than the Malibu General Plan which gave it the most intense commercial zoning (CG), which allows motels.
As for Councilmember Kearsley’s quotes from Frank Angel’s letter written on behalf of MTC–that was a recitation of AB988, the current law. MTC did not make that law. But once it was enacted, the City might have been in a better position to negotiate with the Coastal Commission if it had cooperated with the process instead of getting in their face with the “Hogin” draft, written by staff with no public participation.
MTC has and always will advocate local control. For over 50 years, MTC has been doing just that.
Efrom Fader, vice president
Malibu Township Council