In the hopes of answering many questions surrounding the Measure R proposal to regulate chain stores and let residents vote on new developments, the Malibu City Council voted 5-0 on Monday to host a debate between proponents and opponents of the measure.
“I think it’s important that everybody understands exactly what it is they’re voting on,” Councilman Lou La Monte said.
Someone from the Reiner camp would likely represent proponents of the measure, but it’s unclear who would represent opponents.
Councilwoman Laura Rosenthal came up with the idea for a debate, suggesting that the debate would be beneficial to the public before the November election.
She did not immediately have an answer for who would be speaking at the debate in opposition to the ballot initiative.
“I have no idea,” Rosenthal said, adding, “I’m sure that somebody will come forward.”
Measure R, originally introduced as the “Your Malibu, Your Decision” Act, is an initiative aimed at curbing chain store development in Malibu’s Civic Center. Nearly 2,300 petition signatures were gathered in July to place it on the November ballot.
Planning Commissioner John Mazza spoke during public comment on the issue, not as a commissioner but on behalf of the Measure R group, which is being led by Rob and Michele Reiner. According to Mazza, there is no organized opposition to the Measure R initiative.
“If there is no opposition there really is no need for debate,” Mazza said, urging the Council to shoot down the debate idea.
He added that no clear opponent or committee opposing Measure R has emerged.
“There does not seem to be any organized opposition to Measure R. So far all we have seen are a few letters to the editor in the local newspapers, a one page ad by a developer and a recent mailing,” Mazza said.
Councilmember John Sibert took exception to Mazza’s suggestion.
“I find some of this insulting, the idea that we shouldn’t have a debate because there isn’t any opposition,” Sibert said.
Craig Foster, the president of Advocates for Malibu Public Schools (AMPS), supported a debate.
“I think the idea of a public conversation about Measure R is brilliant,” Foster said, mentioning that a public town hall “is important, especially on contentious issues, because it tends to suck the venom out of those issues.”
Mark Persson, executive director of the Malibu Chamber of Commerce, pressed for a debate as well.
“I think we all deserve to hear all sides of this argument,” Persson said.
As for who will moderate the debate, Rosenthal presented a couple of possibilities, including the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution and the League of Women Voters.
Rosenthal said that she hopes to schedule the forum to coincide with absentee ballot mailouts.
“I’m hoping for the beginning of October, maybe the second week or so,” Rosenthal told The Malibu Times.
Public art requirement passes
The City Council also voted 4-1 in favor of a public art ordinance, which will require new public developments to allocate a portion of their building funds for public art, either by a donation of art itself or money that the city will allocate.
Council members decided developers should be obligated to put 2% of their building costs toward public art if they are paying for the art themselves, or 1% if they decide to allocate funds toward art, going into a Public Art Fund.
The dissenting vote came from Councilwoman Joan House, who did not feel that percentages should change.
“I don’t support a sliding scale,” House said, “I support 1 percent.”
The so-called sliding scale was supported by public commenters, including former Malibu Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich.
“It’s not enough to do 1 percent,” Ulich said.
Rosenthal added an amendment clarifying developments built using taxpayer funds should not be subject to the Art in Public Places ordinance.
“I just feel like we’re double-dipping if we’re using taxpayer money,” Rosenthal said, outlining the exemption for city and public school projects.
Private schools are still subject to the requirement.