City Council hears community concerns over proposed Civic Center Way location, urges alternative solutions
The Malibu City Council convened a special meeting on Feb. 3 focusing on the Palisades Fire Phase 1 household hazardous materials removal. A large group of Malibuites gathered, ready to express concerns about the Environmental Protection Agency’s approach to removing such materials, which includes paint, cleaning products and solvents, oils, pesticides, and batteries, including lithium batteries, which are particularly vulnerable to spontaneous combustion after being damaged in a wildfire.
The state of California granted the EPA authority to access properties within the fire scar on Jan. 15.
Michael Montgomery, director of the Superfund and Emergency Management Division for the EPA’s Region 9 office; Rusty Harris-Bishop, a site cleanup section manager; and Tara Fitzgerald, the on-scene coordinator, explained that the EPA will remove lithium-ion batteries from vehicles, homes and other products such as home alarms, digital cameras, drones, and some electric devices. The EPA also will remove visible asbestos and inspect pressurized fuel cylinders such as propane tanks.
Officials explained that after the EPA certifies that a property has been cleared, Phase 2 debris removal will be managed by Los Angeles County and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, with property owners having the choice to opt in and have FEMA conduct the process at no charge or to opt out and have private contractors perform that function in accordance with relevant local and county laws.
Some express grave concerns about Civic Center Way location
After attendees patiently listened to the presentations by FEMA and the EPA, Mayor Doug Stewart opened the proceeding to public comments. And many commented at length.
The main concern of many in attendance focused on EPA’s and FEMA’s proposal to place a staging area to temporarily house hazardous materials right in the center of Malibu on Civic Center Way on a parcel known as the Bell property, noting the proposal had been thrust upon the city only one day earlier without any input from city officials or the community. City Councilmember Bruce Silverstein pointed out that no formal decision could be made by the council at the meeting because the item had not been properly agendized. Many attendees also expressed consternation that the EPA had established a temporary hazardous waste collection area at Topanga and Pacific Coast Highway on California State Parks land on the site of the former Malibu Ranch Motel, a proposal that instigated a protest by citizens on Jan. 31, noting that the EPA failed to provide advance notice and expressing concerns about regarding health and environmental risks associated with the site’s operations.
Further, State Parks approved the EPA’s request for a temporary use permit without consulting Malibu officials or any residents
Officials acknowledged that the site is operational, but explained that it was rapidly filling up and more land is needed to perform Phase 1.
Harris-Bishop explained that the Bell lot is “ideal to serve as a staging area as it has enough space — we need more than 20 acres to perform the process, and further, it is flat,” he added. “We need a place to safely handle materials and there are no large trucks used — we only use F-150’s and trucks of that size.”
When asked about whether the EPA needed a permit to conduct operations on the Bell property, he responded that, “the city has emergency authorities and this may not require a full hearing — we have a sense of urgency as the residents want their property back to begin the building process.”
Fenton chimed in, stating that “we are here to help you, and we want to do it quickly and safely.”
Harris-Bishop emphasized, “It is important for the hazardous substances, which are currently in an uncontrolled environment and pose a public health emergency where they sit — they need to be removed as soon as possible.” He also noted that President Donald Trump has ordered EPA to complete Phase 1 in 30 days, a process that often takes up to six months to perform.
After removal to a staging area, officials organize the material by substance type and ship them on for storage at an accredited facility. They emphasized that the hazardous materials are wrapped in plastic during transit and stated that they did not present a danger beyond their fenced area and that there would be perimeter air monitoring.
When Harris-Bishop tried to equate the fire-related hazardous materials he was suggesting be temporarily stored in mid-Malibu with household materials the city sometimes collects, he received a lot of pushback.
“Don’t the fire-related hazardous materials have a different composition?” City Councilmember Haylynn Conrad queried. “Also, what routes are you proposing to take the materials through as they go to the storage facilities — our mountain canyon roads have slopes and curves.”
Fitzgerald explained, “When the materials are processed, we transport them in smaller trucks, and then they are placed on large commercial trucks before being taken on larger roads. The routes we will take depend on what kind and what amount of materials we are shipping. We will be shipping daily.”
The conversation then focused on the possible risks of transporting the debris into Malibu, which is well outside the burn scar and, to use EPA phrasing, “co-locating debris into larger groups of the same substance.”
Silverstein and others honed in, seeking clarity and asking whether the EPA representative could assure the council and community that there would be no hazards possible to the environment or to people. They could not do so.
Former Mayor Skylar Peak and others noted that there were no good solutions, the hazards had to be mitigated, forthcoming rains can cause mudslides in the burn scar, and fire victims need to start the rebuilding process as soon as possible. “Get out of the expert’s way,” Peak suggested to the attendees.
Other locations discussed
“Wouldn’t it be better to clear sites that are in the burn area and use those sites instead of in the middle of Malibu?” Silverstein asked.
Stewart stated, “The Bell area sits within one-quarter mile of two schools, homes, and shopping areas.” He also noted that an integral principle in the city’s mission statement is to protect the environment.
Several citizens who testified noted the site abuts areas where both children and adults run for exercise, is near the public library, and is between Santa Monica College and Pepperdine.
Carolyn Day, who lives in Topanga, asked whether the EPA needed to use the Topanga location, quoting Steve Canalog, deputy incident commander for EPA Region 9 who told the Los Angeles Times that the efforts to remove hazardous materials from the fire scar is “probably going to be the biggest lithium-ion battery removal activity that’s taken place in this country, if not the world.”
Day stated, “I hope that Malibu protects its city and citizens!”
Andy Lyon queried, “Why don’t you set up your area at Big Rock? No one is living there. It’s our Civic Center, not an EPA toxic dump.”
Talk turned to the feasibility of using Will Rogers State Beach, which sits at the bottom of where the Palisades Fire raged. Responding, Harris-Bishop stated that authorities had refused the EPA’s request to do so. “That location would be our first choice,” he said.
Former Mayor Pamela Conley Ulich proposed that the officials “look at this situation using common sense and use that beach.” She noted that the number of structures affected by the fire in Palisades is 7,000 versus Malibu’s toll of 700.
“Be creative and do what’s right,” she implored. “We have experienced enough trauma in Malibu — why expose kids to these materials?”
Noting that he lived within a mile of the Bell property, Michael Lynn implored the EPA team, “Please stop! The health and safety risks of using that property include ocean winds taking hazardous materials airborne, possible seismic activity — why would I want this a block from my house where my 2-week-old son is? What you’re proposing is 400 yards from an elementary school and 100 yards from our pediatrician. The solution is simple — pack and sort the materials in the fire burn.”
The takeaway
In the end, Harris-Bishop stated he appreciated the city’s offer to intercede with county and city of Los Angeles authorities to have them revisit the Will Rogers beach location. Ultimately, he agreed that the EPA “would continue to pursue the Will Rogers location and other potential sites.”
Stewart stated that the city will do all it can to help him do so.
UPDATE, Wednesday, Feb. 5: After a review and considerable outcry from both city residents and the city council, it was announced today that the parking lot at Will Rogers State Beach would serve as the temporary processing site for hazardous materials. These materials, transported from nearby properties, will be processed, securely packaged, and safely loaded for transport to a permanent disposal or recycling facility outside the area.