Malibu residents expressed their growing concerns about the Civic Center Draft Guidelines at Monday night’s Planning Commission meeting.

Two weeks ago, the guidelines faced strong opposition from a group of citizens who thought them premature and poorly drafted. Residents reiterated their concerns about the guidelines’ concepts in front of the commission. The speakers expressed opinions on the proposed water treatment solutions, increased development allow-ances, street realignment and creating a cul-de-sac on Civic Center Way.

While Drew Purvis, the city’s senior planning director, stated that the guidelines are intended to propose integrated themes and plans for infrastructures so that developers who own the properties can work in unison, the general public had doubts.

Marshall Thompson, president of the Malibu Park Homeowners’ Association, brought up a poignant point. “As the Civic Center goes, so goes the rest of Malibu,” he said.

There has to be a justification for this build-out, he said, and it will not come from beachgoers who do not spend a lot of money in Malibu. Rather, it will encourage zoning changes that will allow subdivisions and more residential build-out, said Thompson.

Resident Ann Hoffman said the guidelines give developers new rights by allowing a package sewage-treatment plant instead of letting developers deal with their own septic systems, which would limit the size of development.

“It matters to me because the treatment plant would allow for a bigger commercial development,” she said.

Don Schmitz, representing Malibu Ranch La Paz property owners, said the owners of two key parcels in the Civic Center area, who have had applications before the city since last year, are concerned about the original language for the treatment plant.

Additionally, property owners do not like the restrictions placed on them by the city’s guidelines, including the 50- to 100-foot linear wetland path and setback guidelines, which they are providing in their plans anyway, he said.

Another speaker was troubled by the mixed messages sent by the city on this matter. “Even though they say the guidelines don’t have legal effect, they do,” said Jay Liebig. “Are we going to permit a million and a half square feet of development in the Civic Center?”

Steve Uhring, of the Malibu Coastal Land Conservancy, said this issue deserves more community input. He thought the plans were badly drafted, and that in case of a disaster, people will not be able to evacuate if the Civic Center is redesigned as the guidelines indicate.

“A significant number of people want the Civic Center to remain open,” said Uhring. The group he represents has drafted its own Civic Center guidelines. He suggested that alternatives be presented to the public as well.

Georgianna McBurney implored the commission to schedule three neighborhood meetings, stating that Councilmember Sharon Barovsky was in support of that idea.

“It’s imperative that the city have a water map of the Civic Center,” she said, “to see how the area can deal with additional treated water and drainage.”

“Where will the water go?” she added.

Chair Ed Lipnick explained at the beginning of the commission’s discussion of the matter that it is not the function of the commission to approve or disapprove the guidelines.

The commission was directed by the City Council to review the draft guidelines and present its opinion on the draft.

“If we don’t adopt the guidelines, we’re going to look worse than Calabasas, we’ll look like Ventura Boulevard,” said Lipnick.

“I think some people might be missing the point,” said Barry Hogan, planning director. “This set of guidelines presents an opportunity to present a single vision.”

“I’m in favor of common planning as opposed to no planning,” said David Fox, commissioner.

But before it can decide on anything, the commission wants more time to reflect on the comments and material. After another lengthy debate, the commission adjourned at a late hour. The commission plans to revisit the guidelines on April 2, without further public comment for the moment.

New office rules eases burdens for home businesses

By Sylvie Belmond/Staff Writer

The Planning Comm-ission, at Monday night’s meeting, unanimously adopted a new Home Occupation Zoning Text Amendment that will make it easier for home-based businesses to operate in Malibu.

During the past year, the current home office ordinance was under fire because it was thought to be too restrictive by residents who organized and requested that the rules be relaxed.

According to city staff, the amendments to the home occupation section of the code have been specifically tailored to the unique needs of Malibu. The most significant portion of the amendment is the allowance of workers and clients in home occupation settings, according to a staff report.

With the new rules, educational businesses, like those who give piano lessons or swimming lessons, will be allowed to have up to six students onsite at one time and home-based offices or studios will be allowed to have up to three clients and three employees at once.

At one point during the meeting, the commission was concerned about opening a Pandora’s box-making room for abuses of the ordinance, but objections were outweighed by the benefits of the amendments overall.

Ann Hoffman, a proponent of the new amendment, said it would help reduce code enforcement cases. It will save time for everyone, including city staff, she said.

But not everyone agreed that the change was beneficial. Malibu resident Frank Basso opposed the amendment because he thought the relaxed rules could have a negative impact on residential neighborhoods.

“How can it be enforced?” he asked. “Let’s do some planning and take care of the people who want to live in their houses and have their kids play on the street. It’s too liberal.”

Efraim Fader spoke on behalf of the Malibu Township Council. He referred the commission to a 1997 proposal that had a more detailed ordinance. Fader started calculating what the new rules could mean for residential neighborhoods. Six students in five classes a day can equal 60 car trips a day, he said.

“And consider these people using the bathroom,” said Fader, referring to over-usage of septic systems.

Commissioner Ted Vaill, who served on the code enforcement taskforce, agreed that the MTC’s thoughts made sense. Staff did not address the multiple classes per day issue, he said.

But after debating in detail, and making a few changes in the amendments’ wording, the commission approved the home occupation amendments unanimously.

In other matters, the commission reviewed a zoning text amendment that would allow business owners to put their logos inside the signs in a shopping mall.

“The reason we proposed this amendment,” said commission chair Ed Lipnick,” is because we felt that it was a waste of the commission’s time to have applicants go through a variance system and we approve the signs 98 percent of the time.”

But some public speakers disagreed with the amendment.

“This is a roll-over-and-die kind of amendment,” said Jay Liebig, a Malibu resident, in opposition to the amendment.

After hearing comments, Commissioner Richard Carrigan apologized for suggesting that the commission proposed the amendments and he successfully retracted the proposal, with com-

missioners Ted Vaill and Andrew Stern concurring that it may be too liberal.

“We should control and prevent worst-case scenarios and I am reversing the position I had on June 19, 2000,” said Carrigan.

The motion failed after Lipnick motioned to approve the amendment and Commissioner David Fox seconded it, but Vaill, Stern and Carrigan voted against it.

Probably any parent of a teenager who has seen the Oscar-nominated film “Traffic” has been disturbed by the portrayal of affluent teenagers free-basing drugs and having sex. Most adult viewers are not sure if this is an accurate picture of teenage culture today, or a provocative Hollywood exaggeration.

A group of teenagers at Cross Creek Mall were asked their opinion of their peers’ depiction in the film. Their response was a unanimous, “It’s not true.”

“A lot of people [teens] smoke weed and drink at parties. But if there are hard drugs, it is hidden,” they said.

However, on ABC’s “Nightline” this week, Ted Koppel explores the reality of what was depicted in the movie. And, according to Monday night’s episode, the film was right on target in the portrayal of the drug trade and use by teens across the country. Three teens interviewed, who were all in drug rehab, said that drugs were prevalent in their upscale Midwest community. They also said that buying drugs was easier than buying alcohol.

The group at Cross Creek agreed that they did not feel ignored or alienated at school or at home, as was portrayed by the girl in “Traffic.” “A lot of people care about you,” one girl offered. The consensus was that kids with “serious” drug problems were probably getting private counseling.

However, the use of alcohol, tobacco and drugs and premature sexual involvement are the concern of Malibu middle and high school administrators, counselors and teachers and of a variety of related services such as the Smart Moves program at the Boys and Girls Club Teen Center. Smart Moves is a national program to help children avoid the four major perils of adolescence — drugs, alcohol, tobacco and premature sexual involvement.

Laure Stern, president of the board of directors of the Malibu Foundation for Youth and Families, which supports Smart Moves, said, “There has always been a need for this type of program here, and anyone who thinks we don’t have a problem with these issues in Malibu must be in total denial.”

“It’s hard for parents to see the world through their child’s eyes,” said Irene Ramos, Malibu middle school assistant principal. “Parents need to realize that their children are much more exposed to drugs, alcohol and violence than we were. When [parents] find out their children are involved in these types of activities, they are usually shocked.

“Peer pressure is so great. Most kids are ill-prepared to handle it and most parents don’t know how to talk about these subjects. We really need to get involved. We have the authority to teach kids how to read and write but as a society, we have to do more. Eminem for example. Look at what they are being exposed to,” Ramos grimaced.

School counselor Nancy Pallathena agreed, “It’s hard to grow up now. All schools have illegal substances on campus and not many kids are caught. A lot is going on that we are not aware of. Our roles are limited. Kids are getting through school as best they can, but everything is so fast. And now we all know what the costs are for not paying attention.”

Students turn to school counselors Pallathena and her colleague Luke Sferra for help or else reveal their neediness by their behavior, but Pallathena regrets that she does not have enough time for all of them.

“What we need is another counselor. Six hundred kids each is too many. We are under-staffed in this district. There is a lot of talk about the value of programs, but unless you dedicate money along with the talk, you are not going to succeed.”

One privately funded program is the unannounced appearance of drug-sniffing Labrador retriever Pounce. He, or a stand-in, comes every few weeks or once a month.

“The kids don’t like it,” Pallathena offered, “and only occasionally has he alerted us to a problem, but I do think it is a deterrent.”

According to Tess Hudson, Student Council president, students have “adjusted” to Pounce. “When the dog first came it was a big ‘to do,’ but now we just take it as a matter of course.”

However, drug-sniffing dogs have created controversy at a middle school in Santa Paula. Parents are outraged and say that the searches violate students’ privacy rights.

In addition to the dog, the school campus is “policed” by security personnel Teresa Wallace and Milton Greene. Wallace knows the students well and they know her. She tries to be everywhere.

“We want to make it safe,” she said. “The last thing we want to do is to catch someone.” Her mantra is, “Prevention, prevention, prevention.”

There are other drug-combating and self-esteem programs in progress. Volunteer counselors come to the campus from Jewish Family Service, the Action Program in Santa Monica holds group sessions, and ninth- and tenth-graders all participate in Student Council, which aims to develop listening skills, verbal expression and self-empowerment.

With Smart Moves, 10 high school students are leaders and mentors for middle school participants. For about eight weeks, the group will explore the perils of drugs, alcohol and premature sexual involvement. Stern fervently champions the national program along with club directors Scott Robinson and Stacey Gray. A new group will be formed after spring vacation.

The ultimate goal of Smart Moves at the Teen Center and of school administrators and faculty at Malibu Middle and High School seems to be the same — to keep kids in school so they can learn, and to give them the strength to resist negative influences so they can become positive members of the community.

The City of Malibu has decided not to trade a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) of $384,000 for a General Fund Grant at approximately 60 cents on the dollar.

Instead, the city has been granted an extension of their March 31 deadline to come up with a plan on how to spend existing grant funds.

However, one problem faced by the city is the restrictiveness of the grant, which allocates CDBG funds to cities with populations under 50,000 or unincorporated areas in Los Angeles County. The grants are for the purpose of improving the quality of life for people of low and moderate incomes, which Malibu qualifies for because of its high population of senior citizens.

“Senior citizens are presumed to be low- and moderate-income according to HUD [Department of Housing and Urban Development], based on [the fact] that many are on a limited income,” said Linda Jenkins, a manager with the Community Development Commission that administers the grants.

However, only 15 percent of CDBG funding can be spent on community services, such as senior meal programs, family violence intervention services or youth recreation programs. The majority of funding can be used for infrastructure improvements, which include construction of community centers or modifications of public spaces to make them handicap accessible.

The city is hoping to apply the funds toward building a senior citizen center, according to Julia James, city administrative service director.

But, “[the] problem is that property is very expensive,” said James. “[And] building a new facility is time-consuming; the city had not had enough resources, staff and time to devote to this project.”

Councilmember Jeff Jennings, who also sits on the administration and finance subcommittee, said that the funds have not been spent yet because the city has been “accumulating the money against the tide of the time needed to construct the senior center.”

On an annual basis, Malibu receives $84,000 under the CDBG program. The city can borrow up to approximately 16 times against the annual allocation on a variable interest rate, around 5.5 percent, said Jenkins.

Jenkins said they have not received a formal application from the City of Malibu for a request to borrow extra funds. She did say that city staff did meet with the commission two years ago, but has not heard back from the city since.

One issue the city was contending with then, as now, was where to find the property to purchase, said Terry Gonzalez, director of CDBG programs.