Reassuring people this was just the beginning of the process, the City Council voted 2-to-1, with City Councilman Ken Kearsley dissenting, May 23, to set three public hearings on the city’s proposed long-term development deal with the Malibu Bay Co.

Hearings are set for June 27, June 28 and July 5 or July 6 to define a project for an environmental impact report. The meetings take place in various locations of the city.

The council will then debate the project at its July 10 meeting.

Before public comment, City manager Harry Peacock said hearings were not a referendum on the merits of the agreement, but to define a project for an environmental impact report.

“We will not be approving the development agreement or donation agreement,” said Peacock, noting that copies of the documents were available at City Hall.

“When the council meets July 10, it needs to modify the agreements solely for the purpose of going for environmental review.

“The agreement will go before the Planning Commission in fall or winter, and come back to the council in ordinance form,” Peacock added.

Reacting to comments by resident Candy Clark and Mayor Pro Tem Joan House that sewage standards and legal descriptions were not spelled out in the agreements, Malibu Bay Co. spokesman Dave Reznick said the standards could be added the first week in June. Peacock noted the legal descriptions are being prepared but add little to the agreements.

“This is simply the beginning of the process. There will be many hearings after June,” noted Peacock.

Kearsley and city councilman Jeff Jennings said calls for negotiations with eight other Civic Center landowners before hearings on the Malibu Bay Co. deal could not be accommodated.

Time is of the essence and the opportunity for comprehensive negotiations had been missed with rejection of the Civic Center Specific Plan, said Jennings and Kearsley in response to comments by Malibu Township council president Frank Basso and residents Art London and Daniel Frumkes.

“If this were three years ago, when we talked about the Civic Center Specific Plan, it would have been a lot easier to achieve the goal of coordinated planning,” said Jennings.

‘What we are talking about is not the standard development process, where the city calls all the shots. We are talking about an agreement here,” he said. “We are getting something in return for giving something up. That process requires everything to be subject to negotiation, including timing of the process.”

“One of the disasters in this city was rejection of the Civic Center Specific Plan,” said Kearsley in response to Peacock’s comment that no one could agree on the Civic Center Specific Plan project to be reviewed.

This, the second in a series of differing views on the Civic Center development, presents the views of Gil Segel, president of the Malibu Coastal Land Conservancy (MCLC), and several of his associates: David Gottlieb, a filmmaker and a director of the Resource Conservation District of the Santa Monica Mountains, Ozzie Silna, MCLC treasurer, and Marcia Hanscom, Executive Director of the Wetlands Action Network.

Often it seems that the controversy over development of Malibu’s Civic Center has raised passions to an adversarial level incapable of compromise or even conversation.

Not so, Gil Segel asserts.

“We have never been either-or,” he said of the MCLC’s position on development vs. non-development.

“We were characterized in Arnold’s paper (The Malibu Times, published by Arnold York) on an either-or basis, as people who are only environmentally predisposed,” said Segel. “That’s not who we are, that’s not who we’ve been.

“We do have environmentally involved people with us, but our concept has always been two-fold,” he explained. “Our focus and goal has only been towards an aspect of conscious development, and controlling the perennial problem of pollution of the Malibu Creek Lagoon and Surfrider Beach.”

Few would argue with Segel over Surfrider’s problem, a beach that seems to get an “F” rating in dry weather as well as wet, which brings in mountain runoff.

“We know that pollution is not specifically a Malibu problem,” said Segel. “It’s regional; 109 square miles dump into Malibu Creek. If we don’t find ways to deal with that pollution, we will have a chronic problem forever.

“I feel so bad when I watch those kids out there every day on the greatest beach in the Southern California area,” he adds. “They get rashes and they get ill. A total development within the Civic Center just to maximize square-footage will only add to the pollution.”

The solution as offered by Segel and his associates?

Set aside a significant part of the Civic Center property as a “wetlands,” which could, by natural oxygenation, cleanse the pollution.

Segel said his group is presently making studies that will determine how much of the land should be set aside to do the job (they consider the Environmental Impact Report done by the Malibu Bay Company, the major site owner, inadequate and failing to deal with the “totality of potential development by all nine site landowners, most of whom have already filed for building permits”).

Unlike the 20-acre Chili Cook-off site, which is situated on the flatland (and which the MBC has agreed to leave undeveloped for a decade), Segel seems to have little objection to a reasonable development of the eight-acre Ioki parcel running uphill from the Civic Center.

“I don’t want to fight with the developers,” he adds. “I recognize there is a private right to develop their property. But this community should be able to put together enough funds–state, federal and local–to set aside an appropriate amount of land in a restored wetlands concept that would work toward cleansing the creek, lagoon and ocean.

“Let’s put together the funds to buy land so the developers don’t get hurt.”

Hanscom said of the wetlands concept, “The Malibu Lagoon and the creek have been considerably fragmented over time, much of it before we knew how wetlands work.

“As one example, not many people know that Jerry Perrenchio, owner of MBC, has a private golf course just northwest of the lagoon, which can be a source of pollution.,” she said. “So we need a larger wetlands, and they don’t work in a vacuum. They are part of an ecosystem including wildlife like the Great Blue Heron and egrets, which you can often see here as well as the white-tailed kite, a protected species which the EIR says is probably nesting in the area. We are looking for a way for humans to survive, as well as the many species which call Malibu home also.”

“And it will enhance their development,” Segel added. “Think about an office building that is surrounded by a park.”

(As the Corps of Engineers has found, that, other than for a small section, the Civic Center site does not fulfill the government’s definition of a “wetland,” ).

Gottlieb suggests as an example of potential funding sources, the recently approved acquisition of 1,640 acres in lower Topanga from the L.A. Athletic Club, with $40 million from state Prop. 12 funds.

“I would love to see a people park/wetlands restoration that people can canoe on, that you could walk in, that people who come from the city can see and experience what this area was like and can be like forever,” said Segel.

“Were we to acquire it, we would turn it over to some entity to hold on a permanent restricted basis–but it’s a park. The more land we are able to get, the more public access,” he said.

Since no one is pro-pollution, and Segel’s group claims they are not adamantly opposed to some “development,” how did the issue become so violently adversarial?

“It’s economic and it’s political,” he said.

Political?

“Certainly getting control of the city at some level,” he added.

Traffic, as it was for Ed Niles who argued the case for reasonable development in The Malibu Times May 18 issue, is also a concern of Segel’s.

“How do you make reasonable economic development within the community if you can’t get here?” he asks.

Although he offers no concrete suggestions, Segel dismisses the premise that Malibu gridlock is inevitable.

“Nothing is absolutely inevitable if you think about it before it happens,” he said. “I’m not willing to say that this has to become another Laguna or Newport Beach. We want to be able to move around. We’re trying to say ‘take the whole concept into consideration.’

“That was the concept of the General Plan [the overall growth plan for Malibu created in 1994.] The more land we can acquire simplifies addressing the problem of PCH.

“There can be development in the Civic Center,” he repeated, “but there also can be ball-fields, and meandering paths and a wetlands restoration large enough to be effective. This is the sole purpose for which we started our conservancy; not to be antagonists but to be consciously constructive of the community’s welfare.”

“I’ve been the enemy of [the] paper for a long time,” Segel said of The Malibu Times. “But its time for everybody to unite, try to do the best job we can, and, with the assistance of the state and the federal government, solve a perennial problem potentially forever. Malibu can be an example for the world.”

Malibu joined the nation Monday on Memorial Day in pausing to respect and honor those who died in America’s wars as its citizens drove down the coast to the 114-acre Los Angeles National Cemetery in West Los Angeles.

There they silently prayed among the 86,000 graves of veterans and their families from every war since the Civil War, including World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War.

Here in Malibu, several veterans remembered their own military experiences for The Malibu Times.

Two served in Vietnam and one served several tours of active duty during his 37-year career in the Naval Reserve. While each man’s experience was unique, each indicated he had emerged stronger and more mature.

Veteran John T. Payne, CEO of Payne and Co. Insurance Brokers, began his military career while still in high school as a Seaman Recruit in the Naval Reserve.

He said he values his time both on active duty and in the Reserve, serving 37 years before retiring with the rank of captain in 1995. Today he continues to extol the Navy and naval careers as a leader of The Navy League in Malibu.

“I enjoyed my time in the military,” Payne said. “I still miss it–the camaraderie, the people you meet, places you go and things you do. I don’t know why more people aren’t interested. It’s a great experience.

“My first active duty, following Submarine School at New London, Connecticut, was with the USS Catfish out of San Diego.”

Payne’s had a variety of assignments since then, including the command of an aircraft carrier reserve unit supporting the first nuclear powered submarine, the USS Enterprise.

Payne expressed disappointment that he was not called up for Desert Storm in the early 1990s.

“It would have been an honor and a privilege for me to do something like that,” he said.

“The Navy gives people a lot of responsibility,” added Payne. “One of the benefits of my military service was to learn a management style that I could use in my personal insurance business.”

Another Malibu veteran, Jeff Jennings, an attorney with a specialty in estate planning, is a city councilmember and was mayor of Malibu from 1997-98.

Graduating from Yale in 1965 as an artillery lieutenant, his active duty was delayed for studies at Stanford Law School and for two years of teaching law.

Then he trained in artillery in Oklahoma and was shipped to Vietnam in March of 1971 with the rank of captain. Assigned to the 101st Airborne Division “way up north near the demilitarized zone,” he found the military needed his skills as an attorney.

“I spent most of my time on legal duties or connected to legal affairs,” said Jennings.

“Our camp was ringed by firebases, and we experienced rocket attacks from time to time,” said Jennings. “When shells fell, we went to sandbagged shelters. I experienced ‘moments of fear’ from the shelling, and in armed travel from place-to-place to investigate cases. But basically we were not supposed to be in combat.”

Jennings indicated that although the experience was unpleasant from many perspectives, he is glad he went.

“At the time I didn’t like it, but the edges blur over time,” he said. “I forget the unpleasant aspects and realize I learned something from the experience. It made me more skeptical of easy answers and positive solutions. It was a maturing process.”

Jennings added that he had been vocal in the anti-war movement before going to Vietnam.

“I was young; I was sure I had the answers,” he said. “I went over there with certain fixed ideas. Slowly they began to wear off. The picture was more complicated; I could see reasons why we were there.”

Remembering fallen comrades, Jennings said, “I had close buddies who died–people who I worked with, prosecution and defense counsels, people in different units. Sometimes scheduled trials didn’t take place, as those involved were killed in action.”

Jennings, who is married with 3 sons, left Vietnam Christmas of 1972.

Todd M. Sloan, now an attorney specializing in civil trial and business litigation law and member of the Code Enforcement Task Force, served two tours of duty with the Marine Corps in Vietnam. He was there during the early days of the conflict when Americans were advisors to the South Vietnamese Army, and later when conflict had burgeoned into full-blown insurgency warfare.

“I think often of friends who were casualties,” he said. “I was lucky. When I think about Memorial Day, I think of the wonderful, brave Marines who are dead now. They were the finest men I ever knew in my life.”

Sloan served all over the country as an infantry, intelligence and scuba officer during his two tours of duty. He saw great changes between 1963, when he was a first lieutenant in the extreme western part of Vietnam, and 1968.

“The country in 1963 suffered from relatively insignificant communist guerrilla activity and some 3-4,000 Americans served as advisors,” he said. “Our job was to observe the North Vietnamese coming south on the Ho Chi Minh trail.

“Initially, Americans were there to support the South Vietnamese Army,” he added. “But, by 1966 this had changed and we were fighting in the countryside and they were back in the bases. Although there were many fine South Vietnamese people in the field, I was struck by the number of draft dodgers and people who didn’t want to fight.”

By 1968, during Sloan’s second tour of duty, the American feeling was to “get the job done,” Sloan said.

“Basically, the South Vietnamese conned America into going out and doing the fighting for them,” he said.

“When I returned home,” he said, “I really had an understanding of how the war started. I read history. I knew the diplomatic overtones. I certainly learned to appreciate living in a country where you are free.”

Malibu residents slamming the door in the face of census takers might well be turning their back on expanded services of the fire department when they need it most, believes Malibu census crew leader, Julie Bongers.

Since March, Bongers’ crew of Census 2000 workers has fanned out from PCH into the hills and canyons gathering information, which helps the community obtain funding for roads, schools, parks, hospitals and public services, such as the fire department.

Bongers said Malibu residents have been frequently unhelpful and think of the census as an intrusion of privacy, not realizing that participating is in their own best interest.

“Long forms have been answered over the intercom and by yelling through thick oak doors,” said Bongers. “In gated communities security guards have been instructed not to help us.”

Census Bureau statistics listed Malibu as one of eight cities in thecounty that did not meet the 1990 mail-back response rate. Census takers are instructed to make contact with each residence three times, by phone and in person.

“Malibu residents that feel they don’t need roads or schools should realize that the fire department matters,” said Bongers. “We have many bad fires; bad car accidents and houses get flooded and washed out. Nobody is excluded.”

A Malibu resident herself, Bonger said she believes the community would also benefit from the funding for more parks. “Whether you are pro or anti-development, parks are necessary places to create community. Just look at Crosscreek and how many people bring their kids there to play,” she said.

Malibu’s terrain also makes it difficult for census takers to get their information. Houses are far apart and neighbors do not know one another. Access to some homes requires driving on rough narrow roads only to find a property completely gated. Some addresses no longer have homes on them since recent fires, which then requires a visit with the fire department to clear the Census Bureau paperwork.

Bongers said that many of the second homes in Malibu are the hardest to get information about. Despite unlisted phone numbers and absentee owners living elsewhere, census takers are required to keep coming back in an attempt to make contact.

“People will just get pestered more. If someone knocks and they just fill out the form, chances are someone will not come knocking again,” said Bonger.

Census takers are hired to work in the cities they live in. Bonger said this policy was to hire people who “speak the language of your neighbors” as well as the practical side of knowing your way around.

This knowledge came in handy when Malibu’s homeless population was counted on March 28th, the same day the entire country, devoted to seeking out the “non-sheltered” population. Bonger believes they got an accurate count.

“We went to where we knew people were living outside; behind Ralphs market, Topanga beach, in the canyons and some of the places they hang out in the daytime,” said Bonger.

Malibu census takers have found residents comfortable with English.

“Many Malibu families have lived in Malibu for a long time. There is no pattern of non-English speakers,” said Bonger.

By law, the Census Bureau can not share answers with other agencies, including the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Internal Revenue Service, welfare, courts, the police or the military. Bongers said she maintains the oath to privacy in her own mind by not reading the names on the questionnaires she checks over each day as they are turned in by her staff.

In the midst of career changes, Bonger went to work for Census 2000 as a way to make a little extra money. She said her crew is made up of an interesting variety of people in various stages of life including a number of Pepperdine students, an artist, some retired people looking for something to do and someone wanting extra money for fire insurance.

The Malibu Public Library has provided them with a bit of office space and a table to meet.

Census takers are easily recognizable by large badges with the seal of the Census Bureau. The census ends June 10.

Reacting to pleas from City Councilman Ken Kearsley and speaker David Kagon, the City Council voted May 23 to consider appointing someone to fill the vacancy created by the death of Harry Barovsky.

Mayor Tom Hasse, who was instrumental in scrapping the appointment option in April, was not present for the 3-0 vote, not having returned from a Sacramento meeting of the League of California Cities.

The ordinance and complementary resolution will be debated at the June 12 meeting of the City Council.

“Tonight we have evidence that two members can decide an issue,” said Kagon, referring to the denial by Mayor Pro Tem Joan House and Councilman Jeff Jennings of appeals of Planning Commission decisions on two homes on Latigo Shores Drive.

The appeals were made by local attorney Frank Angel and the Sierra Club. Kearsley had recused himself because he had been Planning Commission chair on the vote.

“Suppose you had not voted the same way,” continued Kagon. “Was that the will of the people, to have one person make the decision? It is almost mandated that you appoint someone so people have the full council make decisions.”

Kearsley, who had been lobbying for the appointment process for the last month, said the volume of work alone necessitated a five-member council and five-member Planning Commission.

The appointment vote represents the second about-face on the vacancy issue. On April 10, the old council introduced the same ordinance the new council introduced May 23. It calls for filling every City Council vacancy by special election and making an interim appointment until the special election.

Then, on April 22, the old council decided to have voters choose the fifth member in a special election in November. At that meeting, Hasse nixed the idea of appointing someone, including Barovsky’s widow, Sharon, Ted Vaill, former Parks and Recreation Commissioner, and Frank Basso, Malibu Township Council chair

In other action the council:

• Voted 3-0 to disband the Local Coastal Plan Committee after House said Sen. John Burton, pro tem of the State Senate, told her and Hasse in a 10-second meeting, “Get your LCP done.”

• Swore in Bill Carson and Kathy Greco to the Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission; Pat Greenwood and Doug O’Brien to the Parks and Recreation Commission; Ed Lipnick, Richard Carrigan and David Fox to the Planning Commission; Marlene Matlow and Melanie Goudzwaard to the Public Safety Commission; Richard Davis and Richard Scott to the Public Works Commission; and Lloyd Ahern to the Telecommunications Commission.

• Jennings announced the appointment of Bob Newlon to the Architects and Engineers Zoning Review Committee, and Jennifer Skophammer and Larry Grey to the Trails Master Plan Committee.

• Heard a presentation on the work of the Code Enforcement Task Force from chair John Miller and requested the Task Force prepare a written progress report in September. During the presentation and public comments it was noted that the Building and Safety Department staff were not required to be present at the meeting and there was confusion about rules for a home office. Responding to comments by Miller, House and city manager Harry Peacock said home offices were allowed under development standards. Activist Anne Hoffman said a code enforcement moratorium would provide “widespread relief” to thousands of residents who are subject to “great invasions of privacy” for using their home office to collaborate on writing and film projects, entertain clients, conduct business meetings or have personal training in connection with their profession.

• Voted 3-0 to add new, at-large members to the Code Enforcement Task Force.

• Added design services for a neighborhood park, including a 2,000 square-foot community building, on city-owned property in Las Flores Canyon to the capital projects budget for fiscal year 2000-2001.

• Unanimously approved a contract with Kimberly Nilsson to administer the city’s film permit program.