Before any more taxpayer funds and volunteer efforts are spent on this scheme, shouldn’t someone make a reality check? Here are some questions and concerns that should be answered before we go too far:

HEALTH AND SAFETY–“Wetlands” is just a pretty name for a swamp (see any dictionary). It is a living environment with life forms ranging from bacteria to birds, with insects and waterlife of all kinds in the food chain. It has now been determined that the dangerous levels of pollution that have closed the beaches at Huntington Beach have been traced to the Talbert Wetlands, a 20-acre marsh just inland from the shore in the heart of that city. After all, the excretions and droppings of thousands of birds are as bacteria-ridden as any other source of disease.

Last year, seven people died and hundreds were sickened by the West Nile Virus in the city of New York. Despite heavy aerial chemical spraying over the city and the surrounding suburbs, the virus has reappeared, now spreading along the entire East Coast.

This virus has been traced to mosquitoes in the wetland and ponds and is being carried by migratory fowl across the continent. Just this week, in Ventura, a horse died of equine encephalitis, similar to the killer East Coast disease, also spread by mosquitoes. In the East, parents are being told to keep their children away from bodies of water this year.

Yet, some people in Malibu are proposing that the city build playing fields adjacent to the “Chumash Wetlands” so that children can play in close proximity to a potential source of deadly disease. By the way, the reason these proponents have not declared that the site has archeological significance is that no self-respecting Chumash would have ever built a dwelling next to a swamp.

WATER SOURCE–To keep the Wetlands alive, hundreds of thousand of gallons of water will have to be obtained each month. Is there enough water flow down Malibu Creek to fill this giant pool all-year-round? If not, how much will the city have to spend each year to purchase Colorado River water? In a city which does not have a minimally adequate supply of water to meet any emergency needs, it seems reckless to provide for birds and insects while homeowners must stand in line for bottles of drinking water every time a pipeline is closed for two days.

REDUCED TRAFFIC ON PCH–This has been the mantra of the Wetlands proponents. However, if they expect to obtain state or federal funds for their project they must know that they will have to provide access to everyone who would like to visit their beautiful wildlife refuge and park. Where in their plans do they propose to build the parking lots for all the tourists who will come each day, the dozens of school buses bringing thousands of school children on nature study field trips and the hundreds of bird-watchers and canoeists that Ms. Van Horn said she’d like to see? Does anyone believe that American taxpayers will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a park that would be enjoyed only by Malibu residents and local schoolchildren, as described in a recent article in a local newspaper?

If the proponents of the Wetlands are serious, I am sure that they must have answers to these concerns. I would hate to think that all this fuss is just about finding a way to stop reasonable development of Malibu, and to kill worthwhile projects like senior housing.

Will it really help reduce traffic and pollution on PCH if residents must continue driving dozens of miles to meet simple shopping and healthcare needs?

Bob Rubenstein

Last Tuesday I wrote a column about our mayor Tom Hasse and mayor pro tem Joan House making the rounds in Sacramento. I predicted that if, as Sen. Burton said, we don’t get our political house in order and get our Local Coastal Plan passed and approved, there are some big money-hammers in Sacramento who will come crunching down on our heads. It didn’t take very long.

The very next day, Wednesday, Sen. Burton introduced a bill into the State Senate, SB 406, that says he’s giving us a drop-dead date. His bill says that if we don’t get our Local Coastal Program adopted by the city of Malibu, submitted to the Coastal Commission and “effectively certified” (which is the bill language) by the commission by July 1, 2001, the State Controller (the gal in charge of passing out the bucks) is instructed to “withhold, to the extent permitted by the constitution, any subvention, payment, or appropriation to or for the benefit of the city of Malibu for any purpose.”

The first thing that went through my mind was, “He can’t do that, can he? They can’t pass a special rule just to punish one city because they don’t like what we’re doing or not doing. Can they?”

Actually, the more I thought about it the more I was sure the bill was probably unconstitutional. However, despite that, it doesn’t mean we don’t have a problem, and it’s a serious problem. It probably isn’t a legal problem, but what it certainly is, is a political problem. For one thing, the most important guy in the State Senate has decided to hold our feet to the fire and he’s not doing it alone. His principal co-author is Bob Hertzberg, who, as you may recall, is the Speaker and the number one guy in the Assembly. This means that two-thirds of the leadership of the State of California is definitely not in our corner, at least not on this issue.

Now I don’t really think Burton and Hertzberg want to take away some of our money, which, by the way, according to our city manager Harry Peacock’s quick and dirty estimate, was about $1.5 million per year, and which, I suspect, will climb as they think about it.

What they want to do is send a message and that message is, “No man is an island.” Nor either, I suspect, is any little city like ours. They have put the proverbial shot across our bow, but this time they’ve actually fired it through the superstructure and said, “Take heed.”

What is driving this thrust is a little hard to say. With Sacramento virtually closed down for the holiday weekend, there wasn’t even anyone to call to try and find out, but they’ll be back and I’ll nose around.

What we’re seeing is not particularly unique to our relationship with Sacramento. It applies to almost every area where the city of Malibu operates. For example, just recently, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge rendered a decision on the case involving a proposed development in west Malibu called Trancas Town. It’s a proposed project of 15 single-family homes and 52 town homes in west Malibu at Trancas Canyon Road and PCH. The city, together with the Trancas Property Owners Association, has been battling this development and a series of developers for almost 10 years. Their position over that period is pretty much that the only acceptable compromise is “nothing.”

You can see where a judge might think we were a little rigid and unreasonable. Here’s what the judge said about us in his most recent opinion, and, I might add, this judge was formerly the head probate guy, so it’s safe to assume he’s not some wildly emotional guy whose mouth just runs loose. His comment when he ruled for the developer in Trancas Town project was, “I do think that the city of Malibu and the Property Owners Association, in a real sense, have just decided that they’re never going to let this happen and they’re acting like outlaws and renegades and I’ll use those words. They are bound and determined to never let this development go forth, no matter what the developer does, no matter what the Coastal Commission has agreed to, and it seems to me that is patently wrong.”

Folks, as we used to say in my old neighborhood, we got a bad rep. Frankly, it’s well-earned and frequently well-deserved and it costs us–big time. We’ve got to take a good hard look at what we do, and ask ourselves the tough questions like–what have we got to do to fix this situation?

It’s not that the answers are so tough, they’re not. It’s just that no answer can please everyone, and as we continue to try to keep all of our citizens happy we keep getting the city into trouble. Good leadership means that from time-to-time you have to have the nerve to say, “No, you can’t have whatever you want.”

We all know it as parents, so why is it we have so much trouble saying ‘no’ in our public life?

I know it is not necessary to explain one’s absence from church, but I want to because I had such a good excuse. My wife, Dorothy, and the mother of my two children wanted to go on the Million Mom March–and, in addition to me, both my son, daughter and a grandson were going to the march also.

We have sort of a simple theology and test for our behavior. Our God is not a tall man with a long beard who performs magical tricks. Our God is LOVE. We test our behavior by asking what would Jesus do in a particular situation. We really do not think that Jesus would be a gun owner–we do not own guns. We do not think that Jesus would be pleased that people have so little faith, and so much fear, that they have to have loaded guns in their homes. If this is a Christian nation, we find it hard to realize that we are literally awash in guns.

So we missed church to march on Mother’s Day because we hope that our country will develop a more rational attitude about handguns and that the number of people, particularly children, killed by guns can be greatly reduced.

Chuck Green

PS: Before W.W.II, I was on the Border Patrol so I had to carry a gun, and it did not make feel any safer. I knew that everyone else could see that I had a gun, but I did not know if they had guns. It made me concerned as to how I might be able to get the drop on the “bad Guy.” I realized that I had to depend on something more substantial than a gun.

Councilpersons Tom Hasse, Joan House, Jeff Jennings, and Ken Kearsley, and city manager Harry Peacock:

It appears from the agenda for the May 23 closed session of the City Council that Ad Hoc Committee development agreement negotiations may be under way with some or all of eight property owners in the Civic Center area.

The Malibu Township Council has no quarrel with any effort by the City to work out with Civic Center area property owners terms for development of their properties. It seems necessary and only fair that each of these eight other property owners be given the same opportunity to negotiate development agreements for their properties, which the City has given the Malibu Bay Company.

It may be that separate confidential negotiations between the City and the owners of each of these eight properties might be conducted, with proposed development terms for none of the properties disclosed until proposed agreements for all properties are reached. But it seems unrealistic to expect to keep each of eight separate negotiations secret from the other seven property owners. A single confidential negotiation between the Council Ad Hoc Committee and representatives of all of the eight property owners might be a more realistic approach.

Either way, we shall need to consider and evaluate the merits of: The Proposed Development Agreement with the Malibu Bay Company respecting its properties in the Civic Center area and in west Malibu, plus Proposed Development Agreements respecting eight additional properties in the Civic Center area.

The proposed Malibu Bay Company developments will impact and will be impacted by development of the other eight properties, and development of all of the properties will have a cumulative impact on Malibu’s environment and infrastructure. Also, depending on what is proposed for the eight properties, their development could have positive or negative impacts on the economic viabiity of the development proposed by the Malibu Bay Company. Development allowed the other eight property owners might be limited by development proposed by the Malibu Bay Company, and vice versa. Therefore, if all are to receive fair and equal treatment, it seems unavoidable that the Malibu Bay Company Proposed Development Agreement must be reviewed and evaluated not ahead of but as part of a package including proposed development of the other eight properties.

The schedule proposed for public review of the Malibu Bay Company Proposed Development Agreement, three hearings in June, with City Council formal consideration of adoption July 10, puts that proposal on a fast track to approval (with only minimal hearings, no public workshops) and with no consideration given to:

. Property rights of owners of the other eight Civic Center area properties,

. Economic viability (simply put, does Malibu need all that development—by the Malibu Bay Company, plus that proposed by the other eight property owners?),

. Environmental impact (impact of Malibu Bay Company proposed development and also cumulative impact of that proposed development and development proposed by the other eight Civic Center area property owners),

. Infrastructure impact (Can Malibu’s water supply, wastewater disposal capability, road system, etc. support all of this proposed development?)

The Malibu Township Council asks the City Council to develop a schedule of comprehensive public workshops and hearings on the entire package of proposed development agreements to the end that the council gets maximum informed public input for its deliberations. Maximum informed public input may be obtained only if reports, plans, exhibits, etc. on these matters are made available to the public not days, but weeks (at least a month) in advance of scheduled workshops and council hearings. In this regard, we ask that when agreements are reached as to proposed development of the other eight Civic Center area properties, these agreements should be made available for public review at least a month before they are placed on a council meeting agenda.

The Malibu Township Council hopes that each of you Councilpersons recognizes the importance of planning and allowing time for ample hearings and workshops on any proposed developments. Although at this time, because the Council Ad Hoc is evidently in negotiations respecting the other eight Civic Center area properties, you may only be able to prepare a tentative schedule of public workshops and hearings, it is important that you proceed at this time to do that. Planning ahead now, we suggest, will give you the informed public participation and consent you will need to make good decisions.

Malibu Township Council

Frank Basso, co-president

Leon Cooper, co-president

I am writing to you today to tell you how I feel about the closing of Noah’s Bagels. Last week, on my way to the doctor’s office, I was so hungry that I asked if we could go to Noah’s Bagels. When I got to the store, there was a sign on the door that said “We Are Closed.” When I saw the sign, I was so disappointed! I couldn’t understand why Noah’s would be closing. My mom read in the newspaper and told me why Noah’s had to close so many of their stores.

I thought Noah’s was making a lot of money because every day I saw people going in and out of the store. I used to go there all the time, especially on Tuesdays. Going to Noah’s on Tuesdays was special because one guy named Dominic always greeted us with a smile.

I think the community of Malibu will really miss Noah’s Bagels because it was the only place in Malibu that you could get a fresh bagel or Challah. If anyone in Malibu feels the same as me, you can call this number: 1-800-931-NOAH (6624). Maybe if enough people get together and call that number, we can get the store reopened.

Megan Helfend, 8

Third grade, Webster Elementary School

In response to letter written May 18 by Susan Tellem

The Malibu Kiwanis Club is pleased to announce that in the year 2000 (as in all previous Chili Cook-Offs) fireworks of any kind will not be available.

We as Kiwanians look forward to providing you a safe and enjoyable time with your family, friends and neighbors September 1, 2 and 3, our 19th Annual Chili Cook-Off.

As always, our event is under the combined scrutiny of the Los Angeles County Sheriffs, Fire Department, Health Department and Animal Control.

Please feel free to call the Malibu Kiwanis Club at 310.589.9266 if you have any questions regarding our event or anything else you might want to know.

Oh, and by the way, tickets are now available for a chance to win the 2000 Porsche Boxster, Honda Fourtrax Recon or 2 Ocean Kayaks.

Members of the Malibu Kiwanis Club

Expressing the desire to return to a “matriarchal society” on the reservation where he lives, Russell Means, a political activist, spoke at a benefit to raise funds for a new school on the Pineridge, Porcupine Reservation in South Dakota, Sunday.

The benefit was hosted by Albert and Patricia Stern at their Malibu estate overlooking Pacific Coast Highway and Zuma Beach.

Means, who is also an actor, artist, singer and author of his autobiography, “Where White Men Fear To Tread,” was one of the orchestrators and leaders of the 71-day armed siege in 1973 of Wounded Knee, S.D., which protested abuses against Indians.

He is also one of the founders of the T.R.E.A.T.Y Total Immersion School, an institution that will base its teachings on the cultural heritage of the Sioux Indians.

While educating children, from kindergarten through third grade, in general courses, a main part of the school’s curriculum would be in the traditional manner– “in our own language,” said Means.

“[It is] the ultimate expression of sovereignty,” he said.

The idea of the school is based on the success of the Total Immersion School of the Maori Peoples in New Zealand, said Means. The Maori’s schools focus education in “total immersion into the root cultures language, art, dance, music, science and oral tradition grounded in the children in their identity and rich heritage.”

Means, who has 15 children, said that this is the first fund-raising effort for the school in California. He started raising funds through his Internet site, www.russellmeans.com, at $10 a donation. As announced at the benefit, the T.R.E.A.T.Y. Total Immersion Educational Endowment Fund has $992, 000 in assets, including land of 160 acres that Means and his brother donated to the cause. An additional 85-acre ranch was purchased by the fund, which will serve as headquarters for the school and house a community center for Lakota youth. Training begins this summer for five teachers who will be in charge of the education of 20 students in the fall.

The 160 acres that the Means’ donated will be used to created a self-sufficient community, or Village, that “will reinstate the matriarchal way of life,” said Means.

“It is the only way Indian people can retain their identity,” he said.

“Our language uses the feminine and the masculine [gender],” Means said. “When we talk about the ‘Great Mystery’ we are referring to the feminine.”

Stern, who has known Means for two years, met him through the efforts of Stern’s son, Shawn.

In high school, Shawn, interested in American Indian culture, picked up Means’ book by chance, he said.

At the same time, Stern, a violinist, was recording the album “Spirit of the Nation” and he needed someone to sing or perform a “spoken word message” for the album, said Shawn.

Shawn suggested Means for the job and they invited him over.

“They struck up an instant friendship,” said Shawn.

“Right from the first meeting he talked about the T.R.E.A.T.Y program,” he said. “He has a real pride in his culture.”

There are future plans to involve Means in a film that Shawn has written, which he will act in also.

As part of the entertainment for the benefit, Stern performed pieces from his recently released album “The Road To Love,” a compilation of pop songs ranging from “Send in the Clowns” to the famous Beatles tune, “The Long and Winding Road,” on his 300-year-old Stradivarius.

Kristin Burns, a 16-year-old vocalist and daughter of Dr. Steve and Jo Burns, who specialize in equine reproduction, sang several love ballads, ending her performance with a slightly bluesy tune that fully demonstrated the maturity of her voice.

In contrast to the contemporary performances of Stern and Burns, was the performance of a mini-powwow.

Andy Torres along with The Bluestone, an American Indian singing and drumming group, filled the cavernous living room of the Sterns’ home with pulsing energy during the powwow. Three dancers performed in full-Indian regalia.

Means took part in the powwow by speaking prose or “word messages.”

Means, when posed with the question of why is it difficult, when a person moves outside of a reservation, to put their energy into creating a movement or schools, or anything, that would benefit their lives and their heritage, said, “[They’ve] bought into the patriarchal consumerism society, [therefore, diverting energy from any cause,]” he answered.