When I first saw the City Council agenda, the alarm bells should have gone off. It was an item on this week’s council agenda, something innocuous, sounding like “communications policy proposal.” For a moment, I forgot the rules known to all reporters who cover governments.

Rule #1: If it sounds innocuous, it usually isn’t.

Rule #2: If you can’t figure out from the agenda what the item is all about, that usually isn’t an accident.

Rule # 3: If it’s on late in the council meeting — by the time everyone’s gone home — it’s probably important, and someone wants to bury it so it won’t get noticed.

Rule #4: Almost always, every agenda item has a staff report, so if the staff report is missing, that definitely is not an oversight.

Rule #5: If, when the reporter gets to the meeting, the only ones who seem to have copies of the staff report are the council members, and they say they forgot to make enough copies for the audience or the press, so nobody quite knows what they’re talking about, you can bet that someone is trying to pull a fast one.

And pull a fast one they did. In fact, Tom Hasse was the author of this little cutie that slipped the equivalent of a Mickey to his four other council members. He got them to unanimously agree to a new council communications policy, which is a nice way to say a set of gag rules calculated to hide what they’re doing from the press and the Malibu public, lest we find out and be upset.

This is how Hasse thinks the city ought to handle News Media inquiries:

“All news media inquiries on city policies, campaigns, political issues and decision making that is within the policy making jurisdiction of the City Council shall be referred to the mayor and city councilmembers.” Since that covers just about everything, the message to the staff is clear — don’t ever talk to the press or you’re in trouble.

“News media inquiries concerning the City Commissions shall be referred to the chairperson of the respective city commissions.” That means no planning commissioner is to talk to the press; they are to refer it all to their chair, Jo Ruggles.

“No city department directors, or the Sheriff’s Department, or city contractor or city consultant shall respond to the news media inquiries without the express authorization of the city manager.” That means the planning director shouldn’t talk to the press, the building and safety officers shouldn’t talk to the press; in fact, none of them should talk to the press.

And so it goes on. However, to be fair, they add:

“Nothing herein shall prevent bonafide newsgathering organizations from attending open and public city government meetings.” Nice, since it would be against the law to try and keep us out.

Well, I got news for you, Tom Hasse. It won’t work. It never works because there are decent, honest people working for this city, and they’re not about to let themselves be pushed around. The information always gets out.

P.S. In case you think this is just for the press, they have rules about who can talk to Malibu-based homeowners associations/property owners associations/community associations; local political organizations; nonprofit organizations; trade, business, and professional associations; service clubs, social and philanthropic organizations; art, theatrical and cultural associations, sports, leisure and recreational group and associations, advocacy organizations; businesses and local school events and associations

P.P.S. This will come back for a second reading. Let’s get sensible and stop this obsessive need to try and control everything.

Art critics are unlikely to swoon at the Weisman Museum’s latest exhibition. People will. On May 22, more than 500 lovers, students and dealers of contemporary traditional art embraced the opening of “On Location in Malibu: Paintings by the California Art Club.”

Friday’s opening at Pepperdine marked the largest since Dr. Michael Zakian took helm of the museum in 1995.

Inspiration for the show came on the heels of last year’s “Historic Landscapes of Malibu,” which Zakian curated. The landmark exhibit captured the splendor and serenity of our town in 40 works dating from 1897 to 1959.

Most notable were a group of 16 paintings by George Gardner Symons and by William Wendt that were commissioned by Frederick H. Rindge, last owner of the Rancho Malibu (In 1892, Rindge purchased the 13,300-acre Spanish Land Grant from Henry Keller for $10 per acre. Matthew “Don Mateo” Keller paid a dime per acre for it in 1857). Cloistered in private collections, many of the paintings had not been seen for 100 years.

Both Symons (1862-1930) and Wendt (1865-1946) emerged as leaders of the Laguna community of en plein air (in open air) painters. Wendt became a founding father of the California Art Club and served as its second president.

It was no accident that when Zakian sought to exult the majesty of modern Malibu, he invited the support of the CAC, the oldest continuing professional art organization in the state. Artists began work last summer, exploring breathtaking shoreline, pastoral streams and mesas, rugged canyons and mountain vistas. They sketched in Serra, beside the Malibu Pier and along Malibu Creek. They caught the waves, the wildflowers, the eucalyptus. And so much more.

Following review of nearly 400 examples submitted by 93 artists, a committee headed by Zakian selected 66 for the show. Malibu artists S. Burkett Kaiser and Joseph M. Yuhasz are among 47 club members represented in three Weisman galleries.

Founded in 1909, CAC’s formative years coincided with the Golden Age of California Impressionism. The school garnered favor with Los Angeles and San Francisco presses and with real estate developers who used scenic renditions to lure business and settlers to the state.

During the late ’20s, the club flourished at Hollyhock House, the Frank Lloyd Wright-designed estate of Aline Barnsdall. Amid lush gardens and olive groves overlooking Hollywood, CAC sponsored non-stop exhibits and lectures on art, architecture, film, literature, music and theater. It was an era of outdoor performances, salon dinners and society balls (Susan Landauer provides an opulent account in American Art Review; March, 1996).

After the onset of World War II, five decades passed before Peter Adams, a Pasadena artist and fourth-generation Californian, was to rescue the club from near obscurity.

Since 1993, when Adams assumed presidency, CAC has enjoyed exhibitions at the Natural History Museum, Los Angeles; Academy of Art College, San Francisco; Carnegie Art Museum, Oxnard; Springville Museum of Art, Utah; Bowers Museum of Cultural Art, Santa Ana and Muckenthaler Cultural Center, Fullerton. The club is in negotiation with Gene Autry Museum of Western Heritage to host its 90th anniversary exhibit next year.

For tourists descending upon Malibu beaches or trekking toward the Santa Monica Mountain recreation areas, “On Location” provides a cultural complement to the expected pastimes of summer. For locals, the show may reflect our very souls.

“On Location in Malibu: Paintings by the California Art Club,” 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. through Aug. 7, closed Mondays; Frederick R. Weisman Museum of Art, Pepperdine University, 24255 Pacific Coast Hwy.; 310.456.4851.

There is a battle in progress regarding the removal of the Ringe Dam on the Malibu River. We should stop for a moment and consider the basics of this debate.

The first and foremost issue should be public safety, and the safety of those living below the dam. As the dam is currently filled with sediment, it acts in no way to control the river and its occasional flooding. The river has flooded several times since the dam was completed, as the long term residents of the Serra Retreat area have attested. If the dam were partially or completely emptied, and allowed to maintain a lake, would this add to the danger for the people living below it (by providing a flow contributor to the heavier materials during a failure)?

Did the Northridge earthquake compromise the structural integrity of the dam? The dam has not been thoroughly inspected, to my knowledge, since the decommissioning of it several decades ago. As it stands now the Ringe Dam is a liability to the state parks department. Should the builders of the dam (the Ringe family) carry the responsibility for maintaining the dam, or the financial responsibility of repairing any damages caused by the dam’s eventual failure?

A feasibility study is in development that would review all aspects of the dam. This includes maintaining the dam, as well as removing it. This would provide scientific information to all people interested and allow an intelligent debate to continue, or possibly even eliminate the debate all together. Comprehensive information on the dam would enable us to resolve this issue and focus our efforts on improving other areas of Malibu including the river.

Although there are many factors contributing to the decline of the steel-head population, there is the potential to rebuild the wild trout run in this watershed. Removing the dam will provide these fish greater access to their native waters; this will only aid in their recovery. Eliminating or reducing the other threats, including but not limited to; pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, farm and ranch waste such as horse manure, general trash and street run-off, unnatural excess water flow (Tapia), and industrial wastes will not only help the steel-head, but will aid in protecting the health of the children, surfers and general public who use the beach and lagoon area where the river empties.

If the Ringe family would like a namesake, wouldn’t it be much nicer to have a pristine canyon as a remembrance rather than a destroyed section of the canyon and river?

I close with but two questions: Would you rather live next to a stream that may over flow once in a while, or below a 100-foot wall of mud, dirt, rock and water that will eventually collapse? Does Mr. Ringe live below the dam? No.

Wes Merrill

In last week’s edition of both papers appeared a letter critical of the City Council members for failing to attend the music festival at Malibu High School. Arnold gave the letter a title reaffirming his personal animus toward the mayor and Anne gave it a somewhat more neutral title.

Whatever criticisms anyone may have of those of our fellow citizens who have given up time, money and privacy to serve as our elected representatives in this town a complaint that our council members do not participate in town affairs is totally unfair. As an example, four of the five council members are also members of the Optimist Club of Malibu. All four contribute their time and money to that club. All four have contributed the time and money that make it possible for the club to donate the $16,000 in college scholarships the club will pass out the week I hope this letter is published. They do not donate the money to the club from the $300 before tax that they receive for their official, city duties.

The council members do not always agree with each other. They certainly do not always agree with me. They certainly do not always agree with those whose sole joy in life seems to be to complain about them. However, all persons who have served on the council, from Larry Wan to the two Jeffs to the present council, are deserving of our praise for serving Malibu and undeserving of our condemnation because they failed to appear at a particular event. All council members put in countless hours of unpaid time attending a variety of community events plus their official time. I am sure the writer enjoyed the event. I hope she will attend the pancake breakfast in July where the aforementioned council members will, I am sure, cook for her and for the deserving high school seniors of the class of 2000.

Bill Sampson

What part of “Thou Shalt Not …” don’t our kids understand?

I know that there are youthful Malibuites who do not love their fellow man, and I am distraught by youth like that! Likewise, the Lilly’s Cafe 8 a.m. coffee assembly is distraught. These citizens of Malibu are in their 60s, 70s and 80s with an occasional youthful visitor to the group, me. Shaking hands with a member of this group is like touching the past. These Malibuites are still industrious men and women and a treasure of knowledge. Growing up was a challenging experience for them. It was a quest.

The theme of their contemporary coffee chitchat has to do with the shootings at our educational institutions, the lack of respect for authority and the family unit. This is their allegory not mine. It is something that they wanted me to share. They said “Tom, you can write. So tell the newspaper what we think.”

Let’s see, they think, as I recall, that it started when Madelyn Murray O’Hair complained that she didn’t want any prayer in our schools, and folks said, OK.

Then someone said you had better not read the Bible in school — the same Bible that says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal and love your neighbor as yourself. And again folks stated O.K.

They remember Dr. Benjamin Spock, who said we shouldn’t spank our children when they misbehave, because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem? And folks said, OK, we won’t spank them. They relate that Dr. Spock had us spend so much time putting our kids on the pot, we can’t get them off it.

Then someone said that teachers and principals better not discipline our children when they misbehave. Our administrators said whatever, no one in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we don’t want any bad publicity, or want to be sued.

Someone said, let’s let our daughters have abortions if they want, and we won’t even have to tell their parents. And folks stated that’s a grand idea. Then someone else said, let’s give our sons all the condoms they want, so they can have all the “fun” they desire, and we won’t have to tell their parents. And folks said that’s another great idea. So now we’re asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don’t know right from wrong, and why it doesn’t bother them to kill.

Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, Malibuites can figure it out.

Tom Fakehany