Malibu Trails Association is a dedicated trails advocate. It was founded in 1991. Its main membership consists of many local Malibu residents whose ultimate goal is the preservation of neighborhood trails, pathways and side paths, historical and connector trails within the Malibu boundaries, and linking these trails up to the county, state and National Park trails that surround Malibu.

If these short, local trails are cut off from the main arteries, such as the Coastal Slope Trail and the Backbone Trail, the community will cease to have any easy access to their local recreation areas — the very reason most of us moved here in the first place.

In addition, these little neighborhood trails give safe alternatives to pedestrians and equestrians, who are otherwise forced out into the busy streets.

Last, but by no means least, there is a great deal of concern over the safety of all school-age children who must literally dodge cars and buses, just to get to other parts of their neighborhoods. With these revived neighborhood connectors, children could use them to actually walk or ride their bikes safely to and from school, market and friends.

What a concept!

Ask the old timers – It used to be that way!

After so many years of effort by the Malibu Trails Association and others, I was thrilled by the Malibu City Council’s creation of the Trails Master Plan Advisory Committee. My thoughts and emotions are reflected in this poem.

I used to ride my horse each day

until I joined the MTA

Now in the office, mostly I stay,

typing letters and phoning

My life away!

But, not all in vain

I’ll give you this clue

For the Land-Use-Sub-Committee

Has come to the rescue!

The city of Malibu has seen the light

Listening and responding

Against the plight

Of too few trails within – in its bounds

With fewer safe routes for residents

To get around.

So, hats of to all!

We are launched, you see,

On this brand new mission —

Connecting our trails

From land to sea!

So, I’ll ride my horse again, someday

Wave to passing neighbors

Along our new trail-way.

Count my blessings,

Enjoy the sights.

Thank the Lord

For this little Paradise!

Patricia Keenan

president, Malibu Trails Association

I wanted to publicly express my disappointment with the Traffic Court system located at 5030 N. Pkwy. in Calabasas. I am sure many residents of Malibu have likewise experienced the futility of going to court to plead their innocence or mitigating circumstances in front of either Commissioners Mcintosh or Goetz.

Having a day off recently, I went to the Calabasas Court to see if anyone presents enough evidence clearing them of their traffic infractions, and maybe pick up a few pointers. I observed approximately 15 people who believed in their innocence enough to forego the tempting “bribe” known as traffic school and argue their cases.

Predictably, however, everyone lost.

Realistically, how could anyone hope to win? After all, the commissioner obviously knows the officers, evidenced by their friendly greetings before the officers are sworn in to testify. And then the commissioner proceeds as prosecutor, judge and jury. So much for checks and balances. Nevertheless, below are summaries of some of the cases I thought merited dismissal:

In one case, a man pulled out of a Burger King parking lot and made a left turn. As it turns out, 100 feet up the road from Burger King was a “no left turn” sign. The man had no reasonable means to see that sign because all he could see was the backside of it, 100 feet away! Commissioner Mcintosh, however, still ruled against him stating that the state met its burden under the Vehicle Code. Guilty.

In another case, the 101 Freeway was shut down at night because a tanker truck had flipped over, so the police were directing everyone off the freeway and on to an alternate route circumventing the accident. The defendant was in the middle of a line of 16 cars cited by an officer for driving on the shoulder of the freeway. The defendant testified he thought the police up ahead had directed a second lane of traffic on the shoulder to help facilitate traffic off the freeway and he was merely following the other cars. That seems reasonable. Personally, I thought it would be alright to issue a ticket to the first few cars illegally driving on the shoulder, but not some poor guy in middle of the pack. But Commissioner Mcintosh simply read the pertinent Vehicle Code Section that stated it is illegal to drive on the shoulder of the freeway. Guilty.

I particularly enjoyed the individual who claimed the officer’s radar gun tracked another vehicle. The commissioner responded, “Radar is never wrong.” Guilty. Did the commissioner go to law school to divine that brilliant legal analysis?

Is it too unrealistic to expect a judge to listen to the particular facts of a case, take into consideration extenuating circumstances, reasonable explanations and so on, and then make a reasonable ruling without lazily flipping to the appropriate code section and making a ruling completely devoid of everything the defendant just testified to? Unfortunately the commissioners at the Calabasas Court seem to be nothing more than automatons who unfairly and unjustly shirk their judicial responsibilities, failing to provide a meaningful forum for defendants to be heard and, in fact, merely recite abstract code sections while turning a deaf ear to every defense presented.

No one has to take my word for it — take an afternoon off and check it out for yourselves.

Dale Reicheneder

“Every painting is a little battle,” says Malibu artist Kathleen Keifer about the artistic process. “You know in your mind what you want, and you have to get there. It’s a little struggle, until you get it, and then it’s denouement from there.”

Her works are on exhibit at McLean Gallery. The majority of her paintings are in the pointillist style, a method of painting in which the background is covered with tiny points of pure color that blend together when seen from a distance.

“The thing that gets me excited is color,” she says, while other painters look first at line or subject matter. She estimates her pointillist canvasses use 70 colors per square inch. “They mix optically. It’s like capturing the moment.”

The McLean exhibit is exclusively of Malibu scenes. “With three kids,” she says, “I don’t get out of Malibu too often.” She is mother to three girls: Lucy, 7 and in second/third grade at Webster Elementary; Emily, 6 and in kindergarten at Webster; and Claire, 3 and a preschooler at the Garden of Childhood.

“So three mornings a week, I’m free to paint,” she says, although before a show she will paint between 5 and 7 a.m. After Keifer leaves Claire off at preschool, she spends four hours painting plein-air on Point Dume. “It’s so enchanted. One time a fox came up to me.”

She discovers spots to paint while on her morning runs. “My eyes are wide open. From my point of view, there’s too many paintings and not enough time to do them.”

These days, while Lucy and Emily do homework on the family’s dining room table, Keifer sets up her easel in the dining room. “So of course Claire wants to start painting then.”

She takes Lucy and Emily plein-air painting. “I definitely teach them. I won’t let them paint on a white canvas. I’ll make them do the underpainting, and I’ll critique it.” Lucy critiques back. “She hates dots. Lucy loves the artwork of [Malibu artist] Fay Singer. She says, ‘See Mom, no dots.’ Lucy is a fan of Van Gogh and Fay Singer.”

She sometimes teaches painting at Webster — “A little art history and then a little project in the style of the artist.” For example, while teaching about Michelangelo, she copies God’s hand from the Sistine Chapel’s “Creation of Adam,” leaving the other hand for the students to paint — each student lying on his or her back with a drawing taped to the underside of each desk.

At the kindergarten level, she says, the students are free and each paints wonderfully. By second or third grade, she says, “They’re sophisticated enough to know what it ‘should’ look like, or they compare themselves to one another.”

The gallery showing includes a number of canvasses of Malibu Pier. “Series paintings are fun. You have the same subject matter and can create different moods. To me, the pier is haystacks.” Don’t expect to see exact representations. “Sometimes, it’s dull to paint things as they are,” she says. “I’m not a photographer. I take liberties, and I take great liberties with color. I’m reinterpreting nature to my own vision.”

The landscapes and the dots were not part of Keifer’s vocabulary until she moved to Malibu, in 1996. “When you’re an Easterner and you come here,” Keifer says, “this place sort of knocks you over. You never have those vistas in the East.”

She was born in Chicago and spent eight years in New England, and she has been painting since youth. She met and married her husband, Jim, when they were in art school at Notre Dame University. {CQ} While she worked as a book illustrator, he worked in the toy industry, for Parker Brothers, Milton Bradley and now Mattel, where he is “in charge of puzzles and games.” She says he is her best critic, “and he’s always right on.” Her work was recently accepted into the L.A. County Museum’s sales gallery.

While she seems to adore the process of making art, she admits, “Every time you sell a painting, it’s a thrill. Think of what’s out there to compete with.”

“Interpreting Beauty,” with paintings by Kathleen Keifer, is on exhibit through June 13, reception for the artist Saturday, 6 to 9 p.m., at McLean Gallery at the Malibu Country Mart. Tel. 310.456.2226.

Something happens to people when they get involved in local government. That natural suspicion most of us have about the excesses of power in the federal government, the state government and the county government seems to vanish totally .

I know conservative Republicans who are appalled at most exercises of governmental power but who wouldn’t hesitate to tell their next-door neighbor what color to paint their house, what greenery to plant and what kind of pets are OK. I know liberal Democrats, who are deeply suspicious of governmental authority, who would have the sheriff arrest everyone in their neighborhood whose children play loud music.

If Malibu once had a “live-and-let-live” philosophy, it seems to have deserted us more and more, as some people feel the purpose of local government is to provide a mechanism for complaining about their neighbors.

Since our entire code enforcement system is based on who screams and shouts the most, what we’re beginning to see is tit-for-tat government fostered by groups like the Planning Commission that keep proposing draconian laws.

For example, the Malibu Planning Commission just came to the City Council with a proposal that would have required a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) for those planing to have a party at their home with more than 50 people. The background on this is twofold.

First, the people in Ramirez Canyon are furious at the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, and with good reason. The conservancy has taken the Barbra Streisand property that was donated to them and turned it into a commercial event venue to raise money to support the facility, which means groups of people are trucked in every weekend. The state and the conservancy have thumbed their noses at the neighbors and essentially said there isn’t a damn thing you can do to us because we’re the state and you’re not.

Additionally, there are a few owners of large homes in other Malibu locations who have turned their mansions into permanent wedding and event venues, much to the consternation of their neighbors.

The Planning Commission tried to do something about these problems, but unfortunately it didn’t do it very well. In classic bureaucratic overreaction, they unanimously, I’m chagrined to say, decided to require a TUP for those more-than-50-people parties or some variation on that theme.

Can you imagine having to go down to City Hall to get a permit to throw a party in your home?

First of all, this is Malibu. If anyone on the Planning Commission had ever thrown a party, they would know that no one in Malibu ever RSVPs. In fact, it can drive you mad. It’s only after years of party throwing that you begin to get an inkling of how many people will show up. So, now, you have to guess how many people will show, and there are always a few who bring extra friends. Therefore, you have to put someone at the door to count heads and turn away guest number 51. I absolutely guarantee you, if you don’t, there is someone down your block who was never invited to any of your parties who would like nothing better than to call the sheriff to complain. Now what happens? Does the sheriff come in and count heads? Do you hide the extra guests in the closet? Do you allow them to search the house? Do they need a search warrant? Does the Planning Commission need their heads examined? Do you need an extra-strength Excedrin?

Fortunately for us, City Manager Harry Peacock has been around the block once or twice and wrote a memo to the council suggesting just maybe this wasn’t the way to do it. He gave them an example: “If I had a party at my home for the staff and spouses, it could easily exceed 50 people. Then, whom do I not invite so that I can avoid getting a TUP, pay a $225 fee (almost $5 a head) and risk having to cancel the party at the last minute because of some neighbor who doesn’t like me and appeals my application?”

If this were just an isolated incident, I would merely shrug. But this is the same Planning Commission that wants to control our interior lighting, that was upset because large windows let too much light outside and that doesn’t like to be able to see a house on a hillside from a public road.

In all fairness, it’s not everyone on the Planning Commission, but, from time to time, there seems to be three votes for sheer wackiness.

It’s particularly appropriate that we look very carefully now because the City Council is about to decide on the hillside ordinance. That ordinance is going to impact a lot of people negatively, and it was drafted, in the main, by our far-seeing Planning Commission.

P.S. I invite someone from the Planning Commission to write next week and try and explain this foolishness.

It was difficult to follow the distorted logic of Bob Purvey’s letter last week, but apparently he believes it’s acceptable for Gil Segel and Remy O’Neil to violate the law because Malibu’s soccer and Little League families are devious liars who just want to kill us all. Make sense to you?

Quote from Mr. Purvey’s letter: “It is a shame that freedom in America may be taken to the extent of lying to fool a lot of people. Remember, a thief can take your property, and a liar can kill you.” Why would anybody mention killing this past week over issues having to do with families?

It is not surprising that Mr. Purvey provides the real hypocritical quote of all time — repeated word for word from his letter? Mind you, lying is an issue at stake in the FPPC subpoena for the records of Mr. Segel and “friends” — Did Segel and Remy O’Neil lie in their political campaign ads — oh yes, pardon me, that was supposed to be educational ads?

Those who did tell lies will be scorned just as Mr. Purvey wishes including those thankful to liars such as Mr. Purvey. A more rational observer than Purvey might conclude that Segel’s sleazy, Nixonian political dirty tricks blatantly broke local and state campaign laws designed to protect our right to a fair and open electoral system.

Now — just like Nixon — Segel is desperately scurrying around trying to cover up the original violations. The future of Malibu is a serious topic that deserves serious and honest debate. That debate can only be subverted by Segel’s political dirty tricks and Purvey’s irrational rantings.

Let’s get back to the real issue: how we can meet the needs of Malibu’s residents and their children for recreational facilities, parks and other services. Malibu would be much better off if Segel, Purvey and their kind spent a little time and thought on that problem rather than spinning additional paranoid fantasies about families active in Malibu.

Linda Larabee