A Reporter’s Opinion

For weeks, the question has been, “Will he or won’t he?” Will the judge make the group, “Malibu Citizens for Less Traffic on Pacific Coast Highway” (MCLT) and its founder Gil Segel produce their bank records or not?

The answer came Friday in the courtroom of Judge Robert. H. O’Brien. The answer was, Yes, those bank records can be subpoenaed, and, according to the attorneys involved, that’s what the next step will be unless the matter is appealed and stayed.

Segel, the MCLT and their attorney, Brad Hertz, had gathered all their fire power in the papers they filed with the court. They charged that the cases filed by the California Fair Political Practices Commission and the city of Malibu were all “smoke and mirrors ” and nothing more than the result of a “vengeful losing candidate,” “an overzealous state agency” and “a biased city attorney” who were all “determined to teach Malibu’s slow-growth advocates a lesson. . . .” As if that weren’t bad enough, they charged that unholy trio of trying “to chill their constitutional rights and to make them think twice before speaking out about development and traffic in the city of Malibu.”

They also dramatically charged that the state “protests too much . . . [i]n trying to defend its heavy-handed investigation (complete with nighttime raids of witnesses’ homes and other stalker-like tactics reminiscent of Big Brother. . . .” By this, I assume they meant they were quite unhappy that the state was very determined to see that no one ducked its subpoenas

Segel and MCLT also told the judge they took great offense at what they charge was “the level of distortion by Jennings of his own voting record.”

Their papers also indicated a new addition to their enemies list — the name of present Malibu Planning Director Craig Ewing, who was referred to in their papers as “a close Jennings ally.” I’m sure this came as a great surprise to Jennings and Ewing. Has Ewing joined that august company of previous Planning Directors Joyce Parker, accused of being a pro-growth, pro-Jennings planning director, and her predecessor, Bob Benard, also charged with harboring pro-development sympathies by the Keller-Van Horn axis? Without deciding whether this was some sort of congenital anomaly in planning directors that suddenly turned them pro-development in middle age, the judge confined himself to the narrow issue of the subpoena and said, and I paraphrase, “Give ’em the bank records.”

He did that despite a series of arguments and a parade of declarations under oath from the MCLT and its compatriots.

The arguments ran this way:

Judge, you shouldn’t consider the state’s court documents.

Judge, the city’s brief and related documents shouldn’t be considered either.

Judge, we didn’t do it.

Judge, the ads weren’t false and misleading, but even if they were, it doesn’t matter legally.

Judge, the fact that the ads said “political advertising” doesn’t mean anything.

Judge, the fact that some of the donors may have mistakenly associated MCLT with the Tom Hasse campaign doesn’t mean anything.

Judge, just because MCLT and the Road Worriers used some of the same words in their ads or shared some of the same members is of no legal significance.

Judge, Gil Segel swore that the state made false and misleading assertions but is offended at the state’s claims that the MCLT ads contain false or misleading information. He also wanted MCLT to remain anonymous and that desire for anonymity had nothing to do with avoiding any reporting obligations under Malibu’s campaign regulations or the Political Reform Act.

Judge, Joanne Segel, Gil’s wife, said in her sworn declaration she didn’t know why her name was on a receipt for an advertisement attacking Jennings placed in the Surfside News, other than she was standing at the counter the same time as this fellow and the Surfside News employee just mistakenly assumed that she was the contact person for that fellow. Nor was she involved in another ad attacking Jennings placed by a neighbor of hers. She merely carried the ad and the check down to the Surfside News and she was just acting as a messenger.

And when one of the Surfside News employees said in a sworn statement that she appeared nervous when placing the ads and said something like, “You didn’t see me do this,” or, “That never happened,” what she really meant — and I quote directly from her sworn declaration — “I do not recall being nervous or making such comments, but to the extent I did seem nervous or make such comments, it would have been because I did not want anyone else to see me placing the ads, and I did not want to lose my anonymity with regard to the ads. To the extent the FPPC intends to imply that I was nervous or anonymous because I was doing something wrong, I resent the implication.”

And it goes on and on.

Come on folks. Just admit you made a mistake, and you’re sorry and you won’t do it again.

Last week, in response to the school shootings in Littleton, Colo., the U.S. and California flags flew at half-staff in the quad at Malibu High School. But the hand-lettered sign hanging from a nearby, second-floor walkway told far more poignantly how deeply the tragedy in Colorado touched the hearts of the school’s 1100 students. It read simply and eloquently: “We’ll never forget you, kids of Columbine High.”

Although MHS has an exemplary safety record, the tragedy also galvanized Michael Matthews, Malibu High’s principal since 1993, into immediate action. The day after the shooting, the 37-year-old principal spoke to the entire student body about the issues involved.

On Friday, he sent a letter to every school parent outlining the school’s response.

Later that day, Matthews spoke with The Malibu Times.

DW: What was your first reaction to the news?

MM: The realization that it could very easily have been us; we’re the same kind of school and have, basically, the same kind of population.

My first question to myself was, ‘How do I make students feel safe here?’ I knew they’d feel unsettled and would need to be consoled and reassured that this was an OK place to be. My second question to myself was, ‘How do we make it a safer place to be? What can we do as a school to be more protective of our students?’ So, on Wednesday when they came into school, I got on the intercom for 10 minutes, talked about the flag being at half-mast, about what scares me and what I feel good about here at Malibu High School.

DW: What did you say to them?

MM: I reminded them that we have worked a lot on the issues of race and respect. They are part of the curriculum and our advisory program. Then, I addressed two issues. First I explained that violence comes from hatred and urged the kids to remember those lessons, and also to remember that the little insults they give each other add up. I love teen-agers, but it’s the meanest age of all; high schools can be pretty scary places to be. Second, I discussed our continuing efforts to keep Malibu High School a safe campus, a record of which I am very proud. I reminded the students of our weapons policy and that we all, teachers and staff, are here to help, but that we also need the students’ help if they are worried about something. In my letter to the parents, I asked that they also reinforce this at home.

DW: Is there any way to spot the difference between a teen whose antagonism may be a normal part of growing up and one who is seriously troubled and possibly suicidal?

MM: That’s the big question parents and schools have right now. How do you identify potentially dangerous kids? Should we have a dress code that keeps all the kids looking the same? Should we shake them down before they come into school?

What we look for closely is any change in behavior of any kind– academic, social, you name it. This raises red flags, and we’ll deal with it. We do have some dress codes. For example, no hats are allowed, a respect issue that’s also a big help safety-wise. We often have people from off-campus come on wearing hats, and they wonder how we know in a second that they are not students here. We can identify them far away and know something is amiss. Our dress code also prohibits negative messages and showing too much skin. But we don’t have rules against earrings or hair color, and I don’t plan to change that.

DW: When you spot behavioral changes, how do you handle them?

MM: We have counselors and a psychologist on campus who can address those changes and work with the parents. We’re not too worried about violence per se, but whether they are going to get in serious trouble because they are so angry or so alienated — yes, even here in Malibu. We will, and have, intervened when we become concerned about the stability of a student. We also have a close relationship with the Juvenile Intervention Team of the sheriff’s office who also work with the families and the kids. [See sidebar.] You know, there are all kinds of conflicts in schools that can bring out the anger — conflict between teachers and students, conflicts between student and student. If you’re watching closely enough, you’ll probably see it. But, I guarantee, no matter how good you are, you won’t see it all.

DW: So what do you do?

MM: Our teachers are paying very close attention, all the time. We also have two security guards (unarmed) who are paying very close attention, too. But we also do much more than that. Every student has to have at least one adult here they feel comfortable talking to and they trust; I don’t care whether it’s me, a teacher or one of the custodians; it’s a policy basic to our philosophy here at Malibu High. We also have an advisory program where every faculty member and some classified employees meet with students every Friday to go over academic stuff but also to just talk. And the same advisor stays with the student throughout his or her high school career.

DW: Have any students ever brought weapons on campus?

MM: There have been no incidents involving loaded firearms, but large knives, by that I mean knives with blades 4 or 5 inches long, have been carried on campus.

DW: I understand you have a zero-tolerance response to drugs. What about weapons?

MM: If you’re caught with even a pocket knife, you’re suspended. If it’s a larger knife, just like with guns, you’ll be recommended for expulsion. Drugs? The policy is an immediate transfer out of the school, and if there is a recurrence in another school in the Santa Monica-Malibu district, then the student is recommended for expulsion. We’ve had 20 or 30 transferred out over the last six years, and about five of them were eventually recommended for expulsion.

DW: Unlike many principals, I understand you also stay closely involved with the students by getting out of the ivory tower and teaching [Advanced Placement history].

MM: Yes. It gives me an hour a day every day to be out there listening and getting the feel of what’s going on on campus. It helps tremendously to be physically available, and have a close personal relationship with the students. It earns me the trust of a lot more students who will come my way and talk to me if they sense problems out there.

Planning commissioners grappled Monday with environmental, esthetic and floor-area-ratio (FAR) issues for a self-storage facility on Mariposa Land Company property on Cross Creek Road.

Alternative proposals were reviewed for the 56,366-square-foot facility, located in a commercial zone opposite the GTE building and adjacent to Malibu Masonry.

Variances were sought for an increase in height over the base 18-foot height limit and an increase in the FAR over the base 15 percent.

Commission Chair Jo Ruggles took issue with several items she said were not fully described in the project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including technical information on hydrology, how toxic waste would be disposed of and mitigation for runoff into Malibu Creek.

Joseph Power, consultant on the EIR, explained that, by definition, the EIR is not meant to contain a lot of technical data. “CEQA directs that it’s to be 125 pages or less,” he said. “It discourages exhaustive data and is written in nontechnical language so decision makers can understand it.”

“We don’t want anything that produces runoff into the creek,” Ruggles said. “And how does the UCLA study impact this? We want to make sure we’re not doing something really stupid here.”

Steve Hunter, vice president of Land Design Consultants, described in detail how the plan mitigates runoff with a series of check dams and a large area on the north side of the building, at lower grade level, where water will percolate into the soil. The area, first planned as an orchard, was changed to a rustic meadow planted in native grasses, shrubs and trees, which would require no fertilizers or soil amendments and only enough irrigation to comply with the L.A. County Fire Code. “The meadow has more filtering capability than the orchard,” Hunter said.

Norm Haynie, who chairs the Wastewater Advisory Board, said the concept is the same as City Engineer Rick Morgan has recommended for other areas around the creek and lagoon. “They work extremely well in flood areas. As water comes up and sits, it forces percolation into the ground.” As to whether the orchard or meadow would work better, Haynie said, “If you’ll excuse the pun, it may be a wash.”

Commissioner Charleen Kabrin said she was concerned about the visual impacts of the building. “The size and scale is commensurate with a two-story house with a sloping roof. Horizontal and vertical offsets, the landscaping, are taken right from the General Plan specifications,” architect Bruce Jordan said. Then, Kabrin asked whether projected impacts from the possible removal of Rindge Dam had been addressed in the EIR.

Commissioner Ed Lipnick said, “I don’t see how anything available on Rindge Dam could be of any help.”

In the end, commissioners requested more information be provided on impacts and voted to continue the discussion until May 11. “God willing and the creek don’t rise,” said Commissioner Ken Kearsley.

Following the school shooting in Littleton, Colo., Sgt. Tim Younger, head of the Juvenile Intervention Unit (nicknamed the “J-Team”) of the Malibu/Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station spoke with The Malibu Times.

DW: Does the J-Team have a policy for intervening with at-risk teens?

TY: The policy is, if there is a violation of the law, we’re going to enforce the law. If there is a violation of school policy, we’ll help them in dealing with that. The schools have the ability to do a lot of things the law can’t do because they deal with and can probably identify at-risk teens earlier than we do.

DW: What about juvenile problems in Malibu specifically?

TY: There are not many problems within the town now. But the key to success is the continuing involvement of the law, the schools and the parents with our teens. A combination of all is important, especially the parents. I can’t stress that enough, and we teach a parenting class once a month to explain how they can be on top of problems.

DW: Is there any way to pick out kids who might be dangerous both to themselves and to others?

TY: Kids give off a lot of warning signs before they become at risk. Lots of changes in behavior will raise a red flag. When the school sees these changes, I know they intervene; when parents see them, they should take action by calling the school or any professional help they have the ability to seek. As Mike Matthews said to you, it takes all of us working together to keep our schools safe.