Taxpayer Groups Sue SMM Conservancy over Spending

• Powerful Agency Insists Activities in Question Were Vetted by Attorney General’s Office

BY BILL KOENEKER

It seemed that the threat of litigation hung over a meeting this week of the board of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy which met in Malibu to discuss the controversial Malibu parks public access enhancement plan.

The executive director of the agency, Joe Edmiston, announced at the beginning of the meeting pending litigation by a taxpayers group. While the rest of the meeting dealt with the public works plan and hours of public testimony, the board was apparently ready to discuss the pending lawsuit in closed session.

The next day, a press release was issued by several taxpayer groups including the Santa Barbara County Taxpayers’ Association, the Ramirez Canyon Preservation and several other organizations announcing they filed suit in Ventura County Superior Court accusing the SMMC of “illegally using Proposition 50 Clean Water Bond funds.” They are asking the court to recover what they contend are misused funds.

The lawsuit comes on the heels of the plaintiff’s attorney Allison Burns asking both the state Attorney General and the Department of Finance to investigate the allegations. Both agencies declined to do so with the Attorney General’s office saying there were measures recently put into place that the Conservancy must follow in spending the funds and other procedures.

The Department of Finance also indicated in a letter to Burns that budget control language was added to the Conservancy’s bond fund appropriations from encumbering bond funds for any grant not previously approved by the Attorney General. The control language also requires the Conservancy to issue grants only in accordance with the law, the specific provisions of the bond funds and advice from the Attorney General.

Conservancy officials continue to maintain they have followed all of those procedures and submitted all items as required to the Attorney General for review and approval.

Provisions of state law allow a citizens group to pursue litigation of the matter if the state agencies decline to do so.

The plaintiffs allege the SMMC transferred hundreds of thousands of dollars of Prop 50 funds to its sister agency, the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority.

The complaint states the SMMC spent Prop 50 grant money to develop the Malibu Public Works Plan and that SMMC spent bond funds to pay its lawyers to defend a lawsuit filed by local residents in 2000 to stop SMMC’s “illegal use of its property.”

Meanwhile, the SMMC board continued to hear public testimony much of in favor of the public works plan by various environmental groups, biking enthusiasts and equestrians who said they supported the trails connecting the various parks owned by SMMC or the MRCA in the City of Malibu.

Edmiston explained to the board how he envisioned the matter proceeding. He indicated that while the SMMC board would approve the plan it is not the decision-making body to certify the plan as legally valid. That authority rests with the California Coastal Commission.

The SMMC executive director, who noted submitting the plan to the coastal agency and its review is the equivalent in state law of undertaking an Environmental Impact Report, said the entire process would probably take six months.

“The Coastal Commission approves the plan, then we can propose to implement the plan and then we submit projects to the commission [to determine] if it is consistent with the plan,” Edmiston added.

However, that approach has raised the ire of Malibu city officials and others who contend the process would allow the SMMC to not have to deal with the city’s or county’s local planning laws and skirt local authority for the public works plan.

The plan calls for increased activities at Ramirez Canyon Park, the SMMC headquarters, and includes connecting Ramirez Canyon Park with Escondido Canyon Park and Corral Canyon Park.

Recent revisions to the plan call for maximizing camping opportunities at the Corral Canyon Park, because it is most isolated from adjacent neighborhoods, with about 20 campsites.

The revised plans indicate each campsite location will have a water line and tank placement to accommodate the county fire department requests for fire safety, and that all campsites will be “cold camps,” camp fires will be prohibited at all times. Camping will be prohibited during “red flag days”

The draft plan which was not available for this week’s meeting is expected to be ready for public scrutiny on the SMMC and MRCA websites on November 10. Edmiston said there would be more meetings for public comment on the draft document.