SMMUSD Board Restores Measure BB Funding Cuts to Malibu

Members Agree to Change Rules on Interdistrict Student Permits to Help Fill Classrooms

BY BILL KOENEKER

The Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District Board of Education voted unanimously last week to bring back an action item reallocating money for Malibu that is part of the BB Measure funding.
The board’s move followed on the heels of the BB Measure Advisory Committee recommending BB funding be restored to the middle schools, including $14 million to the Malibu campus, $16 million to Lincoln Middle School and $12 million to Adams Middle School.
The committee and board’s tentative actions are being taken after Malibu parents called foul when the money had been reallocated by the committee and the board voted to reduce the school district staff–recommended allocation for Malibu and voted to raise the amount allocated for Santa Monica.
Some board members last week stressed the recommendation and future action would still need to be considered tentative because projections of declining enrollment in future years coupled with the expansive nature of the capital projects envisioned by using BB funds could ultimately mean the school district would end up overbuilding.
Declining enrollment was much on the minds of the board members, who were reminded by Superintendent Dianne Tallarico that the enrollment report that was discussed at the board’s last meeting “clearly demonstrates that student enrollment in the district is expected to decline over the next five years.”
“We are a shrinking district,” said board member Jose Escarce. “Maybe we can slow down the decline in enrollment.”
Despite all of the emphasis on reducing class size in public advertising by unions and other education system elements, the board did not appear to see fewer students per classroom as something that might be beneficial to students.
The primary concern appeared to be maintaining current personnel levels and one of the main ways the board perceived maintaining the staus quo was by changing the policies related to interdistrict transfers in the hope of “capturing” more students and keeping enrollment numbers up.
The board took up where it left off at its last meeting, when it decided to take action on interdistrict transfers by voting last week to change the policies to facilitate more transfers, and thereby possibly impact the declining enrollment projections presented by the consultants.
Board member Kathy Wisnicki said she wanted to see fewer restrictions to help fill classes. “If we wait too long we will not be able to fill the classes,” she said.
Wisnicki was referring to a staff recommendation giving children of individuals employed within the City of Malibu first priority.
Consequently, the board spent a considerable amount of time discussing how students are picked and what criteria apply for the permits.
After being told the staff does not accept permits on a first come, first serve basis—a lottery is used after any other priorities are considered—that there are also waiting lists and other criteria apply, the board wanted to make some of its own rules.
Board members agreed to drop the students of parents employed in Malibu as a priority, but instead said that one criteria they wanted to see is students must have been in the school district for the last three years.
Board members were told it is hoped that the loosened regulations could add up to 200 more students.
Most of the discussion focused on Malibu, where there are openings and classes are running short of students, but there were no specifics on how many additional students might be allocated to Malibu schools.
“The intention is not to open new classrooms, but fill the spots within,” said Timothy Walker, deputy superintendent. “We could do away with split classrooms.”
Talarico said expanding enrollment by 200 students could help out in terms of planning for staffing.
However, one board member made it clear he did not want to see staffing levels to be exceeded if the policy is successful. “If the staff levels are exceeded, we would not allow the student [permits],” added Escarce.
When it came time to talk about staffing allocations and reductions, board members were less certain in what direction they wanted to go, and instead talked about taking second looks at various programs and about how classes can be scheduled for staffing purposes and other ideas.
But they will not come up with anything solid until the staff looks at several programs for possible reductions.

Lane of PCH to Be Closed for Four Weeks of Landslide Work

• Cliff Between Latigo and Corral Is Longstanding Problem that Could Require Major Remediation

BY HANS LAETZ

Caltrans geologists said a crack discovered in the cliff above Pacific Coast Highway at Latigo Beach is serious enough that large amounts of rock need to be removed, and sooner rather than later.
Cranes shifted concrete barriers into one of the two northwest-bound lanes on Monday, and said the lane closure will be in effect for at least four weeks.
On Jan. 27, a large number of boulders fell onto Highway 1 traffic, narrowly missing a car driven by Malibu City Councilmember Andy Stern. Crews working for the City of Malibu scooped up the slide debris quickly, and the city asked Caltrans to look at the cliff, which had a large fissure remaining.
A geologist visited the site in early February and recommended corrective action, said Caltrans spokesperson Marie Raptis. The experts did not feel, however, that an emergency closure was necessary.
The rockfall came a day after this winter’s biggest storm dropped 3.3 inches of rain in 24 hours in the area, and several months after the cliffside burned in the Corral Fire.
The cliff in question is between Corral Canyon and Latigo Canyon roads, and has been the scene of similar rockfalls and emergency removal efforts over past decades.
Raptis said the visible fissures in the cliff are serious enough to warrant emergency action, although the amount of material that needs to come down is unknown. “We have to get up into the ledges and alcoves to see what is happening,” she said.
Work will go on 24 hours a day for at least four weeks, however, as substantial amounts of cliff need to be dislodged, Raptis said.
Similar uncertainties at cliff fractures near Sunset Mesa and Las Flores Canyon have in past years led to lane closures lasting months, and traffic on a daily basis backed up in those areas east of the Malibu Civic Center.
The Latigo cliff, however, is west of the Civic Center and Malibu Canyon Road, possibly sparing evening rush hour drivers from delays where the road is narrowed to one lane. The closure’s effect may be more severe, however, on cars waiting for a gap in PCH traffic from the Corral Canyon Road intersection, where a traffic light is promised but not yet installed by the city and Caltrans.

Los Angeles County Water Officials Say La Paz Plan Is Lacking in Fire Protection

• City of Malibu Planning Commission Disregards Testimony that Project Could ‘Go Up in Flames’

BY BILL KOENEKER

In a startling and potentially serious revelation, the Los Angeles County deputy counsel for Waterworks District 29 told the Malibu Planning Commission last week that the current plans for water service for the proposed La Paz commercial retail/office complex planned for the Civic Center area offer inadequate fire protection.
“We do not want to see this structure go up in flames,” said Michael Moore, the deputy county counsel, who said the water district insists the project needs off-site tank storage in the event of a rupture of the water main. Malibu’s 30-inch water main is the sole source of water supply for the Civic Center.
Another disturbing revelation was made when water district officials alleged the statements they had made about requiring off-site storage for the proposal were deleted from the project’s Environmental Impact Report and replaced with language that suggested the water district had given the OK to the current plans.
“The statement that waterworks agrees that no additional water storage is needed is not true. We are not asking the project be stopped. We are asking the planning commission to renotice the hearing to take additional testimony,” he added.
Greg Even, another waterworks official, said the water district had submitted their comments in 2003 and were attending last week’s planning commission meeting to set the record straight.
“This project is being built in a pressure zone without storage. There is no tank to provide fire protection. We want to correct the record. Our comments were deleted in the EIR. The 30-inch water main is the entire source of water for this area. If there is an interruption of the line, there will not be fire protection for this project. There have been 12 ruptures in the last 10 years. It is not unlikely the line will be ruptured. Many other areas have gravity storage, even if the power is out, there is still fire protection,” Even said.
The La Paz proposal had already come before the commission, which had previously recommended approving a smaller alternative 99,000-square-foot version instead of a larger project with a public component, or “benefit” of city hall space.
The matter was before the commission last week, because it was a consent item on their agenda for considering the findings of their recommendation to the city council, which will hear the request on March 24.
Commissioners were told by their attorney not to discuss the new information but rather to decide if they wanted to simply pass their recommendation on to the city council or if they wanted to reopen the hearing as requested by waterworks officials to take additional testimony.
Commissioner Les Moss said he was willing to send the matter to the council. “It will get a full hearing at the city council,” he said.
The other planning panelists agreed, except for Chair Regan Schaar, who had previously voted against the applications. When the commission voted 3-1, with Commissioner Carol Randall absent, to send the matter forward to the city council Schaar said, “You guys are nuts.”
Apparently the applicant and the water agency have been battling for months over the district’s position. Consultant Don Schmitz charged that the district is trying to “extort money from the developer” by making what he asserts is an “unsubstantiated” determination that there is not adequate water infrastructure to provide public fire protection.
“Notwithstanding the vitriolic nature of Schmitz’s accusations, the City of Malibu is well aware, during the past ten years, there have been 12 major leaks. Based on this historical record of leaks, the district engineer has sufficient factual basis to conclude that the fire protection water supply proposed by the developer is not 100 percent reliable. The district engineer has concluded a gravity storage tank is required for satisfactory level of water system reliability in the event of a fire,” wrote Adam Ariki, the assistant deputy director of the waterworks division of the county’s public works department, in a recent letter to the city.
Schmitz, in his own correspondence to the municipality, called the water district’s requirement of an offsite tank estimated to cost $4.5 million tantamount to an “out and out plan of extortion” condemned by the courts.
However, Schmitz indicated that the La Paz owner would voluntarily pay $750,000 to the city to hold in trust for the water district for work on a system for the Civic Center.
Schmitz counters that the scenario envisioned by the water district that a fire may occur at the same time as an earthquake, landslide or other similar natural disaster, which in turn might cause the pipeline to fail so that there would be little water available of adequate pressure to fight a fire, is an “improbable occurrence.”
The water district has indicated what is needed is a one-million-gallon water tank, a pumping station, over a mile stretch of 12-inch water main, and other improvements.
Schmitz acknowledges that the water district has an existing infrastructure that is “overall substandard,” but balked at the idea that La Paz should pay for the district’s “wish list” since the impacts of La Paz are much less than a $4.5 million price tag.
Water district officials insist they are putting everyone on notice. “In the event that La Paz is constructed prior to the construction of the required off-site water storage tank and distribution facilities, the developer and the city must acknowledge the risks of allowing the project to proceed without sufficient gravity water storage to meet the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County fire flow and duration requirement,” Ariki cautioned.

Lee Baca Slams Idea of SMC Campus in Former Sheriff’s Station Building

• Says Malibu Law Enforcement Costs and Response Times Are Adversely Affected by Facility’s Closure •

BY HANS LAETZ

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca says he is perplexed that no one from the City of Malibu or Santa Monica College has asked him about county plans to sell off the abandoned sheriff’s station at Malibu Civic Center, a plan he calls a mistake.
The sheriff said restoring the mostly-unused building back into a functioning sheriff’s substation serving Malibu and adjacent unincorporated coastal areas is a high priority for him, and a proposal to build a community college branch on the site “would be a mistake that would endanger lives” and waste money.
The sheriff’s broadside on the fate of the structure built in 1963 may have been aimed at the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, which is under intense financial pressure as the state’s budget melts down, and has been trying to sell surplus property.
Westside Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky has been brokering talks to sell the site to the Santa Monica College District, and at a Jan. 8 board meeting, said he knows the sheriff would like to have a substation in Malibu.
“I’d like to have a field office overlooking the Malibu Lagoon, I’d like to be able to say every morning, ‘I’m going to work in Malibu,’” the supervisor said. “But they don’t need a substation in Malibu.”
Baca sought out a Malibu Surfside News reporter at a law enforcement appreciation lunch in Calabasas Tuesday, and said that negotiations between the City of Malibu and Santa Monica College over the building, which is controlled by the county Board of Supervisors, “would remove from the Malibu community a crucial lifesaving law enforcement facility that is irreplaceable.
“Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever and will never come back,” the sheriff said, noting that its radio tower, helipad, fueling facilities and much of the building itself are still in use by county road crews.
The sheriff said not having a substation on the ocean side of the Santa Monica Mountains increases deputies’ response times, endangers Malibuites in times of fires or other disasters, and is a waste of city taxpayers’ money.
“Right now, Malibu is throwing away 10 percent of its law enforcement dollars, because our deputies have to drive back and forth over the mountains,” the sheriff said. The city hires Baca’s office to provide municipal police services, but the local sheriff’s station was closed in 1991 when the new Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station was built about 15 miles north of the Civic Center.
The old building was used as Malibu’s first City Hall, but has sat mostly unused for about five years, Baca said. County Department of Public Works workers are still using the fenced equipment yard, fuel pumps and radio relay tower.
Yaroslavsky’s chief deputy, Alisa Katz, said the 43-year-old building is unusable due to water damage, and that its helipad and radio towers are not part of the proposed sale to the college district.a
“We think the college branch is a great deal to benefit the people of Malibu,” Katz said. “The sheriff is doing a great job enforcing safety in Malibu from the consolidated office in Calabasas.”
Santa Monica College is obligated under terms of a 2004 bond issue to build a 25,000-square-foot satellite campus in Malibu, and three-way negotiations are underway to transfer the old sheriff’s station site to the district. An earlier plan to build the campus on the so-called “Yamaguchi Site,” an old flower farm on Stuart Ranch Road near the present City Hall, failed.
Baca acknowledged the financial difficulties facing the county, but said “the county really needs to do a real assessment of the practice of selling a $25 million facility for $5 million to the college district—particularly when it’s something that you cannot replace under any circumstance.”
No similar plot of flat land is owned by Los Angeles County anywhere in the western county, Baca said.
Yaroslavsky’s chief deputy said no value has been placed on the old building and its site, but the college district would pay market value for the land.
The longtime sheriff said the boarded-up station “played a key role in the recent fires, when we were back there filling up fire trucks and patrol cars from the diesel pumps.
“I have been listening to the residents of Malibu who have told me they want an emergency clinic—and the helipad behind this station is a key piece of the emergency health system for this area.”
“I’m not against a community college there,” Baca said, “but shouldn’t they build it over by the library?
“The college project is not predicated on building it inside the sheriff’s station,” Baca said, “but the sheriff’s goals are predicated on that building.
“The key to this decision should be one of saving human life, and public safety first,” he said. “Then let’s worry about incorporating a community college into a new, state of the art library at the Civic Center.”
An official at Santa Monica College was unavailable for immediate comment.

Mystery Passenger-Driver Is Focus of Malibu’s Latest DUI Auto Saga

• Name of Other Person in Mercedes during Barron Hilton’s Arrest Is Being Kept under Wraps •

BY ANNE SOBLE

Now that Ferrari Guy, Bo Stefan Eriksson, has been deported to his native Sweden, Malibu is ready for a new car story. While the latest saga may not be making headlines around the world, it has the celebrity media abuzz. Much of the buzz, however, appears to be in error.
How much error is still unclear, as local law enforcement agencies are staying mum about some specifics surrounding the escapades of a member of the Hilton clan for whom driving under-the-influence arrests appear to be family rites of passage.
As previously reported, Barron Hilton, 18, who lives with his parents in Beverly Hills, and is described by none other than the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department as the “younger brother of Paris Hilton,” was arrested in Malibu on Tuesday, Feb. 12, for driving under the influence.
Sheriff’s deputies had received a call that a vehicle was being driven erratically near Latigo Canyon Road and Pacific Coast Highway just before 8 a.m., according to a press statement that the Malibu Surfside News had to request by e-mail, a new procedure, according to veteran journalists.
A deputy’s report states that the driver of a second vehicle on Pacific Coast Highway reported witnessing that Hilton, driving a black Mercedes Benz, was allegedly weaving on the road and, at times, driving on the wrong side of the highway.
The witness followed the vehicle until the young scion stopped at Corral Canyon Road and PCH and got out of the car. The witness, according to the report, then told Hilton to sit on a bus bench and wait for sheriff’s deputies.
When deputies arrived, they said they conducted a drunk driving investigation and arrested Hilton for driving under the influence. He was also alleged to be in possession of a fake driver license.
Hilton was booked at Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station where he was held overnight, then released on bail. It was reported that Hilton had a .14 blood alcohol reading. In California, .08 is considered legal intoxication for drivers over 21. For drivers under 21, any blood alcohol level constitutes legal intoxication.
That’s the part of the incident that involves Hilton. That information, according to Sgt. Phil Brooks, the Lost Hills traffic liaison, is being turned over to the L.A. District Attorney’s office. A spokesperson for the DA’s office told The News Tuesday that nothing has been filed with them yet, and they cannot put the matter under review until the material is received.
There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of mystery so far. Where things get a little murkier is with the California Highway Patrol’s part of the case, which involves Hilton’s female passenger, whose name, according to Officer Leon Hines, the media liaison for West Valley Office of CHP, cannot be released to the media.
Hines says this isn’t a case of celebrity coddling, but the passenger, reported to be 19, cannot be named because no arrests have been made in an ongoing investigation. Hines refuted media reports attributed to him that the passenger was Skye Peters, the daughter of film producer Jon Peters, who is sometimes described as the god-daughter of local Barbra Streisand. Skye Peters and Hilton made headlines last December when the pair were found by police at the Bel Air Hotel after being reported missing.
It is being alleged that this unidentified female may have been driving the car, which is registered to a third party also unidentified, when it was involved in a collision prior to Hilton taking the wheel.
If the woman is well known, one can’t tell from the name being circulated, but Hines says the possibility of a fake driver license hasn’t been ruled out.
What Hines did disclose is that the victim in the alleged collision identified the female as the driver when the accident occurred at about 6:30 a.m., earlier that Tuesday morning.
According to Hines, the female driver was heading west in PCH in lane one at an unknown speed, while the victim was heading west in lane two. The woman drove into lane two and the right side mirror of the Mercedes hit the door of the victim’s Ford pickup.
Hines said the woman and Hilton switched seats at some point after this incident, but when is not clear from the report.
Further complicating the case is an injury report made by a complainant the day after the DUI arrest, which Brooks said is “puzzling” as there were five deputies at the scene when Hilton was arrested and nothing was said about an employee at the service station having being injured when they were there.
The complainant alleges that he was hit by the Mercedes when it pulled into the service station. This matter is under separate investigation.
This latest story may not feature a million-dollar-plus Ferrari or a spectacular crash, but it’s going to have to do until something better comes along.

Rambla Vista Slide Shows New Activity

• City Officials Say They Are Keeping Watchful Eye on Bulge •

BY BILL KOENEKER

A Malibu city official said they are keeping a cautious eye on what appears to be renewed slide activity above Rambla Vista Road.
“It is moving a little bit,” said Richard Calvin, who is the municipality’s public works superintendent. “It is an ongoing problem.”
Calvin said the slide has been covered to keep out the rains, but the winds have ripped up the plastic over the last several weeks and some water may have seeped into the slide plane.
The short-term plan calls for keeping water out of the slide area. “Over the last rain events there might have been some saturation. It is bulging,” Calvin acknowledged.
For the long-term, according to the public works spokesperson, a grading plan has been submitted. “I have not seen it yet, but the engineers have a plan,” he added.
The slide has been an ongoing problem for years while the city and the property owners worked out a solution for the moving slide, much of which is on private property.
Over a year ago, the city completed work on a $1.4 million emergency fix to keep the toe of the slide from moving onto Rambla Vista.
A debris wall was built and existing mud and debris were removed.
During construction in 2006, the slide mass began to move due to over saturated soil above the original work zone. City officials were told that it would be necessary to extend the debris wall by about 80 feet to protect public facilities.

Supporters of a Separate Malibu School District Study Gather Signatures

• Volunteers Expect to Collect Total Number Required by the End of the Month

BY ANNE SOBLE

Malibu voters are starting to receive campaign mailings from city council candidates on the April 8 ballot, but that’s not the only political game in town. Also drawing attention is consideration of secession from the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. A petition drive is currently underway to determine whether to study the feasibility of terminating a half-century-long connection with Santa Monica and form a separate local school district.
District secession emerges as a community issue intermittently, but a recent clash over allocation of Measure BB bond money and displeasure with facets of the parcel tax consolidation and increase in the form of Measure R, which would not have passed this month if it was up to Malibu voters, have breathed new life into the notion.
Study of secession requires the signatures of approximately 25 percent of the 8370 registered city voters and the 1989 voters on the rolls in unincorporated Malibu (all of whom are in the school district) to get the feasibility study started.
Volunteers are tentatively slated to collect signatures at the Ralph’s Market on Saturday, Feb. 23, 10-1; Monday, Feb. 25, 10-1; and Wednesday, Feb. 27, 3:30-5:30. Some of the times for voter sign-up at HOWS Market are: Thursday, Feb. 21, 9-noon; and Sunday, Feb. 24, 9-11 and 3-6.
Signatures have to be validated within 30 days of petition completion. If the signatures pass muster, the petition goes to the Committee on School District Organization, an 11-member county panel charged with reviewing district reorganizations.
The committee could take several months, as many as six, to hold public hearings and study the financial and educational impacts of district reorganization on all of the public schools in Malibu and Santa Monica.
If the committee finds separation to be feasible, the application proceeds to the State Board of Education. Again, there is no formal timetable as to when that panel would have to take action on the proposal.
The state board is expected to conduct its own feasibility study, as well as undertake an environmental impact report. Only if both of these studies result in favorable analyses, would the matter go to a Malibu vote.
A random sampling of Malibuites casting ballots on Super Tuesday by a team of Malibu Surfside News reporters indicated that residents appear divided on the merits of a district split.

Appellate Court Says Coastal Commission Has ESHA Power

• Determination Has Major Significance for Unincorporated Malibu and Santa Monica Mountains

BY BILL KOENEKER

A recent state appellate court ruling holds that the California Coastal Commission has the power to unilaterally designate new Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas prior to the certification of a Local Coastal Program.
The court found that neither an issuing agency, nor the CCC, can deviate from a certified LCP and designate additional ESHAs, but it held that if an LCP has not been certified, then “allowing the issuing agency to protect natural resources for the benefit of the public by designating new areas when they meet the definition of environmentally sensitive habitat area more closely comports with the declared and salutary purposes of the Coastal Act.”
The court ruling came about after Milos Douda and Trisha Douda had applied for, and the California Coastal Commission had denied, a permit for a 5804-square-foot home located in the Santa Monica Mountains near King Gillette Ranch.
The commission had denied the permit on several grounds, citing view impacts and that the coastal sage scrub and chaparral on the Douda property met the definition of ESHA under the Coastal Act.
The Doudas sued, with the trial court upholding the commission’s action, and the Doudas then appealed. They contended the commission did not have the authority to designate an ESHA, or to impose visual resource regulations on the property.
So the court was then asked if the coastal agency has the power to unilaterally designate ESHA and thereby prevent development.
The court noted that each local government must provide an LCP certified by the CCC and that Los Angeles County did not have a certified LCP.
The three-judge panel ruled that in this case there was no certified coastal program, so the CCC was left with the task and the power to determine whether the development was in conformance with the Coastal Act, including provisions of the act protecting sensitive habitat zone.
“Thus in reviewing an application for a coastal development permit prior to the certification of a local coastal program, an issuing agency should deny a permit based on a previously undesignated environmentally sensitive habitat are only when necessary to achieve the legislature’s basic goals, Only by exercising such restraint can an issuing agency avoid becoming a de facto manager for a local government’s land use planning and development,” the court wrote.
Additionally, the Doudas argued that the state legislature limited the commission’s power to designate ESHAs through a statute that gave the commission only until September 1977 to designate sensitive coastal resource areas.
The Doudas claimed that ESHAs fall within the definition of sensitive coastal resource area and are subject to the same restrictions on implementation. The court determined “otherwise.”
The reasons, according to the justices, are that another section of the law states that the commission has an ongoing duty to protect ESHAs without any limitation as to time. “In sum, the legislature provided the commission only a brief period in which to designate sensitive coastal resource areas. However that limitation does not prevent the commission from implementing its obligation to protect ESHAs,” the court ruled.
The Doudas had also argued that the legislature did not intend to give so much power to an appointed body that is not answerable to the electorate. The ruling responded, “But this view is not supported by the statutory scheme. Also, we do not share the Doudas’ concerns over the grant of power. The power is not broad (because it is restricted to rare and especially valuable resources) and is subject to review through the courts via writ of administrative mandate. Also, the power is given to the issuing agency, not to the commission in particular.”
The Doudas also contended that Coastal Act provisions establish that local governments essentially have exclusive say over the content of land use plans and local coastal programs. The court again said it disagreed, “The more reasonable interpretation is that the commission when it is the issuing agency is obligated to reject developments that contravene the polices of the Coastal Act. However, it has no power to force local government to select one use that conforms to the policies of the Coastal Act over other uses that also conform.”
On the Douda contention that the coastal agency lacked the authority to regulate scenic and visual resources four and half miles inland, the court again said it could not concur. The lower court had ruled that the Doudas waived their objections to the commission’s power to regulate scenic and visual sources by failing to argue the issue at the administrative hearing. But the appeal judges said whether the Coastal Act permitted the commission to regulate is a question of law for the courts and was beyond the commission’s jurisdiction to decide.
The Doudas argued there is a difference between coastal areas and coastal zones, and that coastal “area” refers to an area on or along the ocean. However, the Coastal Act does not define the phrase coastal area.
“Our directive… is to construe the Coastal Act broadly to achieve its purposes and objectives. Construing coastal areas as a smaller area than the coastal zone is problematic. If a coastal area is smaller than the defined coastal zone, the issuing agency and local governments will have no guidance to where the coastal area ends. The Doudas’ interpretation might require constant litigation. Ultimately, the courts would be required to draw coastal areas.”
In addition, the three-judge panel said that a section of the Coastal Act identifies the Santa Monica Mountains as a highly scenic area, and it requires that new development in that area be subordinate to the character of its setting. “This bolsters the interpretation that the commission’s power to regulate scenic and visual resources (especially as to the Santa Monica Mountains) extends inland as far as the boundary of the coastal zone,” the ruling stated.

Arraignment of Two Men Who Originally Started Corral Cave Fire Continued

• Pair May Seek Separate Trial from Trio Who Allegedly Caused Fire to Spiral Out of Control

BY HANS LAETZ

The two Culver City men charged with starting the November fire that claimed 53 Malibu houses made a brief court appearance last Thursday, and their attorneys eagerly sought out reporters afterward to explain the pair’s contention that the fire was “a terrible accident.”
Eric Matthew Ullman and Dean Allen Lavorante appeared before Judge Michael Kellogg—coincidentally, a Malibu resident—in the Van Nuys courthouse to enter pleas and be arraigned on three felony arson counts each.
Ullman, 18, and Lavorante, 19, are two of the five men accused of instigating the fire on Nov. 24, a Friday night when hellacious Santa Ana winds were sweeping through a cave at the top of Corral Canyon Road, a party spot frequently the scene of illegal fires and underage drinking.
Ullman’s attorney, Mark Werksman, said outside the courtroom that “my client is a good man, a decent man, who meant no harm that night. These are good boys, from intact, loving families, they are going to schools, and they are not rogues.”
Lavorante and Ullman appeared in suits, with their parents, and all looking grim. They heard their arraignment and plea-entering will be delayed until April 2 at the request of both prosecutors and the defense attorneys.
All five defendants in the case are charged with recklessly causing a fire with great bodily injury, recklessly causing a fire to an inhabited structure, and arson during a declared emergency. All three crimes are felonies. Each carries a sentence of between two-four years in state prison.
Neither attorney would allow their clients to speak. But Werksman said he agreed with the rough description of the night’s events made by Judge Kellogg several weeks ago, at a hearing for the other three men charged in the fire: Los Angeles residents Brian Allen Anderson, 22, William Thomas Coppock, 23, and Brian David Franks, 27.
At that hearing, Judge Kellogg said the state’s version of the fire’s origin was that the two Culver City teens and two female companions had started a small fire inside a hole-in-the-rock window cave that overlooks the lights of the San Fernando Valley. According to the investigation summarized by Judge Kellogg last month, the foursome’s small party in the cave was interrupted when the three L.A. men arrived, took over the scene, and chased off Lavorante and Ullman.
Some time after those two men had driven away, and after a large amount of alcohol had been consumed, the Los Angeles trio stoked the fire with several bundles of wood stolen from the Ralph’s Market in Malibu, and then kicked burning logs into the brush below.
Intent to actually cause a brushfire, however, is not necessary for convictions on the arson charges brought against the five defendants, the judge has said in past court appearances. The arson laws being used against the men only require a finding by the jury of a negligent act of causing a fire that spreads.
At the previous hearing, Kellogg said red flag alerts had been broadcast for days before the fire broke out, and the near-hurricane-force winds buffeting the Santa Monica Mountains that night made it obvious that a bonfire could have terrible consequences. The judge, who had helped friends move horses during a local fire two months earlier, also noted that large signs prohibiting fire were posted down the road from the caves.
Again at last week’s hearing, Judge Kellogg told the attorneys he understood why the case against Lavorante and Ullman is different from the case against the three other men. “There are two separate factual scenarios, I understand that very well,” the judge said.
Kellogg took the unusual step for a bail judge last month of researching all of the arson and sheriff’s deputies investigations, and summarizing them out loud in court. Kellogg said at the time he did that to make sure he understood exactly what the worst-case scenario of what happened at the cave was, before allowing the men out on bail.
Although all five could be tried together, the attorneys said it was likely that the recent Culver City High School graduates would seek a separate trial from the Los Angeles trio.
“For [our clients], at the very worst, this was an act of incaution that had horrible consequences, that everyone regrets,” said Ben Pesta II, who represents Lavorante.
The Nov. 24 fire swept down Corral, Latigo and Escondido canyons in the predawn hours of a hot and gale-force windy night just after Thanksgiving. Prosecutors are saying that 55 homes were destroyed, although the Los Angeles County Fire Department states that it counted 53 burned-out houses. No official damages total has been released, but the $100 million figure has been speculated by officials.

• The Publisher’s Notebook •

Malibu’s March Machinations

BY ANNE SOBLE

College basketball fans aren’t the only ones getting ready for March Madness. The city is starting to shift into council campaign gear, and the fun of Malibu-style politics is already under way. What is Malibu-style? First, it seems that at least two of the campaigns have “moles” who are sending opponents’ private communications to the media in the hope of causing mischief. Other not-so-malice-oriented types may be doing the same thing, but they will probably learn very quickly that this is not appreciated by the candidate. Second, the attack letters-to-the-editor are trickling in, so I’ll repeat my policy about refusing to enable the undercurrent of mean-spiritedness that has prevailed in city elections for too long. Civil discourse is not as difficult as might appear to be the case from past political behavior during council races. Third, supporters have to cease trying to package blatant political advertising in letter form, especially when that form appears to be mass produced. In 2006, seven people sent in the same exact letter. Coincidence, right? However, letter-writers are openly invited, nay enthusiastically encouraged, to explore local public policy issues in their missives without promoting a specific candidate’s views on those issues. Give the well-educated, politically-savvy Malibu voter enough credit for putting two and two together to get four. If there’s support for environmental constraints, and a candidate stands for those constraints, the electorate will get the message.
One form of election communication that I not only will disseminate, but I also will encourage, is public candidate forums. While some of them occasionally may lack the luster of the Lincoln-Douglas debates, forums offer up-front-and-personal exposure to the people who want to be elected to the city council. Although final schedules may still be subject to change, a tentative list of forums is now available, starting on Saturday, March 1, with an event hosted by the Paradise Cove Association and the POINT DUME CLUB from 1 to 3 p.m. in the PC community room. Next on the calendar is the forum of the POINT DUME COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, which is slated for Wednesday, March 12, at 6:45 p.m. This is also the group’s annual membership meeting. It will take place in the Point Dume Marine Science School auditorium. Third is the MALIBU TOWNSHIP COUNCIL’s forum on Saturday, March 15, at 10 a.m. in the Webster Elementary School cafetorium. The MALIBU PARK HOA program is set for Saturday, March 29, from 3 to 4 p.m. at Malibu United Methodist Church. Lastly, the MALIBU ROTARY CLUB is hosting a breakfast forum on Wednesday, April 2, at 7:30 a.m. in the Fireside Room at Pepperdine. Other groups that have traditionally hosted public forums have not yet announced their plans. Residents are encouraged to try to attend at least two events to assess candidate consistency and steadfastness. Moreover, they’re often the best show in town.

Largest Beef Recall in U.S. History Affects Malibu Schools

• Local Menus Will Reflect State Directives during Inhumane Animal Treatment Review

BY NICOLE KLIEST

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced on Sunday the recall of 143 million pounds of beef, the nation’s largest recall to date, from Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Company, a former meat supplier for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District and other districts throughout California in the National School Lunch Program.
“We have received additional guidance from the state not to use the meat, however we are still awaiting guidance with what we are to do with the beef we have isolated,” said Orlando Griego, director of food and nutrition services for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. “We will not be serving beef products until we receive clearance from the state.”
“In the meantime we have been replacing meals that have beef in them with turkey items or chicken products. We are also still encouraging students to use the salad bar,” Griego added.
Just days before this historic recall, two Westland employees were charged with felony and misdemeanor counts by the San Bernardino County District Attorney Michael Ramos.
Employee Daniel Ugarte Navarro was charged with five felony counts under California’s anti-cruelty statue and three misdemeanor counts alleging the use of a mechanical device to move so-called “downer” cows—animals that are too ill or otherwise unable to walk on their own—into the chute that leads to the slaughterhouse kill box.
These felony charges could bring a sentence of up to 15 years in prison, $100,000 in fines, plus additional penalties on the misdemeanor charges.
The second employee, Jose Luis Sanchez, was charged with three misdemeanors involving downers and faces up to 18 months in jail and $3000 in fines if convicted.
According to the group’s spokespersons, never before in the knowledge of The Humane Society of the United States have slaughter plant workers faced charges of this nature.
“We applaud District Attorney Ramos for taking decisive action in bringing felony counts against people who abused animals in these heinous ways,” said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the HSUS. “He knows that this sort of cruelty can never be tolerated, and because of his decision to prosecute, justice is being served in this case.”
The enormous beef recall came in response to an HSUS investigation documenting on film—that is difficult to watch—downer cows being severely mistreated at a Southern California slaughter plant. In addition to the cruelty issue, providing meat from downer cows can also pose a serious risk to human health.
“The plant HSUS investigated has been shut down indefinitely, its products have been recalled, and two of its employees are now facing criminal charges, with additional legal action certain to follow. Every slaughter plant in the nation should heed the messages sent by this investigation,” added Pacelle.
The HSUS is urging the USDA to take swift criminal and civil action due to the fact that Hallmark/ Westland shipped potentially dangerous ground beef to schools across the country as part of the National School Lunch Program.
The matter has spotlighted feed animal cruelty and health issues on the state and national level.
On Tuesday, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a statement about the current situation.
“Protecting consumers, particularly children, from willful and deliberate violations of food safety laws is among the most important responsibilities of government,” said Schwarzenegger. “If these allegations are proven to be true and an isolated case, we expect full criminal prosecution.”
Some animal activists, however, are concerned this incident is the first inkling of widespread industry cruelty to feed animals that will require a major public outcry for redress.

Guy Wires Slated for Study as Possible Factor in Malibu Wildfire Starts

• SCE Supports Call for New Look at Equipment Regulations that Would Be Applicable Statewide

BY ANNE SOBLE

The Public Utilities Commission, the state agency that regulates utility companies, is investigating the possibility that guy wires, the cables that connect the wood power poles that dot the landscape throughout the state, can spark brush fires in strong wind conditions.
Electrical wiring experts have raised the issue of guy wire culpability in the context of the multi-millions of dollars in insurance settlements being paid in the wake of the rush of Southern California conflagrations in late 2007, including Malibu’s Canyon Fire, whose starting point was reportedly a downed pole.
Power companies across the nation use similar cabling systems, but some of these firms are also asking for technical review of current regulations in the face of mounting liability concerns and the realization that wildfire is now a year-round phenomenon in many parts of the country, including Malibu and the rest of Southern California.
Although power lines failed during last October’s hurricane-force winds in Malibu, there has not been any formal determination that the guy-wire systems were the weak point.
State investigators have still not completed their study of the cause of the Canyon Fire in Malibu, but firefighters are on record as stating that the fire spread from a Southern California Edison power pole that fell in the 75-mph winds.
Residents near the downed line, including longtime local Ed Meyer, indicated that pole had been leaning over, and had complained to regulators before the fire that the wires might be insufficient.
State officials have tentatively indicated that preliminary studies by insurance industry experts may lead to some rule changes.
The PUC’s Consumer Protection and Safety Division is expected to initiate action to formalize further study and consider formal recommendations for guy-wire requirements.
Gil Alexander, a spokesperson at SCE’s corporate offices, told the Malibu Surfside News this week that the company has not been contacted by the PUC on this issue yet.
He said the company maintains that “our guy wires are installed and maintained in full compliance with G.O. 95 guidelines,” the state regulations for utilities.
However, Alexander added that SCE “supports” the call made late last year by the San Diego Gas and Electric Company—hardest hit by wildfires—for a review of these guidelines and what in utility jargon is called “a PUC Order Instituting a Rulemaking” that could result in an overhaul of rules on guy wires. The commission has not yet responded to this call for action.

Sparks Fly at City Council Debate over Setup of ‘Volunteer’ Fire Brigade

• One Member Says Professional Firefighters Aren’t Enough

BY BILL KOENEKER

The Malibu City Council meeting got a little heated this week when members were told Los Angeles County Fire Department officials were not going to recommend Malibu create what is likened to a quasi-volunteer fire department, a Call Firefighter Program.
The program is described as an integral part of the department’s emergency services delivery system serving the rural and remote areas of the county. The firefighters work on a part-time basis, as needed for all types of emergencies. They are trained and paid.
Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich called on Malibu to create its own volunteer department and had asked city and county staffers to provide feedback.
Fire department spokesperson Marie Grycan told council members the battalion chief and captain saw no reason for Malibu to have its own program.
That seemed to set off Conley Ulich and Councilmember Ken Kearsley who peppered Grycan with questions about the denial.
Conley Ulich, who insists the matter is one of protecting lives, urged council members to question the opinions of lower ranking officials and appeal directly to the head of the county fire department Michael Freeman or the county board of supervisors.
“People will die if they don’t get training. I want to make sure people are protected,” she said.
Kearsley wanted to know how and why Topanga has a program and not Malibu.
Grycan said Topanga has one fire station serving 20,000 people, as opposed to Malibu, which has four stations within its city boundaries serving fewer residents. “It is not just a matter of training,” Grycan responded.
Grycan attempted to continue the department’s rationale but was cut off several times with more questions and challenges.
The fire department spokesperson told council members there are five firefighters assigned to the call program in Topanga. That the personnel can be assigned anywhere and, in the event of wildland fires, be sent outside the area. Grycan also said the department thinks Topanga is more rural.
Kearsley shot back he wanted to know the parameters for such definitions and the rationale for how the department arrived at these conclusions.
Grycan said that one of the parameters is how long it will take an engine company to arrive on the scene. In Topanga, it is 20 to 30 minutes.
She said the call teams are deployed usually in remote places, such as desert communities like the Leona Valley or Pearblossom, or other distant locales such as Catalina Island.
By contrast, Malibu has four stations in its city limits, another just outside the city on Decker Canyon Road, and two other stations located over the hill in Monte Nido and Agoura Hills.
Kearsley said he was not buying any of that and added that if the department “did the numbers,” the size and remoteness of Malibu would be evident.
Grycan answered, “There are 12 stations in this battalion.”
It was also pointed out that the call firefighters are not ideally suited for wildfires. They can be assigned anywhere and would not necessarily stay at home base.
Another issue the council kept bringing up was about people staying with their homes. “That is another issue,” Grycan said. “If you are talking about training them. Call firefighters won’t fix all of those problems.”
Councilmember Sharon Barovsky then began asking Conley Ulich what kind of program she was seeking. “I am hearing you say the program you want is they could be sent to fight fires in the Antelope Valley? It is ultimately the fire department’s choice. They are the experts. I am the only one that criticized the fire department and got smeared. Topanga has one station and that is such a fire trap,” she said.
Mayor Jeff Jennings asked about the training of the firefighters.
Grycan said they have 64 hours of training during eight Saturdays, Afterward, they are obligated to drill with their engine company one Saturday per month.
Conley Ulich, who at one point insisted the county board of supervisors should be called in to grant Malibu’s request, took a different tack and suggested the key was the backfill of the existing stations during the summer months when fire officials were making many paramedic calls. “These programs would help. It is not about property it is about lives,” Conley Ulich said.
Grycan again answered that the only reason Malibu has four stations is because of the use of the shift in population during the summer months. “The beach traffic is the biggest reason the stations are there,” added Grycan, who emphasized to council members that the department also relies on the paramedic training of the lifeguards, which are then also used as backfill for the stations.
Barovsky said she would support sending a letter to Freeman asking to explore the possibility of meeting with an ad hoc committee to find out the rationale for the department’s decision. Other members agreed and voted unanimously to direct the staff to send off the letter.
In other action, the council heard from Point Dume Marine Science Elementary school children about their drive called Pennies for Peace.
Each of the students spoke for several minutes from a prepared script about why they were embarking on an effort to save pennies for school children in Afghanistan and Pakistan. “The kids do not even have papers or pencils,” one student remarked.
Another student said while pennies have no real meaning in our society a penny saved for their project could buy a pencil or paper.
“A penny cannot buy a gum ball here, but it can buy a pencil there,” another student told council members.
“It gives kids like us a chance to help other kids in other parts of the world,” one student added.

Another Hilton Faces DUI Charges in Malibu Arrest

• Paris’ Brother Spends Time in Jail

BY BILL KOENEKER

Barron Hilton, 18, of Beverly Hills, described by authorities as the “younger brother of Paris Hilton,” was arrested Tuesday morning in Malibu for driving under the influence, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.
Deputies received a call on a vehicle being driven erratically near Latigo Canyon Road and Pacific Coast Highway just before 8 a.m., according to a press release that in a change of protocol, could only obtained after the Malibu Surfside News e-mailed a request for it and a booking photo to department headquarters.
A deputy’s report states that the driver of another vehicle had reported that Hilton, driving a black Mercedes Benz, was allegedly weaving on the road and, at times, driving on the wrong side of the highway. The witness followed the vehicle until the driver stopped at Corral Canyon Road and PCH and got out of the car. The witness, according to the report, contacted the driver and told him to sit on a bus bench and wait for sheriff’s deputies.
When deputies arrived, they said they conducted a drunk driving investigation and arrested Hilton for driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs. He was also alleged to be in possession of a fake driver license.
Hilton was booked at Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station where he was still being held as The News went to press. Bail was set at $5000.
It was reported that Hilton had a .14 blood alcohol reading. In California .08 is considered legally intoxicated for drivers over 21. For those under 21, any blood alcohol constitutes legal intoxication.
Bloggers and Internet celebrity sites are reporting that Hilton, who lives with his parents, left home Monday evening. The family ostensibly had no idea where he was or who he was with, but reports are circulating involving a local dining establishment.
A female passenger was in Hilton’s vehicle, according to the report. The female may have been driving the car and been involved in a collision prior to Hilton taking the wheel. The California Highway Patrol is handling that aspect of the investigation and was not available for comment.

Trial Runs of Malibu’s New Emergency Notification System Are Described as Successful

• Unlisted Numbers Can Be Added to Reverse 911 Database

BY ANNE SOBLE

On Saturday, the City of Malibu used its new emergency notification system to summon its Certified Emergency Response Training volunteers to an evacuation drill at Zuma Beach. City Emergency Services Coordinator Brad Davis said the call to take part in the mock emergency exercise had a “100 percent success rate.”
The notification system, Contact-CTY, is a form of what is often dubbed a “Reverse-911” system. It was created for Malibu and is expected to cost about $16-18,000 a year to maintain. Costs are based on census figures, Davis said.
The setup designed by the firm NTI was implemented because communication failures during last October’s Canyon Fire were, according to Davis, “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
Davis acknowledged reports that Malibu residents received partial messages or, as in the case of the Malibu Surfside News lines, recordings that told them to “push button two” without saying why. If one did, nothing happened, and the call disconnected.
The new system will allow city officials to send thousands of voice mail messages to the residential and business telephone numbers in its database in a short period of time.
Only public safety messages will be sent through this system, Davis said. Wildfires, floods and significant road closures are among the types of incidents that would warrant announcements.
The city’s website (www.malibu.ca.gov), telephone hotline (310-456-9982), cable television channel (3), and the radio station (AM 1620) will continue to serve in their present capacities.
The first areawide test of the Contact-CTY system was on Tuesday, Jan. 29, when calls were made to registered numbers culled from the white pages of the local telephone directory.
Davis said 4282 calls were made with a 77 percent success rate, which he indicated is “considered high.” Only numbers with Malibu area codes and prefixes, which poses some cellular issues that are still being addressed, can be included in the database.
No unlisted or business numbers were called in that test. Davis said the city cannot legally make calls to unlisted numbers, even if Malibu is under siege. Those numbers have to be “self-registered” into the system, he added.
Cell phones are also not automatically available for inclusion in the database “because there are so many carriers,” according to Davis, but those people can also self-register their numbers.
Davis said an address can register up to five telephone numbers. E-mail addresses can also be registered. “We want to encourage everyone to self-register to the fullest extent,” he added.
The city’s goal is to have a way to contact everyone in Malibu within minutes when a crisis hits.
Those currently in the system who do not want to receive emergency notifications can opt out of it by calling 310-456-2489, extension 335.
Addition of new Malibu area numbers or the alteration of numbers that are currently in the database can be done through the city’s website.

School District Told to Expect Declining Student Enrollment

• Additional Tax Dollars May Be Used to Fund More Out-of-District Students to Fill Seats

BY BILL KOENEKER

The Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Board of Education met last week in Malibu. The board has scheduled four of its regularly scheduled 31 meetings or programs for the 2007-2008 academic calendar to be held in Malibu.
On the board agenda it was simply called commendations, Webster Elementary School, but in fact it was a full show-and-tell by Webster students and Principal Phil Cott, who demonstrated some of school’s hands-on educational ventures, including a kindergarten class, studying Mandarin Chinese, that danced to a Chinese song in costume, and a fifth grade class that dressed in full costume as colonists during the early days of the nation.
Superintendent Dianne Talarico said she had recently visited the school and was especially fond of the poetry garden. She added she had also visited the Chinese language class.
“You have a great school and interesting leadership. I have great respect for Mr. Cott, even though we don’t see eye to eye,” she said.
Cott said, as a prelude to when the board was to later discuss declining enrollment, that he thought a less stringent permit policy would be welcome by him and others.
“At Webster we are very accepting to fill spaces, to have low income families who work in Malibu and bring their children to the community. They offer a diversity and a real bit of reality,” he said.
Cott went on to state the defining event for the school this year was the fire that almost burned the campus and how five Webster families lost homes.
Upon questioning by board president Oscar de la Torre, Cott also talked about how a group of day laborers wanted to donate time and effort to the community and school after the fire.
“I expected maybe 10 or 20 people. They assembled over 100 workers. The Wall Street Journal was there, La Opinion and several Spanish language television newscasters. I spoke to them via a translator. They started chanting. They placed sandbags. They cut back blackened landscaping. They really helped a lot,” Cott added.
Board members, after hearing a request from Malibu parent Colleen Baum about the accountability of Measure BB expenses, agreed that regular reporting of the expenses should and would be undertaken.
The board heard little and talked less about the passage of Measure R, expect from a Santa Monica parent, who offered what could only be called the Santa Monica slant on the issue.
“This started before Measure R. The kids need stability and predictability. With the passage of Measure R, our schools have the assurance of fundraising and staffing. Much of the heavy lifting was done by the PTAs. It was so much more intensive that anyone imagined. The election was more about community, not about two communities. We are one school community. We can overcome our differences. If we turn on each other, our children will be the losers. We need to do it as one community,” she said.
The board then heard from demographics consultants DecisionInsite from Orange County about the rapidly declining enrollment over the next four years in the school district.
The consultants provided the board with what they called two sets of projections. A conservative one that could be used for budgetary planning purposes and another version that could be applicable for construction planning.
In considerable detail, the consultants explained how the figures were arrived at using live births, which are going down, and a host of other variables.
Another aspect of the decline, according to consultants, unique to the district is there was no “hump” in enrollment from K-8 to high school.
“You would expect kids from private schools to go to public high school, but that is not happening in your district,” one consultant added.
Other population variables are easier to explain. “The community in the district is aging. Growth of the communities is slowing,” said a consultant, who added another reason for decline. “[Out-of-area] permit students are declining [because of district policy].”
The consultants, in their presentation, stressed that their numbers are based not only on enrollment in prior years, but on outside factors related to the census data.
The information is important, according to the staff, since the data for staffing allocations will be used for the 2008- 2009 school year.
The consultants had come up with the conservative and moderate projections because the board had asked for the long-range data not only to make accurate staffing projections, but also to examine the projects included in the Measure BB facilities program.
The staff recommended using the conservative projections for staffing allocations and the moderate projects for the planning of construction.
Another consultant had done enrollment projections for Measure BB, but Assistant Superintendent Mike Matthews said staffers wanted to know how accurate those numbers were and had hired DecisionInsite to do a “much deeper analysis.”
The consultants said that, according to one forecast, in five years the district will have an enrollment of 93 percent of what it is today.
Another forecast, using other variables, found that in five years the district will have 85 percent of what it has today.
The consultants ticked off a list of how they believe events will unfold: Live births are going down. The decline will happen in coastal areas and Los Angeles County. Within two areas of the district there is modest growth, but the persons per household rate is in decline. Santa Monica and Malibu are at a point where the community is aging, which is in part a function of the economy. All of these variables relate to student population, which in turn means the district is not growing.
The decline in enrollment reverses or picks up in 2010. California live births will start to pick up later, which is good news for schools, but consultants are not sure if that will happen in the SMMUSD.

As Malibu Goes, So Goes the State and the Nation (Sort of)

• Measure R Would Not Have Been Approved by 90265 Voters

BY ANNE SOBLE

Malibu voters appear to be in sync with many of the voters elsewhere in the Southland and much of the state for the most part, but there were some notable exceptions.
The 8370 registered voters in the city and the 1989 registered voters in unincorporated Malibu have traditionally shown strong streaks of independence in their voting patterns.
In the city, there are 3561 registered Democrats, 2720 Republicans and 1735 Decline-to-State voters (still called Non-Partisan on some forms). In Malibu Heights, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder’s Office designation for unincorporated Malibu, there are 723 Democrats, 655 Republicans and 507 DTS voters.
In terms of votes cast, 42 percent of registered city voters went to the polls, but unincorporated voters only had a 36 percent turnout.
In assessing voting patterns, all Malibu precincts will be totalled together and assessed as 90265 voters in Los Angeles County.
Measure R, the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District parcel tax that was approved handily in the school district as a whole, would not have passed if it only were up to Malibu voters, i.e., if only those in the city and in unincorporated Malibu got to decide its fate.
More Malibuites favored Measure R than not, by a margin of 2138 to 1730, but that is only a 55.27 percent approval rate, not the 66.67 percent that was required for passage. That called for the heavy pro-R vote from Santa Monica to put the measure over the top.
Malibuites were even less kind to funding for community colleges as packaged in Proposition 92. Here they voted in opposition by a margin of 2305 to 1475.
They were somewhat less adamant but just as opposed to Proposition 93 on term limits, where they expressed opposition by 2077 nays to 1819 yays.
Indian gaming expansion tended to have strong support across the board with all Malibu precincts but three, but even here, the margins were close and would not have tilted the overall yes votes on the four-measure package.
That Hillary Clinton may have waited too long to make some campaign staff changes might have already been evident in her Malibu numbers. Barack Obama outvoted her by 1483 to 1067. Though she took the state, her local numbers reflect the surge that Obama has seen in recent weeks.
Clinton still has strongholds that may fall in her camp, but Malibu may turn out be a reasonable precursor of the delegate count before the convention.
The extent to which the Malibu Democratic vote was skewed by DTS, or independent voters, taking part cannot be ascertained from the current county data. That some ballots had the so-called “double-bubble” problem is not perceived as having a statistical impact on the totals.
Whether John McCain will have the 1191 delegates he needs before the GOP convention opens wasn’t aided by the local Republican numbers. Malibuites gave Mitt Romney 548 votes, McCain got 517, and Mike Huckabee received 55 votes.
These are still unofficial numbers as the county continues to hand count ballots that could not be processed by machine. No major surprises are expected however, and the final tallies are slated to be formally certified in three weeks.

Monopole Issue Could Block Operations at New Malibu County Line Fire Station

• Line of Sight Needed to Improve Communications on Ventura County Wildfires Headed South toward Rest of the 90265 Area

BY ANNE SOBLE

The sliver of Ventura County that has a 90265 zip code is Malibu by mailing address only, with little to no official interaction with the rest of the other addressees. But when an out-of-control wildfire rages through this chaparral area, it has little respect for arbitrary political boundary lines.
Thus the opening of the new, larger Ventura County Fire Station 56 is good news to many Los Angeles County Malibuites who have watched wildfires head south and southwest from Ventura County to threaten homes in western Malibu as far as Encinal and Decker canyons.
In 1993, wildfire roared through that area, taking out landmark homes, such as that of Tony Duquette, and Dwight Yoakum’s ranch house. Ventura County firefighters were on the front lines, assisting their Los Angeles counterparts.
However, the new station may not be able to begin operations until a view issue with some of its neighbors is resolved. They oppose plans to install a 50-foot monopole radio tower with a 20-foot whip antenna atop the station, even though the upgrade in communications is deemed a necessity by the Ventura County Fire Department.
During a county planning commission meeting last month, neighbors delayed a permit for the tower. The Fire Department then lowered the proposed tower height by 20 feet, but contends it cannot change the design.
The fire department has had plans to install the monopole setup at the new station for several years to improve coverage of the coast where radio signals readily drop out and to boost the relay from key equipment at Point Mugu.
Abbe Berns, the assistant director of fire services for the VCFD told the Malibu Surfside News this week that the matter is now set for resolution before the director of the VC planning department on May 15.
She said both sides are hiring experts for the fray. The fire department has brought a specialist from Motorola on board.
Berns said the department cannot run conduit underground and obtain the necessary signal strength. It needs a line-of-sight signal from Point Mugu.
She said, “Our biggest concern is that each proposal to change [the design] adds an additional point of failure [and] in addition to transmission issues, there are security issues.”
Berns added that the proposed design is the best for the site and maximizes ability to alert, talk in and talk out and provides radio redundancy, which can be critical in an emergency, while being protective of the public safety channels.
The VCFD spokesperson said the next three months will allow for study of every option, but the “bottom line for the department has to be reliability.”
She said county personnel and equipment can’t be utilized to save lives and homes if there isn’t a way to get crisis information from one point to another.

• The Publisher’s Notebook •

Phantom Policymaking in Malibu

BY ANNE SOBLE

You gotta love some of the members of the Malibu City Council. Without them, political life in this community would be so humdrum. We might even have to spend time on substantive policy analysis, if issues such as development, resource protection and all of those dreary and difficult things that occupy cities where there’s an attempt to have a positive impact on the future ever came up. That we may now have some candidates for council seats who promise even more potential for this type of amusing diversion from political thinking means that an observer’s cup runneth over. There will never be a shortage of things that prompt one to say that they can’t believe what they hear or see, even as they watch the replay dozens of times with unrelenting incredulity. The latest policy brouhaha Malibu-style is council members who don’t seem to get that Los Angeles County has one of the finest firefighting forces in the world and the notion of volunteers in every neighborhood is not only unnecessary, but also potentially dangerous and the kind of financial liability this already eminently suable city does not need.
We‘re surprised there aren’t council members who willy-nilly want to do what we concertedly did for all of the MSN news crew, and advocate that the city buy everyone in town a yellow crew coat, a hard hat, regulation masks and bandannas, and put them on the fire line. But humor aside, this council mentality might not understand the difference between journalists who willingly assume risks to get news that can help with life-and-death decision-making and citizens who don’t want to dabble in do-it-yourself fire protection when top professionals are already on the job. Furthermore, it’s one thing to make the decision to stay and defend your own home and to assume the personal liability for doing so, but to expect volunteers to do this on a regular basis defies logic. Council members making this recommendation appear to have a Disneyfied view of wildfires. Some of nature’s infernos can be stopped quickly, and others can’t. That’s up to nature. To put neighbors in the position of having to answer to the forces of wind and heat is unconscionable.
If members of this city council really want to make a difference in firefighting capability, why aren’t they on the front line with the governor asking for more money for night-flying helicopters, better communications equipment, newer heat-resistant gear and more trucks and fixed-wing aircraft? Why aren’t they prodding the county board of supervisors for year-round SuperScooper presence? Council members could even get behind a special firefighting surcharge. Isn’t it worth extra dollars to fill in the gaps in local fire budgets? But why should council members deal with tough issues like these when they can grandstand? The call for a volunteer brigade is an emotional sham that takes energy away from ideas that could make a difference. Playing on emotions may be good for getting votes, but it makes for poor public policy.

Measure R Passes; Malibu’s Specific Super Tuesday Precinct Numbers Are Still Being Tabulated

• Local Voters Mirror Heavy Statewide Voter Turnout in History-Making Primary Election •

BY ANNE SOBLE

According to the latest Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk tally from the Feb. 5 election, the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District parcel tax, Measure R, passed handily by 22,309 to 8446. In percentage terms, Measure R was approved by 72.54 percent to 27.46 percent. The parcel tax required two-thirds approval of the votes cast to pass.
The number of voters who cast ballots on the measure was 30,755, or 43 percent of the district’s total registration of 70,107. The vote count was completed for the 71 precincts in the district at 3:57 a.m. on Wednesday.
Malibu voters mirrored other voters statewide who went to the polls in record numbers in what was inarguably one of the most exciting primary elections in American history. The final vote tallies for local precincts in the 90265 voting area are expected to be available sometime Wednesday or Thursday.
Those numbers will be posted on the MSN website and blog at www.malibusurfsidenews.com as soon as they are downloadable. The precinct-by-precinct breakdown will be analyzed in greater detail in subsequent posts on the website and in articles in next week’s print edition of The News.
Supporters of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District’s Measure R had gathered at a Malibu restaurant Tuesday night, where campaign organizers expressed optimism that the parcel tax would receive the 66.67 percent vote that was required for passage.
There was no organized opposition to the parcel tax measure that was supported by the primarily Santa Monica-based Campaign to Protect Quality Public Schools, which waged a vigorous, well-funded campaign on R’s behalf. Numerous mailings and ads put together by a San Francisco agency stressed the measure’s fiscal necessity without going into specifics about the actual cost of first parcel tax to be approved in perpetuity that is subject to annual cost-of-living adjustments.
Generally speaking, the election went smoothly in Malibu, although some of the same issues that plagued the statewide voting process were encountered locally, including complications when decline-to-state (a political party) registered voters tried to vote for a Democratic presidential candidate as they could choose to do in this primary.
DTS voters who did not mark the appropriate spot on the ballot were told that their votes might be disallowed. County voting officials indicated that this procedural snafu was not expected to have an effect on final results.

Local Voters—No Last Names Please—Cast Ballots

BY BILL KOENEKER and NICOLE KLIEST

Malibuites are very private voters, or so it would appear from a random sampling of Malibu polling places on Super Tuesday when most of the people approached by two reporters from the Malibu Surfside News would not discuss how they cast their ballots, and if they would, usually preferred not to disclose their last names.
Polls were set up in areas around town such as the Malibu Library, Bluff’s Park, and the Malibu Swim Club. Being one of the most historic elections in what some say is decades, it was evident that voters were eager to have their voices heard.
“I voted for Obama because I am ready for change,” said Ryan, a 21-year-old Democrat who did not give his last name after voting at the Malibu Bluffs Park.
“Obama is in a sense revolutionary,” said 57-year-old Democrat Richard Reynolds. “I spent a long time comparing Clinton and Obama’s views and although they are quite similar, I find Hillary to be too much of an entrenched Democrat and Obama has less contacts with the past, which I see as a plus.”
On the other side, Democrat Maureen Weston who voted for Clinton says Clinton has more experience. “I like both candidates but ultimately I think Clinton is ready to take on the position. I find her to be experienced and very confident,” Weston said.
Non-voting on policy matters was a trend that seemed to resonate with younger voters in terms of Measure R. However, older demographics appeared be aware of this measure.
“I’m not a homeowner, so I can’t speak from that perspective but I definitely support what helps the funding of arts and music and teachers,” said Democrat Maureen O’Connell who does not have any children in the school district.
“I support the funding for schools, ” said Bill, a Republican who did not give his last name and cast his ballot for Measure R at the Malibu Swim Club.
57-year-old Democrat Richard Reynolds also voted yes on Measure R. “I support our schools and I believe that we should keep funding them,” Reynolds said.
Voting at the Malibu West Swim Club, Jerry, who only gave his first name, is 65 and a registered Republican. He has lived in Malibu for 16 years and has one child. He said he voted for Romney because he thought he had a better feel for the economy. “It is the economy, stupid,” he laughed, adding “Borrowing a line from the Democrats.”
On Measure R, Jerry voted no. “We felt a little bit screwed by our Santa Monica brethren. I saw this coming. Santa Monica has all the voters. Malibu will be much better off with our own school district.”
Also emerging from a Malibu West Swim Club voting booth was Bill, who also wanted to give only his first name. A lifelong Democrat, Bill, who is 64, is married with four children and said he voted for Clinton. He said he was influenced to vote for Clinton because of the combined experience of Bill and Hillary as opposed to just Obama. “Obama talks about change, but he doesn’t say how he is going to do it. He is a little young. With the Clintons, I know what I am getting,” he said.
Bill, a 26-year resident, said he did not follow closely the issues or politics of Measure R, but nonetheless voted yes.
A steady stream of voters was evident at the Malibu Bluffs polls, where Cynthia, 36, a mother of three and a professor who has lived in Malibu for the last three years, said she is an independent who voted for Obama. She said she supports him because she is looking for a change. Cynthia, who said she is aware of the political issues surrounding Measure R, voted for the tax because of her support for public education. “I am a professor, have children that go to public schools and am concerned about the major issues of the junior high school and high school in Malibu.”
Camille, who is 22, considers herself neither a Democrat nor Republican, but is registered as a Republican. She has lived in Malibu since 2004, has no children and said she voted for Romney. “McCain is OK. I agree more with Romney,” she added.
Camille said she did not know much about the local school district issues, but voted for Measure R because “it is about schools. I am a student.”
Another voter, who declined to give any name, said she is 55, a decline-to-state, a lifelong local resident and has two children.
She said she voted for Clinton because the candidate is the “lesser of two evils.” She claims she is not in the SM-MUSD, so she did not vote on Measure R.
Another voter, leaving the Malibu Library polling place, who declined to give a first or last name, said he did not vote in the presidential primary, but came to cast a no vote on Measure R. “The reason I voted against it, I am pro happening about a tax, but what is currently happening in the district should not be happening,” he said.
Poll workers, during a very brief respite at the Malibu Public Library, said they had a busy morning, with over 200 voters coming in to cast their ballots.
Despite their numbers, the voters at the Malibu Library polling place also included a majority of citizens who declined to be interviewed about their voting habits and outlooks. But they all get blue ribbons for citizenship.

• The Publisher’s Notebook •

Malibu’s Bite May Be Worse than Its Bark

BY ANNE SOBLE

Political campaigns have become slicker and slicker, and, too often, pander to and nurture the worst aspects of human nature, doing so with an air of condescension and the smarmy smirk of those who regard the electorate as a bumbling mass to be manipulated in whatever ways attain the desired objective. Regardless of Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District’s Measure R having passed, a case in point is a flyer on behalf of the school parcel tax proposal. This was one of the most offensive political mailings to come to my household in the Feb. 5 campaign. The double-sided, coated 8 1/2” by 11” flyer was from the group calling itself Campaign to Protect Quality Public Schools. CPQPS waged a pull-out-all-stops campaign on behalf of Measure R, concentrating its substantial budget and people power on the voters of Santa Monica who can outnumber Malibu voters by as much as eight to one. The address side (shown above) of the mailing features a boy, who could be my son at elementary school age, or anyone else’s son, telling his pet dog to “stay”—the term in canine obedience training that to command an animal to remain in place and not move. It’s an authoritarian command that connotes subservience. Some might think that the graphic is cute, but for the fact the dog symbolizes the school district voters who are being told to “stay,” or be obedient, i.e., do what they are told by a district that regards them on a par with domesticated animals in need of obedience training.
The mailing also reiterates the pro-Measure R contingent’s disingenuous contention that the proposal does not increase the present tax rate, but “simply renews local funding that is already in place.” This is not the case, as the measure does not sunset, as do existing tax measures, and the parcel tax is subject to annual COLA increases, which has not been the case with any of the previous measures on the ballot. The school district cannot expect an electorate that is equated with a dog to not snap back if it is mistreated. Dogs will be faithful, even to those whose actions deserve reproach, but they know the difference between good and bad behavior. That faithfulness has limits and negative rumblings are bound to continue in Malibu. If secession proves to be financially and politically feasible, efforts to form a separate school district can only be bolstered by underestimating Malibu voters. Measure R’s passage may mean that the district has won the battle, but could lose the war if the community decides that it has had enough. Whoever approved this ad for Campaign to Protect Quality Schools owes the voters in the school district an apology. If that individual, or those individuals, is/are at this Thursday evening’s school board meeting at Malibu City Hall—one of only two meetings slated to be held in Malibu that is on the district calendar through June (that’s “equal access” in the SMMUSD)—they should publicly apologize for this mailing. The district needs to show respect for its voters. If the school district thinks it’s acceptable to tell voters to “stay,” the voters may contemplate telling the district to “heel.”

Malibu Great White Shark Is Released from Captivity

• Aquarium Says Shark Was Showing Signs of Stressful Behavior •

BY ANNE SOBLE

For the third time in four years, staffers of the Monterey Bay Aquarium bid farewell to a young white shark after it spent time on public display. The male great white was released in Monterey Bay on Tuesday five months after it was first placed in MBA’s million-gallon Outer Bay exhibit.
The shark is fitted with two electronic tags: one that will relay near real-time data about his travels for about eight months, and a second device that will collect detailed information on his general movements for the next five months.
Data from the second tag, documenting where the shark goes, how deep it dives and the water temperatures that it favors, will be relayed to scientists via satellite when the tag pops free in early July.
The shark was captured just north of Malibu by a sea bass fisherman last August and spent three weeks in MBA’s ocean holding pen off Point Dume. When transported to the aquarium facility on Aug. 28, the shark was 4-foot, 9-inches and weighed about 67 pounds. At its release, it was 5-foot, 10-inches and 140 pounds.
This is the third shark to be exhibited and returned to the wild. The first shark, a female, was at the aquarium for 198 days in 2004-2005. The second shark, a male, was on exhibit for 137 days. The latest male white was seen by more than 650,000 people during its 162 days on exhibit, according to MBA spokespersons.
The first two animals were successfully returned to the wild, and their tracking tags transmitted extensive behavioral data. MBA staffers anticipate similar success with the third shark and anticipate the collection of additional valuable information that will add to current knowledge about great white sharks.
Scientists also have tagged another 10 young sharks in the wild in Southern California waters as part of the white shark field project that also supports research to track the migrations of adult whites that have been tagged off the Farallon Islands and Point Año Nuevo on California’s central coast.
MBA will begin its seventh field season of white shark research this summer, and plans to set up its ocean holding pen off Malibu in an attempt to capture another animal for exhibit.

Photo/Monterey Bay Aquarium