Q and A with the City Council Candidates

• Part One of a Multi-Part Series on the April 2010 Election

BY BILL KOENEKER

A 25-question survey was distributed to the 10 city council candidates by the Malibu Surfside News. Seven candidates tackled the array of complex local issues and policy questions that were included.
Among them, council hopefuls were asked what they thought were the three best decisions and the three worst decisions made by the city council during the last four years.
John Mazza said the council got it right when it fought against the LNG port, fought to acquire Bluffs Park and reversed its decision to allow camping in the mountains.
Mazza gave low marks to the council for originally agreeing to approve overnight camping in the mountains, and entering into a lease agreement for 54 years “with less than one percent per year inflation projection.” He also gave a thumbs down to loaning the Malibu Lumber Yard developers “$1.5 million interest free for 15 years and paying about an additional $800,000 to fund the loan.”
Laura Rosenthal agrees the Bluffs Park acquisition was a smart move by the city council. Rosenthal said Legacy Park was also one of the best decisions. “First it was vital to remove the acreage from development. Secondly, the city can now provide a facility to clean, disinfect and recycle storm water,” she added. She also commended the council for acquiring the new city hall.
On the bottom of her list, Rosenthal said Trancas Park was a bad decision. “I think I would have taken the extra month to study the Goldman plan if it was able to save a substantial amount of money,” she noted.
Rosenthal said she also did not like the $1.5 million deferral deal for MLY. She said the council “has often shirked their duty to seniors, teens and other resident groups” to provide amenities when the opportunity arose.
Lou La Monte said he gave thumbs up to the council for the acquisition and constructions of Legacy Park, starting plans for the Civic Center wastewater plant and leading the fight against the LNG terminal.
La Monte said the three worst decisions: Giving the Malibu Township Council the authority over league play at Trancas Park, not taking the time to look further into the Goldman plan for Trancas Park and not communicating enough with the school district “to avoid controversies, such as the number of night activities at the high school.”
Harold Greene noted the most successful actions of the city council were “realized in their acquisition of land and buildings for our public use and benefits.” He indicated the acquisition of Legacy Park, the new city hall and the acquisition of income properties in the Civic Center all have potential benefit to the city.
Greene’s worst list: “Questionable decisions have been made regarding the extent of public use facilities at Legacy Park, the extent of retrofitting necessary at the new city hall, the lighting at the high school, and the cost and frequency of city involved lawsuits,” he said.
Mike Sidley said the purchase of the new city hall building was the worst, followed by not incorporating a wastewater feature at Legacy Park. “Finally the bailout the developers of the $1.5 million deal got at the Lumber Yard,” he said.
Sidley said on his best list is how the city has demonstrated a commitment to funding public education. “The city council has also shown a commitment to solving our storm water problem. Finally, the city has expressed a willingness to build parks for residents,” he added.
Ed Gillespie said the three best decisions include “appointing me to the planning commission. [That] would have to be number one.” And, he said, the acquisition of the ball fields at Bluffs Park. “It is too early to call the purchase of the Chili Cook-Off site and the new city hall the best decisions that could have been made,” he added.
Gillespie cited the three worst decisions as “the purchase of the Chili Cook-Off site, the new city hall and the bailout of the Lumber Yard.”
Steve Scheinkman listed the council’s best decisions as development of Legacy Park to address pollution, opposing the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy to allow overnight camping in the canyons and presenting an alterative plan to the Regional Water Quality Control Board addressing the Civic Center septic prohibition. “That would include the installation of a sewer in the commercial area at the Civic Center,” he said.
Scheinkman said the three worst decisions were agreeing to the $1.5 million bailout at the Lumber Yard, spending $27 million on the purchase of the new city hall without a thorough due diligence and not completely opposing the SMMC’s plan for overnight camping.
Next week, “Q and A with the Candidates” will ask “Who would you most like to see elected to the other seat on the city council?” Some of the answers are predictable as two candidates are running as a slate, but others may be somewhat surprising.
Candidates are also asked what is their first priority if they get elected.