Coastal Commission says Malibuites incorrectly interpreted State Election Code in fight.
By DeNae Thomas
Staff Writer
The hard work of Malibu resident Anne Hoffman did not pay off.
At least, not yet.
The California Coastal Commission, a state agency responsible for regulating coastal zones, rejected last Thursday a referendum initiated by Hoffman to block the state mandated Local Coastal Plan that set specific standards for land and water use in the city.
In a letter to Malibu City Attorney Christi Hogin last Thursday, the commission said that citizens misinterpreted the State Elections Code section 9237 when they submitted a petition to repeal the LCP.
The State Elections Code 9237 says that if citizens submit a petition signed by 10 percent of the cities registered voters within 30 days of the adoption of an ordinance, enactment will be halted and the legislative body of the city will reconsider the ordinance.
“Elections Code 9237 applies solely to legislative enactments adopted by a city,” the commission’s letter to Hogin said. “As you pointed out in your letter to me, the Malibu LCP was adopted by the California Coastal Commission and not by the city. A referendum can only be brought where a legislative act of the city is involved.”
Because the city did not design and adopt the Malibu Local Coastal Plan, the commission said that Code 9237 does not apply and Malibu citizens lack the authority to stop implementation of the plan with a petition.
However, Hogin said that Malibu is going to hold that the referendum is valid.
“Americans decided to accept democracy when this country was founded,” Hogin said. “The commission is boiling it down to who took the action, not what the action says, and to me that seems un-American.”
Hogin said that she is currently working on a response letter to the commission. She said she will tell the commission to accept the referendum based on the fact that Malibu is in an “unusual situation,” because of a law passed in 2001 giving the commission authority to write the LCP for Malibu, whereas in every other city in California it is the responsibility of an elected party.
“I am not buying the idea that they have ultimate jurisdiction,” Hoffman said. “This is just the beginning of the battle. A lot of private action is already being filed.” Private action entails individual Malibu citizens bringing forth a suit against the commission to recover personal rights they think were denied.
“This battle is not just over … a judge may have to decide what is democracy,” Hogin said. If the referendum continues to be deemed illegitimate, the city of Malibu may end up in court with the commission, she said.
The battle began in 2001 when the commission was instructed to certify a Local Coastal Plan for Malibu by Sept. 15, 2002.
“The commission overreached its authority in writing more than 500 pages of land use regulations for the city down to the smallest details,” said Hoffman, who opposes the LCP.
“The plan attempted to micromanage the color of our homes, practically abolish gardening, dictate light bulb wattage, even to the extent of illegalizing Christmas and Hanukah lights by prohibiting ‘lighting for aesthetic purposes,’ ” Hoffman continued.
“And by declaring over half the city as ‘Sensitive Area’ the Plan would have opened the way for the commission to conduct broad scale talkings.”
When the Coastal Commission adopted the Malibu LCP on Sept. 13, Hoffman spearheaded a campaign to gather signatures of registered Malibu voters to block the plan under the Elections Code Section 9237.
Hoffman put an advertisement in The Malibu Times encouraging Malibu citizens to go to Ralphs, Cookes and HOWS Markets where petitioners were waiting out front to gather signatures for the referendum.
“Once I got the copies made of the referendum people came out of the woodwork,” Hoffman said. “There was overwhelming support and a high level of awareness of democracy. People comprehended their rights were being violated.”
Neighborhood captains stepped up to help gather signatures in their areas. Resident leaders covered Malibu Canyon Road, Malibu Colony, Winding Way, Ramirez, Malibu West, La Costa, Las Tunas Beach, the Equestrian community and Point Dume.
More than 2,600 petition signatures of registered Malibu voters were collected. Only 880 signatures were required according to the code.
A group of city activists delivered the referendum to the Malibu city clerk Oct 10 in hopes of repealing the LCP.
The Malibu Times reported last Thursday that the referendum had at least 100 pounds of legal documentation attached to it.
Hoffman said that because the referendum included hundreds of pages of the Coastal Commission LCP, it was one of the largest in California and perhaps the United States.
Hoffman said she is already busy gathering even more support and deciding what private actions need to be taken in order to guarantee that Malibu citizens have a voice in the decisions made by the Coastal Commission.
October 24, 2002