• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Advertising
  • Join PGM
Pepperdine Graphic

Pepperdine Graphic

  • News
  • Sports
  • Life & Arts
  • Perspectives
  • G News
  • Special Publications
  • Currents
  • Podcasts
  • Print Editions
  • NewsWaves
    • Thank You Thursday
  • Sponsored Content
  • Our Girls

Measure M fails with 58 percent ‘no’ vote

November 6, 2003 by Pepperdine Graphic

By Katie Clary and Mielissa Overbeck
Staff Writers

Measure M opponents gathered at Granita Restaurant Tuesday night, waiting to hear the results of the vote. Just shy of midnight, the restaurant erupted in cheers as the results were announced.

The group rushed to congratulate Ozzie Silna and Richard Carrigan, the campaign leaders against Measure M.

“That’s 100 percent. We won, Ozzie!” someone yelled across the room.

“I’m so excited. I feel like the birds can sing now,” Malibu Chicken owner Robert Sanders                         CHRISTINE MORRISON/
said.                                                         ASSISTANT PHOTO EDITOR

The measure, backed by local political figures such as Mayor Ken Kearsley and councilwoman Joan House, failed by an overwhelming 58 percent. House helped author the measure in 1999.

The measure proposed purchasing 120 acres of land from the Malibu Bay Company, the largest real estate holder in Malibu, for $25 million. It also called for the construction of a park and athletic fields on the Malibu Chili Cook-Off site, a water treatment facility, senior center, as well as the renovation of the urgent care facility.

The measure raised concern from many Malibu residents who are known for opposing development of any kind.

“It’s always been a battle of choosing the lesser of two evils,” said Brian Spangle, a Malibu landscape architect who said the decision was difficult.

Kearsley said the issue was very simple.

“Either we get a park or a shopping mall,” Kearsley said. “There’s no other issue.”

Opponents said the issue was significantly more complicated.

“It isn’t a matter of whether (the measure) was a good deal or a bad deal,” Silna said. He added the measure was rushed and that voters did not receive sufficient information on the subject.

Carrigan said that these problems affected the vote.

“People voted ‘no’ because (the measure) was confusing, there was a lack of information on the subject, and the decision was clearly rushed,” Carrigan said.

Although pleased with their victory, the group said that this was not the end of the process.

“As a result (of the vote) we have gone back to day one,” Silna said.

Both he and Carrigan hope to arrange a new deal if the Malibu Bay Company is willing.

“I really hope we can negotiate an agreement in a way that everyone can be on board,” Carrigan said.

2003-11-06

Filed Under: News

Primary Sidebar