[9:59] Okay, we're ready.

[10:07] » The March 9, 2026 regular meeting of the Malibu City Council is now called to

[10:12] order. In-person participants, if you'd like to speak, please submit your

[10:15] request to speak form to the clerk. We have one slip and only one person here,

[10:19] so that makes sense. Remote participants, if you'd like to speak,

[10:23] please join the Zoom webinar meeting printed on the agenda and raise your

[10:26] hand in Zoom when the item you wish to speak on is called. It's going to be

[10:29] called shortly. May we please have a roll call.

[10:33] » Council member Conrad >> here.

[10:34] » Council member Rigggins >> here. Council member Stewart

[10:38] » here. >> Mayor Promarine

[10:40] » here. >> Mayor Silverstein

[10:42] » here. >> You have a quorum.

[10:43] » Okay, we are getting feedback up here. So maybe that could be addressed during

[10:47] the break.

[10:50] » Okay.

[10:55] » Do we have any remote speakers on the close session items?

[10:59] » No, we don't have any speakers or participants on Zoom.

[11:03] » Okay. Um we have one. We don't take a roll call for this, by the way.

[11:09] » It's not on my um script. Kelsey, do we take a roll call?

[11:13] » No, you don't need a roll call. There's no motion before the council at this

[11:16] time to hear public comment. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, we have one

[11:19] public speaker, Ann K.

[11:23] » Hello everybody. My name is an an comarask or actually it's Anna according

[11:28] to the secretary of state is Anna an A. It's an an K for everyone else. So, we

[11:34] have two items here on the closed session and uh there's no information to

[11:39] chat about other just to inform you that I would love to see a date and well

[11:45] there's a date on there but a clock so that you can actually see what time it

[11:49] is these meetings start as they countdown because you know what happens

[11:53] between the close session and the open session so that kind of stuff. So, and

[11:58] the other thing too, you'll probably see a little less of me here and there

[12:01] because, you know, I have qualified to become nonpartisan governor of

[12:04] California. Yay. So, they want me to further redact my taxes. They said more

[12:10] of the President Trump style, but I don't know what that means. So, I need a

[12:13] little help. So, but we're there. There's no official candidates for the

[12:17] 23rd or the 26th of the month. So, there you have it. So, just a update. And I

[12:23] have no idea what you guys are talking about because I didn't say here, but

[12:26] thank you

[12:31] » mayor. Your microphone. >> That concludes public comment for the

[12:35] close session item. We now will recess to close session to discuss the items

[12:39] listed in the close session agenda. We will reconvene at 5:30 p.m. or as soon

[12:44] thereafter as we are finished the close session to begin the regular session and

[12:48] hear the close session report. We're recessed.

[13:17] testing. Okay.

[13:36] Well, I appreciate

[13:49] That's not

[14:52] I'm going to talk to her.

[14:59] 5:30.

[15:12] So strange.

[1:19:02] » [clears throat]

[1:19:15] » The March 9, 2026 regular meeting of the Malibu City Council is now called back

[1:19:19] to order. Inerson participants, if you'd like to speak, please submit your

[1:19:23] request to speak form to the clerk. Remote participants, if you would like

[1:19:27] to speak, please join the w the Zoom webinar meeting printed on the agenda

[1:19:31] and raise your hand in Zoom when the item you wish to speak on is called. And

[1:19:35] remember, the rule is raise your hand on Zoom before we call the item. And um

[1:19:42] please and submit your blue slip before we call the item. May you please have a

[1:19:46] roll call. >> Council member Conrad,

[1:19:48] » here. Council member Rigggins, >> here. Council member Stewart

[1:19:50] » here. >> Mayor Promirine

[1:19:52] » here. >> Mayor Silverstein

[1:19:54] » present. >> You have a quorum.

[1:19:55] » Thank you. Scott, you want to lead us in the pledge of allegiance?

[1:19:58] » Want to lead us in the pledge of >> allegiance?

[1:20:06] To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it

[1:20:11] stands. One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for

[1:20:17] all.

[1:20:22] May we please have a close session report?

[1:20:26] » Oh, >> I can give you a report on the posting

[1:20:30] of the agenda while we wait for the city attorney. The agenda for this meeting

[1:20:34] was properly posted on February 27th, 2026. Due to technical difficulties with

[1:20:40] the city's website, the staff reports for the meeting could not be posted

[1:20:43] online at that time and were posted on March 3rd, 2026. The amended agenda was

[1:20:48] properly posted on March 6th, 2026 with all associated reports.

[1:20:53] » Thank you. So before we go on with the agenda,

[1:20:57] Trevor, can you please give us a close session report?

[1:21:00] » Absolutely. At 4:45 p.m., the city council met in open session, recessed

[1:21:04] closed session, the absolute on the posted agenda. Council member Conrad um

[1:21:08] was recused um from the discussion due to location of her home um and no

[1:21:12] reportable action was taken. >> Thank you, Trevor. Okay. Um, can we have

[1:21:18] an approval of the agenda? >> I can make a [clears throat] motion to

[1:21:23] rearrange the agenda. >> Let's hear it.

[1:21:27] » Um, can we move item 7B to after item three?

[1:21:37] » Yeah, I'm anticipating that we will have um

[1:21:43] people show up. So that's moving the snack shack to be heard after 6:30 but

[1:21:48] before public comment for items not on the agenda.

[1:21:50] » Correct. >> I'll second that.

[1:21:53] » I This is discussion. >> I I I'm This is for discussion. Um there

[1:21:59] have been some members of the public that have been critical and and I don't

[1:22:03] fault them for it that um when we've moved things up that we've moved it

[1:22:07] before general public comment. So, what I'd ask is a friendly amendment to move

[1:22:11] it up, but move it up after general public comment, not before general

[1:22:15] public comment. The other thing is, and I'm not opposed to it for this reason,

[1:22:20] but some people have also said they plan their schedule when they want to speak

[1:22:24] around the published schedule, and when something's late on the agenda, they

[1:22:28] don't necessarily come to the meeting for the first hour or two knowing that

[1:22:31] it's not going to get called till 8 9:00. And when we move something that is

[1:22:35] scheduled late on the agenda to occur first thing or early on, they missed

[1:22:40] their opportunity to participate. So I just raised that. It's not a basis for

[1:22:45] not doing it tonight, but I just raised that. But I would ask that you amend the

[1:22:48] motion to um have the item 7B occur after general public comment.

[1:22:55] » So after 4 A, but before 4B. >> Sure. I let me see if I understand it

[1:23:02] because I was I was going to make something similar. Uh move 7B

[1:23:06] uh to the first item after 4B and before item five.

[1:23:11] » Yeah, I I actually think that makes more sense.

[1:23:13] » I think we're going to have a lot of kids here and our 4 A and 4B has often

[1:23:19] times not been occurring until 7:30, 8:00. So, I'm trying to I know they're

[1:23:23] not here yet, but I know they're coming. So, um,

[1:23:28] » you know, everybody everybody knows that that's how these meetings work.

[1:23:31] » How about how about this? Why don't we put it at 4 A [clears throat] and, um,

[1:23:36] we can revisit it when we get closer to that time. If there's a lot of people

[1:23:41] here, maybe we can >> make a motion to rearrange it again at

[1:23:46] that point. >> Are are you you accept a friendly

[1:23:49] amendment to move 7B following 4 A so long as it's after 6? Well, it'll have

[1:23:54] to be after 6:30 because we can't take >> I don't think there's a question. We're

[1:23:56] going to be after 6:30. >> Sorry.

[1:23:59] » I don't think there's going to be a question.

[1:24:02] » Agreed. >> We only have half an hour. Yes, I agree.

[1:24:05] » I agree. >> Are you in a second?

[1:24:07] » Yeah. >> So, the friendly amendment was accepted

[1:24:09] to hear item 7B after 4 A and before 4B. >> Yes.

[1:24:16] » Doug, are you going to be okay with that or

[1:24:18] » I'm okay with that. Yeah. >> All right. All in favor?

[1:24:21] » I I >> No opposed. So ordered. Okay. So the

[1:24:25] agenda is approved with the change that 7B will appear after 4A.

[1:24:35] Okay. We'll now consider the consent calendar. Remote participants, please

[1:24:39] raise your hand in Zoom if you wish to speak on the consent calendar. I've got

[1:24:43] one card going once, going twice. Is anybody signing up for consent calendar?

[1:24:50] No. Okay. So would any >> Yes, we have one raised hand on Zoom.

[1:24:55] » Thank you. Okay, so we have one live speaker or in person speaker, Joe

[1:25:00] Drummond.

[1:25:11] » Good evening, city manager Joe Irvin. Welcome, Bruce, mayor Silverstein and

[1:25:18] city council. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Um, I'm pulling 1B10

[1:25:23] which is obviously we want you to put through the property tax 110%. We want

[1:25:30] that to be for all fire victims just to have the 110%. I was just wanting to ask

[1:25:37] if um you'll be also I submitting something

[1:25:41] about property taxes needing to be reduced for fire victims that have

[1:25:46] burned down lots that are over evaluated like no lots in Big Rock for instance

[1:25:50] are worth more than a million a million two because it's so hard to get a

[1:25:54] rebuild permit right now averaging over a year to issue from submission. Jim

[1:25:59] Rogers, one of my neighbors on Seabard, bought his home 2 and a half months

[1:26:02] before the fire and he applied for the misfortune and calamity reduction and is

[1:26:06] paying property taxes on $2.7 million for his lot for instance. So this is not

[1:26:13] accurate or fair. And I just wanted to let you know Salwa is um arriving from

[1:26:20] Dubai. She might even be here now. So she has the sales tax letter for you all

[1:26:26] that she will submit to you. I know we that was another issue that you guys

[1:26:31] were doing. So, that's coming. But, thank you for approving this. Thanks so

[1:26:34] much. >> All right. Thank you, Joe. And um just

[1:26:37] so everybody knows, members of the public don't can't pull items on the

[1:26:41] consent. They can ask that we do that. So, I'll take that to be a request that

[1:26:45] somebody on council pull that item. We have one speaker on Zoom.

[1:26:50] » Yes. Ann.

[1:26:55] » Hello. You hear me? This is Ann Kamaras. >> We hear you.

[1:27:01] » Oh, sorry. I'm at Tony Terron. I'm supposed to have a dinner here with the

[1:27:05] family. So, listen. Um, most of the stuff can be taken care of at the state

[1:27:09] level. So, I appreciate uh your consideration for changing the public

[1:27:14] comment time to be set in stone maybe perhaps at the beginning of the meeting.

[1:27:19] But, um, whatever Joe Drummond said, I agree. Thank you.

[1:27:25] Okay, that closes public comment. Um, would any council member like to pull

[1:27:29] any item for further discussion?

[1:27:37] » I'll make a motion to approve the consent calendar.

[1:27:39] » Just want to confirm before that that nobody wants to pull anything.

[1:27:44] » I'm not seeing the one that Joe Oh, wait. Because it's outside the packet. I

[1:27:50] don't think we have to pull it, but we should discuss maybe later about the

[1:27:53] other issue because I I think Okay, let's pull

[1:27:58] 1B10, please. >> Okay. Anybody else want to pull anything

[1:28:01] else? >> I'll make a motion to approve the

[1:28:05] consent calendar except for 1B10. >> I'll second.

[1:28:09] » All in favor? >> I.

[1:28:11] » Okay. All items except for 1B10 are approved. Halen, you wanted to speak

[1:28:16] about 1B10. Do you want a staff report or just want to speak? I just wanted to

[1:28:20] ask this is something totally different. This is one bill that we are as council

[1:28:24] and the city is supporting property taxation, newly constructed

[1:28:27] reconstructed property. There's a separate bill in which I believe Joe was

[1:28:31] talking about where the residents are looking for support on sales tax on

[1:28:37] items when they do. Do we have an update on that bill or if we're going to

[1:28:42] support it or >> I I think since that's not the consent

[1:28:47] item, you have to ask for that during council member comment.

[1:28:50] » Got it. I'll put it down. Thank you. That's it. I approve.

[1:28:53] » I'll I'll make a quick comment on it. I know uh the discussion was about

[1:28:58] overpriced lots. Just to refresh everybody's mind on this, uh, when the

[1:29:03] fires took place, the first thing the county assessor did, separated out the

[1:29:07] the two categories that's on the property tax bill. One's improvements,

[1:29:11] one's land. They immediately took the improvements off on the total destroyed

[1:29:15] using the Cal Fire assessments as to what percentage was damaged and so

[1:29:19] forth. Uh, the property uh, land values or whatever the land value was on the

[1:29:25] tax bill. understand that the land values are not necessarily what the

[1:29:28] market value is. And uh if you go back to 1978 or whenever Proposition 13

[1:29:34] passed, those values at that time went up by 2% if you unless you bought the

[1:29:39] property in the meantime. If they've got a problem with the assessed value, they

[1:29:42] need to take that up with the assessor. They can actually file a claim for it

[1:29:46] and the assessor's office will be glad to talk to about it. The county assessor

[1:29:50] was here two weeks ago, I think it was, and um had the appraisal people here.

[1:29:55] They're wide open to having discussions and looking for input on that. All you

[1:29:59] have to do is file the claim. >> All right. Thanks. Helen, do you want to

[1:30:02] make a motion to approve 1B10? >> May I make a comment first? Go ahead.

[1:30:05] » Um I believe that meeting with the assessor was recorded and it would be

[1:30:10] available on our city website or on YouTube. And so I'd recommend that

[1:30:14] everybody because he he gave a very detailed uh Jeffrey Pring, our county

[1:30:18] assessor, gave a very detailed um uh explanation of how assessments are done,

[1:30:25] how they're calculated. Um I think it was a really good presentation. It's

[1:30:28] good information for everybody to know regardless of your house was destroyed

[1:30:32] or not. Um anybody at the county. So um just look on our website for that and or

[1:30:38] on YouTube you can put it in. Um great information on there. Yeah,

[1:30:42] » I'd like to add one more comment. It was a good session not just about the

[1:30:46] property tax um valuations on your house that you might be paying. Now, it all he

[1:30:53] also talked about how you can transfer that property tax value to another house

[1:30:57] if you were going to move. Uh it's there's some intricate uh procedures for

[1:31:02] it and it'd be good to listen to that uh uh type again.

[1:31:06] » Does anybody else have any further comments? I make a motion to approve

[1:31:10] item 1B10. >> Is there a second?

[1:31:13] » I'll second. >> Thank you.

[1:31:14] » All in favor? I. >> Okay. So, approved.

[1:31:18] » Mayor, can I make a quick comment? >> As long as it's limited to the consent

[1:31:21] calendar. >> No, we pass the consent.

[1:31:25] This is about the agenda. >> Sure.

[1:31:28] » There there were a number of posts I saw today talking about the roundabouts were

[1:31:32] going to be on tonight's agenda. I don't see the roundabout people out there

[1:31:36] tonight, but it is not going to be on tonight's agenda. Come back on the 18th

[1:31:40] and it'll be the meeting. Thank you. >> Can I also add that there was a lot of

[1:31:45] misinformation or information that tonight will have antennas and or 5G

[1:31:51] polls being put up. That is not on tonight's agenda. So, if you're here for

[1:31:55] that, please don't stay. >> The only thing on the agenda is what's

[1:31:59] on the agenda. Okay. That brings us to 2A. Big Rock Landslide Facts. Community

[1:32:05] Development Director Bundy will present a PowerPoint presentation.

[1:32:08] » Yes. Good evening, council. Um I'm just introducing the team. Um the item before

[1:32:14] you will be a tech a brief technical presentation uh to discuss the big rock

[1:32:19] messa landslide status. With us, we have MB5 and Jen Associates. So I will pass

[1:32:25] the presentation uh to them.

[1:32:32] Thank you. Let's see. So, by way of introduction,

[1:32:38] I'm Scott Morris. I'm a um certified engineering geologist and a certified

[1:32:42] hydro geologist. I've been working in the Malibu area and surrounding Southern

[1:32:47] California for 37 years. Uh I started working in Malibu in n well I I started

[1:32:54] working for Malibu in the city uh in 1998.

[1:32:59] Uh I was with Binguna Associates at the time and I managed the landslide

[1:33:05] assessment districts for 6 years and then for two more years at Fugro after I

[1:33:11] moved to Fugro and we carried the contract with us. So I've got a lot of

[1:33:16] experience in Malibu. Uh been out of town for a little while but uh I'm glad

[1:33:20] to be back. Recently hired as the uh um >> You might need to move your microphone a

[1:33:26] little closer. a as the fire rebuild uh geotechnical review manager.

[1:33:33] » And Lori, >> yeah, my name is Lori Barry. Um I'm a

[1:33:36] project I'm a [clears throat] senior project manager and engineer for the A

[1:33:40] and Associates. I have 23 years of geotechnical consulting experience in

[1:33:44] Southern California. I'm the current project manager for the landslide

[1:33:48] assessment assessment district project for the public works department here in

[1:33:52] Malibu and have uh held that for the last six years and four years prior to

[1:33:57] that at FURO. I also managed the landslide assessment districts for the

[1:34:01] city. >> So there's a outline uh we're limited on

[1:34:07] time so I'm just going to jump right into the first slide. Um the little

[1:34:13] history on the Big Rock Mesa landslide. Um historically the Big Rock Mesa area

[1:34:21] was used for agriculture and cattle ranching. Um

[1:34:27] that production

[1:34:30] led to the development of the Ocean Mutual Water Company which operated tin

[1:34:35] water wells for domestic supply and agricultural support. Um so those uh

[1:34:42] water wells operated for decades and effectively helped dewater the landslide

[1:34:47] area. Um the tract was permitted in the early 1960s

[1:34:54] for development and over the next 20-ish years 216 homes were de were built on

[1:35:02] the landslide area uh all of which had septic systems. uh following uh heavy

[1:35:10] rainfall years in 1978 and 1980 culminating in one of the

[1:35:17] wetest years on record in 1983. Um the landslide started to creep

[1:35:22] actively. It had been incrementally creeping in the late '7s and then it

[1:35:27] started moving much more rapidly. It was moving at about a quarter inch a week,

[1:35:33] which doesn't sound like a lot, but if your house is near the crack, that's a

[1:35:37] problem. Um, uh, major lit litigation ensued. Um,

[1:35:45] one of the outcomes of that litigation was Bing Yin and Associates was retained

[1:35:50] by Los Angeles County to do a very comprehensive evaluation of the

[1:35:55] landslide. Um and the other thing that led out of that was the establishment of

[1:36:01] the landslide dewatering district. Um one last note, there's 355 landslides in

[1:36:07] mapped by the California Geological Survey in Malibu and Big Rock Mesa is

[1:36:12] the largest. Um so here is a map of the Big Rock Mesa landslide area. This is

[1:36:18] the main landslide mass. Uh there's dozens of homes on the western extension

[1:36:25] uh which is not in an actual landslide area, but they their sole access is

[1:36:31] provided through the landslide area. So they're part of the benefit assessment

[1:36:34] district. Um there's also scores of of surficial

[1:36:43] bluff failures just above PCH all along the the um the bluff there.

[1:36:51] Uh the next slide is a cross-section through the SL through the landslide. Um

[1:36:55] down that line here's the landslide mass. Uh a couple of interesting things

[1:37:00] about this landslide. It's very deep. It's over 400 ft thick. It fails over

[1:37:07] 100 ft below sea level. Um, uh, we can trace, uh, geologic beds

[1:37:16] across the landslide. And

[1:37:21] see if I could use my pointer here. Uh, and I can trace this bed back to

[1:37:28] this bed and this bed back to this bed. And we can use that to estimate that the

[1:37:33] landslide moved between three and 500 feet over the course of its uh lifespan

[1:37:40] which was thousands of years. Um in 1983 it's estimated it moved on the order of

[1:37:47] 3 to 4 feet. Uh and if you push that back three or 4

[1:37:53] hundred feet uh of movement, the hill used to look like that.

[1:37:58] Um, so talking about uh how the C California Geological Survey has

[1:38:03] classified the landslide, CGS classifies the Big Rock Mesa landslide as an active

[1:38:09] historic landslide. Um, they define it as definite, 100% [snorts]

[1:38:16] confident it is a landslide. There's no question about that. Um

[1:38:22] the definition the California Geological Survey's definition of the active

[1:38:26] historic landslide is the landslide appears to be currently moving or

[1:38:31] movements have been recorded in the historic past. So any landslide that's

[1:38:36] moved in the historic past they consider to be active. The next definition down

[1:38:42] there list of four definitions is dormant young and the landforms related

[1:38:50] to the landslide are relatively fresh but there is no record of historic

[1:38:54] movement. So this definition which is the next one down clearly does not apply

[1:39:00] to big rock. It it moved in 1983 clearly and definitively. As a side note, I'd

[1:39:06] mention that the city of Los Angeles building code defines an active

[1:39:10] landslide as a landslide that has been active at some point since January 1952.

[1:39:17] Um the most important point though is

[1:39:21] [clears throat] what's most important for permitting or policym

[1:39:27] making is not the fact is not the whether you call it an active landslide

[1:39:33] or a dormant landslide. Uh what's important to policym is the factor of

[1:39:38] safety of the landslide. So the factor of safety of a landslide in

[1:39:47] essence is the resisting forces divided by the driving forces. So the resisting

[1:39:54] forces or the driving forces are governed by the mass of the upper

[1:39:59] portion of the landslide. um the amount of water in the landslide

[1:40:04] and the increased pore pressure that that water puts on the slide plane. The

[1:40:10] resisting forces are the mass of the lower portion of the landslide and the

[1:40:16] um shear strength of the slide plane, the rupture surface that the slide

[1:40:20] plane's failing on. Uh what's worth noting is the only thing

[1:40:26] that changes over time year to year, season to season, is the amount of water

[1:40:32] in the landslide. Um the mass of the upper slide, the mass of the lower

[1:40:37] slide, the sheer strength of the slide plane, those are all fixed and

[1:40:41] relatively constant. So what governs the current stability of the landslide is

[1:40:46] the amount of water that's in it. That's why we have the dewatering district. So

[1:40:50] the groundwater levels in 1983 on this cross-section line looked about like

[1:40:55] like this blue line here. Uh by 1992 after a few years of active dewatering

[1:41:05] the water levels were lowered over 100 ft in the central Mesa area and current

[1:41:12] water levels are almost at about the same level that we got them to in 1992.

[1:41:18] So, we're keeping up with septic influent period periodic rainfall. Um,

[1:41:26] and I'll hand it over to Lori for a moment.

[1:41:29] » Steal the mouse. >> Hi, thank you, Scott. Yeah, I just

[1:41:33] wanted to point out that the the main purpose of the landslide assessment

[1:41:35] district is to fund the equipment and the maintenance and evaluations that are

[1:41:40] needed to look maintain these lowered groundwater levels and also to monitor

[1:41:44] for potential landslide movement. We do this through active dewatering system

[1:41:49] consisting of 24 dewatering wells and 36 horizontal drains. We monitor the slope

[1:41:57] um through 23 slope inclinometer casings. We can measure if there's any

[1:42:01] shear deformation at those locations and we monitor the groundwater levels at 29

[1:42:05] different monitoring points throughout the district.

[1:42:09] We also track pavement cracks or changes in pavement cracking. Um and then we

[1:42:14] also track the two items that of water that go into the landslide on any basis

[1:42:19] are the imported water usage and septic systems and rainfall.

[1:42:26] So this [snorts] graph represents uh presents the historic deatering of the

[1:42:29] Big Brock Mesa landslide dating back to 1983.

[1:42:34] The blue shading. Oops.

[1:42:38] Okay. Uh the blue shading is represents the uh portion of the deatering output

[1:42:43] that is from the deatering wells and the green is the portion of dewatering from

[1:42:47] the hydrogers. The red is the sum of of the total

[1:42:52] deatering from both of those deatering methods.

[1:42:55] Why I find this graph really interesting is that it really points to how dramatic

[1:43:01] the initial dewatering was following the um when the landslide moved in 1983 and

[1:43:07] the efforts that were made to dewater and lower the groundwater levels to over

[1:43:11] 100 ft. Following that initial period of dewatering, you can see that the cycles

[1:43:17] um even from back to the early 90s remain relatively constant um at or at

[1:43:23] least uh static and predictable where we do see spikes in the data all coincide

[1:43:29] to where there were historic high rain seasons. Um and that that's where all

[1:43:34] these spikes uh all cor correspond to that and that shows that the dewatering

[1:43:38] system increases but it's keeping up with the increased water from rainfall

[1:43:43] that's entering the system. Here I just wanted to point out that the

[1:43:48] deatering output was at its all-time low following the January 2025 Palisades

[1:43:54] fire. That was due to no electricity to power the deatering wells.

[1:43:59] there was a surge of dewatering in um spring once we were able to get most of

[1:44:04] the deatering wells at least running intermittently. And so that that just

[1:44:07] shows there was kind of a surge to lower those groundwater levels that may have

[1:44:11] risen a bit from January. And then here we are last month kind of right back on

[1:44:16] track to where we would predict to be in annual deatering output.

[1:44:21] This is a graph of imported water usage to the Landside Assessment District

[1:44:26] dating back to 1993. This is um this is the other item

[1:44:32] besides rainfall that adds water to the assessment district. And just what I

[1:44:36] wanted to show point out on here again is that the imported water is at an

[1:44:41] all-time low um following the January 2025 fire. [snorts] And that the bottom

[1:44:47] line is that the dewatering discharge increases in response to rainfall and in

[1:44:51] response to these water usage demands to maintain the lowered groundwater levels.

[1:44:55] the system essentially keeps up with the demand um of imported water and

[1:45:00] rainfall. And then finally, I just wanted to

[1:45:04] highlight some of the extensive repairs that were done on the facilities within

[1:45:07] the landside assessment district. We repaired and replaced over 90 watering

[1:45:12] well pumps. Um we replaced almost all of the electrical control panels and

[1:45:17] enclosures and Edison meter panels with new stainless steel equipment. We had to

[1:45:22] pull and replace over 5,000 ft of damaged wiring. We had the dewatering

[1:45:28] wells. Uh we have them running intermittently now both on metered and

[1:45:31] generated power to keep up with the demands of the system and maintain

[1:45:34] lowered groundwater levels. Um the other uh exciting improvement was we were uh

[1:45:40] as when the city was working on the storm drain pod drain project, the

[1:45:44] municipal storm drain, we were able to uh consolidate the drainage and consolid

[1:45:49] conveyance piping for the dewatering uh system. And all [snorts] of those

[1:45:54] repairs should be completed are expected to be completed by April of this year.

[1:46:01] So in conclusion and summary um California Geologic Survey classifies

[1:46:07] the Big Rock Mesa landslide as an active historic landslide.

[1:46:11] What's most important and guides permitting and policym is generally the

[1:46:16] factor of safety of the landslide. The factor of safety is controlled by the

[1:46:22] whatever the groundwater levels are. So we need the dewatering system to

[1:46:26] maintain um

[1:46:29] to lower water levels and maintain a safe uh factor of safety. The current

[1:46:34] factor of safety is uh believed to be about 1.25

[1:46:39] which is below the typically required 1.5 factor of safety for a len for a

[1:46:45] stable development. Um and it's 1.25 25 is just marginally

[1:46:51] above the the level the factor of safety where you'll start seeing creep movement

[1:46:55] in a landslide which is typically between about 1.1 and 1.2. So we're just

[1:47:00] a little bit above that. Um and that's uh that's what the deatering system is

[1:47:06] capable of maintaining as it currently is configured. Um the three elements

[1:47:10] that influence groundwater levels are rainfall uh septic input and dewatering.

[1:47:19] rainfall every decade we get a we get a couple of doozy years and uh the system

[1:47:26] has been able to keep up with that. Septic's relatively constant for most of

[1:47:30] the time. Right now it's at a historic low. Um groundwater levels remain

[1:47:35] stable. Septic input is currently at historic lows. Uh no discernable

[1:47:41] movement has been detected in the landslide for [snorts] at least the last

[1:47:45] decade. um that's based on inclinometer data and synthetic aperture radar which

[1:47:52] is a fancy form of satellite radar. [snorts] Um

[1:47:56] and then the last point is the Bing and Associates report was a very

[1:48:02] comprehensive and state-of-the-art report prepared in 1992

[1:48:06] and despite technological adv advances in things like software the physics and

[1:48:12] the science have not changed and the factor of safety evaluation remains

[1:48:17] valid today. That is the end I think of our

[1:48:22] presentation.

[1:48:27] Thank you. Does anybody have any questions?

[1:48:30] » Uh yeah, I've got on your factor of safety. Um when you show 1.25,

[1:48:37] what's going to be a factor that might change that to a lower number where we'd

[1:48:42] have a creep. And secondly, I assume that applies across the entire landslide

[1:48:47] area. Are there pockets that are at higher risk than others?

[1:48:51] There are pockets in in the Bingan and Associates report when they really did

[1:48:58] the evaluation. If I get all the way back there,

[1:49:04] this slide, there's

[1:49:10] there's I showed you if I can get my cursor over here.

[1:49:15] Where's the cursor? Help

[1:49:19] me Lori. Where's my cursor? >> Oh,

[1:49:22] » maybe it has to. >> It's not showing up over there. It's got

[1:49:27] to there. Okay, I got it now. Sorry. So, I showed you this slide. Each of these,

[1:49:32] this is another cross-section. We had cross-section A, B, C, D, E, and F which

[1:49:37] was evaluated, which were all evaluated. They were actually

[1:49:41] they went well through the alphabet. Um each cross-section had its own factor of

[1:49:48] safety. Um D was typical and runs right down the middle. So that's the one I

[1:49:53] presented. And but in general, the factor of safety for the

[1:49:59] area is about 1.25. That's a reasonable average. And and changes in groundwater

[1:50:05] are what govern the change in the stability.

[1:50:08] » All right. So the changes in the groundwater uh obviously we're

[1:50:11] dewatering and it looks like it's holding over the past decade multiple

[1:50:16] years. Uh is there anything that would cause that to rise in spite of our

[1:50:20] dewatering system or is the watering system the only only thing to be

[1:50:23] considered?

[1:50:26] » So the the big variable is rainfall. We get wet years. Uh but it is essential

[1:50:33] that we maintain and limit the amount of water that's input into the slide

[1:50:38] through septic systems which is why we have controls on development on the

[1:50:42] mesa. You're not allowed to add you can add small additions but you

[1:50:48] can't add plumbing fixtures. Um, and it we're always uh as we do reviews and and

[1:50:56] geotechnical input um we're always encouraging homeowners to uh have limit

[1:51:02] irrigation uh because that's a big input. Um

[1:51:08] so controlling water into the slide is is what we need to do. We can't control

[1:51:13] rainfall. we can make sure, which Lori pointed out, uh they're replacing all

[1:51:18] the surface drains because all those pipes were mostly HDPE and they all

[1:51:22] melted. Um and uh so restoring that carries rainwater through the storm

[1:51:30] drain system off the mesa. So that's a big improvement and an essential

[1:51:35] improvement. Um so but that's how we control this landslide. it. This

[1:51:41] landside is simply too large to use a traditional

[1:51:46] concrete queson, uh, tiebacks, things like that. Uh,

[1:51:53] they're they're too small compared to the mass of the landslide. You've got to

[1:51:57] control the groundwater. It's the only way to control the stability of this

[1:52:00] landslide is a practical matter. >> Okay. Thank you very much.

[1:52:06] » Um, yeah, I'll piggyback on that. I think

[1:52:10] » [clears throat] >> Thank you for all of that as well. Um,

[1:52:13] sometimes I in my mind I think of all of these properties rebuilding at once and

[1:52:18] it causing kind of disturbance to the land regardless of water because I hear

[1:52:23] that this is all about water and dewatering. Um, but for an active

[1:52:29] landslide, which I'm hearing it is a historic active landslide, construction,

[1:52:34] would that have anything to do with movement?

[1:52:38] Not really. What I mean adding you're you're going to restore these septic

[1:52:43] systems, right? >> Which will contribute, but that's just

[1:52:47] going to bring it back to where we were. We're at historic low septic influent

[1:52:52] right now. >> So, it's not like jackhammering all at

[1:52:54] the same time. And >> that is inconsequential.

[1:52:57] » That's good for me to question, but it's good for me to know.

[1:52:59] » It simply becomes dimminimous. Um, also, you know, speaking of the sewer

[1:53:04] possibility, people have asked why not go up Big Rock. And I think the answer

[1:53:08] was to people don't want the price and they also don't want the development.

[1:53:13] But would sewer help the big rock slide and the dewatering this whole watering

[1:53:19] system? >> Yes, it would.

[1:53:22] » Yes. Yes. A sewer would be a tremendous benefit to the mesa. I mean,

[1:53:27] » we understand the development concerns, but but uh you know, as far as the

[1:53:31] landslide stability, it would be a tremendous benefit.

[1:53:35] » Good to know. Um where does the water go from the deatering system?

[1:53:41] » It runs through a series of conveyance piping. So before the fire um it it

[1:53:46] connected at individual facilities on different streets for the deatering

[1:53:50] wells run into the the closest storm drain catch basin and followed the

[1:53:54] city's municipal storm drain system down to um PCH where then it goes into a calr

[1:54:00] culvert under PCH and outlets at discharge locations on the beach

[1:54:05] » to the ocean. Yes. >> Okay. And then I was wondering would it

[1:54:09] be um feasible or too expensive to ent trap the water and then use it again

[1:54:16] because we know that Big Rock doesn't always have water like other

[1:54:20] neighborhoods in Malibu to ent trap the water and then reuse it. Is that maybe

[1:54:25] out that's a public works? I don't know. But instead of having it all go to the

[1:54:28] ocean >> instead it would

[1:54:31] » I think that just brings up a slew of other complications. water treatment

[1:54:35] would be required, all sorts of monitoring. Um,

[1:54:39] » okay. >> But it it's as feasible as as sewer.

[1:54:42] » Um, and I wasn't sure if you knew the answer, but residents pay for this

[1:54:46] through an assessment district, which is, and I don't know that number, and I

[1:54:51] should. Does anybody know that number?

[1:54:55] » Like, one, two, or three? I mean, I know the number of what our

[1:54:59] budget is for the actual monitoring and maintenance of the for of Big Rock is on

[1:55:03] the order of $350,000 a year. Oh, okay. Thank you. 350 a year. Um, okay. And

[1:55:12] then I heard that there's no electricity on the deatering system. So, let's say

[1:55:16] the power goes out, there's a big fire, and then it's not doing its job, but

[1:55:20] then there's a huge amount of water being pushed into the mountain because

[1:55:24] they're trying to get the fire out. Would that cause a landslide or could

[1:55:28] that >> um do you

[1:55:32] » Well, you have multiple things going on. You lost all the dewatering system

[1:55:36] because all the all the electric infrastructure burned up.

[1:55:40] » That's right. Um, simultaneously you lost all the septic system inputting

[1:55:46] water because all the houses burned down and there there was this temporary slug

[1:55:53] of firefighting water, but that becomes pretty trivial. I mean, it was a lot of

[1:55:59] water for a few days, but it it doesn't amount to much in the overall stability,

[1:56:06] long-term stability of the slide. That is sort of a flash in the pan that goes

[1:56:10] away. >> Got it. And I was absent of a huge fire

[1:56:14] that was like palisades, you know, moderate PSPS, which is a public safety

[1:56:19] power shut off. Does your system have backup power?

[1:56:24] » We have several um contractors that we can call on a moment's notice to bring

[1:56:29] out temporary generators and portable generators uh within a day.

[1:56:34] » Um yeah, >> that's great. Um, okay. And then are

[1:56:38] there any other active landslides in Malibu?

[1:56:41] » Yeah, there's the Cayaba Bargo landslide and the Malibu Road landslide.

[1:56:45] » The Malibu Road. >> Yes, that's correct.

[1:56:47] » Got it. Thank you. I wanted to ask that. And then

[1:56:50] » those are the landslide assessment districts, but there are scores of

[1:56:54] active landslides in the city of Malibu. >> Okay.

[1:56:57] » Active or historic? >> Both active and I mean not not

[1:57:02] necessarily actively move. If you're talking to a geologist,

[1:57:06] If a landslide has moved in in recorded history, it's considered active. That's

[1:57:13] the general accepted definition. There's multiple definitions of what is active

[1:57:19] and not, but but the the widely held consideration is what the

[1:57:26] California Geological Survey defines it as. If it's moved within history, it's

[1:57:31] considered active. >> Okay, that's my questions.

[1:57:36] Thank you. >> I guess mine's kind of a big question

[1:57:41] and I apologize for not prepping it earlier, but so we have all these

[1:57:45] questions, you know, about geology reports, geotechnical reports, things

[1:57:48] like that. And if the houses were standing before, why can't they just put

[1:57:52] back the same house that they had? Why do they have to do additional reports?

[1:57:56] So maybe you can just give a little opine on

[1:58:00] » well why we need this. >> Well, a lot of these homes were built in

[1:58:02] the '60s. >> And so in essence they can they can

[1:58:08] rebuild what they had. That's that's the the the policy. But they have to comply

[1:58:14] their foundations have to comply with the building code, the current building

[1:58:18] code. So they can rebuild the same house um

[1:58:22] plus 10% volumeish. Um but the foundations have to comply

[1:58:29] with the building code. And some of the homes

[1:58:33] uh the original foundations don't comply

[1:58:37] with the original the the current building code. So they have to upgrade

[1:58:41] their foundations and then they can put their house on top of their new

[1:58:46] foundations. It really comes down to a code

[1:58:49] compliance issue with regards to current code standards.

[1:58:52] » Yes. I mean that's required for >> following the LMA Pria earthquake in

[1:58:58] 1989 and following the 1994 Northridge earthquake, building codes were upgraded

[1:59:05] substantially to address primarily the seismic but other hazards that we faced.

[1:59:10] And so codes have advanced and they're somewhat more stringent now. And so your

[1:59:16] foundations, if your foundations were built in 1963, they'll need to be

[1:59:20] upgraded. >> Thank you. A good presentation. I

[1:59:24] appreciate it. Thank you, >> Steve. Any questions or comments?

[1:59:28] » No, just I agree. I think this this is very helpful. So, thank you very much.

[1:59:32] I' I've learned a lot. So, thank you. >> So, I just have one question, which is

[1:59:37] what's the headline? What's the What's the big takeaway from this presentation,

[1:59:41] if anything? I I think it's Lor's presentation that

[1:59:46] the dewatering system is doing a good job keeping up with the you know

[1:59:56] the big thing that changes year to year is is the amount of rainfall we get and

[2:00:03] that has a substantial consequence to the stability of the landslide. And if

[2:00:07] it wasn't for the dewatering system, we would lose that battle. And you know, it

[2:00:14] it would be the the tract was developed in the 60s and 70s. And after it was

[2:00:21] fully built out, it very quickly started to fail. Um once it got all those 216

[2:00:28] homes and all their 216 septic systems putting water into the landslide, it

[2:00:33] very quick it started creeping in the 70s and it started active failure in the

[2:00:38] in the early 80s. U it didn't take long once all those septic systems were

[2:00:44] putting water in. uh whereas and the other thing that had happened is as I

[2:00:49] had mentioned there was this ocean mutual water system that had been

[2:00:54] dewatering the landslide not intentionally just for municipal supply

[2:00:58] water for decades before but the housing pushed all those wells out and so they

[2:01:04] stopped dewatering and they started putting septic in and and the slide

[2:01:08] failed rapidly. >> Okay, thank you.

[2:01:13] That takes us to commission committee city manager update. I have three cards

[2:01:20] for commissioner updates. There are no commissioners online right on Zoom.

[2:01:26] [clears throat] >> Correct. We don't have any virtual

[2:01:29] commission updates. >> Okay, Scott Dick, you're up.

[2:01:44] Thank you, uh, Mr. Mayor and Council and Joe. Um, that was a great report. as a

[2:01:51] public works commissioner for that last decade. Um we've gotten the reports on

[2:01:58] this on the big rock and the other uh watering districts, dewatering

[2:02:04] districts. And what we've seen, of course, is what was just presented is

[2:02:10] that over that time period, um it's been stable.

[2:02:17] And if it's been stable, then

[2:02:23] what we call it a landslide for rebuilding,

[2:02:26] it seems like we don't have any problem. Um, but Halen brought up something I

[2:02:33] wanted to address. All that water goes out into the ocean.

[2:02:40] Now, the gentleman mentioned that the fire department when they come and

[2:02:47] they're trying to put out houses, lots of water. Except I'm going to remind

[2:02:52] you, the fire department did not come to Big Rock or any of the other canyons.

[2:02:57] So, that wasn't a contributing factor. But

[2:03:03] there wasn't water there to fight a fire.

[2:03:08] Now it comes back to public works. We would like you guys to direct staff

[2:03:16] and the public works commission to investigate

[2:03:21] the possibility of using

[2:03:26] that water somehow. I don't see why you'd treat it cuz you're talking about

[2:03:30] using it for fire purposes only to build a tank at the top of Big Rock. Now, this

[2:03:38] just seems logical to me. I'm not an engineer, but it seems like if we could

[2:03:44] take a bunch of water and have that available,

[2:03:50] um I know it's not going to take we're not going to use all the water, but the

[2:03:54] easiest part have a big tank so that if excuse me, when there's another fire,

[2:04:02] we can use that water to have at least a resource for our

[2:04:09] firefight. writers. So, I don't know if it's feasible, but I think we should

[2:04:14] investigate it. So, please send that over to public works

[2:04:19] commission. We will investigate. Maybe it's way too expensive, but maybe it's

[2:04:25] possible. So, let's look at what we can do to make our town a little bit safer.

[2:04:31] Thanks, >> Scott. Is is that a public works

[2:04:33] commission request or you just raising that on your own right now? Um, as a

[2:04:38] public works commissioner, I am bringing that to you.

[2:04:43] » Was that was that something that the public works commission voted to have

[2:04:45] you present to? >> No, it it was not.

[2:04:48] » Okay. What I'm asking is let's see if we could investigate. Thank you.

[2:04:53] » Sure. >> Um, Judy Viblanca.

[2:05:08] Good evening, Mayor Silverstein, members of the council, city manager. Um, I am

[2:05:11] the current chair of the parks and recreation commission and I'm here to

[2:05:15] update you on some of our activities. I also want to recognize the other

[2:05:18] commissioners, Jake Lingo, Dane Scophammer, Georgia Goldfarb, and Alicia

[2:05:22] Peak. Uh, first, we are excited beyond belief that our permanent skate park was

[2:05:27] opened on Saturdays and Sundays on February 14th. Yes. Since opening, an

[2:05:32] average of 20 to 30 people per hour have been enjoying it. The park is still

[2:05:37] closed Monday through Friday uh because construction continues for landscaping,

[2:05:41] irrigation, fencing, and the restrooms. Tonight, the council will be reviewing

[2:05:46] the commission's recommendation for the preliminary design of the Malibu Bluffs

[2:05:50] Park snack shack with associated storage for youth sports, which has been at the

[2:05:55] front forefront of the commission's work plan since 2023.

[2:05:59] commission has worked very hard to bring the best design forward and limit costs

[2:06:03] as much as possible while providing the needed facilities. All of the

[2:06:07] commissioners, many who you'll hear from later, um strongly support this project

[2:06:11] as a vital amenity for this park where our youth sports and skate park are

[2:06:15] centered. This will really be a great community building asset. We realize

[2:06:20] each parks and wreck project requires significant funding and as the

[2:06:24] commission continues to work with you on developing desired recreational

[2:06:28] facilities for our community. We would ask the council to consider developing

[2:06:32] an infrastructure to allow private funding to be solicited to supplement

[2:06:36] city funds so we can complete these projects. Um some upcoming events

[2:06:40] include the nominations for the 2026 Jay Caredian Award are now open until

[2:06:46] Tuesday, March 31st. Uh the nomination form is available at

[2:06:50] maliboucity.org/jake award and this award is presented

[2:06:54] annually to an individual or group that contributes to the betterment of parks

[2:06:57] and recreation in Malibu. Uh the 15th annual shoe day pow and intertribal

[2:07:02] gathering will be at Bluffs Park March 28th to 29th. There will be free

[2:07:07] shuttles from city hall and theoki property since there's no on-site

[2:07:10] parking. There will be Native American dancers, drummers, and singers in

[2:07:15] addition to artists and vendors and food trucks. Please join the celebration and

[2:07:19] you can find more information at malib city.org shumash day. Um the parks and

[2:07:24] recck commission is also responsible to oversee the earth friendly management

[2:07:27] policy in our city parks which which includes the elimination of herbicides,

[2:07:32] pesticides and rodenocides. Um we are proud of what we have accomplished and

[2:07:37] we have several goals and outreach opportunities to achieve in 2026. We

[2:07:41] hope these efforts will provide a model for everyone in Malibu to become more

[2:07:45] aware of protecting our unique habitat and implementing these principles on

[2:07:49] their own properties. Um some other projects that we have in the works are

[2:07:54] um the staff is working with Tranquist Riders and Ropers to develop a community

[2:07:57] use agreement and potential restoration plan for the equestrian center. Um staff

[2:08:02] is also working with commissioners to see if we can do a dog park at Los

[2:08:05] Flores Park which is currently being restored after major fire damage. Um,

[2:08:10] I'll just end by inviting the community to attend our meetings the third Tuesday

[2:08:13] of the month at 6:30 in the multi-purpose room. Thank you.

[2:08:17] » Thank you, Judy. >> Mel May.

[2:08:31] Good evening, council members. Welcome, city manager Irvin. We had a safety

[2:08:38] meeting last week. I spoke with Chair Spiegel who's in attendance tonight and

[2:08:42] just wanted to run down a few things that we're working on which people may

[2:08:46] be aware of may they may not be. Um first off I would like to

[2:08:53] plead with everybody if you see something say something because a lot of

[2:08:56] things that people see they think people are going to fix but they don't fix

[2:09:00] them. I got a I was party to an email where somebody hit something in PCH tore

[2:09:05] up their tire. They were stranded. So if you see something see something in the

[2:09:09] highway report it to um Susan Dwayne's office here at the city public works or

[2:09:15] CALR.

[2:09:19] We discussed a lot of topics last week. One of the first things that came up was

[2:09:24] uh Mayor Silverstein's appointment Alexis brought up the recent fatality on

[2:09:29] Malibu Canyon and so we discussed that a little bit. Uh, I've worked on Malibu

[2:09:33] Canyon in the Krails and the guardrails for over 10 years with Jennifer Denakoa

[2:09:36] many years ago and I was on the safety commission previously. I've reached back

[2:09:40] out to the county to see if we can get some accelerated action to try to make

[2:09:45] that highway safer as the traffic gets more congested this summer. Uh, other

[2:09:50] things that were discussed were the Corell Canyon intersection and the

[2:09:54] safety there, West Winding Way and the overcrowding that's going on there. uh

[2:10:00] crosswalks and safety there. I've had a friend that was hit by the Zoomerz

[2:10:04] crosswalk and I actually almost got hit in that crosswalk, too. So, we've talked

[2:10:08] about safety and crosswalks. The city has put up some new high visibility

[2:10:13] yellow signs along Cross Creek and uh Civic Center, and uh I've reached out to

[2:10:19] them to try to redo some stenciling for some of the worn lines there so people

[2:10:22] will be safer there. Also, the Zuma underpass, we are pushing forward to try

[2:10:28] to get some action on that to get that open. So, that last weekend again, uh

[2:10:32] there wasn't enough people taking money at the parking lots and so and the

[2:10:36] underpass wasn't open and so traffic backed up on PCH. So, you've got PCH

[2:10:41] gridlocked because of a couple very simple things to fix. So, we're working

[2:10:46] on that. Uh the fire leaison made a nice presentation. in the city for those of

[2:10:51] you that don't know that that has a department for fire safety. They have

[2:10:54] some very educated fire liaison people which will come out to your property,

[2:10:59] inspect the property, give you suggestions, defensible space, brush

[2:11:03] clearing, and also home hardening techniques. So, it's a it's very helpful

[2:11:08] on many different levels. So, please reach out. Um,

[2:11:14] uh, we have the council members, as I mentioned, Alexis is on there. We have,

[2:11:19] uh, Richard Garvey who's on CERT, Brian Merrick, who's been a realer and has

[2:11:22] been in this town forever. And so, we've got some good depth on the count on the

[2:11:27] commission right now. And we'd love to hear from people if they have any

[2:11:30] suggestions about things to work on. And, um, there's also water storage. You

[2:11:36] know, we've had a problem with water storage in the past. It will in this

[2:11:39] fire. >> Thank you. So, we're pressing for more

[2:11:42] water. >> Okay. We received one slip late and we

[2:11:46] already heard one person from the public works commission. So, sorry.

[2:11:51] » We're going to move to the um city manager update.

[2:11:55] » Yes. Good evening, mayor, members of city council, and members of the public.

[2:11:58] Joe Irvin. Uh hello, community of Malibu. Happy to be here today. Uh, a

[2:12:03] few items I'd like to update everyone on is, uh, the council members, uh, Riggins

[2:12:09] and Conrad, uh, celebrated Malibu Village Books. Uh, we highlighted the

[2:12:14] store's resilience through the recent fires and its role as a community hub.

[2:12:18] Uh, part of this is part of the city's ongoing efforts to support our local

[2:12:21] businesses from Palisades Fire. Uh, and resources are available via Malibu

[2:12:27] Rebuilds.org related to these efforts. Also as part of the public works project

[2:12:32] uh the signal synchron s syn synchronization

[2:12:36] uh we are connected to real- time video feeds on traffic conditions on PCH it's

[2:12:41] now available on the CALR website tiny URL back or.comcalrans

[2:12:49] traffic cams we'll make sure that's clear on the city's website this is part

[2:12:54] of the city's PCH uh signalization uh safety projects

[2:12:59] community services has recently installed three new public telescopes at

[2:13:03] the whale watching uh spot. This is at Malibu Bluffs Park. Two have stepups and

[2:13:09] one is wheelchair accessible. These are significantly better than the aging

[2:13:14] telescopes that we're breaking down. Uh it's a great tool for our kids and

[2:13:18] adults to watch whales uh and observe the coastline and our beautiful views

[2:13:22] for education purposes and just enjoyment uh outside.

[2:13:30] Uh some of you may know about the uh executive order that was issued uh

[2:13:35] probably 45 60 days ago uh from the [clears throat] president. Uh there's

[2:13:40] been some talk in the community about the Small Business Administration

[2:13:43] guidance that's being given out to those who have received uh funding from SBA.

[2:13:49] Uh, I just want to state for the record and to make it very clear that city

[2:13:52] building permit codes, fire safety codes, county building codes, all still

[2:13:57] shall be met. Uh, if you plan to rebuild, get in the door with the

[2:14:02] Yolanda Bundy's uh, office to get your expedited permit and follow the rules

[2:14:07] that are in place to ensure you uh, build properly and consistent with local

[2:14:13] codes. With that, I would like to turn it over

[2:14:17] to Director Bundy to give a brief overview of our rebuilding process.

[2:14:24] » Thank you, city manager. Um, and thank you, city council. Uh, just a brief

[2:14:29] update where we are with our fire rebuilds. Um,

[2:14:34] currently, uh, we have, um, we are close to the 37, uh, permits issued. We're

[2:14:42] working with three more families uh to uh issue permits this week. So that will

[2:14:47] give us 40 of those homes for our families are being built. Uh we have so

[2:14:54] far 629 total building permits issued on that

[2:14:58] affected area and with 176 uh planning approved uh homes.

[2:15:07] I also wanted to share with the uh council and with the community that this

[2:15:12] morning staff met with the rebuilds on capitans uh Darren Graves uh Joe

[2:15:18] Drummond Lu Tenna and um both of our council members Rean and Conrad to

[2:15:24] continue talking about our better ways to streamline the process. And one of

[2:15:30] them was uh we are creating a master uh rebuild guidelines that provide will

[2:15:36] provide a clear easy to follow roadmap for all of our families. We also um had

[2:15:43] another meeting in regards to the rebuild website to make sure that our

[2:15:48] documents uh as per Darren's comments last week follow the policy and that

[2:15:54] direction of uh of council. I feel confident that with this efforts, we're

[2:16:00] getting to a point that we're collaborating with the community. We're

[2:16:03] getting things move forward. And lastly, um just want to share with you a few

[2:16:09] events that are coming. uh one that will happen tomorrow at at the council

[2:16:14] chambers from 12 to 2 with the zone capence uh to continue talking about

[2:16:19] those geotechnical guidelines and provide clarity uh to those families

[2:16:24] that still uh feel that they need a little bit more clarification that will

[2:16:28] take place here at the council chambers. Uh we will also be hosting on Wednesday,

[2:16:33] March 11, a design professionals meetings. To all of our design

[2:16:37] professionals that are out there, uh please we uh urge you to attend. This is

[2:16:43] to continue answering questions as they are the ones that are submitting the

[2:16:47] projects for review and we want to continue um discussing any other uh um

[2:16:54] questions that they might have or ideas that they might bring on board. Uh so

[2:16:59] please uh we uh urge you to uh join us on Wednesday 11th and then March 24 uh

[2:17:07] all of our families. Uh we really want to have a a gathering and this is uh

[2:17:14] with the intent to uh invite families that have already been through the

[2:17:18] process on policies fires and so they can give the uh the feedback to the ones

[2:17:24] that haven't submit to those 307 families that haven't submit so they can

[2:17:29] um know that it is doable it is possible and the city is committed to continue

[2:17:34] helping them. And with that I conclude my presentation. Thank you so much.

[2:17:40] » Thank you uh Yolanda. And I believe we have uh Sergeant uh Solderland who's

[2:17:45] here to give a brief update. Mayor, >> before we move to Sergeant Southern,

[2:17:49] does any council member have any questions of Yolanda?

[2:17:52] » Just uh curious, how close are we to getting uh certificate of occupancy on

[2:17:57] any of those permits? >> Uh the closest one is uh Denise

[2:18:00] Tubberman. Uh she is located on the Big Rock area. She right now they are uh

[2:18:05] doing the framing. We estimate within the next six months uh she will be

[2:18:10] calling for a certificate of occupancy.

[2:18:15] » Any other questions? >> Thank you.

[2:18:18] » You're welcome.

[2:18:28] » Good evening, city council. Welcome, city manager Joe Irvin. Look forward to

[2:18:33] uh partnering with you and working with you. Um I have the crime statistics for

[2:18:39] the month of February for the city of Malibu. Uh in February there were 15

[2:18:44] part one crimes reported. Uh this brings the total for the year to 32 and that

[2:18:50] compares with 42 from the same time last year. So that's a almost 24% decrease.

[2:18:55] So still the crime trends are still trending down. So that is good to

[2:19:00] [snorts] see. A couple notable incidents that happened uh over the past several

[2:19:05] weeks. Uh the first one uh both of these involved uh homeless individuals. So the

[2:19:12] first one happened on February 24th at about 1:00 in the afternoon. Uh this was

[2:19:18] in the 23,000 block of PCH at Malibu Village books. Um the suspect had set up

[2:19:26] uh a tent on the location, which is private property, and a security guard

[2:19:30] at the location um went to have that individual leave the the property. Uh

[2:19:37] the suspect then took out a pair of scissors and threatened to stab the

[2:19:41] security guard. Um deputies were called and while they were on the way, the

[2:19:46] suspect gathered their belongings and left on foot. uh a California State

[2:19:52] Parks officer was nearby and that uh security officer flagged the California

[2:19:57] State Parks officer down and who followed the uh suspect to um Legacy

[2:20:03] Park and the deputies were able to locate the uh suspect and take him into

[2:20:08] custody and he was arrested for felony criminal threats and brandishing a

[2:20:12] weapon in this case the scissors. Um, [clears throat]

[2:20:16] another notable incident that happened uh on February 28th at about 9:30 in the

[2:20:22] morning at the Starbucks on Malibu Road. Um,

[2:20:27] uh, the victim was seated outside of the Starbucks. Uh, when she overheard the

[2:20:31] suspect arguing with an employee in the location about being asked to leave the

[2:20:35] premises. As the suspect walked away, he suddenly swung his right arm in a

[2:20:39] punching motion towards her, knocking over the drinks on her table. Uh the

[2:20:43] suspect then swung his right arm again and this time hit her on the shoulder

[2:20:46] with a closed fist. The suspect immediately fled on foot. Um when the

[2:20:52] deputies got there, the suspect was gone. But later in the day, a witness to

[2:20:55] this incident actually located uh the suspect walking on PCH about a mile from

[2:21:02] the Starbucks and had the presence of mind to call the sheriff's department

[2:21:06] and deputies were able to apprehend that suspect. So, thank you to that witness.

[2:21:10] uh that suspect was arrested for elder abuse because the victim in this case

[2:21:16] was 71 years old. So um thank [clears throat] you for that to that

[2:21:20] witness for being a good witness. Um

[2:21:27] finally over the past weekend uh Parker you can pull up the uh the DUIS. So, the

[2:21:33] Malibu VOPS were out on patrol this past weekend and uh if you can see and uh

[2:21:41] they were patrolling the area on PCH near Tranis when they noticed a vehicle

[2:21:46] that was driving erratically and they thought the uh driver may have been

[2:21:51] having a medical emergency or was possibly under the influence and they uh

[2:21:54] used the radio to to have the deputies respond and the vehicle was pulled over

[2:22:01] and inside the uh vehicle, they've located a nitrous oxide bottle and also

[2:22:08] that French bulldog there and they determined that the suspect was under

[2:22:12] the influence of not only alcohol but nitrous oxide and were able to arrest

[2:22:16] him for driving under the influence. So kudos to the VOPs. Uh they're extra help

[2:22:23] for us out there. They're outstanding and they did a great job over the

[2:22:28] weekend. Um, finally, [clears throat]

[2:22:33] uh, the sheriff's department and the fire

[2:22:37] department went to Dukes last week. They had a a nice gathering for us for first

[2:22:41] responders and that's int anticipation of their grand reopening this week. So,

[2:22:47] uh, they will be open and they could, uh, use your patronage. So, please stop

[2:22:52] by. The food was great. Um, also deputies from the sheriff station played

[2:22:58] the middle schoolers at Malibu, um, middle school in a basketball game

[2:23:03] game during their lunch. So, um, we won 26 to 23. Couldn't let the middle middle

[2:23:11] schoolers beat us, but uh, it was a great event and it was a great time with

[2:23:16] the kids and, uh, everyone had a great time. So,

[2:23:20] um, finally, if you can bring up the flyer,

[2:23:26] uh, if you would like to donate, we are doing a fundraiser for feeding military

[2:23:30] families at the station. You can drop off, uh, any of those needed items

[2:23:34] there. Um, they support, uh, the armed forces families at 29 Palms, Camp

[2:23:40] Pendleton, Fort Irwin, and Los Angeles Air Force Base. So, the deadline to get

[2:23:45] it to the station is this Wednesday. There's also a QR code there if you want

[2:23:49] to uh contribute directly, but uh we're accepting donations at the station and

[2:23:54] we'll transport it out to uh Sand Deus there. So, that is all I have. I'm

[2:23:59] available if anyone has any questions. Does anybody have any questions?

[2:24:05] » Steve, >> we played the high school kids and we

[2:24:09] won. You say that with a little more confidence. [laughter]

[2:24:13] Yeah, we uh it was probably the the hardest 20 minutes of my life.

[2:24:17] [laughter]

[2:24:20] » You know, you catch these homeless people with the guy with the scissors or

[2:24:23] what happens to them when you arrest them?

[2:24:26] » So, in that case, uh he was arrested for a felony. And so, uh and since it

[2:24:32] involved a weapon, so that's a serious crime, they stay in jail until they see

[2:24:35] the judge. So, uh, they have an arraignment date within 48 hours and

[2:24:40] then it goes through the criminal justice system

[2:24:42] » and typically they just get let go again. Is that I mean I don't

[2:24:46] » So zero bail is in effect and so a lot of crimes um are released on citation

[2:24:53] but in this case uh they were held in custody.

[2:24:58] » We played the kids and we won. >> Anybody else?

[2:25:03] » Thank you for your report. >> Thank you.

[2:25:12] I don't have any more. Um, >> did you want to hear a law enforcement

[2:25:18] update from the MRCA or under public comment?

[2:25:21] » We we can hear from Ranger Tim now. >> Ranger Tim and

[2:25:26] » thank you.

[2:25:34] Good evening, mayor and city council members and city manager. Uh, I'd like

[2:25:38] to give the MRCA uh, Coastal Ranger report. In the last month, a total of

[2:25:43] 276 st citations were issued involving park violations and illegal parking,

[2:25:49] including littering, possession of alcohol, smoking in the back country,

[2:25:54] and dogs off leash, as well as being in a closed area. Currently, we have

[2:26:00] augmented staffing in Malibu due to recent wind events and for the for a

[2:26:05] potential or prevention of a wildlife incident, wildfire incident. Correction.

[2:26:11] And Parker, do you have the picture? Thanks. On February 9th,

[2:26:17] we're almost there. There we go. On February 9th at Murphy Way Roadway,

[2:26:21] there are three park signs that were defaced and vandalized by painting over

[2:26:26] them. Currently, the signs were restored and are back to their original state.

[2:26:34] Thank you. Thank you, Parker. Continuous uh ranger safety patrols were

[2:26:39] implemented at Escanido Canyon Park due to the park visitors roadway safety and

[2:26:44] navigation to the designated trails. A total of 876 pounds of trash was picked

[2:26:51] up at our coastal area parks, including all beach accessways. Currently, there

[2:26:56] have been no evidence of new encampments developments at Malibu Blust Park and

[2:27:01] continuous patrols persist in the area. And this Oh, also a total of 875 pounds

[2:27:10] of trash was picked up. I I said that before. And this concludes my ranger

[2:27:15] report. Any questions? >> I do.

[2:27:19] » Okay. >> Hi, Ranger Tim. How are you?

[2:27:21] » Good. How are you? >> Great. Good to see you.

[2:27:23] » Thank you. Likewise. Any details of the injury that happened yesterday? I think

[2:27:27] somebody might have broken their leg on the hike.

[2:27:30] » Oh yeah, absolutely. There was a uh there was a a female

[2:27:34] » girl 18 years old that buckled her her ankle.

[2:27:38] » So luckily we were on on scene and we went uh to her rescue. Luckily

[2:27:44] everything was okay. the father, the parents were there and we put uh we

[2:27:48] ministered first aid, put ice and um got her safely back to her her vehicle with

[2:27:53] the parents. >> Thank you. Um any information about the

[2:27:57] accident, the vehicular accident on PCH and East winding way from last week?

[2:28:01] Yes, there's a a vehicle was going uh westbound and was trying to make the

[2:28:07] turn, lost control, and then sideswiped another car that was parked on the

[2:28:13] opposite side of East Waring Way. >> Yeah,

[2:28:15] » I saw that. I saw the whole thing. I saw the Tesla was parked illegally and the

[2:28:20] visitors that were coming, are they all okay? They were

[2:28:22] » Yes, absolutely. Yeah.

[2:28:25] » Um, so was this weekend a red flag weekend? It was really windy. It was

[2:28:30] very windy, but not a red flag. >> Got it. Because you know we close the

[2:28:33] parks during red flags. >> Absolutely.

[2:28:35] » Yeah. Um and then I was wondering who gets the money from all of your

[2:28:38] citations? Is it the city? Is it MRCA?

[2:28:43] » Good question. Um that would I would have to ask the administration to see

[2:28:47] where the funds do go >> and I could get back to you on that.

[2:28:50] » I would love that. And then when you give citations, are they on PCH or are

[2:28:54] they generally just in the 13 spot parking lot? just in the parking lot.

[2:29:00] » So, you give all of those citations just in the parking lot. Well,

[2:29:04] » sometimes we will issue citations adjacent to our parks.

[2:29:08] » Yeah, >> it depends on severity and

[2:29:11] » Wow. Um, I was also wondering, are you guys able to tow because there are cars

[2:29:16] that park on East Winding Way and a lot of the residents there ask me if you

[2:29:23] guys ever tow. >> Yes, we can. We do have the capacity or

[2:29:28] we can tow a CHP 180. >> So would we call your Ranger company

[2:29:33] phone number that I have that I would give that and then you guys would come

[2:29:36] out and tow or do we have to because people call Lost Hills, it's a private

[2:29:39] road so they can't actually tow. >> It depends on the area too. If uh if

[2:29:45] it's on PCH um >> it depends if we have the time to to

[2:29:49] wait for a tow and depends on severity. If it's a major public safety issue,

[2:29:54] absolutely. We'll we will take the time to uh to get a tow truck out there and

[2:30:01] then I heard about the vandalism. I'm sorry to hear that. There isn't I think

[2:30:05] do can you confirm if there's a new sign at the uh Eddie Albert

[2:30:09] trail head because that looks brand new,

[2:30:13] » I believe. So, yeah, they restored all the all the uh deface signs that that

[2:30:18] were in that area. >> Okay. Looks like different information

[2:30:22] has been put up, but I'm not sure about that. Like new information on that sign.

[2:30:26] » Could be. >> Okay. Yeah.

[2:30:28] » How much is your smoking citation? >> Uh depending on red flag, uh they they

[2:30:34] start at 175 and the red flag it could be $500

[2:30:39] » or more. >> All right.

[2:30:40] » And depends on whether we issue administrative citation

[2:30:44] » or a notice to appear. >> Got it. Thank you so much.

[2:30:48] » You're welcome. My pleasure. Any other questions? Anybody else?

[2:30:54] » Thank you. >> Hey, you're welcome.

[2:31:00] » You want to hear from CHP? >> There's no CHP reports are done. Thank

[2:31:04] you, mayor. >> Great. Thank you.

[2:31:07] » Okay, that takes us to written and oral communications from the public. It's

[2:31:11] after 6:30, so we can get to that. Um, how many slips we have here?

[2:31:17] » This is trying to see what item

[2:31:20] » this is for for >> a

[2:31:29] first. >> Okay,

[2:31:32] » that's okay. Sorry about it. >> Okay, got a lot of slips. Are there any

[2:31:35] people on Zoom?

[2:31:39] » There are two raised hands. Okay, lock them down. So, we'll start with Scott

[2:31:44] Toau, followed by Susie Chambers, followed by

[2:31:49] Dean Wener. >> And mayor, I just want to know as you

[2:31:52] called the item, we have four raised hands if you want to give everyone a few

[2:31:56] seconds warning and then >> Okay, this is 4 A. And we'll give Zoom

[2:31:59] 10 more seconds. I'll let you count it down and if no one else raises your

[2:32:02] hand, let us know. Thank you. Glaz Malibu Film Society wants to invite the

[2:32:08] entire community to our Oscar party this Sunday at Alo Restaurant. There is no

[2:32:14] fee to attend. The first drink is on us, either sparkling wine or sparkling

[2:32:19] cider. All you have to do is register on our website. We have about 20 seats

[2:32:24] left. Um I know we've had a fire, but it's been over a year and we wanted to

[2:32:30] bring you up to date on several things related to the film society. As far as

[2:32:34] our free screening series here at city hall, we've done five out of the 12 that

[2:32:38] were budgeted under the grant. Hugely popular with attendance averaging around

[2:32:44] 150 a show. Almost all of the Malibu residents. We're told the AV system is

[2:32:49] still unreliable. We can't do anymore. Um, when we first launched this series

[2:32:54] in 2024, it was so successful that a member of this council asked us to

[2:32:59] prepare a proposal to restore this room in a way that would let us bring

[2:33:03] firstrun screenings back to Malibu. We did that. We presented the plans to this

[2:33:08] council that October. Of course, then we had the fires later followed by a

[2:33:13] request and hold off until we had a new city manager. So, welcome Joe. Looking

[2:33:18] forward to working with you. Call me when you have time. Um, our big screen

[2:33:23] install. We offered to put up a 24 ft screen here. Council voted last August

[2:33:28] to approve it. What we wanted to do was a simple flat screen install behind the

[2:33:33] curtains, but staff said, "Nope, it's got to be motorized. Got to be suspended

[2:33:36] from the ceiling. It's going to weigh 500 lb. We have to re-engineer the whole

[2:33:40] thing. We'll pay for it." Nothing's happened in the six, seven months since

[2:33:45] then. Library speaker series. members of this council voted to uh award an 85 or

[2:33:52] request an $85,000 grant from the library set aside funds so that we could

[2:33:57] create a new free screening series which would celebrate the ongoing connection

[2:34:01] between books and film which goes back well over a hundred years. Well, library

[2:34:06] staff turned that down. Never told us why. We weren't even advised that we had

[2:34:11] been turned down. Last August, we met with library subcommittee. this time got

[2:34:16] some specifics on what was needed. We sent that very detailed updated proposal

[2:34:21] last September and are still waiting for a response. Library staff now wants even

[2:34:26] more information. Nobody will tell us what it is. Uh nor have they told

[2:34:31] responded to our request for a sample invoice from the current speaker series

[2:34:36] so that we can at least see how we should supply any requested financials.

[2:34:41] We need this council's help. We are stuck in a bureaucratic morass. All we

[2:34:47] want to do is help the city. So, please help us. Thank you. Thank you, Scott.

[2:34:56] Susie, you're next.

[2:35:05] » Do I push anything? >> Thanks.

[2:35:10] Good evening and welcome to our city, Mr. Irvin, and nice to meet you, city

[2:35:16] council. Hi, Maryanne. Um, I'm Susie Chambers and I am a longtime proud

[2:35:22] member of Malibu. Thank you for this chance to speak tonight. I'm here

[2:35:27] because 10 day 10 days ago, a bunch of Malibu residents received a notification

[2:35:32] that the T-Mobile cell tower be fasttracking to be put on the public

[2:35:38] utility easements within our residential areas, one of which polls is being

[2:35:42] proposed at my home. I have grandchildren. I will homeschool them

[2:35:47] there. I have a baby, a family over here that's pregnant. I have an elderly

[2:35:53] couple here and here are surrounded. Our neighborhood is surrounded by people

[2:35:57] that need their health and wellness. That being said, we understand that the

[2:36:02] FCC does not comply with health standards for the restrictions of any

[2:36:08] cell towers, but we would like to ask you as city council to represent us and

[2:36:14] pushing those cell towers and places that would be in public areas. for

[2:36:18] example, out on beaches and places where people people don't reside and sleep at

[2:36:24] night. We also see the TMO see this um the T-Mobile cell towers as not

[2:36:33] necessarily a public utility because they are not to be benefit

[2:36:39] all of the utilities. They only benefit T-Mobile customers. So, we have concerns

[2:36:44] with that and we have concerns with the permits that have been put forth by

[2:36:49] Crown Castle via T-Mobile to the city that are not what is existing on the

[2:36:56] poll, at least in my neighborhood. Um, we have so many people, probably 99% of

[2:37:02] our street would like to decline the motion by T-Mobile and Crown Castle and

[2:37:08] we are beseeching you as our representatives

[2:37:12] 20 years from now when your legacy leaving this office and my legacy

[2:37:18] leaving my house to my children and and people that live there after me. I want

[2:37:22] to be proud of what I've left behind. And if people are looking up and looking

[2:37:27] at cell towers amidst our residential beautiful rural Malibu and all of our

[2:37:33] streets that we've worked so hard to preserve nature and health and

[2:37:36] environment and wildlife and we look up at cell towers 20 years from now because

[2:37:42] these large corporations mowed over us as city members and residents, I think

[2:37:49] we are all going to be highly upset by that. So, it's not been on an agenda and

[2:37:54] we are beseeching you because tomorrow my letter is due to Crown Castle which

[2:37:59] is on a shot clock which gives us an urgency and so we're asking you to

[2:38:06] urgently look at this with us and on behalf of us as residents. Thank you.

[2:38:12] » Thank you Dean.

[2:38:22] Thank you. I did not know that we were going to get into the Big Rock

[2:38:25] Assessment District earlier. I would have spoken then because that was my

[2:38:28] subject. Um >> there was no public comment then anyway.

[2:38:31] So this is your time. >> Excellent. Thank you. So relative to the

[2:38:35] assessment district because it got into some questions that were coming up. Um

[2:38:39] you know there's special and general benefits separated. The amount is

[2:38:43] limited to the special benefit. Parcel receives direct and special benefit

[2:38:47] distinct from the general public. Uh there's no regulated method for that

[2:38:52] aortionment aortionment. I won't touch on the dewatering as they did a great

[2:38:56] job about that. The two distinct benefits break down into protection of

[2:39:00] property, protection of roads. That assessment was done by David toig and

[2:39:04] associates in consultation with the city's geotech consultant and city's

[2:39:09] public works. um the assessment district is properly represented as they did. Um

[2:39:15] the special benefits basically break down protection which is reduced risk

[2:39:21] and degree of damage distress suffered from slope failure. Road access

[2:39:25] maintained for properties reached by roads benefits were deemed equal for

[2:39:29] both property um and and the road uh to make sure that it could be enjoyed

[2:39:34] properly. Since roads except for PCH do not convey through traffic, there is no

[2:39:40] general benefit to the public for such road access. Um,

[2:39:45] and then stabilization of the area. So, the method of assessment, which was a

[2:39:51] question somebody raised, there's 348 assessments, 706.1 benefit assessment

[2:39:57] units, that's calculated based on a single family or a condo/ apartment,

[2:40:03] which also then has an assessment for what is called the average weekday trips

[2:40:08] per unit. Um, without boring you with all of that detail, the points I wanted

[2:40:12] to make is I would ask you to prop maybe agendaize this in the future to look at

[2:40:18] this. I don't think the assessments are proper and the reasons being CALR

[2:40:23] benefits more than any property in the assessment district based upon

[2:40:26] equivalent area protection of property and the fact their parcel trip

[2:40:30] generation factors are in excess of 1,500 times higher than the single

[2:40:35] family home assessment per table C1 of the document. They receive far more

[2:40:41] benefit than anyone and pay nothing towards it.

[2:40:45] The city benefits from PCH for use of city employees, contractors, etc. City

[2:40:50] benefits benefits from tax revenues, other things. Um, long story short,

[2:40:55] there's a large group of us us beach owners that don't necessarily feel we

[2:40:59] benefit the same because the drainage is at the PCH level, not below. We don't

[2:41:04] contribute to the groundwater. But what we're really after because we think the

[2:41:08] methodology is wrong is we want because of the situation on the roadway to get

[2:41:14] better access to the roadway for rebuilding including no fees for

[2:41:18] encroachment access to the roadway and K rails if necessary. So thank you.

[2:41:23] » Thank you Jean. Okay. Next is Joe Drummond. Joe I see you have four

[2:41:27] minutes and I see that your extra minute is here. Uh, Linda Eddie and then Clydy

[2:41:33] Lane,

[2:41:37] you have four minutes. >> Honorable Mayor Silverstein, city

[2:41:40] council, I want to speak about the geotechnical review you heard today with

[2:41:44] about Y from Yan Associates about the big rock landslide. These reports are

[2:41:49] presented to you every year and reviewed after review by the public and public

[2:41:54] works commission and they consistently show the same result. There has been no

[2:41:58] meaningful change in the landslide conditions affecting our lots. As Yay

[2:42:02] stated, there has been no discernable movement in over a decade. Our factor of

[2:42:06] safety numbers coming out from the 30 to 50 extremely expensive and detailed so

[2:42:11] reports that have been completed so far in Big Rock are all coming out between

[2:42:15] 1.95 and 2.1 well over the 1.5 limit for our lots. We are also all rebuilding

[2:42:21] using low water fix lowflow fixture counts. So water import will be much

[2:42:25] lower than before. thus reducing the risk further. If conditions have not

[2:42:29] changed, why require additional geotechnical studies to rebuild homes

[2:42:32] that stood safely for decades? Wildfire does not suddenly destabilize a

[2:42:37] deep-seated landslide. The controlling factors are groundwater and soil

[2:42:40] strength. And as Yay stated, our area is affected mainly by groundwater levels.

[2:42:44] In Big Rock, the hillside has remained stable because of the well-maintained

[2:42:48] dewatering system that residents and public works have monitored for decades.

[2:42:52] Our homes that burned down were not speculative projects on unknown terrain.

[2:42:57] They were functioning homes on lots that have already proven stable. I do hope

[2:43:01] that the fire victims of Big Rocks are not paying for that presentation through

[2:43:04] our assessment district and asked to fund yet another report confirming what

[2:43:08] decades of monitoring have already shown, unless of course it helps us

[2:43:12] finally streamline DI techchnical review. If homeowners are already

[2:43:16] required to recompact and grade to improve stability and build stronger

[2:43:19] foundations, upgrading to current building codes, why on earth are we

[2:43:22] required another round of geotechnical studies on lots that have already

[2:43:25] demonstrated and reported decades of stability? You heard it clearly tonight

[2:43:29] that when a landslide area has been stabilized through drainage, rebuilding

[2:43:32] homes that stood safely for 20, 30, even 50 years pose no additional risk

[2:43:36] rebuilding. Meanwhile, major projects in Malibu, including 100 foot piles in

[2:43:40] landslide zones without variances and the infamous 50 foot 5- foot retaining

[2:43:45] wall behind the Malibu in hotel proposed received approvals without the same

[2:43:50] level of geotechnical scrutiny. Thank goodness, a past city council stopped

[2:43:54] the hotel project. But when modest fire rebuilds face more hurdles than major

[2:43:58] new development, something is clearly wrong. These requirements also create

[2:44:02] major delays. A soils report with redundant borings alone takes at least

[2:44:06] four months with several more for review. Wave upbrush studies for beach

[2:44:09] homes can take over a year, even when rebuilds must already meet FEMA plus 1

[2:44:13] ft of elevation, which is often excessive already. Almost all of

[2:44:16] Palisad's fire applications are like for-like rebuilds within the 10%

[2:44:20] allowance, not speculative development. We should also be transparent about the

[2:44:23] rebuild statistics. There are now over 233 applications submitted and 37

[2:44:29] permits issued. This is barely over 15%, not the 45 or 75% presented at the

[2:44:34] planning commission last week. I do appreciate you, Linda, giving straight

[2:44:38] statistics tonight. Big Rock is at about 80 of these applications submitted also.

[2:44:42] So, only about half have decided to rebuild. Being honest about where we

[2:44:46] stand is the first step toward fixing the problem. These redundant

[2:44:49] requirements do not make our homes safer. They only slow recovery. Even if

[2:44:52] we approve all the applications in building plancheck today, we will only

[2:44:55] be at 81 permits issued, not the 100 permit goal we had at the end of last

[2:44:59] year. But hopefully you can help us get to this number faster. Please streamline

[2:45:03] this process so all families in Big Rock and beyond can rebuild and come home.

[2:45:07] That can start with the council directing staff to take these issues

[2:45:10] into can into account at tomorrow's prescriptive geotechnical calculations

[2:45:14] meeting and approach it with an open mind towards allowing prescriptive

[2:45:18] rebuilding for lake forlike fire rebuilds up to 10% without unnecessary

[2:45:22] additional soils reports unless required by a soils structural engineer. We don't

[2:45:26] want another avenue for geotechnical consultants to demand more and more

[2:45:30] reports that fire victims pay exorbitantly for. If homes stood safely

[2:45:34] on these lots for decades, the default should be rebuilding, not another round

[2:45:37] of studies. Thank you. >> Thank you, Joe. Linda,

[2:45:43] » is Linda here? >> Okay. Um, Clay,

[2:45:52] » pronounce your name right? >> Yes. Amazing Grace Clay Lane. Uh, good

[2:45:58] evening Malibu City Council City Manager. So, I am also um wanting to

[2:46:05] speak out about what Susan spoke out about. I live on Rainsford Place. So,

[2:46:09] with regards to the 5G cell tower network and the increase of that setup

[2:46:15] that's already there, um, my major concern is about

[2:46:19] environmental impacts. This part of Malibu

[2:46:23] supports a wealth of nature, bees, birds, and many other pollinators who

[2:46:28] are already under extreme pressure from drought, habitat loss, climate stress.

[2:46:35] And when this multiple wireless site, when it overlaps in a small area, the

[2:46:41] cumulative environmental footprint should definitely be reviewed.

[2:46:46] Pollinators are sensitive to changes in their immediate surroundings, including

[2:46:52] what's being proposed, new equipment, more noise, infrastructure placed close

[2:46:57] to their habitat. So please before approving these upgrades, the city

[2:47:03] should verify what equipment is actually going to be on the pole and whether the

[2:47:08] cumulative impact of these overlapping sites connecting all these these towers

[2:47:13] has actually been properly evaluated. This is especially important in these

[2:47:19] neighborhoods, these areas where there are gardens, vegetable gardens, fruit

[2:47:23] orchards, and small agricultural properties and small farms where these

[2:47:28] pollinators play a critical role. So, this is not just verbiage. We've lived

[2:47:34] on our property for 30 years and before my daughter was born, there were bees.

[2:47:39] We had honey at the end of every summer and we've seen this slow decline. So

[2:47:45] these are very real factors for people who live in this neighborhood and kind

[2:47:49] of have a small farm simple living highing mentality.

[2:47:54] Um, another thing I would like to refer to

[2:47:58] is the notification process. So, Malibu being designated as a very high fire

[2:48:04] hazard severity zone and um this means that timely public notice is actually

[2:48:10] essential for any meaningful participation from any of the residents.

[2:48:15] In this particular case, residents received only a little pink postcard,

[2:48:20] not the actual plans. And even when people immediately requested the plans,

[2:48:25] they didn't even receive them in time to review the proposal or submit relevant,

[2:48:31] you know, informed comments before the deadline. So, there's a little bit of a

[2:48:35] glitch in the system there. In one case, a resident even received the postcard 2

[2:48:40] days before the comment period closed. Um, another question I have, I mean,

[2:48:45] there's some confusion around the actual appeal process. If somebody wants to

[2:48:50] appeal an approval, the fee is $750, which, you know, having spoken with

[2:48:55] various residents, some people can't afford that at such short notice, but

[2:49:00] we're trying to clarify. Is that 750 per person per appeal?

[2:49:05] » Thank you.

[2:49:14] » Tiffany, you're up next. I can see you've got you've got five minutes. I

[2:49:17] can see your two vouchers are here. Um, then CC Lee followed by Brian Cameron.

[2:49:29] » It still says three. >> No, it says three. You have five.

[2:49:33] » Oh, thank you. Thank you. >> Maybe you can say what you wanted to say

[2:49:37] before when you submitted the late card. >> I don't think I'll be able to fit that,

[2:49:41] but thank you. Good evening, council members, mayor, mayor prom.

[2:49:47] I'd also like to welcome our new city manager.

[2:49:51] Malibu is a rare and remarkable place, and your leadership in helping protect

[2:49:55] it will matter greatly to this community. Your guidance will shape how

[2:49:59] residents, wildlife, and the landscape of this community are cared for for

[2:50:03] decades to come. I'm speaking tonight because many

[2:50:06] residents feel that something important is accelerating a Malibu quietly and

[2:50:10] quickly and we're not sure the public or even council members have been given the

[2:50:14] full picture yet. And the truth is this isn't really a technology question. It's

[2:50:19] a stewardship question. Right now, telecommunications installations are

[2:50:24] being presented one 5G pole at a time on very short timelines as if each exist in

[2:50:30] isolation. But these small tow small cell towers are designed to work

[2:50:35] together as a network handing signals from one node to the next. This is not

[2:50:40] about a single pole. The biggest physical change with 5G is network

[2:50:45] density not higher power because the system relies on many nodes working

[2:50:50] together. That means more antennas, more electrical boxes, more power supplies

[2:50:55] and more polemounted hardware. Each installation may seem small, but

[2:51:00] cumulatively the network spreads across entire neighborhoods. Yet, the public is

[2:51:05] being asked to evaluate them one piece at a time without being shown the full

[2:51:10] scope. That prevents residents from understanding the cumulative effect on

[2:51:14] safety, aesthetics, and the ecosystem. And the record shows this is not

[2:51:19] hypothetical. When residents have called to report dangling wires or maintenance

[2:51:23] issues on existing poles, most often nothing happens.

[2:51:27] Typically, no one knows which company is responsible, so the request is left

[2:51:32] unresolved. In fireprone areas like ours, these are not minor concerns.

[2:51:37] Overloading poles with additional equipment increases risk. Every

[2:51:41] electrical system eventually fails. Prevention is not optional, its

[2:51:45] survival. Malibu was incorporated to protect something fragile. the rural

[2:51:50] character of this coastline, the wildlife corridors of the Santa Monica

[2:51:54] Mountains, the dark skies and the living landscape that connects the mountains to

[2:51:57] the Pacific Ocean. Residents look to this council not just to manage growth,

[2:52:02] but to guard the character and safety of this place. Places like Malibu are

[2:52:07] rarely lost all at once. They change slowly, decision by decision, permit by

[2:52:12] permit, pole by pole, until suddenly the landscape is totally different. We may

[2:52:19] be temporary residents here, but Malibu should be a permanent one. The wildlife

[2:52:23] moving through these hills at night has no idea these meetings even exist. Last

[2:52:29] night, I stepped outside my home. The sky was full of stars. The ocean was

[2:52:35] breathing in the distance and a bobcat crossed the road. [clears throat] That

[2:52:40] is Malibu. Not infrastructure, not convenience, not progress measured in

[2:52:45] metal boxes on poles. This is what residents are here to protect. So what

[2:52:50] we are asking tonight is straightforward. Before this network

[2:52:53] expands further into our neighborhoods, the city should provide a transparent

[2:52:58] cumulative overview of what is being proposed for Malibu. Not one poll at a

[2:53:02] time, but the complete picture. We are asking for full RF specifications and

[2:53:08] exposure analysis for every proposed site. a cumulative analysis that

[2:53:12] includes already approved installations like the rains for a tower, public

[2:53:17] access to the this information so residents can make informed comments

[2:53:23] because Malibu doesn't get a second chance with infrastructure mistakes. And

[2:53:27] the question isn't whether technology will come to Malibu. The question is

[2:53:31] whether Malibu will still look like Malibu when it does. Malibu is not

[2:53:36] valuable because it's developed. Malibu is valuable because it's still

[2:53:40] wild. Some things can be restored, but Malibu's wild character can only be

[2:53:46] protected, and it deserves to be protected.

[2:53:52] This is not just about one pole. This is about how our city manages growth,

[2:53:56] technology, and the landscape for the next generation. Every decision sends a

[2:54:03] message to residents, wildlife, and the natural systems that sustain Malibu.

[2:54:07] Thank you. >> Thank you, Tiffany. Uh,

[2:54:14] » just use your hands. >> CeCe,

[2:54:24] the tree was my home. Like it was yours.

[2:54:32] The tree was my home. Deeper my roots

[2:54:38] lost like never before. The tree is a connectivity to the wifi of the planet.

[2:54:47] We don't need 5G. We don't need more stalkers. Okay, let's limit that. You

[2:54:52] guys are empowered to say no to these people coming in. Okay, Tim, we don't

[2:54:58] want that sign up of our houses. That's stalking and invasive. It needs to be a

[2:55:02] sign of the wildlife in the area. So that sign needs to completely come down.

[2:55:06] I don't know who's spray painting. It's not me. I don't believe in spraying

[2:55:09] those toxic chemicals. Lato is the best road for a parking lot.

[2:55:16] There's two for sale. There's $99 million in the bank that belong to the

[2:55:20] city of Malibu and the people. Thank you, Judy from Villa Blanca calling it

[2:55:24] Park. Yes, that is what it's called. We have made progress. We have made great

[2:55:29] decisions and we're moving forward. I'm here to speak about many different

[2:55:33] topics. There were 32 trees cut down in what used to be a park for Malibu at the

[2:55:38] campus at Malibu Middle School, Malibu High School. That's not right.

[2:55:44] The structure of a palm tree, if you look at a map of the roots, it's like a

[2:55:49] nail into the ground. We're talking about landslides, but we're not building

[2:55:52] any trees. The trees can do a much better job than any structural pylon you

[2:55:58] could create. But yet, I'm looking at a full campus. 32 trees completely

[2:56:03] disappeared from these kids' future and existence. The only thing that we all

[2:56:08] own together is what we breathe. So if we can work on a campaign of building

[2:56:12] more trees and again that parking lot at Lato, maybe we can help the people cross

[2:56:17] the street better as well cuz that turn is the most actually dangerous turn in

[2:56:21] Malibu. The wildlife passage and the wildlife bridge. And I would like to let

[2:56:26] you know that the least qualified individual, his name is Eric, is running

[2:56:30] the Olympics and the money for it. Okay? If I've ever seen a qualified job given

[2:56:36] to a my like it just is like the least qualified and I think maybe we need to

[2:56:42] look into that and put into an infrastructure of creating again the

[2:56:46] London hub. Each of these pods cost $9,000 with the elevated execution of

[2:56:52] people who want to take a cut. it then costs $48,000.

[2:56:56] We can create a system with the city and if we kind of like point out that we are

[2:57:02] an integral part of the Olympics because they will be visiting us and we will

[2:57:06] have non-stop traffic and that's when my horse will be the most valuable.

[2:57:09] Anyways, yehaw. Thank you so much. >> Thank you Cece

[2:57:15] Crystal Brian.

[2:57:26] Mayor Silverstein, uh, Mayor Proing, and city council

[2:57:31] members. Uh, good evening. My name is Brian Cameron, and I'm a Calabasas's

[2:57:36] resident. I've had the privilege of serving as a Calabas's public safety

[2:57:40] commissioner for the past 10 years. In the aftermath of the Woolsey fire, the

[2:57:45] city council asked me to help create an independent nonprofit focused on

[2:57:51] emergency preparedness, outreach, and education. In 2021, I co-founded

[2:57:58] emergency preparation in Calabasas, a fires safe council.

[2:58:03] We're a 501c3 organization, and I currently serve as president.

[2:58:09] We are a volunteer-run community outreach organization and we were

[2:58:13] honored to be named Calabas's organization of the year in 2024.

[2:58:18] Our mission is simple. Help residents better prepare for emergencies before

[2:58:23] they happen. To that end, we're currently executing several initiatives,

[2:58:28] some in partnership with the city. These include free home hardening evaluations

[2:58:33] to reduce wildfire risk, helping neighborhoods qualify as firewise

[2:58:38] community, and distributing emergency radios pre-programmed to the Calabasas's

[2:58:43] repeater so residents can receive critical information when all other

[2:58:48] systems fail. We also publish weekly safety articles that reach more than

[2:58:53] 2600 local residents. All these efforts share one goal. Making

[2:58:59] emergency information easier to access, easier to understand, and easier to act

[2:59:05] on. By improving how quickly and reliably residents receive trusted local

[2:59:11] information, EPIC directly supports the city's broader resilience goals of

[2:59:17] preparedness, communication, and community safety. That's why I'm here

[2:59:22] this evening to introduce what we believe is one of our most impactful

[2:59:26] initiatives to date. Our free smarthome smartphone app. The app tr the app

[2:59:34] stores trusted locally relevant emergency preparedness and response

[2:59:40] information on residents smartphones so it is available right when they need it

[2:59:44] most. Rather than describing it myself, I'd like you to hear directly from the

[2:59:50] person who designed and built it. With that, I'm pleased to turn the PO podium

[2:59:55] over to Michael Stall, the creator of the emergency preparedness and Calabasas

[3:00:00] app. Thank you for your time.

[3:00:08] » Good evening. >> My name is Michael Stall. I am a

[3:00:11] Calabasas resident. Feel a little out of touch here, but that's okay. Um,

[3:00:16] » hold on. We didn't call you yet. >> Oh, [laughter]

[3:00:20] » did I announce that you were next? Because you actually are, but

[3:00:23] » Okay. Do I get to restart the shot clock?

[3:00:25] » Well, let's let's identify who the next few speakers are going to be. So, hold

[3:00:29] on. Mike Stall, followed by Scott Ditrich,

[3:00:33] followed by Molen Watts. Now, you may start.

[3:00:37] » Okay. So, uh, I developed this app at the request of this is a nonprofit. We

[3:00:43] don't get any money for it. What we did is we got some funding from the city of

[3:00:47] Calabasas along with from Lindseay Horvass office. We created this app

[3:00:52] about 2 and 1/2 years ago. We've gotten about a 25%

[3:00:57] people downloading this app. The app is um we can white label the app. About a

[3:01:04] month ago, Malibu West Hoa has created their own version. They take our version

[3:01:10] and put their their branding and any other editing they want to do. The goal

[3:01:15] was really simple is how do we get the best information in the hands of people

[3:01:21] when there are no more communications. So how do we take all of this excellent

[3:01:27] information from FEMA, from the state of California, from the cities? How do we

[3:01:33] get this? I if I ask you where these are right now in your homes or anybody here

[3:01:38] you go I think it's in the top drawer someplace

[3:01:42] and if you do you have copies in your in your car and in your workplace how many

[3:01:49] people here can put their hand on their phone right now.

[3:01:53] So what we did is we took every bit of information that I could gather from all

[3:01:58] of these vetted sources and put it on an app. Now, you might be asking, well, if

[3:02:04] there's a loss of power and we don't have internet, how's that going to help?

[3:02:09] The way I program this is that it will always be on no matter if you have any

[3:02:15] connectivity. The topics on there go from the very rudimentary like how to

[3:02:20] open a garage door when you don't have electricity, how to harvest water out of

[3:02:25] a hot water heater, how to turn off the gas. So with that we have

[3:02:32] gotten a lot of feedback on people that maybe are not so sophisticated on what

[3:02:37] to do. Everything is by step by step. The the white label program that we

[3:02:43] would like to see you or offer to you would allow you to take all the

[3:02:47] information that we give you. You can edit it as much as you want. You can add

[3:02:51] to it you want. You can brand it. You can skin it. You can do anything you

[3:02:55] want to with it. And it gives you the ability to reach out. You can also push

[3:03:00] information out. We when we are we are a member at the EOC, we have a seat there.

[3:03:05] We push out information that we get from either the PIO or from the EOC. So as

[3:03:11] long as there is that connectivity, we can push out information to that. Um,

[3:03:21] the other thing that is really kind of a unique thing is we have a built-in

[3:03:25] checklist for home, family, pet, and it's dynamic, meaning you can keep track

[3:03:31] of what you need and it also keeps track of what you can do in the future. Thank

[3:03:35] you for your time. We look for the opportunity to maybe present this to you

[3:03:38] in a committee meeting. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mike. Scott, you're up.

[3:03:50] Thank you. Uh, good evening again. You got to ask yourself, why do you live

[3:03:56] here? Malibu is a uniquely special place.

[3:04:04] But there's a lot of pressure from, as I've said before, from outside agencies,

[3:04:11] things that seemingly are beyond our control.

[3:04:16] And one of the things that is really most annoying and has just seemingly

[3:04:22] blossomed out of control is noise. Halen started this and we've been just

[3:04:31] asking ourselves, why do we allow these gigantic packs of motorcycles?

[3:04:40] Even one Harley with its baffles blown out

[3:04:46] can make so darn much of a racket on PCH. You get the cars racing and there's

[3:04:54] a nexus between noise and street racing. We're all trying to make PCH safer,

[3:05:02] right? So, if the guys revving up their engines

[3:05:10] and speed are connected, we have a safety issue and we can fix it. Now,

[3:05:17] thank you to Doug because one of we were hoping technology would be a way out of

[3:05:22] this that like a speed camera, you could have a noise camera, but apparently that

[3:05:29] technology failed. But there's things we can do now. The

[3:05:36] Cog cities face the same issue. I was with a friend in Calabasas today and

[3:05:44] yep, they've got the same racing down Stunt Road, racing on Mullhalland

[3:05:50] and [clears throat] we need to stop this if we're going to maintain the integrity

[3:05:56] of our city. Lagona Beach does it. They do a great job. So, I'd urge our council

[3:06:03] people who are on the cog to talk. we're going to be interfacing with CHP

[3:06:12] and so we can do something about it. The other thing that's really annoying

[3:06:20] is gasoline powered leaf blowers. I did I wasn't sure if they were banned or

[3:06:26] not. Maryanne when I reached out to her said yes there banned in our city.

[3:06:31] There's electric ones that I've seen that, you know, you could be standing

[3:06:36] five feet away and have a normal conversation, but we're constrained by

[3:06:43] uh staff and trying to enforce it. But there's something we can do and I'm

[3:06:49] going to run out of time, but I did mail you how to do it. Thank you.

[3:06:54] » Thank you, Scott.

[3:06:59] » Uh good evening. I'm uh Molina Simple Watts and I'm your local wershed

[3:07:03] coordinator with the North Santa Monica Bay wershed and I serve safe clean water

[3:07:08] LA which all of you voted for back in 2018 with Major W. Um I want to thank

[3:07:14] Mayor Silverstein and uh Mayor Prom Urick and especially our brand new city

[3:07:18] manager. We're very happy you're here um for allowing us to be here and I

[3:07:22] especially want to thank council member Conrad who invited me to come and do

[3:07:25] public comments for you guys. I am here to share funding with the city of

[3:07:29] Malibu. Essentially, there is funding for a project of approximately I'm

[3:07:33] excited. Okay. There's about$1 to5 million dollars to come to you guys to

[3:07:37] do a water project in your community. Um, essentially it's hard to get money

[3:07:43] from Major W. Speaking without notes, that's just the truth. But I have a

[3:07:47] shortcut that I would like to offer you to get the money in hand. There's this

[3:07:50] program called the TRP, the technical resources program. If your city staff

[3:07:55] works with me, we can whip through that grant. It's like five or six pages and

[3:07:59] then you'll get $400,000 worth of a civil engineer to help you design the

[3:08:04] project of your dreams and actually make this extremely difficult application for

[3:08:09] you and then you'll get to that rosy number of $1 to5 million. Now the

[3:08:13] question is what do you want to do with that money? Well, I have a vision.

[3:08:16] There's obviously if you have a TMDL implementation project, we would

[3:08:19] prioritize that. But what I think you really need, having been just gutted by

[3:08:23] watching the Palisades fire blast through all these communities I love,

[3:08:27] what you really need is a really large sistern at city hall. If you take water

[3:08:33] off of your rooftops and gather that into a sistern up on the upper parking

[3:08:38] lot, you have so many buildings in this in this little area that we're in right

[3:08:42] now that you could get to 900,000 gallons of water a year just from

[3:08:47] rainwater. So, you store that in your big system. You connect it to your

[3:08:52] buildings. You put in a little diesel um pump, right? And then you put um

[3:08:56] irrigation all around your building. Then, when the fire comes blasting

[3:09:00] through, you have the option of turning on um sprinklers and saving your

[3:09:04] buildings. Now, I know our beloved fire department has done a fabulous job of

[3:09:08] protecting the city in the past. They probably always will, but it is an

[3:09:13] awesome backup plan. How awesome is it? Well, our beloved council member Conrad,

[3:09:17] she and her husband have built something just like this at their home. So, if you

[3:09:21] guys think this is an interesting idea and you would like a free technical

[3:09:25] resources program application, ask me to meet with city staff and I'll help you

[3:09:29] set this up. Now, I will share with you that city of Calabasas is already in the

[3:09:34] process of making this application. We're a small wershed, so we only have

[3:09:38] $400,000 per TRP every other year. So, I'm going to ask you and invite you to

[3:09:43] take the city of Calabasa's kind offer and do a half half application so we can

[3:09:48] get both city halls covered at the same time. That will reduce the work for the

[3:09:52] application and it will really help us um be proactive about serving our entire

[3:09:57] larger Santa Monica Mountains uh entity. That's it. Three minutes.

[3:10:02] » Thank you. >> Thank you so much everybody.

[3:10:04] » Thank you. >> All right. Next three speakers are

[3:10:09] Darren Graves, Norm Haney, and then an K.

[3:10:24] » Uh, good evening, council, uh, honorable mayor and new city manager. Um, thank

[3:10:29] you for taking the time to hear my comment. Uh, I am equally as excited by

[3:10:34] her idea as, uh, she is, so I hope you are, too. That sounds like a great

[3:10:38] avenue to um beat Calabasas to the punch on getting a sister installed somewhere.

[3:10:44] Um I wanted to speak about the Big Rock Mesa presentation. I thought that was

[3:10:48] very timely and appreciated. Um my whole life I'd been hearing about the Big Rock

[3:10:53] Mesa landslide of 1983. I was born in '84, so I didn't witness it, but I heard

[3:10:58] from my grandmother and my mother about how terrifying it was for my grandmother

[3:11:02] as her house is in the toe of the Big Rock Mesa on the south side of PCH. The

[3:11:07] property directly adjacent to her property was destroyed by the Big Rock

[3:11:12] Mesa landslide. And for 30 years, she lived in fear of a subsequent landslide

[3:11:17] taking out her house. Um, presumably many people on the beach still have that

[3:11:21] fear. And so I wanted to ask uh if it would be possible based on the

[3:11:27] statements given tonight by Mr. Moors if an ad alternate could be added to the um

[3:11:32] sewer study to include Big Rock Mesa properties. Um as he clearly said that

[3:11:38] pumping effluent into the hill did potentially

[3:11:42] cause or make the groundwater supply much uh more dense than it may have been

[3:11:47] had there not been any septic systems pumping effluent into the groundwater.

[3:11:51] and continuing to do so could cause a different landslide. I don't think we

[3:11:56] want the problems of Portuguese Bend and Palace Veries proliferating through

[3:12:00] Malibu. Uh definitely not onto Pacific Coast Highway. So please give that some

[3:12:04] thought. Thank you. >> Thank you

[3:12:09] Nor. You're up.

[3:12:15] [clears throat] >> Good evening uh mayor, city council

[3:12:18] members. I'm happy to uh to welcome uh Joe Irwin

[3:12:25] and city manager and we really need you and look forward to working with you. Uh

[3:12:33] with regard to Big Rock, um I absolutely agree that we should

[3:12:39] look into hooking them up to a sewer uh that's coming in uh and uh going to the

[3:12:47] Hyperion treatment plant. I think it's a great idea

[3:12:52] on that topic as well. Malibu has a limitation on impermeable surfaces for

[3:13:00] everyone. Okay. It should not apply to big rock property. We're trying to keep

[3:13:06] the rainwater out of the substructure, out of the geology, and as much water as

[3:13:14] we can gather through impermeable surfaces

[3:13:18] goes into drains and out to the ocean. That's exactly what we should be doing.

[3:13:24] So, I'm I'm strongly in support of eliminating that restriction on the

[3:13:32] square footage or percentage of your property that can have impermeable

[3:13:36] surfaces on it. So far, there are limitations. There shouldn't be. Big

[3:13:42] rock is a very different piece of ground and we should look at it differently.

[3:13:47] Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you, Nor. And you're up.

[3:13:59] Hello, my name is an K. Uh, I have a video. Uh, Parker, if you want to play

[3:14:04] it. Um, first of all, before Oh, we played it anyway.

[3:14:10] » Oh, uh, pause it real quick. Thank you, Parker. Um, I am a communications

[3:14:16] executive per the California Secretary of State and I like to be proactive and

[3:14:22] this might seem very comical, but I'm going to play this video because it

[3:14:25] deals with roundabouts and it's coming up on the city council agenda and I'd

[3:14:29] love to stop this stuff before it gets to the state. Please, Parker.

[3:14:40] So long be anything. Hello everyone. This is Anastasia

[3:14:46] Comaras live around the world and we found a roundabout. So you folk in

[3:14:54] Malibu dealing with a roundabout. Well, here's a live view of a roundabout with

[3:14:59] a stop sign. And so let's see how this works. Okay, so we come up to a stop

[3:15:04] sign. Okay. So, oh, there's an ice cream truck.

[3:15:11] Look at that. What? You know what? It's a It's a roundabout. So, what I just go

[3:15:16] around and round. [music]

[3:15:26] It's a roundabout. Why not? This is

[3:15:31] I'm getting dizzy. It's a stop sign. I keep going round and

[3:15:36] Okay, I'm going to exit. Okay, so there you go. It's a roundabout. I hope you

[3:15:41] guys enjoyed that. Thank you, Parker. That's just absolutely

[3:15:47] uh Thank you. It goes a little longer, but I just wanted to get ahead of it. Uh

[3:15:52] because I also want to remind everyone that I'm running for governor of

[3:15:57] California, nonpartisan 2026. And Parker, I think we have some more uh

[3:16:01] slides to show. Uh, so one of the things is no governor is qualified yet. It

[3:16:09] doesn't happen until the 26th. So the the 23rd is the earliest. Anything you

[3:16:14] hear about people running for governor doesn't happen until they meet these

[3:16:17] qualifications, which I have to too. So I can't stay at

[3:16:21] this meeting. So I got to had to finish it. Uh, next slide, please. There you

[3:16:26] are, sir. I had to write them a big blank check. There you go. And next one,

[3:16:30] please. And there you see. Uh, I'm listed as a communications

[3:16:35] executive. So, the bees probably want to live. So, they we need to communicate

[3:16:43] the 911 signals and all the communication needs to be done so we can

[3:16:46] save all everything all the nature in general. That's what communications

[3:16:53] executives do. And Secretary of State has certified me as a communications

[3:16:56] executive for California governor. Thank you very much.

[3:17:03] Thank you, Ann. Carrie Clasby, you're up. You're the last in person speaker.

[3:17:11] » Best for the last. Thank you for having me. My name is Carrie Clasby. I have the

[3:17:16] Sterling Farms, the Malibu Fig Ranch up there at Sterling Farms. Welcome, Joseph

[3:17:21] Irvin. My condolences. No, I'm just joking.

[3:17:25] Um I'm speaking about the um cell phone towers. So I just want to say

[3:17:32] um three points. Number one uh the major thing is that cell phone uh towers is

[3:17:40] not that it's safe is not settled science. And I think it's very important

[3:17:46] as a community especially with the amount of science that's coming out

[3:17:50] about it for us to take a deeper look with scientists who have been doing the

[3:17:54] real studies on it. So the three elements of this that are important is

[3:17:59] one the health of the people that are living near these cell towers. We're

[3:18:04] going into 5G next to 6G. How the vegetation is affected by it

[3:18:10] which is a real thing and the bees as uh Ann so aptly said. And the third thing

[3:18:16] is that these strandmounted wireless equipment are um they're threats to the

[3:18:25] wildfire fire communities and they've seen this in Australia, they've seen it

[3:18:29] in Maui, they've seen it across the world. So, it's a third thing that I I

[3:18:34] would uh ask that we take a close look at and um maybe we can appeal some of

[3:18:40] these approvals while we wait for the proper science and scientists to come

[3:18:45] forward. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Carrie. We still have two

[3:18:50] speakers on Zoom. >> There are four raised hands on Zoom.

[3:18:55] » They were all raised before the 10 seconds were elapsed.

[3:18:57] » Yes. Okay, let's go. Jacob Loza.

[3:19:04] » Glad I made it before the 10-second rule came into play. Um, I want to talk about

[3:19:10] Tranus Park. Um, obviously this issue is not new. The Malibu Township Council

[3:19:17] sued the city over Tranis Park back in 2009.

[3:19:21] And um, you know, they're obviously opposed to youth sports, especially

[3:19:25] league play, and it's been tied up in that dispute ever since. But I do want

[3:19:30] to point out that the president of the MTC in 2009 was Steve Yuring. Um that's

[3:19:36] um Vice Mayor Steve Yuring. That's council member Steve Yuring. Um he led

[3:19:41] the charge on a lawsuit against the city and that's what we're living with today.

[3:19:46] It's a park that could serve a large number of kids and families, but it

[3:19:50] remains effectively padlocked when it comes to league play.

[3:19:55] Um, you know, those restrictions have continued to be defended by the MTC and

[3:20:00] supported by Steve and more recently public works commissioner and MTC

[3:20:06] stalwart Joe Drummond. So, and John Maza the other night at uh at planning

[3:20:12] commission. So, it's important that we don't let this issue just end up in the

[3:20:16] dust bin of the MTC's um uh latigious behavior. I know that

[3:20:23] council member Rigggins has been clear that this issue deserves a fresh look

[3:20:27] and that the status quo is not working for families or kids. And Bruce, this

[3:20:32] seems like a meat and potatoes issue for you to get behind. Will you? You know,

[3:20:37] we spend a lot of time talking about the skate park, which we absolutely need.

[3:20:41] I'm glad there's progress on that. Kid need kids need places to go. What we

[3:20:45] need is to address an existing park that could be serving dozens

[3:20:50] of teams, hundreds of kids, and countless families right now if we took

[3:20:54] a common sense approach. This isn't about reopening old lawsuits. Um but we

[3:21:01] should um have the fortitude to just take a look back and see if it was the

[3:21:08] right decision um for now. And so let's just remember that Steve Yuring, John

[3:21:15] Maza, Joe Drummond, and the MTC have the power to fix the situation they created,

[3:21:20] but they've chosen not to. And let's remember this is the same group that

[3:21:24] appealed the PCH safety project. Same people, same pattern. They say they

[3:21:30] protect Malibu, but in practice, they protect their positions, their

[3:21:33] influence, their past decisions, even when the community doesn't clearly

[3:21:37] agree. So Steve, maybe you can comment tonight and commit to a new approach to

[3:21:42] drinkus. Thanks. >> Thank you. Next speaker is

[3:21:50] Lonnie Gordon. >> Good evening, Lonnie.

[3:22:00] » Lonnie, you're unmuted. >> Good evening. Can you hear me?

[3:22:02] » We can hear you. >> Okay. Well, my name is Lonnie Gordon and

[3:22:06] I'm the executive director of Malibu forsafet.org.

[3:22:10] And I'm here tonight because a serious flaw has come to light in the way that

[3:22:14] Malibu is processing small cell wireless permits. That's why you're hearing all

[3:22:18] of this tonight. Over the past several days, I personally verified the

[3:22:23] locations of the recent applications. And what I found is is that the city is

[3:22:28] being asked to approve these sites based on incorrect upstream information.

[3:22:33] Information that starts with Crown Castle is passed to T-Mobile, then to

[3:22:38] the city, and then assigned to a planner to approve, then the notification card

[3:22:43] is sent out to those who are affected. And at every step, the data is assumed

[3:22:47] to be correct. But at least in one of these cases, the Rainsford application,

[3:22:52] it was denied. The pink card told residents that T-Mobile would be

[3:22:57] modifying an existing wireless facility. But when the resident went to the poll,

[3:23:02] there was no existing equipment at all. Nothing to modify. The approval was

[3:23:07] based on conditions that simply did not exist. If one application contains

[3:23:12] incorrect existing conditions, then every application relying on the same

[3:23:17] data source is now in question. This matters because these are not

[3:23:22] isolated poles. They form a mesh network with overlapping emissions. On Point Dum

[3:23:29] alone, there are more than 10 recent sites spaced roughly 350 to 2,300 feet

[3:23:35] apart. And that spacing is intentional. It creates a continuous RF field across

[3:23:42] entire neighborhoods. And I want to be clear, these installations are not being

[3:23:47] built for voice service. They're not needed for phone calls. They're being

[3:23:51] built to support fixed wireless home internet, a high-capacity data system

[3:23:57] that requires dense overlapping nodes. And that's why these poles are clustered

[3:24:02] so tightly. It's not about phone coverage. It's about the volume of data

[3:24:06] the system can push through. And this raises another concern. I don't know

[3:24:12] whether the Rainsford approval was processed with the full Malibu fire

[3:24:15] protocol, which is the strongest in the country, but if the application was

[3:24:20] based on incorrect information, such as claiming equipment existed on a pole

[3:24:24] when it didn't, then the fire review may have been built on the wrong foundation.

[3:24:30] And no protocol can be reliable when it's based on incorrect facts. and

[3:24:35] residents should not have to pay $750 to appeal a permit that was flawed before

[3:24:40] it ever reached them. And the city should not be approving installations

[3:24:44] based on information that no one has verified in the field. Given all of

[3:24:48] this, I'm asking the city to do one reasonable thing. Pause all pending

[3:24:54] small cell approvals until the source of this misinformation is identified and

[3:24:59] the accuracy of each application can be verified. This is not anti-technology.

[3:25:05] It's not anti-ell service. It's simply asking for accuracy, transparency, and

[3:25:10] safety. >> Thank you, Lonnie. [applause]

[3:25:13] » Uh, come on. No clapping. Sorry. >> Next speaker, Steve Price.

[3:25:24] » Yeah. Yeah, I'm here. Can Can you hear me? Okay,

[3:25:26] » we can hear you fine, Steve. >> Oh, great. Thank you. So, yep. Like uh

[3:25:30] like they said, my name is Steve Price and I'm here to talk tonight, you know,

[3:25:36] mostly about my my good buddy Steve Yuring. And I call him my good buddy

[3:25:41] just because we have the same first name. I don't really know Steve Yuring,

[3:25:46] but I I digress. Uh you know, Steve often lectures about rules, compliance,

[3:25:53] and what residents and property owners should or should not be doing in this

[3:25:58] city. He is outstanding at positioning himself as someone who

[3:26:03] protects Malibu and guards the public interest.

[3:26:08] But leadership carries a simple expectation.

[3:26:12] If you are going to sit on this council and tell residents how the rules should

[3:26:16] be enforced, you yourself should be willing to follow

[3:26:21] those same rules. And that's where the problem keeps

[3:26:25] arising. Steve has accumulated a number of

[3:26:30] violations and enforcement issues involving his own property. We talked

[3:26:35] about these just a few weeks ago. He hides behind the council policy to avoid

[3:26:40] talking about his violations. He's even gotten Jean Maza covering for him behind

[3:26:45] this council policy, which as I've mentioned before is not a law.

[3:26:51] Anywh who, the contradiction matters because credibility in public office

[3:26:57] depends on consistency. So, how about the rest of us? Well, we

[3:27:03] apply for permits, respond to inspections, correct violations, and

[3:27:08] work through compliance issues. That's part of living in a community governed

[3:27:12] by rules. But when a council member demands strict

[3:27:16] adherence from everyone else while facing unresolved issues of his own, it

[3:27:22] raises an obvious question I just cannot seem to get answered.

[3:27:27] Are we experiencing principal leadership or just a lot of noise and tail chasing?

[3:27:33] because it starts to feel a little like watching a squirrel dart around the

[3:27:37] yard, warning everyone else about the dangers of buried nuts while quietly

[3:27:42] digging holes of its own. Public office should hold people to a higher standard,

[3:27:48] not a lower one. The people sitting on the dis make

[3:27:52] decisions that affect property rights, enforcement priorities, and the daily

[3:27:56] lives of Malibu residents. Those decisions carry real weight. So, Steve,

[3:28:04] don't you think the public has a right to expect that the people making those

[3:28:08] decisions are following the same rules as the rest of us? Malibu deserves

[3:28:13] leadership that spends less time chasing its tail and more time demonstrating the

[3:28:17] standards if ask everyone else to live by. So, can we for once get an answer on

[3:28:23] this? Finally, does anyone up there care?

[3:28:29] Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Last speaker.

[3:28:34] Andy Lion. Hey, Andy. >> Hey there. Hear me?

[3:28:41] » We can hear you, Andy. Go ahead. >> Okay, cool. Hey. Uh, welcome to the new

[3:28:45] city manager. Good luck. Um, I'm I'm calling tonight in on the public

[3:28:51] comments about this skate park. Um, enjoying it. It's great. Um, just had

[3:28:58] some questions about, you know, we got a lot of kids there tonight for the for

[3:29:02] the little league thing and, you know, the the opening opening day was sort of

[3:29:06] a nightmare because this contractor hasn't finished the parking lot and the

[3:29:11] bathroom. And we had our temporary skate park ripped out, which was supposed to

[3:29:16] stay there the whole time, six months ago. and CS Legacy who was given the

[3:29:21] contract and then subbed out the skate park skate park portion

[3:29:27] um they haven't really I mean they could have finished they haven't finished the

[3:29:31] bathroom they haven't finished the parking lot I'm sure they have excuses

[3:29:34] why but I don't understand really how six months they haven't finished that

[3:29:39] they um it's somebody needs to like check into that because it's ridiculous

[3:29:46] they're making a lot of money I think the whole park was like $4 million

[3:29:51] and I don't see a whole lot of progress and I've been following it from before

[3:29:55] it even started. Um, you know, if that's any indication of

[3:30:01] the snack shack moving forward to something to look at, maybe, you know,

[3:30:06] vet the the contractor a little better. Um, the other thing is this landscaping

[3:30:11] stuff with the trees that were supposed to be going in. I I next door, you know,

[3:30:17] the whole thing got delayed because of Gillan suing the city and we've caved

[3:30:21] and I do we not me but certain council members um that project next door is

[3:30:28] like dead in the water. I haven't seen any progress on any those houses are not

[3:30:32] doing anything right now and I was just wondering if he promised to pay for

[3:30:38] those trees if he paid for them yet or what's going on because I don't think

[3:30:42] he's part of that project anymore. So, I'd like the city to look into that to

[3:30:46] see before they, you know, start, you know, taking on these trees or whatever.

[3:30:53] Um, but that's something that should be looked into because there's nobody

[3:30:58] working on those houses and that's why we should have had that skate park two

[3:31:02] years ago. You made all those noise and now they're not. The houses are like raw

[3:31:07] looking like, you know, just abandoned construction. So, maybe city should look

[3:31:12] into that. I'll be back for the uh snack shack thing later. Thanks.

[3:31:18] » Thank you, Andy. Okay, that closes public comment or that closes item 4 A.

[3:31:24] It's 8:05. We're going to take a 10-minute recess and then we'll resume

[3:31:28] with um item 7B.

[3:46:10] If everyone could be quiet and sit down, the meeting will resume.

[3:46:14] » Everyone take their seats, please.

[3:46:22] Okay, everyone, please take your seats and let's retain order now.

[3:46:29] » Okay, we're now up to item 7B.

[3:46:36] Malibu Bluffs Park Snack Shack and Park Enhancement Project. Please raise your

[3:46:41] hand in Zoom if you'd like to speak on this item. And you'll be called after

[3:46:45] the staff report. Well, actually after the people that are here speak. So,

[3:46:50] first item is a staff report. >> Good evening, Mayor Silverstein and

[3:46:55] honorable members of council. The item before you is the Malibu Bluffs Park

[3:46:59] snack shack preliminary design. The term enhancement project was added to reflect

[3:47:05] the amenities and uh the requirements for the improved park conditions. At

[3:47:10] this time, I just want to take a moment to thank the parks and recre recreation

[3:47:14] commission for their time and dedication and providing feedback and design

[3:47:19] modifications that both serve our youth leagues and enhance the park experience

[3:47:24] for our park patrons. Uh, presenting tonight's report with me

[3:47:28] is Nathaniel McLean, assistant engineer in our public works department. um he's

[3:47:33] been a great teammate and has been working on the project with me and uh

[3:47:38] has attended the commission meetings as well. So I'll get started on our

[3:47:42] presentation.

[3:47:46] So, to give the council um an idea of the project timeline, prior to 2024, the

[3:47:52] council approved an assignment for the parks and recreation commission to

[3:47:55] provide feedback regarding the snack shack and general uh design elements of

[3:48:01] this project. In November, the council approved a contract for design services

[3:48:06] and in June, the parks and recreation commission reviewed the conceptual

[3:48:09] design and provided feedback to staff. In September, the commission reviewed

[3:48:15] modified designs and appointed an ad hoc to this project, which was Commissioner

[3:48:21] Lingo and Commissioner Snope Scopehammer who kind of honed in on some of the

[3:48:25] design elements and gave us uh some great feedback. In December, the Parks

[3:48:31] and Recreation Commission actually met on the site at Malibu Bless Park and

[3:48:35] approved a recommendation to move forward with a final snack check design.

[3:48:39] In January of this year, uh, city staff met with the public parks and property

[3:48:44] ad hoc committee and appro that committee uh, approved the

[3:48:47] recommendation to present the snack shack for county property uh, park

[3:48:52] operations. So, that will be the improvement.

[3:48:55] And to just take you back a little bit, this was our snack shack in 2023.

[3:49:02] And, uh, this snack shack uh, was inherited by the city. So from 2006 to

[3:49:09] about 2018 it was uh operated by Malibu Little League and the snack shack for a

[3:49:17] couple of years was not used and uh became uh deteriorated and so it was

[3:49:24] deemed we had to remove it for safety concerns.

[3:49:28] And if you don't remember that's what it looked like on the inside.

[3:49:34] So, in this picture, I wanted to point out that the uh container behind the uh

[3:49:41] picnic table is the Malibu Little League storage container and then the picture

[3:49:46] on the right hand side are the portable restrooms and then the city container is

[3:49:50] right behind it. So, this is kind of the general

[3:49:55] operation of our temporary snack shack. We have a rented sink which is a

[3:50:01] requirement from the LA County Health Department. Um little league has to

[3:50:06] erect these canopies every time they want to serve food and we have uh or

[3:50:11] they uh corner off the space so to make it a a safety um

[3:50:18] to make sure that nothing no one goes in the space that isn't allowed. So there's

[3:50:23] quite a few people who visit the snack shack. This is um Malibu Little League

[3:50:27] as well. They serve food through these netting openings, which is a requirement

[3:50:32] also from the LA County Health Department.

[3:50:36] So, here is the new and improved snack shack uh restrooms and storage

[3:50:42] container. And, uh I'll go into a little bit more detail about what this all

[3:50:47] really means, but here's a general overview.

[3:50:52] So, the new kitchen is uh 374 square ft and includes the equipment. Uh restrooms

[3:50:59] are required as part of the uh kitchen amenity through the LA County Health

[3:51:04] Department. We have two women's and two men's, both ADA accessible. We have a

[3:51:09] storage upgrade for the youth leagues and the city. Um we have a new ADA

[3:51:13] accessible path and railing near the snack shack. We have an it's not

[3:51:18] depicted in here, but we have a modified handicap parking in the main parking lot

[3:51:24] with an ADA accessible path and a pedestrian sidewalk behind the snack

[3:51:28] shack building which gives better accessibility for all park users.

[3:51:33] Uh we have improved the paved area in front of the snack shack. Um, there is a

[3:51:38] retaining wall that's approximately 26 linear feet and a janitor's closet, data

[3:51:45] room, and a modified baseball field access for equipment and vehicles, which

[3:51:50] is also a safety element. And we also added some new stairs behind the major

[3:51:55] baseball field. That uh slope behind uh the major baseball field is pretty

[3:52:00] steep, so we want to make sure we have improved accessibility.

[3:52:06] So here I tried to color code some elements of this design. So ADA ADA

[3:52:14] access uh new path, new railings, new paving. Um the kitchen is a standalone

[3:52:21] building 20 ft x 20 ft 12 ft high. It'll have a dedicated service window, side

[3:52:27] entrance, and we are uh proposing electric, no gas in this facility. We

[3:52:33] have added new and improved added storage. um that will house city storage

[3:52:38] and little league storage. And then other improvements include a pedestrian

[3:52:42] pass stairs data room which can be used for uh putting out information either a

[3:52:48] digital menu or information on the league or city programming and then uh

[3:52:54] access between the baseball field and snack shack has also been increased. Um

[3:53:00] and we pushed that area that we pushed that building back by 12 ft. So there is

[3:53:05] extra space in front of the building in between the building and the baseball

[3:53:10] field for uh team meetings, community gatherings

[3:53:15] and uh lines for the snack shack. So this is the rendering uh provided by

[3:53:21] our design team. So as you can see um we have the standalone Bluffs Park snack

[3:53:26] shack. We have a men's and women's restroom. We have storage area and we

[3:53:31] have uh kind of an elevated area which uh the sidewalk will be located.

[3:53:38] And here's just another angle uh for that design rendering.

[3:53:46] Just some information about the building. It is a pre-cast concrete

[3:53:49] building. Um this was the best option when we looked at all of the all of the

[3:53:54] options. Uh it has a very long lifespan. will hold up in uh fireprone areas and

[3:54:03] this will be built off site and delivered in 12 foot sections. The color

[3:54:07] palette matches our skate park and we work with our commission on the type of

[3:54:12] equip kitchen equipment that will be inside the snack shack and all of these

[3:54:17] items uh will serve uh our community's needs. [clears throat] I will pass it

[3:54:22] along to Nathaniel. >> Thank you, Kristen. I'll start with the

[3:54:26] estimated project timeline. This slide shows the project timeline for the

[3:54:31] project. It starts with preliminary engineering at around March, April of

[3:54:36] 2026 and finishes with construction in around October November of 2027. We have

[3:54:43] um estimated our preliminary engineering to take around 8 weeks. Our planning

[3:54:47] commission approval to take 16 to 24 weeks. Final engineering at around 10

[3:54:52] weeks. Building permit approval at 8 weeks. Preparation of our final bid

[3:54:57] package at 6 weeks. City council award at 4 weeks and 30 weeks for our

[3:55:03] estimated construction of a snack shack. to go into some cost savings for this

[3:55:10] project. Um, we presented to the parks and recck commission and the snack shack

[3:55:15] ad hoc committee committee with multiple design options and we worked with our

[3:55:19] designer to revise our plans and cut costs. Our starting cost was nearly $5

[3:55:23] million and with our revisions, we saved nearly 1.7 million. To go into more

[3:55:29] specific cost-saving factors, we opted for no electrical upgrades. Our parks

[3:55:35] and recreation commission determined to use the existing electricity to run all

[3:55:39] the kitchen equipment. They minimized their kitchen equipment requests. We are

[3:55:44] using the existing shade structures and picnic tables. And we opted to um use a

[3:55:51] retaining wall and had our pre-cast concrete manufacturer use the building

[3:55:57] wall to function as a retaining wall instead of a separate 122 ft linear

[3:56:01] wall. During our skate park construction, we

[3:56:06] have added stubouts for wastewater and electrical lines. This will place these

[3:56:11] utilities closer to the snack shack during its construction. We have also

[3:56:15] reduced the footprint of the paved areas for what's required with ADA access and

[3:56:20] we minimize the amount of paving in front of the building.

[3:56:24] To get into the cost estimate, our total is 3,711,744

[3:56:32] with the breakdown being $200,000 for preliminary design, $225,000

[3:56:39] for permitting and final design, $2.5 million for the construction of the

[3:56:43] snack shack, a 15% contingency at $383,000,

[3:56:48] and $350,000 allocated to construction management. So

[3:56:53] now to dive deeper into our construction costs, the building cost breakdown for

[3:56:58] the snack shack we have at $2.3 million. This is for general requirements

[3:57:04] mobilization at 20,000 for the contractor. A $17,000 building pad for

[3:57:09] our snack shack. Equipment at $26,000. This includes the kitchen equipment, its

[3:57:16] finishes, um flooring, any storage equipment, and trash enclosures. Our

[3:57:21] special enclosure special construction at $1.17 million is the actual cost for

[3:57:27] the pre-cast concrete snack shack building, restroom and um storage rooms

[3:57:32] and its delivery. Our exterior improvements at $124,000 is all the

[3:57:38] paving pavers in front of the snack shack, its um base and subbase. Our site

[3:57:44] work at three $331,000 is for the demo of existing asphalt

[3:57:51] concrete and concrete. The cost of new concrete walkways, curbs, gutters, ADA

[3:57:57] concrete ramps and rails, new pavement markings, water lines, sanitary sewer

[3:58:02] lines, and storm drains. Our estimated contractor cost is at $432,000.

[3:58:09] This is for their estimated overhead, bonds, and insurance.

[3:58:13] to dive deeper into our site enhancements breakdown. This is to push

[3:58:17] the snack shack back towards the street and have our 4 foot concrete um sidewalk

[3:58:23] which is 150 ft long runs around the back of the snack shack. Um this will

[3:58:28] provide more space in front of the building and adds the sidewalk and

[3:58:31] stairs to wrap around the snack shack. This work is around $223,000

[3:58:37] through the increased grading and foundation for the building and the

[3:58:41] sidewalk and retaining wall. To go into the next slide, we are

[3:58:46] requesting council to approve the preliminary design. We already have

[3:58:51] approved $425,000 in the budget for preliminary design,

[3:58:55] permitting, and final design. And we would like to ask council to direct

[3:58:59] staff to review potential funding sources for the project for the 3 point

[3:59:04] around $3.3 million for construction contingency and construction management.

[3:59:10] Some of those considerations can be fundraising, naming rights, grants, and

[3:59:14] general fund allocation. And that is the end of our presentation.

[3:59:19] Thank you.

[3:59:23] » That concludes this effort. Okay. Thank you. Do any members of

[3:59:26] council have any clarifying questions of the staff before we move to public

[3:59:30] comment?

[3:59:35] No questions.

[3:59:38] Okay, we'll go to public comment. This is now the deadline for raising

[3:59:43] your hand in Zoom and we'll now start with the in person

[3:59:48] people. Um Jake Lingo, you got four minutes. Is Judy still here? Yes. Okay.

[3:59:54] John Alfano and then Sarah and Claire and Freddy.

[4:00:03] You have four minutes. Thank you, mayor, council members. My name is Jake Lingo.

[4:00:07] Uh I serve on the park and recreation committee commission and I'm also the

[4:00:11] vice president of Malibu Little League. Um I'd like to start by addressing

[4:00:15] something that's important. Uh this project is often referred to as a snack

[4:00:18] shack, but what is actually being proposed is a park support facility that

[4:00:22] solves several long-standing infrastructure needs at Malibu Bluffs

[4:00:25] Park. Uh the project includes permanent restrooms, ADA accessible paths and

[4:00:29] ramps, storage for the city and the youth leagues, improved pedestrian

[4:00:33] circulation, and basic technology infrastructure for the park. In other

[4:00:38] words, this is simply not just a food facility. It's essential park

[4:00:41] infrastructure. It's also worth noting that over 20% of

[4:00:45] the proposed building space is dedicated to city storage and janitorial

[4:00:48] functions, further supporting the project's operational value to the city.

[4:00:53] Today, the park relies on portable toilets, temporary storage containers,

[4:00:57] and informal walking paths. I can personally attest that parks and

[4:01:01] recreation committee commission took it responsibility to the taxpayers very

[4:01:05] seriously. Uh the commission reviewed multiple design iterations and

[4:01:09] repeatedly sent the project back for cost reductions.

[4:01:12] Um, through value engineering, including a smaller kitchen, reduced equipment,

[4:01:16] eliminating a new transformer, and other measures, the project cost was reduced,

[4:01:20] as stated, from 5 million down to approximately 3.1. But that's actually

[4:01:24] just hard costs. So, we actually saved over $2.5 million in hard cost. The soft

[4:01:28] costs were already baked into that. So, that was just one thing I wanted to

[4:01:31] clarify. They did a great job with the staff report, but that is something that

[4:01:35] I think is noteworthy. Um, I also think it's extremely important to kind of talk

[4:01:40] about the history of Bless Fields and how they became about. Um, in 1982,

[4:01:44] Malibu Little League was at a crossroads with nowhere to call home and due to the

[4:01:48] coastal commission actions basically beyond our control. Uh, the league

[4:01:52] leased the Bluff site and built the two baseball fields that now make up Bluffs

[4:01:57] Park. uh with the help of local businesses, contractors, and volunteers

[4:02:01] from Malibu, including Doug O'Brien, Carrie Schmidt, Jack Ging, Bill

[4:02:04] Bennowski, and countless others, the Bless Fields were built. Those same

[4:02:09] fields, including the original back stops, still stand today.

[4:02:14] Over the past four decades, Malibu Little League has literally invested

[4:02:17] millions of dollars into that facility. In the last 5 years, we spent close to a

[4:02:22] quarter of a million dollars fundraising for new scoreboards, converting the

[4:02:26] field into a softball field, um installing new infield grass, infield

[4:02:31] dirt, clay, and spending roughly $25,000 on maintenance every year to keep the

[4:02:36] fields in the shape that they are in. And of note, these fields are open to

[4:02:40] everybody in Malibu, including softball leagues and city programs.

[4:02:45] While the days of volunteer building park facilities themselves have largely

[4:02:48] been replaced by regulation and liability, the mission of Malibu Little

[4:02:52] League remains the same. To leave our community better than we found it.

[4:02:57] Those original volunteers built something that has served generations of

[4:03:00] our community and the facility improvements before you tonight will do

[4:03:04] the same. The investment simply ensures that the infrastructure surrounding the

[4:03:09] fields finally matches the legacy our little league community created.

[4:03:13] With your leadership and support, we have the opportunity tonight to carry

[4:03:17] that legacy forward for the next generation of Malibu families. I hope

[4:03:21] you'll join us. Thank you for your time and your consideration.

[4:03:24] » Thank you, Jake. Please, let's be silent in our in our

[4:03:30] support. John Alano

[4:03:49] My name is John Alfano and I am the president of Malibu Little League and I

[4:03:53] am not running for governor.

[4:03:58] [laughter] >> Before taking time to talk about the

[4:04:01] building and infrastructure that Jake just kind of reviewed, I want to talk

[4:04:04] about what it really means to be a part of Bluff Park and what Malibu Little

[4:04:08] League and softball is all about. Every week, hundreds of kids, almost a

[4:04:13] thousand people come to the field every week, and they do what they love. They

[4:04:17] play, they compete, and they grow. They're learning teamwork, resilience,

[4:04:22] confidence, and the value of hard work. They're building friendships that last

[4:04:26] for years. And most importantly, they're having fun. They even sat through this

[4:04:31] meeting this long with smiles on their face. God bless them.

[4:04:35] That culture does not happen by accident. For more than seven decades,

[4:04:40] Malibu Little League has built almost on entirely on volunteer effort. Parents,

[4:04:45] coaches, board members, and thousands of hours have made this experience

[4:04:49] possible. I personally spend about 40 to 60 hours a week volunteering, making

[4:04:54] sure kids have uniforms, they're on the right teams, the fields are safe,

[4:04:58] there's dirt out there, there's no gopher holes, yada yada yada.

[4:05:05] And at the heart of all this is the snack shack. Believe it or not, it's

[4:05:09] more than an experience. It's not just about the food. It's a place where

[4:05:13] families gather between innings, where teammates hang out with their after

[4:05:17] games, and where siblings run around with their grandparents to watch the

[4:05:20] next generations play. Come on a Saturday and you'll walk up

[4:05:25] and see kids with their tickets wanting to redeem them at the snack

[4:05:31] track for a treat. walk away smiling like they just won the World Series.

[4:05:38] Jake already mentioned the millions of dollars that Little League has put in

[4:05:41] over the last 40 years, including over a quarter million in just the last five.

[4:05:46] But the truth is, you cannot put a dollar amount on the volunteer hours

[4:05:49] that have built this program and keep it thriving. And tonight, I'd like to ask

[4:05:54] something very simple. I'd like you to look at the kids that

[4:05:58] are standing next to me. I'd like you to look at their faces.

[4:06:03] Look at the excitement they have tonight wearing their uniforms and just being

[4:06:06] here representing Malibu Little League and softball.

[4:06:10] Three years ago, I stood right here in the same room with another group of

[4:06:14] legal leaders, little leaguers. [snorts] Those kids have now grown up and aged

[4:06:19] out of the league. And they never got to experience what it is we're asking for.

[4:06:24] Please do not let that happen to this group. I'm asking you tonight to make a

[4:06:30] commitment. not to me, not to the league, but to these kids that are

[4:06:35] standing right here beside me. That Malibu will continue serving its

[4:06:40] investment in the places where these kids learn teamwork, friendship, and

[4:06:45] confidence. Because Malibu Bluffs Park isn't just where kids play baseball and

[4:06:50] softball. It's where they grow up and become young adults. Thank you.

[4:06:55] » Thank you, John.

[4:06:59] » [snorts] >> Sarah, Claire, and Freddy.

[4:07:17] » Hi, my name is Sarah and um we're all here to talk about how much we love the

[4:07:24] Snack Shack. Personally, I love it because of all the awesome snacks it has

[4:07:29] and the fact that we turn the money we paid for the snacks into tickets. I love

[4:07:34] the ticket idea because I think it's awesome and way cool and way better than

[4:07:38] waving around normal money. Another thing I love about the snack shack is

[4:07:43] that all the people who work there are very nice and friendly. Another reason I

[4:07:48] love the snack shack because it is an awesome place to just be able to buy a

[4:07:53] snack then go to practice. It is also a good place for all the

[4:07:57] parents to just buy lunch, hang out, and watch their kids play softball or

[4:08:02] baseball. Um

[4:08:06] um hi, I'm Freddy Fink and I'm here to talk about this snack shack and it's

[4:08:11] already pretty cool, but um it would be way cooler if we could get like

[4:08:16] bathrooms and make it a little bit cleaner and bigger and

[4:08:22] um yeah, thank you.

[4:08:27] » Hi, I'm Claire Toledo and um I'm here to speak about softball. We love playing

[4:08:34] softball. And after softball, we would go to the snack shack to get plenty of

[4:08:39] snacks like sunflower seeds, gum, dip, and dots, lollipops. It is really good.

[4:08:47] » That's it. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments.

[4:08:54] Um Josh Spiegel followed by Hug Janice, followed by Olivia and Skyler.

[4:09:08] Hi. Um, I don't really have all that much to say other than just looking at

[4:09:13] this from afar. It's [snorts] super important that Malibu has these great

[4:09:18] parks, these great facilities. It's part of keeping families here and these kids

[4:09:24] are going to be the future of Malibu and protecting what Malibu is in 100 years.

[4:09:30] So, we need to attract that. Um, I'm pretty sure I see where this thing is

[4:09:33] going, so I'm gonna shut up and go sit down.

[4:09:38] » Thank you, Josh. Hugh,

[4:09:43] is Hugh here?

[4:09:46] » No. Okay. Olivia and Skyler.

[4:09:57] » Hi, my name's Olivia Alfano. >> Hi, and I'm Skyler Lingo. The reason why

[4:10:01] we like the snack shack is because it can bring the community together

[4:10:05] » and people can make new friends. Thank you for supporting this idea idea. We

[4:10:10] love the snack shack. >> Thank you.

[4:10:15] » Seeing a pattern here. [laughter]

[4:10:18] » Okay. Um Sienna Graham and Havana Keenan.

[4:10:29] Pull that. >> Pull that mic down for

[4:10:34] That's even better. All right. >> Hi, my name is Sienna.

[4:10:38] » Grandma. >> Hi, my name is Savannah Keenan.

[4:10:42] » First of all, the snack shack is a big part of Malibu Little League.

[4:10:48] I save up all my allowance for it. It is such an honor to be a part of that

[4:10:52] community. It gets a

[4:11:01] It gets me hyped up for softball games in the morning.

[4:11:06] » I mean, I do dishes for get to get snack shack.

[4:11:10] » Thank you. Thank you for listening. >> Yeah. Thank you. That's all.

[4:11:15] » Thank you, Heather.

[4:11:20] Alfano, Leo Gigliadi, and Mila Mustakus and Jenna Alfano.

[4:11:29] » Hi everybody, Heather Alfano, also known as the first lady of Malibu Little

[4:11:33] League. I have inherited the role of the snack shack queen, and I never could

[4:11:37] have guessed how much joy this position would bring. Every Saturday during the

[4:11:40] spring season, I can be found grilling from about 8:00 a.m. till 2:00 p.m. in

[4:11:44] some capacity. Two weekends ago, we celebrated opening day, bringing back

[4:11:49] our infamous Bluffsburg burger. We sold 180 burgers and 60 hot dogs that day. We

[4:11:54] also served breakfast quesadillas for our early morning teams. The snack shack

[4:11:58] has truly become a pinnacle of social connection here in Malibu. I am standing

[4:12:02] before you today to personify how important pushing the plan for a

[4:12:06] permanent snack shack really is. Last year after the Palisades fire, we were

[4:12:10] beyond hesitant to ask our local businesses to sponsor a little league

[4:12:14] team, which is a staple for our fundraising efforts. We relied heavily

[4:12:18] on the profits of the snack shack to keep things moving for all of our

[4:12:21] players. One of the major hurdles that we deal with on a weekly basis is how

[4:12:25] cumbersome our setup and breakdown can be. We have a lot of parents who are

[4:12:29] willing to volunteer. However, it is not easy to set up a temporary restaurant

[4:12:33] each week. We are hooking up water to a mobile sink, a water heater, a drainage

[4:12:38] system, building easyups that are not easy. Temporary trash cans, running

[4:12:42] extension cords to power our register, speakers, and cotton candy machine, as

[4:12:46] well as the grill, food prep, chilling drinks, and laying out an array of big

[4:12:50] leak chew. If we were able to show up to a permanent snack shack, I wouldn't be

[4:12:54] so fearful of this snack shack idea dying when I finally need to retire. So,

[4:12:59] when you find an item on your agenda pertaining to Snack Shack, please think

[4:13:02] of me in my grandmother's apron, pleading with you to make it happen.

[4:13:06] Lastly, I encourage all of you to stop by on a Saturday and get a Bluffsburg

[4:13:10] burger. It is truly the tastiest burger in Malibu. Thank you.

[4:13:14] » Thank you, Leo.

[4:13:28] Is Leo here? >> No.

[4:13:30] » Okay. Mila Mustakus and Gemma Alana.

[4:13:43] » Good evening everyone. My name is Milas and my name is Gemma Alan. One of the

[4:13:49] main parts of Maba Little League is the snack shack. I love going to the snack

[4:13:54] shack, but if it was bigger, it would be even better. I love going there with my

[4:14:00] family and friends. It's so yummy and fun. When we get done with our softball

[4:14:06] games, we go get a lot of food and drinks and candy. It would be amazing to

[4:14:12] have a building to keep it all. Thank you. Any questions?

[4:14:19] » [laughter]

[4:14:21] » Thank you very much.

[4:14:26] Do we have anybody on Zoom?

[4:14:30] Yeah, there's two raised hands. First is Andy Lion.

[4:14:37] Hey there. Um, did I go unmuted?

[4:14:42] » We hear you, Andy. >> Okay. I had a picture. Uh, Parker has

[4:14:49] There we go. That's the original, my original that I the snack shack I knew

[4:14:56] down at the little league in the Malibu Lagoon area.

[4:15:00] And uh you know, listening to all these K we that was the worst best pizza ever,

[4:15:06] the pizza ball, snow cones that were like as hard as hard balls and all kinds

[4:15:13] of candy, you know. And the memories I have of that that snack shack are, you

[4:15:20] know, they go back. That was a long time ago. Um, and I'm listening, you know,

[4:15:26] seeing this whole thing. I I I'm listening to the kids and like, you

[4:15:30] know, the idea of the snack shack, but what they have right now and they're

[4:15:34] just so happy to get to the like if I asked Glider, he as long as he could get

[4:15:38] dipping dots. I mean, if they were coming out of the back of the trunk of

[4:15:41] somebody's car, he'd be stoked and just hanging out with everybody. But it's

[4:15:45] great that there's going to be something coming. It's just unfortunate that this

[4:15:50] whole bureaucracy and the the designs and everything is so expensive and

[4:15:55] crazy. And it used to be I I'm sure like the parent like the dads probably built

[4:16:00] that snack shack and just put something in that had some character and stuff and

[4:16:05] wasn't you know tied into every kind of bureaucracy, red tape, design fees and

[4:16:13] whatnot. But, um, yeah, that's that, you know, do the right thing for it. Um, I'm

[4:16:20] just I I don't know why we got stuck with the skate park having to have

[4:16:24] bathrooms too, right across the street, literally like, you know, 50 feet away

[4:16:30] and they have to make more bathrooms for that and charge more for I don't I don't

[4:16:34] understand, but you know, more bathrooms the better, I guess, because whatever.

[4:16:39] Um, but yeah, it's it, you know, I hope that you can get it done before like

[4:16:44] while those kids are here that are there coming before you and talking about how

[4:16:48] great the snack check is. Hopefully it gets done while they're still in Little

[4:16:51] League. Um, you know, like the skate park, you know,

[4:16:56] the the construction, so many of the kids that went to those meetings that

[4:16:59] were like the kids tonight, they didn't they're already gone. So,

[4:17:05] um, push it through and push it through fast and maybe get something in the

[4:17:08] interim, you know, so, you know, maybe like something that can happen and they

[4:17:13] can use right now as a, you know, that would be great to have a have something

[4:17:19] that's better than there, whether it's a, you know, a,

[4:17:25] you know, food truck or some something that is better. I don't know. I like it

[4:17:31] right now. It's great. Blessberger all the way they you know after skating too

[4:17:36] but I'm in the little league. Go Angels. Let's go get a snack check. Bye.

[4:17:40] [laughter] >> Thank you Andy. Who's next?

[4:17:47] » Alicia Peak.

[4:17:54] » Wow. It's so nice to see all you smiling on the dis tonight because this is what

[4:18:00] local government is all about. our future and our youth. Kids in the room,

[4:18:05] can you please stand up? Adults in the room, can you please stand up? Please

[4:18:09] stand up to show the amount of support that we have tonight.

[4:18:14] My name is Alicia Peak. I'm a parks and rec commissioner, AYSO commissioner,

[4:18:19] teacher, but most importantly, a mother of three ball players, and proud to know

[4:18:23] every single person in this room because you being in this room tonight shows the

[4:18:28] support that we all share for this I promise you that this snack shack is

[4:18:34] not just about little league. It is about AYSO. I see it being used for flag

[4:18:39] football, chew mash day, outdoor movie nights, an emergency kitchen. We always

[4:18:45] talk about emergency services. This could be used in that way. And our new

[4:18:49] skate park. We could use this for having events for the skate park. You can sit

[4:18:54] down now. Thank you all. I appreciate you so much.

[4:18:57] » I think that this is the heart of our community.

[4:19:00] Kids get to learn and immerse themselves um of what it means to volunteer, take

[4:19:07] orders, make orders, and learn how to be a cashier. Unfortunately, Heather, I

[4:19:12] don't foresee kids rolling that 100 pound sink up and down the shelf every

[4:19:16] week like you do. God bless you. I say this all the time, but the only thing

[4:19:21] economists always agree on is that the best investment is to invest in kids. As

[4:19:28] a city, we have committed to this with our school district, with our community

[4:19:32] lands. And this is one more commitment we are making. We are asking the city to

[4:19:36] make in our youth. It is also very important tonight, as you guys discuss,

[4:19:42] we need a robust fundraising effort to make this a dream. Let's vote tonight to

[4:19:47] make this a reality and use this also as an opportunity to create a great

[4:19:52] fundraising effort that we can continue to use for all future projects. Jake

[4:19:57] Lingo and Dne, if everybody could please give a clap for them. They have worked

[4:20:02] so incredibly hard on this. I am proud to know you and thank you.

[4:20:09] » Thank you, Alicia. One more.

[4:20:13] » Those are all the raised hands. Okay, that ends public comment. Brings back up

[4:20:18] to council. Who wants to go first? >> Okay.

[4:20:23] Um, so obviously I've been pushing since I got on council to get this project

[4:20:28] forward. So I'm a big hearty yes. And um I I I'm hoping that we're going to be

[4:20:34] able to find some cost savings um some time savings. Um it would be great to

[4:20:40] have this open um as early as possible. That's all I'm going to say. But

[4:20:46] anywhere we can can shave a couple weeks off here and there, it's going to add up

[4:20:50] to to being um so uh and then also fundraising. Um I know I've already

[4:20:57] talked to some about that. It would be great if we could um move towards having

[4:21:01] a more robust uh way of uh finding dollars for this.

[4:21:07] But um I think regardless if city ends up paying for this or we are able to be

[4:21:12] successful and get some fundraising, we're not going to regret um this

[4:21:16] improvement. Having those shipping containers that are out there and

[4:21:20] portable restrooms are the last thing that we need uh when we're trying to

[4:21:24] encourage residents to rebuild here. uh we need to have something that is

[4:21:28] attractive and that you know families when they're looking at homes and

[4:21:34] they're looking to build here. These amenities are really important and

[4:21:39] having something that shows value in our community is going to show our residents

[4:21:44] that we value them and we want to encourage them to be here. So I'll even

[4:21:48] make a motion to um move this forward. So it's

[4:21:56] what is it? Review and approve the Malibu Bless Park snack check and part

[4:22:00] enhancement project um for final preliminary design and I don't know why

[4:22:08] I'm not putting my glasses on. What a crazy person. Um and then uh yeah direct

[4:22:13] staff to find other um funding sources for it. So my motion is the recommended

[4:22:18] action by staff.

[4:22:22] Somebody want to second that? >> Uh, I've got some recommendations to it,

[4:22:26] but I'm supportive. If I could uh maybe have the mic for a minute here.

[4:22:31] » You can have the mic for as long as you need, but are you making a second or you

[4:22:34] just speaking? >> Uh, speaking in a second will come up.

[4:22:37] I'm going to need to amend it a little bit, I think, and see if Mariana will go

[4:22:41] along. >> First off, Andy, uh, I I'm right there

[4:22:45] with you. I look back on that picture and I remember what it was like when I

[4:22:48] was a kid except uh having a water fountain was really a garden hose and

[4:22:53] you ran it for a while to get the water cool. But that's the way it was then and

[4:22:58] I don't know better or worse that's not the way we are now. Uh although I

[4:23:02] survived as that seems so don't think it kills you. Uh I love the design and I

[4:23:08] applaud the consensus that went into building putting this before us tonight.

[4:23:12] Um costsaving considerations as well. I I could feel the conversations as you

[4:23:17] guys were talking about it. Well, let's take a little bit out of here. Let's

[4:23:19] take a little bit out of there. It It's absolutely wonderful what you guys have

[4:23:23] done. And this is a solution that's long term. Uh this isn't about next week or

[4:23:29] next day. And it's like our skate park. It's a it's a investment in our kids.

[4:23:34] It's investment in our park system. And these will be here forever. Uh and I

[4:23:39] talk about making decisions on this DAS that last a hundred years. This is one

[4:23:42] of those ones. You look at the parks that are there and Jake and John and

[4:23:46] Heather, you guys have have taken over the mantle for today, but there's 60 70

[4:23:51] years of history on this. There'll be 60 or 70 years history going forward and

[4:23:55] we've got to invest wisely and make sure it works. Um, and honestly, if it was

[4:24:00] only the snack shack, it'd be the most expensive hot dog stand in America. But

[4:24:04] it's far more than that. You pointed it out very well, and the diagrams are are

[4:24:08] support that. Our issue, though, is money. Um, I hate to be the the the

[4:24:15] banker up here, but in fact, Joe and I had a conversation this afternoon about

[4:24:19] this. Um, not just about the skate park, but the whole city's finances. Um, you

[4:24:25] go back two or three years ago, we were cashri. We had a $9 million surplus.

[4:24:30] Life was good. Uh, we approved the skate park and said, "We'll pay for it."

[4:24:35] today with the fire behind us and I'll go back to Zeviroski who um made his

[4:24:42] comment to an earlier city council member.

[4:24:45] He was very proud of the fact that he had a big surplus reserve and Seroski

[4:24:50] goes, "You're one disaster away from bankruptcy." And he's right. Uh, city of

[4:24:57] Maloo right now is rebuilding the city that burned and we've got somewhere

[4:25:02] between I'm gonna say 18 to$22 million, I don't know what the number is right

[4:25:06] now on a non-interest bearing loan to FEMA.

[4:25:10] » Uh, we have to advance the money and then they decide if they're going to

[4:25:13] give it back to us. We also don't have the property tax we had a year ago. We

[4:25:18] don't have the sales tax we had a year ago. Don't have the transit occupancy

[4:25:21] tax, the hotel tax. So income is down, expenses are up, especially in support

[4:25:26] of our rebuilding. We're not going to not support our rebuilding efforts. And

[4:25:31] at the same time, we got to take care of the town that didn't burn. So I am all

[4:25:36] in favor of this, and I will do everything I can to get it done. But I'd

[4:25:39] like to maybe put this in a two-step process.

[4:25:44] We've already got $425,000 in the budget to do the preliminary

[4:25:48] design and permitting, final design. as I look at the sheet and Kristen or

[4:25:52] whoever uh nod at me or give me the the stink eye and tell me I'm wrong, but we

[4:25:57] that's going to take us about a year to get there.

[4:26:01] We have got to have some help to build this financially. And I'll tell you

[4:26:06] what, you know, top of my mind is, and I've got my notes down here that I wrote

[4:26:10] on this, um we need to probably get half the funding for this from donations and

[4:26:15] naming rights. call it a million five million seven.

[4:26:20] There's money like that around here for things that need to be done and this

[4:26:24] needs to be done. We've got to find a way to do it. The city right now doesn't

[4:26:29] have a spare million7 but hopefully we can get some money back from FEMA, get

[4:26:34] the reserves built back up. And that's really what I'm talking about it. We've

[4:26:37] got to have these reserves to protect our bond rating and our credit rating.

[4:26:41] We have almost a hundred million dollars in debt in this city. That's what we use

[4:26:46] to buy all these parks and buy buildings and everything else. We're still paying

[4:26:50] off the the beginner house in effect. So, we've got to raise some money here

[4:26:55] to take care of this and we got ahead of our reserves. So, I'd like to make a

[4:27:00] motion to support Mary going with me. Let's fully support the design uh

[4:27:05] planning and approvals and engineering for the $425,000.

[4:27:10] bring this back um at a future date and I don't know how we want to want to do

[4:27:17] that to confirm the funding. You know, where where are we at? Where can we find

[4:27:22] the money and and basically enlist the staff and the

[4:27:28] citizenry and the council to see where we can come up with the money to build

[4:27:32] this puppy. This is as important as anything else we do. And it is critical

[4:27:38] that we get it done, but we don't have the dollars right now. I I hate, you

[4:27:42] know, town is wealthy as Malibu. Hate to say we're going to need to 10 cup, but

[4:27:46] we need the 10 cup. And we got to go find some money to make this work.

[4:27:50] That's my opinion. And Maryanne, [clears throat] I I hearing my story and

[4:27:55] hearing my tale. What can we do to to amend your uh uh motion? And I'm glad to

[4:28:00] second it. Could you put the timeline back up, please?

[4:28:06] Thank you. I I hear what you're saying and I do

[4:28:10] like um the idea of it and um maybe that will also help spur um if we have a

[4:28:18] deadline for fundraising uh to get our community motivated. I just don't want

[4:28:24] to

[4:28:28] I'm just kind of trying to think that if we I want to bring this back as quickly

[4:28:32] as possible, but is what's a reasonable time frame?

[4:28:36] City manager maybe you can also help me with I mean to bring it back for kind of

[4:28:42] a [clears throat] goal setting time frame of it. Yeah, if I'm looking at

[4:28:45] this uh Kristen and uh Nathaniel correct me, but the final engineering is 10

[4:28:52] weeks and that's scheduled in quarter 4 of 26.

[4:28:57] We would want to come back before then because we're going to need funding to

[4:29:01] do that work. >> Okay.

[4:29:05] » 425,000 doesn't cover the engineering. No, it just gets us through the planning

[4:29:10] commission approval and the CDP, but not final construction documents.

[4:29:15] » Well, we've got it. >> Excuse me. Uh, it does get us through

[4:29:20] final engineering. Uh, >> so we're looking at the item before.

[4:29:26] » Yeah. So, can I >> Sure.

[4:29:29] » My understanding of this proposal um was that we're not approving financing.

[4:29:34] We're not being asked to approve financing tonight at all. We're being

[4:29:37] asked to approve the concept basically of moving forward with the preliminary

[4:29:43] design and um permitting not permit and the final design and it will not come

[4:29:50] back to us for a year for approval close to a year for approval of the actual

[4:29:56] project which would include the necessity to approve a budget going to

[4:30:00] payment. um there's ample opportunity for the city to find sources of

[4:30:05] financing in that schedule that's already there. And if the city can't

[4:30:10] find sources for financing, which I don't think is likely to occur, then

[4:30:13] we'll have to make the hard decision of how much of the city's money do we want

[4:30:16] to budget for this. Actually, I don't think it will be a hard decision. But um

[4:30:20] I don't think it's necessary to amend the motion because the the motion isn't

[4:30:24] to approve any payment at this point in time. The motion is simply to approve

[4:30:29] the plan to go forward which still depends upon our approving the financing

[4:30:33] at some future date. >> I I agree with that and uh I think if we

[4:30:37] could maybe set a hard deadline. I like the idea of a goal setting on this um

[4:30:42] and I don't know how we are going to uh staff both a financing

[4:30:47] option for where the city's money comes from and then trying to work on naming

[4:30:52] rights and donations. But um we do need to have a robust effort on both of those

[4:30:56] to make this work. >> Yeah. Would that be I'm sorry. Go ahead.

[4:31:00] » And I just think this is one of the most important things we'll do this year uh

[4:31:03] as far as getting getting things started. Uh and we've got to we've got

[4:31:07] to protect our rebuilding, but we've also got to protect this aspect.

[4:31:12] » So, so far we have a motion and a request to amend it. Where do we stand

[4:31:16] on that? >> Well, are you still requesting to amend

[4:31:19] it or are you just seconding it as it is? We're just going to approve the

[4:31:22] design >> microphone.

[4:31:24] » We're just going to approve the design and the 425,000. I'm all in. I'm with

[4:31:28] you. >> Okay.

[4:31:29] » The 425 is I think already approved. So, it's just continuing the the path.

[4:31:33] » Okay. So, we have a motion, a second. Um, further discussion. Who Who else

[4:31:37] wants to speak? >> Steve.

[4:31:42] » I I understand the need for a project, excuse me, a project like this.

[4:31:48] And I'm with I grew up in Rome, New York, and any given day in the summer, I

[4:31:53] could get on my bicycle, drive around the city, and get into a baseball game.

[4:31:58] Uh they were always there. As long as you weren't a spaz, they let you play.

[4:32:02] Uh and it was now and you it was a baseball town. The commissioner of

[4:32:07] baseball came from Rome, New York. I mean, with those there's a lot of

[4:32:11] baseball being played there. So, I am in favor of trying to put something

[4:32:14] together that makes it better for the children here in Malibu to use that. Let

[4:32:19] me make a couple suggestions. And I spoke to Rob Dau about this a

[4:32:24] while back. Malibu High School has got these

[4:32:29] classrooms that they're tearing apart and they're going to throw them out.

[4:32:34] These classrooms come with eight bathrooms. Uh they're in great shape.

[4:32:40] Uh, and I suggested maybe it's worth trying and they're giving them away. If

[4:32:44] someone doesn't take them, they're going to throw them out. So, I suggested that

[4:32:48] maybe we should take a look at those and see if maybe bringing one or two of

[4:32:52] those in can give us a a jump start in getting this stuff done, this project

[4:32:57] done. Uh, and they save you a few bucks. I think it, you know, you can make it

[4:33:01] look as good as what we're planning here, uh,

[4:33:05] and save some money. So, I I hope somebody is taking a look at that. Uh

[4:33:12] because to have these these classrooms just get thrown out and not used, I

[4:33:17] think is a mistake. Uh that said, and I agree with everything Doug said, money

[4:33:22] is the issue right now. Now, I assume who's going to who's going to be the

[4:33:27] fundraising arm to get this thing going? Do we anybody identify who's going to do

[4:33:31] that? Kristen? Uh yes, I am working with our city

[4:33:37] manager on a plan um to bring forth some ideas for fundraising efforts. We are

[4:33:44] taking a book out of uh city of South Lake Tahoe. Um so I will be meeting with

[4:33:49] those staff members next week to to talk about a plan of moving forward with

[4:33:54] fundraising, a foundation of some sort. >> And I agree with Doug. I mean I think

[4:33:59] you guys you start early and do it often. I mean, there's

[4:34:05] we talked about getting the FEMA money back. Uh, I don't know if you've

[4:34:09] listened to the news. Donald Trump doesn't particularly have Malibu next to

[4:34:13] his heart. Uh, so that money may not be showing up in the very near future. So,

[4:34:18] you know, do what you can to raise as much as you can because I think when we

[4:34:22] get to the end of it, you're going to need it. So, I will support the motion

[4:34:25] so far. >> Yeah. Well, I'm all for community and

[4:34:30] youth and uh seniors as well and animals. So, I support the idea of all

[4:34:35] of this. I just have a lot of I still have questions and I don't know if the

[4:34:39] ad hoc has to come back together with maybe the parks ad hoc. Um I'm still

[4:34:44] supportive of it, but you know, it's great to have the first lady here, but

[4:34:48] when the first lady's kids grow up, who is going to man like is there a plan for

[4:34:53] who mans this snack shack? Is it parent and volunteer? because I know that

[4:34:58] parents and volunteers move on. So, is it a concession contract and then we

[4:35:02] have to have a contract with there's just I feel like there's still some

[4:35:06] nuance that I need to understand. I do like Andy Lion's old snack shack. I

[4:35:11] think it's charming and it also doesn't block the view. I've said this so many

[4:35:15] times. I want to drive to the bluffs and see ocean and not storage units. Um I

[4:35:21] don't know why the storage units haven't been moved already. So, like in the

[4:35:25] meantime, it would be great to visualize that space. Those storage units are

[4:35:30] rusty and old and run down. I I think if they're empty, let's just remove them

[4:35:34] and put some money into removing them. Whatever happens, you can't What's

[4:35:39] inside of them? >> Baseball,

[4:35:41] » all the equipment from I I got it. There we go.

[4:35:44] » Okay. >> So, there's a city uh storage in there.

[4:35:47] And then the little league has their equipment for um the field maintenance.

[4:35:54] Um one of them has the the snack shack equipment and things that are stored

[4:35:58] there when um season's in place. >> Yeah.

[4:36:03] Um yes. I don't want to labor all my

[4:36:08] questions about food trucks because I'm sure you guys looked into food trucks.

[4:36:13] Um, yeah. It's, you know, I want to spend

[4:36:18] money. I want to be up here and be like, "Yeah, let's do it." But it, it's also

[4:36:21] hard because we have, does the city do any match funds? Like when you fund

[4:36:25] raise, do you do a matching which a lot of We don't have anything um

[4:36:32] in line yet. >> Um, so that would be something we would

[4:36:36] look into. Okay.

[4:36:40] Um, okay. I have questions about the concession air and how this is going to

[4:36:47] operate. You know, we also have the Ike lot which has two regulation size soccer

[4:36:51] fields. Um I also want to know how much that's going to cost. So it's hard for,

[4:36:56] you know, I'm glad we're not doing the funding tonight because there's those

[4:37:00] questions about the nursery that we approved with for nature uh native

[4:37:07] plants. Do you have to have a food permit for

[4:37:11] this? Yes, ma'am. We have to We go through LA

[4:37:15] County Health Department to get all the permitting.

[4:37:18] » Does that cost money every year? >> Yes, it does.

[4:37:21] » Okay. All right. Well, I'm super into supporting the youth and making Malibu

[4:37:27] uh memories. I would love to know about the timeline for the AIO soccer fields,

[4:37:33] but we're not really talking about money tonight. And I'm excited to hear about

[4:37:36] what you might have in store that South Lake Tahoe did for funding for parks.

[4:37:40] So, it's not always on the city of Melbourne. Thank you.

[4:37:44] » All right. Thanks, Alan. So, if you want to get something approved, bring the

[4:37:48] kids in. Right. >> Thank you all for speaking. You're

[4:37:51] great. Um, I was super supportive of getting a temporary snack shack in there

[4:37:58] when it was necessary along with Miriam. And, um, I was supportive of moving this

[4:38:04] forward with all elacrity. I can't believe it's taken us as long to get to

[4:38:07] where we are. And we still have a long road ahead. Sounds like um the cost is

[4:38:12] somewhat shocking to me. I really thought we were looking when we first

[4:38:15] approved going forward at hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly low 1

[4:38:20] million. I this number is startling to me. In fact, there was a slide said

[4:38:24] starting price. I thought it said startling price, but then I read it more

[4:38:26] carefully. Um but it is startling. But you know, I I'm less concerned I think

[4:38:31] than others up here about um the city's finances. They're going to come back and

[4:38:36] they're going to be fine. I mean, look, I've said this before. If we have

[4:38:38] another disaster, doesn't matter that we saved money because we're saving it for

[4:38:42] our creditors. And um if we don't have another disaster, then we've not spent

[4:38:47] money for no good reason if we're if we're holding it just because we're

[4:38:50] worried about another disaster. So um this is an important community amenity.

[4:38:55] It's um we haven't done move forward with any of the other community

[4:38:58] amenities that we've been talking about for years and years and years. Actually,

[4:39:02] we we've moved forward with one, the skate park. That's also been more

[4:39:04] expensive than anyone thought it would be, but it's it looks like it's going to

[4:39:07] be a great improvement for the for the kids and for the community. So, I'm

[4:39:10] super supportive of this. I think we need this. Um I wish there were a way to

[4:39:14] do it less expensively. It I can't believe we publish what we think things

[4:39:18] are going to cost and then we go out and ask people to pay to bid it. So, we kind

[4:39:23] of set the floor already. It's ridiculous the way that this works.

[4:39:26] Government is not meant for um money saving. Um, but I'm going to support

[4:39:32] this. Um, I I I have an a nent idea about a way to do this less expensively

[4:39:38] without changing a thing, but it's premature to talk about that publicly,

[4:39:41] but I'm going to talk to the staff about that um over the coming week. Um, but I

[4:39:47] I support this and um I would have supported that if we were approving the

[4:39:52] money tonight, subject to getting it back in ways that we can look into, but

[4:39:55] if not, not not. But so does anybody have any further comments before we take

[4:40:00] a vote on this? >> I just have a question. Has anybody from

[4:40:02] the city looked into um the trailers that Steve's talking about? Because I

[4:40:07] know Kevin Keegan brought it up at a few meetings.

[4:40:10] » Thank you for the question. I I have and um in just a quick email chain with the

[4:40:18] school district um those trail the portable classrooms have to be removed

[4:40:24] by March 30th of this of this year. So at the end of the month uh there is

[4:40:30] costs related to transporting them and getting them off the site that the city

[4:40:35] would be responsible for. Um, so that just means we would have to store them

[4:40:41] for for a [snorts] bit. Um, I don't think they're

[4:40:46] I get I think I could talk to Little League, but a modification to um a

[4:40:51] classroom to have like a rollup gate would probably be [snorts] an expense as

[4:40:55] well. So, um, that was the information I received.

[4:41:00] » Thank you. I wasn't sure if we were you wanted to put them at Heathercliffe or

[4:41:04] Ioke for now sort of because we don't have to store them but they're there if

[4:41:09] you we decide to do that and I was also hoping that we could have like actual

[4:41:12] renderings more. Um so I could kind of understand it better because it's not

[4:41:20] like inspiring to look at that. Um, and then also to Andy Conrad's Point, Lion's

[4:41:28] Point. Um, how many bathrooms in that area will we have? Because I know we

[4:41:32] need bathrooms. You've got uh the Bluff's Michael Landon, which is

[4:41:36] kind of further away, and zero at the skate park now, or there is a restroom

[4:41:41] facility at the skate park. There are two genderneutral restrooms at the skate

[4:41:46] park. This facility at the snack shack will have two women's and two men's. Um,

[4:41:52] if I remember correctly, there are six inside the uh Michael Lannon Center.

[4:42:00] » There I did speak to Little League about um the restrooms across the street.

[4:42:06] There are concerns. It was regarding safety and children crossing uh the road

[4:42:12] if they need to use the restroom at the skate park. So, this was the best idea

[4:42:18] moving forward just as far as proximity to the baseball fields, keeping children

[4:42:22] safe, >> right? I don't know if you know the

[4:42:24] answer to this, but when the money comes in for the bluff burger, who gets that

[4:42:28] money? >> It goes back to

[4:42:31] » Little League. Okay. And then when Little League's not operating the snack

[4:42:34] shack and the first lady's not in the kitchen, who is operating the snack

[4:42:38] shack so that there can be additional funds to make it more worth it? There's

[4:42:42] nobody operating it. So right now no one is operating it there. You had mentioned

[4:42:48] um LA County Health Department. Uh when they permit the facility, it is only for

[4:42:53] Malibu Little League to use that facility.

[4:42:56] » So that's three months out of the year. >> Um they begin in March. It's 3 to 4. Um

[4:43:03] and we do rent the required sink. Um that is part of the snack check as well.

[4:43:10] So, it's closed the rest of the year for the skate park. So, there's no dip in

[4:43:15] dots anyway for glider. Okay. Maybe that's something that we could think

[4:43:20] about to make it a little bit more worth a while.

[4:43:23] » Yeah, I think once we have a permanent facility, it'll be used u more often

[4:43:28] than it is now. >> Okay, great. Thank you.

[4:43:33] » One last thing. It was so good to see all the young girls here tonight for

[4:43:37] Little League. I mean, you know, when I was a child, if I if there was a event

[4:43:41] like this and the little league's children showed up, it would have been

[4:43:44] all boys and it was so nice to see. And you know, one day you'll see a woman

[4:43:49] president of this country and it's a shame we don't right now because we

[4:43:52] wouldn't be at war with the world. >> Are we ready to vote?

[4:43:59] » Okay. You want to do a voice vote or just acclamation?

[4:44:03] » Kelsey shaking her head. Do a single vote. Okay. Why don't you call the call

[4:44:07] the question? >> Do you'd like a roll call? Council

[4:44:09] member Rigggins? >> Yes.

[4:44:11] » Council member Stewart? >> Yes.

[4:44:13] » Council member Conrad? >> Yes.

[4:44:15] » Mayor Promarine? >> Yes.

[4:44:17] » Mayor Silverstein? >> Absolutely. Yes.

[4:44:19] » Motion carries. >> Okay. Thank you all.

[4:44:30] » Mayor, your microphone is off. If you're speaking,

[4:44:32] » turn it off. Okay. It's now 9:19 and we are only up to city council member

[4:44:38] reports. I'm going to ask that council members try to keep these as brief as

[4:44:42] possible. I'm going to forego mine altogether. Who would like to go first?

[4:44:48] » Um I'll go really quick. Um I attended a clean power alliance meeting last week

[4:44:54] and um since our city is with clean power alliance and they have been so

[4:45:00] successful in uh negotiating contracts with uh solar and wind throughout the

[4:45:07] region. Um we're kind of shifting into a new dynamic as far as when power is

[4:45:13] available. Um there is a an abundance of power available during the day. So, it

[4:45:19] used to be that you faced higher rates for using your electrical during the

[4:45:24] daytime. Now, with the abundance of uh clean power, uh you're seeing more

[4:45:32] availability and lower rates. So, they're encouraging people uh to charge

[4:45:38] your your electric vehicles during the day um and uh use of other appliances

[4:45:44] and things like that. if you are on the um the uh daytime use. The Clean Power

[4:45:50] Alliance is also moving forward with a pilot project to look at time of use um

[4:45:57] and seeing if they can get people enrolled to um take part in these where

[4:46:03] you would be on a a demand um and uh just kind of try out see what the rates

[4:46:09] are going to be and things like that. So, uh look for it in the mail. They're

[4:46:14] picking people at random throughout all Clean Power Alliance cities, which uh

[4:46:19] are over most of me uh LA County and Ventura County. Now,

[4:46:24] um but if you are chosen, they'll give you additional information about how you

[4:46:29] can confirm, you're able to opt out of the pilot program if you want to and

[4:46:34] still stay with Clean Power Alliance. Uh but just look, they will be sending out

[4:46:38] mailers to those uh properties that are selected to take part in the pilot

[4:46:43] program. Not everybody will be selected. Uh but just keep an eye out for that so

[4:46:48] you can gain that information. But it's a 12-month program to start with, but

[4:46:52] eventually it may get rolled out depending on how successful it is. So,

[4:46:57] um, if you have more questions, please go to Clean Power Alliance, um, and you

[4:47:02] can chat through and they've got a lot of great information on there and, uh,

[4:47:06] ways to save on power. Okay. >> And other than that, um, attended a

[4:47:11] couple other meetings, but, uh, just working on the city stuff.

[4:47:16] » Steve, yeah, I'll try and be equally as quick. uh these cell towers. Can

[4:47:23] somebody from the city come back to us and let us know what are our

[4:47:27] responsibilities, what options we have to sort of look at these things and get

[4:47:31] them approved or or make comments because these things are going in and

[4:47:35] none of this is coming in front of the city council. And I think some of the

[4:47:38] comments we heard from the residents tonight say it should be right. We

[4:47:42] somebody should take a look at what's going on and making sure it makes sense

[4:47:45] for what we're doing. So, if someone could get back to me on that, I sure

[4:47:48] would appreciate that. I hope somebody's going to chase down Melinda Watts. I

[4:47:52] thought her presentation was worth worth taking a look at. Uh,

[4:47:57] and Mike's app, I don't [clears throat] know what that is or how it works when

[4:48:01] there's no cell phone power, but if someone maybe Susan team could take over

[4:48:06] the public safety could look at that and see if that makes sense. I, you know,

[4:48:10] it's an idea. Uh, I' I've got I used to live in the Palisades and I I still talk

[4:48:17] to some people back there and one of the things they're telling me is a lot of

[4:48:20] the residents of the Palisades are applying for permits and once they get

[4:48:25] their permit they're flipping their house and they said just be careful

[4:48:29] that's starting to go on. And over the weekend I saw a posting I think it was

[4:48:33] Brian Merrick where somebody on the beachside property was doing the same

[4:48:37] thing. They got their permit. They're trying to to flip it. So, I just think

[4:48:41] we got to be aware of that. And if we see a lot of this going on, I do think

[4:48:45] we ought to take a look at doing something about short-term rentals on

[4:48:48] the beach because if enough of these things are flipped over, it just could

[4:48:52] be investors coming in, picking them up, trying to build the the building, and

[4:48:56] turning this place into a, you know, a motel. So, uh, I hope we keep our eyes

[4:49:01] on that. I certainly will, and as I learn more, I'll let people know. Thank

[4:49:05] you, Bruce. >> Thanks, Steve.

[4:49:07] » Thanks, Steve. Halen. Doug, who wants to go next?

[4:49:09] » I'll go next. Um, following up on Steve's points, which were very good, I

[4:49:13] um I'd like to propose an infrastructure resiliency ad hoc to explore water

[4:49:18] solutions, cellular uh these cell towers that I'm just hearing about uh the

[4:49:23] government bills that keep coming, we keep coming across, new technology. I

[4:49:28] met with Mike and the app and I asked them to come to Malibu public comment.

[4:49:34] um things like what Maryann just brought up and we could work together backup

[4:49:40] batteries um there's just a lot that's going on

[4:49:44] and so I think it would be really helpful to have a council member ad hoc

[4:49:49] micro grid solar automatic shut off valves keep coming up do we have a code

[4:49:54] for that is it in our codes >> for water or gas

[4:49:59] » for water like we talked about in the zone captains

[4:50:01] » no >> no so it would be sort of an exploration

[4:50:04] Do I have council consensus to bring back an item about a council member ad

[4:50:10] hoc proposing an infrastructure resiliency ad hoc?

[4:50:15] » So all you're asking for is consensus to have an item to discuss whether to

[4:50:19] appoint an ad hoc. >> Well, or just we can't we can't do it

[4:50:22] today. So >> we will come back and discuss that.

[4:50:25] » I'll support that. >> Thank you.

[4:50:27] » Anything else? >> I'll support it as well.

[4:50:30] » Okay. >> Sure.

[4:50:32] » Okay. You got that. >> Thank you.

[4:50:35] » Um, okay. The 5G towers. I'd like to learn everything I can. I don't know how

[4:50:38] they're putting up things on the polls without CDPs or kind of going through

[4:50:44] the city for that. Um, graffiti. Do we have any mechanism as a city

[4:50:50] council to enforce graffiti on private property? Because that is all over PCH

[4:50:57] and it's really people are not I mean wanting to live here or move here. It's

[4:51:01] a constant reminder. We're getting emails from people, residents.

[4:51:06] » No, I got the email also. I think the rule was that we we have asked those

[4:51:10] residents to fill out one of the forms that allow the sheriff to go onto their

[4:51:14] property. Right. And if we go if if that is completed, the sheriff's able to make

[4:51:19] sure whoever's doing this tagging, they can get him to stop it. Without doing

[4:51:23] that, the sheriff can't go on the property and do anything and the city

[4:51:26] can't do anything. >> Well, sheriff,

[4:51:27] » private property. >> Sheriff has to catch him in the act. I

[4:51:29] think you're are you qu asking more about removal of the graffiti or how to

[4:51:33] stop the graffiti in the first instance >> city removing the graffiti that's there

[4:51:37] and it's enforcement and going actively out to the to the homeowners versus the

[4:51:44] sheriff. So I'd be interested in that and I am done.

[4:51:50] » Doug, >> um to follow up quickly, I'm going to

[4:51:54] put uh the new city manager on the spot since he just got here. Uh two things.

[4:52:00] Can you maybe give us some experience on the cell towers and any recommendations

[4:52:04] on the uh uh graffiti issue? >> Yes. Uh thanks for the question.

[4:52:09] [clears throat] So what I understand is back in 2021-22 the city council adopted

[4:52:15] an urgency ordinance uh to address cell towers. Um

[4:52:20] » I didn't know that >> the wireless permitting is a very

[4:52:24] rigorous code. uh some have said one of the most tough in the country. Um even

[4:52:30] though we have these stringent stringent codes uh the federal law pro allows

[4:52:34] minor upgrades equipment upgrades they call them consistent with FCC section

[4:52:39] 6409. Uh 31 were approved in the first part of

[4:52:45] this year. Six have been appealed and that's what we're hearing about tonight.

[4:52:50] » And the appeal process doesn't come to the council. when it comes to uh hearing

[4:52:54] officer. >> Yes, sir. Hearings officer.

[4:52:58] » And what about the graffiti? Any >> the the the fee for the appeal is $725.

[4:53:03] I think you asked about that as well >> or 750. The graffiti, we are looking

[4:53:09] into that option right now. I've been talking with code enforcement and

[4:53:12] Yolanda to [snorts] see what um how we implement that program to make contact

[4:53:16] with the property owners and then fund the work to be done.

[4:53:21] » Okay. All right. Thank you. I'll try and be quick, too. Uh, one thing I want to

[4:53:25] point out, and Luca, uh, brought this up. Uh, one of the architects that does

[4:53:29] a lot of the work here in the city, >> he's been getting invoices that are

[4:53:33] phony. Uh, those of us that are in business, we get phony invoices

[4:53:38] periodically, and sometimes you just go, "Oh, that's for landscaping." And you

[4:53:43] sign off on it because it's only $25 or $15. You don't necessarily look at it.

[4:53:48] Well, this is serious money. And I got to tell you, I think there's a special

[4:53:52] place in hell for somebody that tries to take advantage of somebody whose home

[4:53:56] has been burned out. Um, so quickly what I'll say is the city doesn't issue email

[4:54:03] bills. Uh, you'll find you'll find them at the counter. Uh, that's where the

[4:54:08] invoices and payments are made. And if you have any questions about it, call

[4:54:12] the city. Uh, but this is and I'll quote him. He says, "I keep receiving these

[4:54:18] emails that to an untrained eye could appear to be real."

[4:54:22] And there's no way we can stop it, but we just want you guys, everybody that's

[4:54:27] got a house under construction or permits or doing business with the city,

[4:54:30] realize that people have managed to identify this. It's a scam 101. Um,

[4:54:36] Mayor May comment about Zuma uh underpass. This has been a problem for

[4:54:41] several years. I know I talked to the city manager about this and we've got to

[4:54:46] figure out a way to get the traffic flowing on PCH before two things happen.

[4:54:50] One, everybody gets uh stuck out there and they can't uh uh get into the beach,

[4:54:56] which affects the quality of life for everybody that's trying to come into the

[4:55:00] city, especially the residents who are just trying to get home. And also this

[4:55:03] potential traffic accident. Um so we've got to get beaches and harbors to clear

[4:55:08] this up. It's a matter of removing the mud and after a big rainstorm and it

[4:55:12] shouldn't take war and peace to get it done. Um, another thing I want to

[4:55:17] mention, Tranquus Fields. Um,

[4:55:22] I've gotten a copy of the actual settlement agreement from 2009. The

[4:55:27] Malibu Township Council looks like they were just trying to facilitate an

[4:55:30] agreement uh with the city. They're not trying to stop the league play. And I

[4:55:35] want to be very clear about something. league play is all that's not permitted.

[4:55:39] There are practice uh uh agreements. People are using that field all the time

[4:55:44] for practice and the parks uh department is issuing [clears throat] permits to do

[4:55:49] it. All you have to do is contact them. The sports people know how to do it.

[4:55:53] It's not a question about the practice fields and we don't have the money to

[4:55:57] turn that into a league play field. We've got property with one to two uh

[4:56:02] fields to be used. That's where our money and our emphasis is going to go.

[4:56:06] Tranquets Park is a settled matter. As far as I'm concerned, they've already

[4:56:10] got uh practice fields there. It's not it's not an issue. We don't have the

[4:56:13] money or the time to deal with it if going to league play. We don't need it

[4:56:17] at this point. Finally, um I want to talk very quickly about code of conduct.

[4:56:22] Uh the mayor and I two years ago came up with a code of conduct plan in

[4:56:27] association with the staff and I want to reiterate two parts of it. uh recent

[4:56:32] planning commission meeting and even our comments at the council level indicate

[4:56:36] we're not following our own code of conduct and I want to just emphasize two

[4:56:40] points and I'm going to read them very quickly on page five it says conduct at

[4:56:46] a public meeting and I'm going to read it it's quickly read city officials are

[4:56:50] expected to prepare themselves for public issues listen courteously and

[4:56:53] attentively to all public discussions before the body and focus on the

[4:56:57] business at hand city officials ought to refrain from interrupting and other

[4:57:01] speakers, making personal comments not gerine to the business of the body,

[4:57:05] speaking privately with one another or otherwise interfering with the order of

[4:57:09] conduct of public meetings. City officials ought to avoid debate and

[4:57:13] arguments with members of the public and ought to commit to the practice civility

[4:57:17] and decorum discussions and debates. That's right out of our document. This

[4:57:22] applies not just the council members but all of our commission members too and

[4:57:26] our volunteers. And fin use of smartphones, laptops, etc. during

[4:57:31] meetings can be distracting, create the appearance that officials are not paying

[4:57:35] attention, and can compromise the rights of those with business before the city.

[4:57:39] In particular, surreptitious communications regarding the public

[4:57:43] hearing items undermines the integrity and fairness of the public hearing. I

[4:57:47] hope no one is texting, trying to find out the the lay of the land, or getting

[4:57:51] comments back and forth during any of our commission meetings or up here.

[4:57:55] Finally, the last thing is conduct by city officials. The professional and

[4:57:59] personal conduct of city officials ought to be above reproach and avoid even the

[4:58:03] appearance of impropriety. This is the part I want to emphasize. City officials

[4:58:08] should refrain should refrain from abusive conduct, personal charges, or

[4:58:12] other verbal attacks upon other city officials, city employees, or members of

[4:58:17] the public. We can take it, but we can't dish it out. All right? It's a free

[4:58:22] country. You can say whatever you want to about us, but we've got to keep a

[4:58:25] professional attitude about this and we got to make sure we're doing the city's

[4:58:28] business and not uh giving the appearance that we're not paying

[4:58:32] attention. That's all I have. Thanks very much.

[4:58:34] » I just make two comments f first which I wasn't planning to you know there's I

[4:58:39] haven't witnessed any of what Doug was just talking about and I would I know

[4:58:42] there's also a provision for reporting what you see if you think there's

[4:58:45] something wrong and I would hope that if Doug thinks he's seeing something wrong

[4:58:48] he'll spell out the specific details and that way it can be ironed out. Um the

[4:58:53] other thing is on the 5G or the cell towers um what Joe says right I I

[4:58:57] remember we had a very robust process for adopting legislation that deals with

[4:59:02] them. We tried to make it as um difficult as we are legally permissible

[4:59:07] to deal with the cell towers and um to regulate them as great as we can

[4:59:12] consistent with federal law. We were got a lot of push back from our own lawyers

[4:59:15] and I think we might even have pushed a little further than the lawyers

[4:59:18] recommended but there is a process. I mean, if as somebody stated tonight, one

[4:59:23] of the applications was false or misleading, that's obviously something

[4:59:27] that someone needs to take a look at. Um, but there's, you know, we we are

[4:59:32] part of a national system and unfortunately we've got a federal

[4:59:35] government that and there's a big lobby that has billions of dollars that gets

[4:59:38] the laws made in Washington. And um those laws are not friendly to us and

[4:59:43] not friendly to the environment, but we're doing the best we can to keep our

[4:59:47] our our town as rural and as um environmentally safe as possible, but

[4:59:52] there's a limit to what we can do. Um but we can certainly continue to look at

[4:59:56] what more we can do. Any further comments from anybody?

[5:00:01] Maryann, >> I just wanted to respond on the Tranquus

[5:00:04] Field, Tranus Park. Um, you know, this is something that I've been trying to

[5:00:11] advocate for for since I got on council and even before I was on council. Um, we

[5:00:18] don't have enough fields and the benefit of yes, we're at least using Tranquus

[5:00:24] Park for the PR practice facility, which we weren't for a long long time. Um, but

[5:00:30] there are lots of games that are trying to find homes and the people who are

[5:00:35] scheduling with AISO. They need that space and that's why it is important to

[5:00:40] allow for league play on every possible field that we have within the city of

[5:00:44] Malibu. Um, I know it's not a regulation field, but it will s certainly fulfill

[5:00:51] the needs of the younger um, AYSO and it gives an an opportunity. So, I would

[5:00:57] just like to ask Malibu Township Council one more time, please work with the city

[5:01:04] attorney so we can get that condition removed. Um, we've been asking for over

[5:01:08] a year uh to have their board make a determination on this and from what I've

[5:01:12] heard, they have not had a board meeting to discuss this. So, I would just ask

[5:01:17] that they please um do that, work with our city attorney, and let's get that

[5:01:22] deed restriction removed so that um younger AYso players can have games um

[5:01:28] on a field in our city. Thank you, >> Marian. If I could make a quick comment,

[5:01:32] I I did check into this. It's not just the Melbourne Township Council, it was

[5:01:36] the local residents that were uh against league play. And I think if we want to

[5:01:41] ask uh the city attorney or the MTC to get involved in this, we probably need

[5:01:45] to give some direction from the city council on it.

[5:01:47] » We did a year ago. >> Yeah. To be fair, uh I was informed by

[5:01:51] MTC's president that it has been considered at one of their meetings, but

[5:01:54] he doesn't have anything to report on it.

[5:01:56] » Okay. And I'm not sure that's true that the council gave direction. I think

[5:01:59] people made some individual comments. >> I think I thought we did. I I don't

[5:02:05] know. I I'm pretty sure we gave We had >> There was direction. Yeah, there was.

[5:02:09] Okay. >> Um,

[5:02:10] » stand corrected. Yeah. >> We done.

[5:02:12] » Okay. We are finished with council comments. Um, we are now at 5A, second

[5:02:18] reading and adoption of flood plane management ordinance and adoption of

[5:02:21] emergency ordinance. So, we'll hear that item now. Please raise your hand in Zoom

[5:02:26] if you'd like to speak on this item and you'll be called after the staff report.

[5:02:30] Are there um comment cards? >> Great.

[5:02:36] And how many people are on Zoom at this moment that have raised their hand?

[5:02:42] » There's one raised hand. Okay, I think that that's enough time for those hands.

[5:02:48] So, we have the one. Uh, can we have a staff report, please?

[5:02:53] » Good evening, Mayor Silverstein, honorable members of the council. I'm

[5:02:58] here to uh present an item on the second reading of the flood plane management

[5:03:04] management ordinance and if you please allow me to begin with recap of what was

[5:03:09] discussed at the previous meeting. So we talked about

[5:03:18] yes talked about the national flood insurance program that city participate

[5:03:24] in and it's a subsidied flood insurance and it's available to those cities that

[5:03:30] that have adopted flood plane management regulations designed to prevent and

[5:03:36] mitigate flood damage. that [clears throat] cities must adopt

[5:03:40] the regulation that meet or exceed the requirements set forth in title 44 part

[5:03:46] 60 of the code of federal regulations. And currently the flat plane uh

[5:03:52] ordinance that city has in place identify authority of the city council

[5:03:58] for uh reviewing and approval of uh projects that are located within the

[5:04:04] flood plane and approval of the variances if if that's what the design

[5:04:10] requires for.

[5:04:15] The proposed amendments to the existing ordinance applies to Palisades fire

[5:04:20] rebuilds and uh what was discussed previously at

[5:04:24] the previous meeting is the changes are the changes that were proposed. The

[5:04:30] first change was identifying flood plan administrator as public works director

[5:04:36] to grant development permits in accordance with chapter 1520 of the

[5:04:41] municipal code. defined uh flood plan administrator

[5:04:46] authority to ensure that variances for septic system and seaw walls that

[5:04:51] protect those system for palisades fire rebuilds midsp specific mandatory design

[5:04:58] and construction regulation set by FEMA.

[5:05:06] We also talked about more revisions which are establish an expedited

[5:05:11] administrative process for issuance of variances for seaw wall protecting

[5:05:16] septic system associated with policy fire rebuilt

[5:05:21] state that decision made by the flood blade administrator may be uh may be

[5:05:25] appealed to city council. It outlined conditions for variances for seaw walls

[5:05:31] project uh protecting uh septic system and uh requires recordardation with Los

[5:05:39] Angeles County and submittal of a FEMA elevation certificate.

[5:05:46] Next couple slides go into information that was requested on the actual

[5:05:52] language of code of federal regulations and it goes into flood management

[5:05:58] criteria for plot prone areas section 16.3

[5:06:03] which talks about the installation of sanitary sewer system that uh protection

[5:06:09] needs to be the installation needs to be ensured that Um the they they have to be

[5:06:16] installed in a way that there is no dis discharge from the system into flood

[5:06:22] waters. Uh there is no contamination in flooders infiltration

[5:06:27] and the system uh will be located in such way that it avoid impairment to

[5:06:33] them or contamination from them during flooding. There is also a section of the

[5:06:39] code uh that talks about um new construction or substantial improvements

[5:06:45] in the zones and vzones um that um need to require the um have

[5:06:54] um open space below the lowest uh floor elevation. It it has to be

[5:07:01] clear of obstruction. So that also goes into installation of a septic system and

[5:07:07] the seaw walls that protect them.

[5:07:14] However, if the um certified engineer or architect can demonstrate that there is

[5:07:21] no other location for installation of such septic system

[5:07:26] but uh only flat plane then FEMA will allow installation.

[5:07:35] uh but uh there needs to be a process for variance and exceptions set by a

[5:07:42] local government and um this is also spelled out in the

[5:07:47] code of federal regulations in section 60.6 variances and exceptions and um it

[5:07:55] goes into certain conditions that need to be met. that variances shall be only

[5:08:00] issued by a community upon showing a good of sufficient cause. A

[5:08:07] determination the failure to grant the variances would result in exceptional

[5:08:12] hardship to the applicant and determination that granting of a

[5:08:16] variance will not result in increased flood height, additional threat to

[5:08:20] public safety, extraordinary public expense, um create nuisance, cause

[5:08:27] fraud, um etc. and variances should only be issued upon determination that

[5:08:33] variance is minimum necessary considering the flood hazard to afford

[5:08:38] relief.

[5:08:42] Um staff um additionally um made the following findings

[5:08:50] um that uh will allow to make to adopt the urg ordinency ordinance to

[5:08:58] um uh for this provisions and they include um protection of public health

[5:09:05] and safety by preventing the discharge to untreat water,

[5:09:09] delay in improving the construction or repair of septic system and seaw walls

[5:09:14] may result in environmental hazard and uh failure to timely administer and

[5:09:19] enforce flood plane regulations in compliance with FEMA requirements may

[5:09:24] jeopardize eligibility of participation in national uh flood insurance program.

[5:09:31] With this urgency finding um it's possible to adopt urgency

[5:09:37] ordinance which will uh go into effect immediately.

[5:09:42] And thank you very much. This concludes my presentation.

[5:09:46] » Okay. I have some questions. Does anybody else on council have any

[5:09:50] clarifying questions before I ask mine? >> Uh [clears throat] just a quick

[5:09:55] question. uh this language that we have right now this has been approved by FEMA

[5:09:59] and who else? >> This been reviewed and approved by FEMA

[5:10:03] stuff work that was multi-mons effort [clears throat] uh with FEMA. We

[5:10:08] actually also worked with uh scientists from the building standards uh up in

[5:10:14] Washington the the people who set up building standards but that was all

[5:10:18] facilitated through FEMA but yes you're correct the language was approved by

[5:10:23] FEMA. >> So if we make it If we make changes to

[5:10:26] it, we have to go back to FEMA. >> We have to go back to FEMA and that

[5:10:30] might delay the process significantly. >> Okay. Thank you.

[5:10:34] » Okay. So, before I ask my questions, I want to be clear. These questions are

[5:10:39] not intended to be critical of anybody. They are because I genuinely need to

[5:10:43] understand things better. Sometimes people think that when I ask my

[5:10:46] questions, I'm I'm using it as a form of criticism. It's not. It's a form of this

[5:10:50] is the way we get information. And secondly, an answer if I don't know is

[5:10:54] perfectly acceptable. It's not it's not a badge of dishonor to not know the

[5:10:58] answer. It speeds things along speeds things along and identifies what still

[5:11:02] needs to be determined. It's it's better than trying to figure things out on the

[5:11:06] fly. Um the other thing is, you know, I'm a lawyer. I've been a lawyer for

[5:11:10] close to 40 years and I read codes and I sometimes read them different than I I I

[5:11:15] do read them different than non- lawyers read them. And um I want to make sure

[5:11:19] that we're reading this code, this these federal regulations correctly before we

[5:11:25] begin to tinker with our existing ordinance. So my first question is

[5:11:30] 60.3A6, I'm sorry, 60.3 E5. This is the um

[5:11:37] provision that deals with um the obstruction. Now with Rob explained to

[5:11:43] us and maybe touch on it, you might have explained to us earlier and I I get this

[5:11:46] that an that a seaw wall constitutes an obstruction. So um correct this would

[5:11:51] apply to seaw walls on new constru underneath beneath new construction and

[5:11:56] substantial improvements. >> I don't view new construction and

[5:12:00] substantial improvements to necessarily capture a rebuild following a disaster.

[5:12:06] And I know we have interpreted the rebuilds to not be new construction or

[5:12:11] improvements of existing construction elsewhere outside of FEMA. And I've gone

[5:12:17] through the um FEMA regulations and there are multiple instances in which

[5:12:22] there's also an or other development identified besides for new construction

[5:12:26] and substantial improvements. And there are many that don't have that additional

[5:12:30] language such as this one. So how do we how have we come to the conclusion that

[5:12:36] 603 apply E5 applies in the first instance to a rebuild that is a like

[5:12:41] forlike rebuild. >> Federal um FEMA and uh per federal code

[5:12:47] FEMA reviews this um rebuilds as a new construction or substantial

[5:12:53] improvements. Is that is there a provision in another regulation because

[5:12:57] I couldn't find it in this one that says that for purposes of these federal

[5:13:00] regulations the term new construction and substantial improvement includes a

[5:13:04] like forlike rebuild of a home destroyed in a disaster.

[5:13:09] » It doesn't have that specific lang language. However, rebuilding of the

[5:13:13] structure from ground zero because it's um it's a destroyed um home considered

[5:13:21] by FEMA considered new construction. >> Where is that set forth in writing?

[5:13:26] » It it is for application of the regulation. Uh the the rules and

[5:13:31] regulation have to uh apply as they said today.

[5:13:36] That's why uh FEMA FEMA needs to make sure all the requirements are met at the

[5:13:43] construction today. >> Well, so what is there besides for new

[5:13:46] construction and substantial improvements that would constitute other

[5:13:49] development that's captured by a few of the provisions of the regulations but

[5:13:54] which isn't identified here? >> Um other developments, everything else

[5:13:59] that are not does not constitute new construction or uh substantial

[5:14:04] improvements. So I guess minor improvements it's it can be minor

[5:14:08] improvement but if it's in the flood zone the FEMA still needs to uh the

[5:14:13] regulations set up by um code of federal regulations still need to be made.

[5:14:17] » All right that those are my questions about that. I'll have some comments

[5:14:21] later. The second question I have is 60.3 A6 which deals with new and oh and

[5:14:27] by the way this also says replacement sanitary sewage. So again, it's another

[5:14:32] example of they know how to use the word replacement when they intended to use it

[5:14:36] as contrasted with only new, which is what's used for the seaw walls. But

[5:14:40] that's not my question. This is an affirmative requirement. New and

[5:14:44] replacement sanitary sewage systems need to be designed to minimize or eliminate

[5:14:48] infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems

[5:14:53] into flood waters. I am I correct in understanding that a variance would only

[5:14:57] be required not a variance is not required for a septic system. It's only

[5:15:01] required for a septic system that doesn't satisfy this standard.

[5:15:04] » You're correct. >> Okay. So, we're not if we adopt these

[5:15:08] this ordinance, we're not imposing a variance requirement on anybody for a

[5:15:13] septic system that satisfies this requirement. Only for ones that don't.

[5:15:17] » If they Yeah, if they can satisfy this this requirement. Correct.

[5:15:20] » Okay. Um so, make that clear then. very

[5:15:25] » it's just if if I may just add it just it just doesn't apply to the situation

[5:15:29] that we're reviewing tonight because we're talking about the Palisades fire

[5:15:33] rebuilds on the coastal um on on the on the ocean side. So we already know that

[5:15:40] uh those require those septic system cannot meet those requirements.

[5:15:45] » I'm sorry. So the septic systems on in the ocean or near the ocean will not be

[5:15:50] able to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the

[5:15:53] systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters

[5:15:56] » by installation of a seaw wall that will protect septic system.

[5:16:00] » But without a seaw wall they cannot accomplish that.

[5:16:02] » Correct. >> Okay. Okay. The variance requirements in

[5:16:08] 60.6A3 they're already in our code, right? We

[5:16:14] already have them in there in hack verba basically.

[5:16:18] » Yes, we have requirements in our code. >> Now the proposed variance requirements

[5:16:24] for the seaw wall are far more extensive than the ones that are already in our

[5:16:29] ordinance elsewhere and are set forth in the FEMA regulations. Why are we adding

[5:16:35] additional requirements that aren't in this code?

[5:16:39] Uh you're talking about the comparison of the local requirements. Yeah, FEMA is

[5:16:44] uh FEMA absolutely fine if the local requirements actually more restrictive.

[5:16:52] » The problem Yeah. >> But why are we proposing more

[5:16:56] restrictive requirements than the FEMA requirements for purposes of a waiver?

[5:17:02] We don't require it currently when it's the city council that approves it and we

[5:17:08] have a council policy of not imposing any obligations that are beyond those

[5:17:13] required by federal, state or county law in the case of these rebuilds. So why

[5:17:17] are we affirmatively creating new more restrictive burdens on somebody that

[5:17:22] wants to build a seaw wall for their lake forlike replacement, needs to build

[5:17:26] a seaw wall for their lake forlike replacement.

[5:17:28] » Right? We are that's why we're talking only about palisades or builds that are

[5:17:32] in the ocean side because they are located within the flood zone. So the

[5:17:37] federal federal requirements will apply for for the house that located somewhere

[5:17:42] else if they're outside of the flood zone. Uh we uh we won't um we won't need

[5:17:49] to um [clears throat] require them to comply.

[5:17:54] Okay. But see 60.6A3 6 A3 this is the the FEMA reg says variances shall only

[5:18:02] be issued upon by a community upon I a showing of good and sufficient cause

[5:18:07] double I a determination that failure to grant the variance would result in

[5:18:11] exceptional hardship to the applicant and triple I a determination that the

[5:18:15] granting of a variance would not result in increased flood heights additional

[5:18:18] threats to public safety extraordinary public expense create nuisances cause

[5:18:22] fraud on the victimization of the public or conflicting with existing local laws

[5:18:26] or ordinances Then you can go to four. Also, variances shall only be issued

[5:18:29] upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary considering the

[5:18:33] flood hazard to afford relief. That's the law right now. And if we didn't

[5:18:37] change our code at all and the variances had to come to the city council for

[5:18:40] approval, that would be what needs to be determined. That and that and that alone

[5:18:45] for purposes of granting a variance, right?

[5:18:47] » Yes. >> Okay. We're proposing in this new

[5:18:51] ordinance to add a whole laundry list of additional requirements to get a

[5:18:55] variance, are we not? >> No, we're we're following the same

[5:18:59] requirements. >> Um, does somebody have the red line? Is

[5:19:02] the red line in our package? >> Yes. Okay.

[5:19:06] Look at page. It's it's the final two pages of the uh of the staff report on

[5:19:13] 5A.

[5:19:18] » We have require we have required determinations here that um it's the

[5:19:25] smallest size and placement as landward as possible. Um not will not be utilized

[5:19:30] for structural support of the building. Shall minimize the obstruction to flood

[5:19:34] flow as much as possible. must comply with all the following regulations. And

[5:19:39] there's there's ones listed. None of those words are in 60.6A

[5:19:46] three or four. So why are we now creating those those specific

[5:19:51] requirements that aren't in our law right right now? If somebody came to the

[5:19:54] city council and asked for variance under our existing code, we wouldn't

[5:19:58] look at any of those things. Why are we putting them in here as burdens on

[5:20:01] people who want to rebuild after the fire? uh we're providing the language

[5:20:04] that are giving um giving set parameters for designing of the septic system. So

[5:20:10] if if that um if that can follow certain rules

[5:20:17] um we're just giving them more um options for

[5:20:21] » well are we giving them more options or we making it more restrictive?

[5:20:24] » We're not making them more restrictive. they're they're still within the flood

[5:20:27] zone and we still uh we still make them follow the federal

[5:20:32] regulations. So is not being permitted to serve in any way as structural

[5:20:37] support of the building something that we would currently require under the

[5:20:41] existing code. If somebody somebody proposed a seaw wall that also partially

[5:20:46] serves as support and it otherwise satisfies the language of 60.3 A3 and 4,

[5:20:52] would we say no, you can't do that. We're requiring that it not serve as

[5:20:54] structural support. >> Uh yes, we're talking about this the

[5:20:59] seaw wall for protection of the septic system. Those are the changes we're

[5:21:03] making by by uh by this modifications. So right now, forget the Palisades fire.

[5:21:11] If somebody wants to build a brand new home on a vacant lot on the beach and

[5:21:17] they come for a variance to build a seaw wall to protect a sew to protect the um

[5:21:22] septic system, would we in order to satisfy the variance requirement of

[5:21:28] 60.6A3 6A 3 and 4. Would they have to establish that their seaw wall that is

[5:21:33] designed to protect their septic system doesn't in any way, shape or form serve

[5:21:37] as a structural support for the for the house as well?

[5:21:41] » Yes, they have to they have to follow the same requirements that are set in

[5:21:44] the code of federal regulations. >> Where where is that requirement in the

[5:21:48] code of federal regulations that's before us?

[5:21:52] » That is in the ordinance in the proposed language of the ordinance. Where is that

[5:21:56] in the code of federal regulations that we are seeking to implement through our

[5:22:00] local ordinance? >> It's it's in the in the this section uh

[5:22:04] in title 44 section 60. >> Can can you identify the provision of of

[5:22:10] section 60 that puts forth that requirement? It might be there. I'm I I

[5:22:14] don't know. I've just I didn't see it when I looked quickly.

[5:22:23] I might um

[5:22:29] » at the same time if you [snorts] could also I want to know where it is that

[5:22:33] where it says that in order to gr a variance it has to be the smallest size

[5:22:36] and as landward as possible. >> Yeah that that's that language is all in

[5:22:42] the um code of federal regulations.

[5:22:46] the one that we have in front of us. 60 >> 16.

[5:22:50] » Okay. Where? >> Again, I'm I'm not saying it's not. I I

[5:22:55] would like to see where it is.

[5:23:16] The question

[5:23:21] » question is I'm trying to identify where in the code of federal regulations the

[5:23:27] various requirements that we're establishing for a variance for our for

[5:23:32] granting a variance are set forth in the code of federal regulations because I

[5:23:35] see them in our code as I mean the fact that they're not there already to me is

[5:23:41] troubling because if they're not there now and we're granting variances. That

[5:23:45] suggests to me that they don't need to be there. All we're doing, all we're

[5:23:49] supposed to be doing through this change is grant the public works director the

[5:23:54] authority to do what the council currently already has the authority to

[5:23:58] do. We can do that in three words. I mean, that's an exaggeration, but what

[5:24:02] why are we adding substantive requirements to that the public works

[5:24:07] director has to determine are satisfied that the city council currently doesn't

[5:24:12] have to determine are satisfied? >> We're just adding currently we're just

[5:24:16] adding language from the code of federal regulations. There is just more language

[5:24:21] added to this um variance that's through our process working with FEMA. So, so

[5:24:27] these requirements are already implicitly in our ordinance when the

[5:24:30] city council's asked to grant a variance.

[5:24:33] » They they are in the code of federal regulations. So, when we receive when we

[5:24:37] review uh the project which proposes a septic system and a seaw wall, we still

[5:24:42] have to follow all this federal regulations and have to obtain the FEMA

[5:24:46] elevation certificate and have to and have to go through all this um checklist

[5:24:51] that we're um we have to verify. So, so right now under our existing code, if a

[5:24:59] um property owner who wants to rebuild a lake for lake comes to the city council

[5:25:04] and asks for a variance because that's the way it currently works, right? We

[5:25:08] would even though these words are not in our city ordinance, we would require all

[5:25:14] of these very same things to be satisfied that are now specified in red

[5:25:19] ink. >> Yes. public works staff through review

[5:25:22] and uh review of process of the project they will verify uh all these

[5:25:28] requirements are met. >> Okay,

[5:25:31] those are my questions. I'm I am going to make a comment because it's pertinent

[5:25:35] to why I'm asking these questions in in my way of doing legislation. I've been

[5:25:40] I've written legislation and worked on committees done legislation for years.

[5:25:44] If something's not broke, you don't fix it because the fix might actually break

[5:25:48] it. Um, if this is already here implicitly, there's no need to put it in

[5:25:52] explicitly. It may not be there. It may not be required under the federal

[5:25:57] regulation. If it's not required under the federal regulation, we're requiring

[5:26:01] it by putting it in here. If it is required by the federal regulation, it's

[5:26:05] already there. So, we don't need to say it because it's already there. I'm

[5:26:08] hearing concerns from residents that we're creating new restrictions, that

[5:26:12] we're making things more burdensome. If all we do is give the um planning

[5:26:18] director the ability to do what the city council currently has the ability to do

[5:26:21] and do nothing else, then we haven't enlarged or or um diminished whatever

[5:26:28] the federal rules are. They're there. We're being told this is for the purpose

[5:26:33] of facilitating more expedition. I'm concerned that what this is doing is

[5:26:37] creating more restriction. So, you know, that that will guide people's comments

[5:26:42] hopefully. I might be completely wrong, but that's the way I look at drafting

[5:26:45] legislation is you don't you when you're when you're adopting a local ordinance

[5:26:51] to implement a federal ordinance, you don't reinterpret the federal ordinance.

[5:26:55] You simply say we have to follow the federal ordinance, which is what we

[5:26:58] currently have in our existing ordinance. So, um, does anybody else

[5:27:02] have any questions based on that public comment? Then, Dean Don Schmidtz

[5:27:09] followed by Dean Wer followed by Darren Graves. Those are the only inerson

[5:27:13] speakers we have.

[5:27:16] » Evening, council members. Very good questions. Mayor Silverstein. Um, I

[5:27:22] would uh I would address the the first prong of what you you raised. It's not

[5:27:27] the rebuild of the house or the structure per se. It's the increase in

[5:27:32] the size of the shoreline protection device, which is the new development.

[5:27:36] And that is predicated upon a coastal engineers report. The shoreline

[5:27:41] protection device needs to be of sufficient height to protect the septic

[5:27:46] system itself. Uh my experience which I've done a few of these over the years

[5:27:53] up and down the coastline is pertains to uh the minimum size and being located as

[5:27:59] landward as possible is something that has been driven by the California

[5:28:03] coastal act. And so uh I am somewhat chagrined that I cannot point directly

[5:28:11] to uh the federal regulation and the questions which you were raising and uh

[5:28:16] I should uh I came here to uh foolishly thinking that this was going to be a a

[5:28:23] early item on tonight and I I did want to give you the accolades and your staff

[5:28:28] for taking this necessary step. It is important and it sounds like uh uh we

[5:28:33] may well be on the same page that if we can come up with an administrative

[5:28:37] process so that we don't have to have 300 plus city council hearings. I don't

[5:28:45] need that work. I've got plenty already. Uh that would be a very loudable and

[5:28:52] appropriate goal if this can be handled administratively. So, uh, and I know

[5:28:56] this is not something that was, uh, taken on lightly, and I do appreciate

[5:29:01] the fact that the city coordinated closely with FEMA to make sure that we

[5:29:05] would remain in compliance with our national flood insurance program. We

[5:29:10] can't jeopardize that. So, there's definitely u uh something that needs to

[5:29:16] happen here in regards to allowing this to happen on administrative level. It's

[5:29:20] often been said that Malibu has a greater challenge on the rebuild front

[5:29:24] because we have unique constraints. I'm not always convinced by that, but one

[5:29:29] thing that's incontrovertible is 300 plus beach homes burning up. Uh that is

[5:29:36] something that brings in the FEMA and the shoreline protection devices and the

[5:29:40] and the beach on-site wastewater treatment systems. A quick a quick check

[5:29:44] with AI, which means it must be true, is that the 300 plus homes that we lost in

[5:29:50] the Palisades fire is the worst example of beach homes burning up in a wildfire

[5:29:56] in the history of the United States. So, we really do need to get this done.

[5:30:01] Otherwise, all the excellent work that you've done to streamline this process

[5:30:05] is going to be for not. So, uh, I I do again very much appreciate this

[5:30:10] direction and strongly urge that with the right verbiage, you come up with an

[5:30:15] administrative process. Thank you,

[5:30:20] » Dean. Thank you, Don.

[5:30:25] » Thank you. Don and I actually first met at the planning commission meeting last

[5:30:30] February, and I was there because I was concerned about this exact type of

[5:30:34] fundamental issue. the the the issue that we have before us is that the FEMA

[5:30:40] requirements do do not go into the level of detail of the red text you have in

[5:30:44] front of you. Free of obstruction does not mean what it says. Free of

[5:30:50] obstruction. It does not prohibit those things. Free of obstruction means that

[5:30:55] it's an open foundation. Essentially, you have pylons and the water can move.

[5:31:00] That's all that that means. Okay. [snorts] At the end of the day, the

[5:31:06] other items, be it septic or seaw wall or other obstructions such as plumbing

[5:31:12] and other things, FEMA P-348 as well as NFIP technical bulletin

[5:31:18] number five clearly show these items. The reason they say free of obstruction

[5:31:25] is because they want to counsel people to realize that if you have

[5:31:29] obstructions, you need to have your engineer design a more robust structure

[5:31:33] to be able to take the additional forces that will occur from wave action

[5:31:38] underneath it. That can easily be done every day. So, it doesn't mean that it's

[5:31:44] a non-specification item requiring a variance. Not at all. It's never been

[5:31:49] done. It's not a requirement. What's happening here unfortunately is just

[5:31:54] like the sea level rise and just like the BFE discussion. We have people

[5:31:59] around here and I respect their opinions, but their opinions are

[5:32:02] preferences. They're not requirements. They are coastal act items. Coastal act

[5:32:08] is suspended. They do not apply to us. If I want to build that way, I can. The

[5:32:14] reason FEMA's not objecting to the review is because if you recommend

[5:32:18] something more robust, more challenging, they're happy to approve it. So, it

[5:32:24] means it's the city recommending that, not FEMA. So, please, this is not good

[5:32:30] discussion here tonight and does not build the trust I and others are looking

[5:32:34] for. What I suspect this is about, and I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not usually

[5:32:40] wrong, [snorts] is we have a situation where

[5:32:44] because it deviates from the Coastal Act, people want to use this variance

[5:32:49] process as an accounting method to allow the Coastal Commission, the Water

[5:32:54] District, and others to track these properties. It's an accounting method.

[5:33:01] I've had discussions with people when I did my own PV back months ago. You do

[5:33:07] not have my building plans because of issues like this. I am not going I have

[5:33:11] too much respect for money to build more than I need to build and where I want

[5:33:15] it. It's my option. So, [snorts] thank you. Thank you, Dean. there.

[5:33:32] Uh, good evening again. Um, I'm not going to question the validity of what

[5:33:37] Mr. Winner said, uh, because I'm not going to espouse conspiracy theories

[5:33:42] about accounting, but I do think that the intention of this ordinance is a

[5:33:47] good one. Um because at face value one would understand that any CDP in the

[5:33:53] city of Malibu which does have a seaw wall below the BFE creates a need for

[5:33:58] variance. Thus maybe 90% of these 320 rebuilds even though they're building

[5:34:04] back like for like they will be installing a new seaw wall thus

[5:34:09] triggering the need for variance and 80% of those 320 applicants will be coming

[5:34:14] to the city council for that variance. it'll clog up the system. I think the

[5:34:19] intent of the ordinance is to get rid of that potential bottleneck. A bottleneck

[5:34:23] which could cause delays for people coming back home. Thus, I think you

[5:34:28] should approve it. And if there are some sort of conspiratorial accounting things

[5:34:32] that come out of it, so be it. But I don't think anybody's going to notice

[5:34:36] because they'll be back at home enjoying the sunsets that they appreciate so

[5:34:40] much. Thank you. >> Thank you, Darren.

[5:34:44] I believe we had one speaker on Zoom. Yes, Danny Smith.

[5:34:53] » Good evening, council. Can you hear me? >> We can hear you, Danny.

[5:34:57] » Mayor Bruce, thank you. I appreciate your questions. I don't know if the new

[5:35:01] language is conflating California requirements with FEMA requirements as

[5:35:04] Don uh suggested. I do know that planning is already requiring seaw walls

[5:35:10] to be placed as landward as possible. So, I'm not sure how that this could

[5:35:14] open anyone up to an appeal if that's the concern because planning isn't going

[5:35:18] to approve a seaw wall that's any more seawword than it has to be. It would

[5:35:23] never reach any sort of appeal stage with an unacceptable design. I'm reading

[5:35:27] the federal regulations right now and they say that new construction or

[5:35:32] substantial improvements in the VE zone must be free of obstruction

[5:35:37] or constructed with non-supporting breakaway walls. You can't build a seaw

[5:35:42] wall with breakaway walls. So, in no way do I see room to interpret it interpret

[5:35:47] FEMA's regulations as somehow allowing seaw walls without a variance. So, as I

[5:35:52] see it, there's a federal requirement that we can't wave nor violate unless we

[5:35:56] want to lose our ability to manage the flood plane, which we don't. We have a

[5:36:00] current system that works, but it's slow. Therefore, the city's reached an

[5:36:04] agreement with FEMA on a way to speed it up to meet the needs of this moment. I

[5:36:08] thank the city for that. It's unfortunate that we have to deal with

[5:36:11] these FEMA requirements, but it is what it is. Thank you.

[5:36:16] » Right. Thank you, Danny. That closes public comment. Bring it back up to city

[5:36:19] council. Who would like to speak first?

[5:36:26] » I guess I will. Um, I was clear on what I was voting on earlier. Um I I what

[5:36:33] I've studied over the whole week has been that we're

[5:36:39] um streamlining the process for seaw walls with a administrator of public

[5:36:46] works that then we can get people back in their homes safely and quickly and

[5:36:52] get insurance for those homeowners. So now am I hearing something different or

[5:36:56] deviation from that because I'm confused?

[5:37:02] » Yes, this um this new ordinance uh will streamline this process.

[5:37:08] » Yes. [clears throat] [snorts]

[5:37:11] » All right. Um first of all, I'm going to say Dean, you're wrong that um this is

[5:37:17] there's anything nefarious behind this. I I mean I I agree with the comments

[5:37:21] that this is being done for good purposes. It's being done with the

[5:37:24] intention of facilitating more efficient, economical, and expedited

[5:37:30] rebuilds on the beach. I am concerned that it is inadvertently

[5:37:36] um bringing in LCP requirements that don't exist right now. And I and I and

[5:37:40] you I don't think Don was saying they were being conflated. I think Don was

[5:37:43] saying he's embarrassed to not know where in the federal regulation it is.

[5:37:46] But I think the fact is they are being conflated. I think I think there are

[5:37:50] certain things in here that we're used to requiring because we're used to

[5:37:54] having the LCP apply and they've been just put in here without the fact

[5:37:59] without regard for the fact that they're not necessarily built into the Code of

[5:38:04] Federal Regulations. But as I said before, even if if they are in the Code

[5:38:07] of Federal Regulations, there's no need to say them in our local ordinance

[5:38:11] because they're already there by virtue of the repeating the exact language from

[5:38:16] the Code of Federal Regulations. if they're not in the Code of Federal

[5:38:19] Regulations, I think we are burdening people with additional requirements that

[5:38:24] don't exist currently. And that's contrary to what we're seeking to

[5:38:27] accomplish. So, I am not convinced that a variance

[5:38:34] is needed for any seaw wall. I I see the argument that it is. I suspect that

[5:38:40] argument might even be accurate, but I don't know that it is for certain. And

[5:38:45] again, I don't know why we need to create an affirmative obligation to get

[5:38:50] a variance for a seaw wall if the federal regulations currently require a

[5:38:56] variance for a seaw wall. And and if Dean wants to spend the next nine months

[5:39:01] arguing with people that it doesn't and and insisting on not asking for a

[5:39:05] variance and maybe going to superior court to get a determination, it's his

[5:39:08] right to do that. But if we adopt a local ordinance that affirmatively says

[5:39:13] to have a seaw wall for your lake forlike rebuild, you must get a

[5:39:16] variance, we are now cutting off any argument that it doesn't currently exist

[5:39:20] under federal law, which is the opposite of what we've all been saying we want to

[5:39:24] do for the past year. Same thing for the um for the um

[5:39:32] the septic systems, but may but maybe that's not as important. But what I've

[5:39:38] gone through this carefully and you know I understand that we really don't have

[5:39:42] the luxury of changing these words on the fly because

[5:39:48] doing so if we were to adopt an ordinance other than the one the FEMA

[5:39:52] representatives it's not FEMA you know it's people employed at FEMA just like

[5:39:56] when people say the city council when it's really the staff that spoke to

[5:39:58] somebody or the coastal commission when it's somebody at the coastal commission

[5:40:01] staff that's said something. But if we change these,

[5:40:06] we might do something that they're not satisfied with. So, so in a sense, our

[5:40:09] hands are tied. It comes to it comes to us fully baked and we're told take it or

[5:40:13] leave it because if we don't take it exactly the way it is and make changes

[5:40:17] to it, it'll it'll blow up in our face. That's not fair. We we we need to be

[5:40:22] able to debate whether these provisions are necessary and appropriate and have

[5:40:27] our determinations and maybe I'll be the only one up here that thinks this way,

[5:40:31] but have our determinations be taken back to FEMA and and asked will this

[5:40:36] work for you? It not not we have to do this. As I read this whole all the red

[5:40:42] all the red ink, there's really only one place in which an affirmative obligation

[5:40:47] to get a um a variance is being imposed. It's in

[5:40:54] subsection F to section 15.20.150 20.150 because it says current if the proposal

[5:41:02] is seaw walls designed to constructed for

[5:41:07] the sole purpose of protecting septic systems blah blah blah are subject to a

[5:41:12] variance. Why not use the exact same language as

[5:41:15] the code of federal regulations? All new construction and substantial improvement

[5:41:20] that includes now Dean [clears throat] says it's not even a seaw wall. and I

[5:41:24] and I actually agree with him. That includes an obstruction. Use the exact

[5:41:28] words of the federal regulation and leave people if they want to to debate

[5:41:33] that they don't need a variance. That's up to them. If they go for the variance,

[5:41:36] they're going to get it very quickly and they're going to be able to move on and

[5:41:40] we've done our our our part to help them. But if they want to take the

[5:41:44] position that the Code of Federal Regulations, which is what we're trying

[5:41:47] to implement here, don't require a variance for a seaw wall, let them make

[5:41:52] their argument. the um

[5:41:56] section 6 15.20.080 subsection 6 has a lot of red ink.

[5:42:02] There's a huge paragraph that's being added.

[5:42:05] All we need to say is if a property owner should need to construct a

[5:42:09] [clears throat] seaw wall to protect the septic system serving a beachfront

[5:42:12] property destroyed by the Pacific Palisades fire if they should need to an

[5:42:17] application is submitted for and an application is submitted for a variance

[5:42:20] to construct such seaw wall. the flood plane administrator shall have the

[5:42:23] authority to grant such a variance. So, we're not imposing the obligation. We're

[5:42:28] simply saying if you need a variance for this thing, which you may or may not

[5:42:33] need, we are empowering the flood plane administrator to grant the variance.

[5:42:39] Section 15.2.180 is a is proposed to be amended as

[5:42:43] follows. A variance for the construction of substantial improvement repair to a

[5:42:48] seaw wall. By the way, that there's there's something garbled there. It says

[5:42:50] a variance for the construction or substantial improvement repair to a seaw

[5:42:54] wall. I think there's a word missing that is intended only for the protection

[5:42:58] of a septic system may be issued by the flood plane administrator conditioned

[5:43:01] upon the provisions and requirements set out in 15.200

[5:43:05] and 15.2010. That language is unnecessary. It needs

[5:43:11] only to say hold. Oh, that that whole that whole

[5:43:15] provision is unnecessary because it's already covered elsewhere.

[5:43:19] And again, it arguably creates an inference. 15.20190

[5:43:24] says, "Decision, this is the proposed amendment. Decisions made by the flood

[5:43:28] plane administrator under the authority granted in section 15.2070 may be

[5:43:33] appealed directly to the city council if necessary. Variances granted for seaw

[5:43:37] walls intended specifically to protect septic systems shall be processed on an

[5:43:40] exped." I like that. Um what it says though arguably is that a a neighbor has

[5:43:46] the right to go to the city council to oppose the grant of a variance because

[5:43:50] it says they can be appealed. Um it should say decisions to deny a requested

[5:43:55] variance made by the flood plane administrator under the authority

[5:43:57] granted in section 1522070 may be appealed by the applicant

[5:44:01] directly to the city council. Any appeal from the denial of an application for a

[5:44:05] variance to construct a seaw wall serving a beachfront property destroyed

[5:44:08] by Pacific Palites fire shall be processed on an expedited basis. I I

[5:44:12] can't put this up on the board like staff does when they present, but I I

[5:44:16] think we should be narrowly tailoring this language and not just having

[5:44:20] general language. Um the title to 1520210

[5:44:25] along with the text of subsection A imply but don't affirmatively state that

[5:44:30] a variance is required in these circumstances. That implication can be

[5:44:35] eliminated. We could say we could make the title special expedition of

[5:44:40] applications for any variances that may be required with respect to construction

[5:44:44] of lake for lake rebuilds of beachfront properties destroyed by the palisades

[5:44:47] fire rather than for var special variance provisions for seaw walls to

[5:44:52] protect septic systems. We could then say under the heading expedited

[5:44:57] variances simply the following applications for a variance that may be

[5:45:02] required for the construction of lake forlike rebuilds of properties destroyed

[5:45:05] by the Pacific Palates fire um

[5:45:09] are eligible for expedited variances to facilitate the timely development permit

[5:45:14] approvals. That's that the the the latter part of that's already in there.

[5:45:18] I just added the the the initial part. Um,

[5:45:22] I have a couple others, but I mean the point is I've gone through this very

[5:45:26] carefully with a deliberate effort to make sure that we're not expanding upon

[5:45:32] whatever's in the CFR because whatever's in the CFR, we're bound to follow. We

[5:45:37] have an ordinance that we prepared years ago that nobody's had any problem with.

[5:45:40] FEMA hasn't had any problem with it. We've been implementing it however we've

[5:45:43] been implementing it. And it doesn't have a lot of these things in here. All

[5:45:48] we're seeking to do, we're being told. and I agree is expedite the way you get

[5:45:53] a variance. Not change what you need to do to get a variance, but expedite the

[5:45:58] way you get the variance. Shift it from the city council to the administrator. I

[5:46:04] really don't know why we didn't need to just say that. just say just add a

[5:46:09] provision that says in where it states that the city council has that a

[5:46:13] variance will be issued by the city council in cases where a lake forlike

[5:46:17] rebuild resulting from the palisades fire is being constructed any variant

[5:46:22] should be required the flood administrator whoever the person is

[5:46:25] shall have the authority to do it. Bruce, if I could

[5:46:28] » one one last thing. Okay. >> I also wanted to add and I a provision

[5:46:32] at the very end of this that says nothing in this chapter is intended to

[5:46:36] suggest that a variance of the type addressed by this chapter is required to

[5:46:39] construct a seaw wall to protect a septic system serving a lake forlike

[5:46:43] rebuild of a structure on a beachfront property destroyed by the Pacific

[5:46:46] Palisades fire. Nor is this provision intended to suggest that a variance of

[5:46:50] the type addressed by this chapter is not required for such construction.

[5:46:53] Rather, this chapter simply sets forth a process for obtaining such a variance if

[5:46:57] and when it's requested. Whether such a variance is required in the first

[5:47:00] instance is governed by applicable federal laws and regulations. We should

[5:47:05] not meddle. There have been many appeals that I've seen and include in including

[5:47:09] the and including the Riddic case that went to the the appeals court and came

[5:47:14] out against us that were because someone in this city when mimicking a statute

[5:47:20] somewhere else changed a word, inserted a comma, made an and or flipped the way

[5:47:25] a sentence was written. And as a result of doing that, we had a substantively

[5:47:29] different law than we were intending to have. When you're dealing with

[5:47:33] legislation, you don't make you don't make changes that aren't necessary

[5:47:38] because every single period, every comma, every word that you inject can

[5:47:43] have substantive significance. You do the least harm possible. And we're not

[5:47:48] doing that. We're going out of our way here with an intention of being helpful,

[5:47:52] which could end up blowing up in the face of our residents who are trying to

[5:47:56] create like for Lake Rebels. And that's the point Dean's been making. I don't

[5:47:59] attribute any ill will to anybody. I think this is being done for all of the

[5:48:02] best purposes, but I think we're going overboard and perhaps inadvertently

[5:48:07] creating bad requirements. So, I would defer this. Maybe I'm sure I I suspect I

[5:48:14] would defer this. I would go back to FEMA with a request that we simply amend

[5:48:18] this to to to shift the the approval request to the administrator for these

[5:48:26] limited purposes if they're required. Full stop. It's all we need to do. I

[5:48:31] don't know why we didn't do just that in the beginning. So, Doug, go ahead.

[5:48:35] » Yeah, Bruce, you know, as I listen to you, you've you've got major issues with

[5:48:40] this and you're substantially rewriting what's on here, and I I appreciate that.

[5:48:44] I honestly, I talk all the time about all five of us bring our skills to the

[5:48:49] table, and you're bringing your skill to the table, and we need to consider that.

[5:48:54] Um, I don't disagree with you one bit. This

[5:48:59] the efficiency would be to say reference such and such and shut up and go home.

[5:49:05] Uh that we don't need to re recite everything. So my questions are a couple

[5:49:09] fold here. First off, how did this get written? Did we write this? Where did it

[5:49:15] come from? We did we work with FEMA and just to add

[5:49:19] a little bit more information about uh I know we're talking about like for like

[5:49:23] rebuild but from a FEMA perspective FEMA doesn't look at it like for like for

[5:49:28] like rebuild because some of those homes might be built you know 50 years ago

[5:49:34] under totally different regulations and um different flood maps. So that's why

[5:49:40] uh all this language was made um into that new ordinance to stay there because

[5:49:48] of the all this new um rules apply. But

[5:49:53] » I mean we look at it as like to like rebuild but they're not they're not like

[5:49:57] for like rebuild because when we're talking about like for like we're

[5:50:01] talking more about the square footage of the house if there is additional

[5:50:05] bedrooms but what FEMA is looking for it's a totally different uh parameters.

[5:50:12] » Okay. Um, you know, if you if you really think

[5:50:17] about it, why do we even need to have FEMA approve

[5:50:21] uh where the appeal is going to be approved? I guess that's that's the

[5:50:24] start of my question. If the if it's the city internal, we could delegate this to

[5:50:29] the uh public works director and that would be it. Would it not? Is that not

[5:50:35] acceptable to FEMA? the fact we've got the same rules we had before and we're

[5:50:39] just going to have the public works director approve it.

[5:50:43] » Well, that will qualify us to participate in the um in the flat

[5:50:48] insurance to continue participating and even more than that um that might uh

[5:50:54] jeopardize from getting federal grants and assistant in in the future

[5:50:59] disasters. >> Okay, I'm I'm aware of what the pitfall

[5:51:02] would be, but I'm thinking this is an administrative issue. What keeps us from

[5:51:06] administratively assigning it to any person to do it as opposed to the city

[5:51:12] council having to do the appeal? I mean, why does FEMA care about how we do this

[5:51:17] internally? >> That's that's our process. That's our

[5:51:20] current process. >> Well, I understand that's our process,

[5:51:23] but why does FEMA care if we want to change it to where the public works

[5:51:26] director can appeal can approve it? >> We can go back to FEMA and possibly they

[5:51:31] will be open to changing this language. However, uh that's the language they

[5:51:35] have approved right now and uh for us to modify anything, I think we we're facing

[5:51:42] uh sign significant delays in instead for helping all these houses to get to

[5:51:48] get rebuilt faster. >> How long ago did we start this with

[5:51:51] FEMA? >> That that took several months.

[5:51:55] » Say again. >> Several months. More than six months.

[5:51:57] » Okay. So, you think we'd have to do the same six-month routine

[5:52:01] » at least? Yes, with uh yeah, with the shutdowns

[5:52:06] of the government, it might be even more.

[5:52:08] » Yeah, I I really think uh I agree with Bruce. You run the risk whenever you

[5:52:13] copy and paste something uh you run the risk of a not following the changes that

[5:52:18] might have occurred in the law as well as you make a mistake somewhere, you you

[5:52:23] you've tripped yourself up. Um, let's hear what anybody else might have to

[5:52:28] say, but um, Marian, >> I I'm I'm troubled by how long it might

[5:52:33] take to get get a change to this.

[5:52:38] » Um, [clears throat] well, I just I think I want clarification from the city

[5:52:41] attorney. Does the city council have the authority

[5:52:46] to change and delegate the flood plan administrator

[5:52:53] as the authority to um make this determination and grant these variances?

[5:53:00] » So, we have the power to change our code. Absolutely. You could change this

[5:53:03] to whatever you want. The issue is um from section 60.1A of the federal

[5:53:09] regulations we're looking here. here says the app provides that flood

[5:53:12] insurance shall not be sold or renewed under the program within a community

[5:53:15] unless the community has adopted adequate flood plane management

[5:53:18] regulations consistent with federal criteria. So the question being um

[5:53:24] whether they would determine that the program is consistent with the federal

[5:53:28] criteria. Now, if it's just an administrative change, I think it would

[5:53:30] be a difficult argument that um it's not consistent with the federal criteria,

[5:53:35] but you have a guaranteed language in front of you um here that has been

[5:53:39] signed off by them. Um but um it would be a difficult argument, I think, for

[5:53:45] them to say that it's not consistent for just making an administrative change,

[5:53:48] but you are taking on risk by doing that. Well, I mean there's other areas

[5:53:53] of the code where we designate a staff member to be the administrator of codes,

[5:54:00] i.e. the building code. >> Yep.

[5:54:02] » So, I guess I'm just looking for clarification. Do we have the authority

[5:54:08] to just designate and so do we need to make changes to our ordinance in order

[5:54:14] to designate >> that change?

[5:54:16] Yes, because the code currently designates a process that requires the

[5:54:20] variances to be to go to the city council. So, if you want to change that,

[5:54:23] we would need to change our code. >> Okay. But look, it's not a binary

[5:54:27] decision that we either make all these changes or we make only that other

[5:54:30] change and take our chances. It's very easy to pick up the phone, call FEMA

[5:54:34] tomorrow and ask them if all we do is add a paragraph that says where it says

[5:54:38] city council makes these decisions, we've determined it ought to be for

[5:54:41] purposes of these um rebuilds, the public works director. And the person

[5:54:46] will either say, you got to be kidding me, or sure, why are you even bothering

[5:54:50] to think that would be a problem? And I suspect they're going to say, of course,

[5:54:54] and then we just adopt that one sentence and we're off to the races. And I would

[5:54:58] have done that six months ago if I had understood this issue.

[5:55:02] » Well, I well, I agree with what you're saying. In principle, I doubt that it's

[5:55:07] that easy of just a phone call. >> Well, other thing I'd add to them is

[5:55:11] that our president wants these rebuilds done as expeditiously as possible and

[5:55:15] doesn't want to add any requirements, including building code requirements.

[5:55:20] » Do you have a proposed solution? >> Yeah, we defer this for one more

[5:55:24] meeting. We call FEMA in the interim and we find out whether if we just scrap all

[5:55:28] these changes and only make the change of deferring to the um public works

[5:55:33] director that's satisfactory to them. And if they say no, then we have a

[5:55:37] harder decision to make. Well, maybe you all don't have a hard decision to make.

[5:55:39] I I will still have a hard decision to make.

[5:55:43] I'll move that we defer this for till the next meeting and then the interim

[5:55:46] staff try to get the cons the sign off by FEMA to simply change this to def to

[5:55:53] um delegate the authority to grant a variance in this limited circumstance to

[5:55:57] the public works director. >> Yeah, we're running into risk that might

[5:56:02] not get any response anytime soon. >> Yeah, they're closed right now.

[5:56:08] » Federal government shut down FEMA. Um, also how many applications are pending

[5:56:15] approval this? >> I know of at least two that are ready to

[5:56:20] receive Darian that are >> and the only thing that they're holding

[5:56:23] on is a public works stamp with this. >> Yes. Bring

[5:56:27] » and the option would be then bringing them forward to a city council meeting

[5:56:31] to have us approve the variance. >> Correct.

[5:56:35] » Okay. So, if there's only two, how many are in the pipeline, do you think over

[5:56:38] the next month? Oh, there will be there will be more. I know there is a two or

[5:56:43] three more that are getting close to that point.

[5:56:45] » Okay. So, >> and there will [clears throat] be there

[5:56:47] will be more >> a handful over the next month or two.

[5:56:50] » Bruce, I got a suggestion for you. >> Why don't we just do it this way? Why

[5:56:54] don't we just have the uh public works director say they approve it, bring it

[5:56:59] into the council as a consent item, that's the appeal done.

[5:57:03] » I think we had a brown eye problem. >> I don't think we can just put a consent.

[5:57:08] I think I think requires a public hearing

[5:57:10] » because it's a variance regardless. We still have to have the full

[5:57:14] » Yeah, be nice to be able to do that. Makes makes common sense, but violates

[5:57:18] California law. But if if look, if we're talking about a handful of these over

[5:57:23] the next month or two, I suspect even three. Um, let's bring them on. Let's

[5:57:28] let's get let's hammer them out here. Let's do it quickly. Let's get the

[5:57:32] people their approvals. and in the interim, let's work on getting FEMA to

[5:57:35] agree that all we need is to defer the authority to the floodplane

[5:57:41] administrator. And you know, so the the choice is possibly do a bunch of harm by

[5:57:47] adding a bunch of words which maybe we don't need to add so that we can approve

[5:57:51] it today and not have any public hearings or have a handful of public

[5:57:55] hearings over the next couple months and in the interim try to see if we can't

[5:57:59] work it out so that we don't have to take a chance on saying things we

[5:58:02] shouldn't say. That that would be my preference.

[5:58:04] » Yeah. Well, I agree with you, Bruce. Let's let's get these two that you've

[5:58:07] got pinning right now on the agenda for next next meeting and do an expedited uh

[5:58:13] variance approval, but with the recommendation of the public works

[5:58:16] director and in this meantime see if we can't clean this up with FEMA because I

[5:58:24] I don't see the real benefit of regurgitating all this information when

[5:58:28] all we're really looking for is just a change of approval form. It's an

[5:58:31] administrative issue. It's not It's not like we need to recite it. And I'm more

[5:58:35] worried the more I think about this that FEMA makes a change somewhere in the

[5:58:40] Federal Register. We don't catch it. It's in our ordinance. And because we

[5:58:44] didn't catch it, now we're out of compliance. I I'm beginning to be more

[5:58:48] worried about that now than anything else.

[5:58:51] So why can't we just do a expedited variance approval? I mean, I got to tell

[5:58:55] you, in in some states when they adopt laws like these that track federal law,

[5:59:00] they just say you shall follow the federal law. One sentence, you know, you

[5:59:05] don't need to regurgitate it and risk saying things wrong. You just adopt it

[5:59:09] as the local law. >> I I'm I'm with you on that, Bruce. I I

[5:59:12] think we're we're needlessly entangling ourselves when we don't need

[5:59:17] to. So, I I'll move that we defer approval of this until we can have a

[5:59:24] further conversation with FEMA about doing it more simply and in the interim

[5:59:28] bring on the variance requests. Look, I cannot believe there's going to be a

[5:59:33] public um upcry outcry when we hear these the

[5:59:38] variance requests. I mean, even the Malibu Township Council is not going to

[5:59:41] come in here with 15 speakers saying don't let this person have the variance

[5:59:45] to construct their seaw wall. I I'll be shocked if anyone says boo. We'll have a

[5:59:50] staff presentation. We'll have the person whose application is before us

[5:59:53] say please grant us the variance and we'll vote. I

[5:59:56] » I don't think it's so much an outcry by the community against these variance

[6:00:02] applications. I think it's the time to the property owners that are waiting for

[6:00:08] their stamp to commence construction. So, if we can get this done at the next

[6:00:15] meeting, I wholeheartedly support this. If it's going to be,

[6:00:20] » you know, we're we're trying to get permits issued and we can't delay

[6:00:23] getting these permits. >> Right. That's my point is there's two

[6:00:25] right now. Those two [clears throat] can be heard in two weeks and we can approve

[6:00:28] them in an hour. >> That's providing staff can get those

[6:00:31] reports. >> Hopefully, well, do we have a 30-day I

[6:00:34] mean, this is not an open. >> Yeah. Can I refer to the city attorney

[6:00:37] to um to see how how they can be done? The expedited approval.

[6:00:41] » Yeah, this isn't that kind of this isn't a public hearing like a land use appeal.

[6:00:44] Do we need to follow those kinds of procedures?

[6:00:47] » We have set procedures for these variances that have been um that have

[6:00:50] been brought forward before. I believe it requires a public hearing. Um we'd

[6:00:54] have to go back. We don't hear them very often, but we have consistently heard

[6:00:58] these on a regular basis for some time, I believe. Kelsey,

[6:01:03] » if I will jump into I know Yolanda was telling me there's probably seven at

[6:01:07] least seven to 10 more waiting that'll soon be coming just so we know like so

[6:01:12] if if we do this we need to make sure uh it's going to be on the agenda going

[6:01:17] forward for a few months. >> So what are the noticing requirements

[6:01:20] for this type of a variance? >> So so we're absolutely certain we just

[6:01:25] can't rubber stamp the public works director. We have to

[6:01:31] to address >> we need to have a hearing

[6:01:34] » to address the noticing question. I don't know the noticing requirements for

[6:01:37] this type of item offhand. I'm looking at it now for the first time. Um we'll

[6:01:41] have to confirm if there is an additional notice requirement beyond the

[6:01:44] posting of the agenda and then with that we do have to at least post the items

[6:01:48] with the agenda. Typically we try although we often amend we try to post

[6:01:53] them 10 days in advance and we do have a internal review workflow before that.

[6:01:57] So, it's usually a 19-day process for most items once the department's ready

[6:02:01] to sign off on it to actually get it before you.

[6:02:04] » If I may have Kelsey, I have a suggestion. So, sorry, Council Member

[6:02:07] Stewart. I think uh you know, at the last meeting, we were planning to bring

[6:02:12] this back for a second reading tonight and we weren't even going to do the

[6:02:15] ordinance, uh the urgency ordinance. So, that tells me that there was some time

[6:02:19] in the process to allow a 30-day uh appeal period to take effect after the

[6:02:27] second reading of the ordinance. Uh, and is that fair? Uh, city attorney.

[6:02:34] So, if first reading, last meeting, second meeting was tonight. We did the

[6:02:39] urgency to make it effective tonight, but we weren't even planning to do the

[6:02:43] urgency, >> right? But that would have held those

[6:02:47] property owners at least 30 days from tonight before they would be able to

[6:02:52] have their permit issued to commence construction. The purpose of the urgency

[6:02:57] was so that we wouldn't have that 30-day delay or 30-day plus delay.

[6:03:02] » I I I Yeah, that's kind of what I was trying to For some reason though, we we

[6:03:08] at staff I don't I wasn't here. I don't know the rationale, but we were just

[6:03:12] bringing a second reading tonight. you had the suggestion for urgency. It was

[6:03:15] good to streamline, but clearly the applicant and staff had been talking

[6:03:20] that there was time available. So, I I think to Kelsey's point, rushing this

[6:03:24] for the next meeting could be a problem. Probably the earliest if we're going to

[6:03:27] bring back these variances would be the April 13th meeting.

[6:03:33] » The council also could adopt this tonight and then come back and change it

[6:03:36] after speaking with FEMA would be an option, too. It may

[6:03:41] » I don't know if it'll prejudice the conversation with FEMA, but you would be

[6:03:44] able to make the changes to your code. >> I have one more. Um, so

[6:03:50] once the variance is approved, is there a waiting period

[6:03:54] after the city council makes that approval that the homeowner has to wait?

[6:04:01] » There's an appeal period. >> And how long is that appeal period?

[6:04:05] » It's a 30 days. 30-day appeal period. >> Appeal appeal to who?

[6:04:11] » It's it's our uh it's in our municipal code. It just follows the um

[6:04:17] » the variance requirements for >> the variance requirements.

[6:04:21] » Well, first of all, Steve's been quiet and I know he's been waiting to talk.

[6:04:24] So, let's let's get his comments and then we can continue.

[6:04:26] » Okay. [clears throat]

[6:04:30] My concern is FEMA's closed down. I have no idea when it's going to open up

[6:04:34] again. And and we can sit around and say we're going to talk to them, but there

[6:04:37] just nobody to talk to. All right? And I think the process of getting these

[6:04:43] variances approved and getting these homeowners moving forward is the most

[6:04:47] important thing we're supposed to be doing. Now I I and I'll go back to the

[6:04:51] last comment Trevor made is that if we approve this, okay, and we get it done.

[6:04:57] So we we can now move forward is what we have, we can always go back and talk to

[6:05:01] FEMA at some point in time and say, "Look guys, if there was an easier way,

[6:05:05] would you agree to allow us to make a change and do it the easier way?" I

[6:05:09] think there's a shot at that. I don't I don't know what FEMA thinks, okay? But

[6:05:13] it at least I got everything going forward and I just don't want to see

[6:05:17] this thing get stalled right now because that is not what we're supposed to be

[6:05:22] doing. I mean our job is at least in my mind. So I'm I'm inclined to say let's

[6:05:28] approve this thing. If we got an issue, go back and talk to FEMA, see if we can

[6:05:32] get something done there. If we need more help, if you need more help, go

[6:05:37] back to FEMA, let us know. I don't know what I don't know what assistance we

[6:05:41] could provide to make a conversation with them more meaningful, but I'm

[6:05:45] certainly willing to consider whatever the hell you might have. But let's get

[6:05:48] this done and move it forward. We We've been spending an hour and a half on

[6:05:51] this. It's enough. Let's get it done. >> If I could make a motion, I I think the

[6:05:56] right approach on this is do exactly what Trevor and Steve has suggested.

[6:06:00] Let's make a motion to approve this tonight. direct the city staff to go

[6:06:05] back and see if we can get a more efficient approach. And while we're

[6:06:10] while we're working on the more efficient approach, we've got this less

[6:06:14] than perfect uh document, but we're going to get people moving under

[6:06:18] permits. And that's what the whole idea is. And yeah, we we might have 10 to 15

[6:06:22] that maybe aren't as clean as we'd like, but at least we got them done. So I'll

[6:06:27] make a motion to approve it >> with the condition that the staff uh

[6:06:30] explores other options on how to make this more efficient.

[6:06:35] » So that's staff's recommendation but directing the uh staff to reach out to

[6:06:39] FEMA to seek to um more narrowly tailor the process um and the the amendment to

[6:06:46] the ordinance. Is that correct? >> You said it better than I did. And that

[6:06:50] would be to to uh um adopt urgency ordinance number 533U, an urgency

[6:06:56] ordinance of the city of Malibu amending Malibu Municipal Code Chapter 15.20 to

[6:07:00] make technical amendments to the flood plan management ordinance and finding

[6:07:03] the same exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.

[6:07:09] » Anybody like it enough to second it? >> I second.

[6:07:12] » I have a question. Where in the existing ordinance does it say that the city

[6:07:17] council has to have a public hearing pursuant to the traditional land use

[6:07:21] public hearing requirements? Where where is the public hearing

[6:07:26] requirement of the city council in our existing

[6:07:29] ordinance?

[6:07:37] I'm not aware of that specified in there. I do know that we've held these

[6:07:40] before and it's been a public hearing and that's how it's been processed.

[6:07:43] Okay. >> I don't know if that's set up in

[6:07:45] resolutions. I don't know if that's how we process them traditionally um

[6:07:50] according to our other public hearings. I don't believe it's specified in the

[6:07:53] flood plan ordinance. >> But is it underneath our regular

[6:07:58] variance requirements under municipal? >> This is a different type of variance is

[6:08:03] the same principles in effect that a that a variance under the zoning code or

[6:08:07] under our LCP would involve. um and the reason that you set it up, but it is a

[6:08:10] different variance. It's not a variance from those codes. It's a variance from

[6:08:14] the requirements of the flood plane. Um those codes have specific hearing

[6:08:19] specifications. >> That's correct.

[6:08:21] » This one doesn't. If it doesn't, then we don't have

[6:08:26] hearing requirements other than other it's an agenda item. And if it does, my

[6:08:30] question is then how is passing it to the um administrator obviating the need

[6:08:37] for them to have a public hearing?

[6:08:42] » What we were doing is we're changing the code that would that [clears throat]

[6:08:44] would remove any type of requirement for that.

[6:08:46] » Where do we say that the hearing requirement is different? Just as just

[6:08:49] as we're saying sending it to a different person,

[6:08:52] » whatever the law is, it's still going to be the same law, but a different person

[6:08:55] is going to be making the decision.

[6:09:06] I'm just letting everybody know I'm going to abstain from this. I'd like to

[6:09:10] go to the bathroom, please. Is that okay?

[6:09:12] » Well, you can you're free to leave at any time, but we'll hold off the vote

[6:09:16] for Are you going to Your votes could be an abstension?

[6:09:18] » Yeah. I have no idea.

[6:09:22] All right. >> So, so my my question is where do we say

[6:09:25] affirmatively that whatever hearing requirement that may or may not exist

[6:09:28] isn't going to be required still with the with the administrator making the

[6:09:32] decision. >> Bruce, you bring up an excellent point.

[6:09:37] Um, >> so we may not be accomplishing anything

[6:09:40] except putting a whole bunch of verbiage into here that's not necessary yet.

[6:09:43] » Well, we may not. We may be doing that, but I tell you what, let's let's get

[6:09:46] these people moving forward. We've got a motion and a second.

[6:09:50] » I don't know that it will be moving them forward. That's my point. If a hearing

[6:09:53] is required of us and it doesn't say a hearing is not required of the public

[6:09:57] works director, how are we moving people forward?

[6:09:59] » Well, it's not an appeal. It's a variance. He's he's

[6:10:02] » No, it's not an appeal here either in the first instance.

[6:10:06] » This is not an [clears throat] appeal under the existing law. This is a

[6:10:09] different the word. Forget that it says the word variance. It could be called

[6:10:12] elephant. It's not the same thing as under the LCP or the MSC. We're proving

[6:10:16] a the proving a variance, right? >> But the word variances used in the CFR

[6:10:24] is not the same as the word variance is used in the LCP or the MMC. Words have

[6:10:29] different meanings in different codes. They all depend on what you want them to

[6:10:32] mean when you're grafting legislation. You can call I said you could call it an

[6:10:36] elephant. You could call it a rhinoceros. It doesn't matter. The fact

[6:10:38] that it uses the word variance doesn't mean it means the same thing as we're

[6:10:41] accustomed to. Tatiana, when this was discussed with FEMA, it was understood

[6:10:44] that this would be processed administratively by the public works

[6:10:48] director. That process was approved from them to be compliant with the federal

[6:10:52] regulations. >> Is that correct?

[6:10:54] » You're correct. >> Where does it say that?

[6:10:59] » That's through the approval of that. That's how we came up with all this

[6:11:02] language and um to give the authority to the public works director.

[6:11:07] » All right. Does anybody else have any comments?

[6:11:12] Let's have a um roll call, please. >> Yes. And we do need a four-fifths vote

[6:11:17] to adopt an emergency ordinance. Um but the roll call is council member Stewart.

[6:11:23] » Hold on. Let's wait till council member Conrad returns because knowing that

[6:11:29] could alter her vote because I'm going to vote now.

[6:11:49] new piece of information. So, we're about to have a roll call vote, but this

[6:11:53] requires four affirmative votes. Just so you know that.

[6:11:57] » Okay, let's have the roll call. >> Yes. An urgency ordinance requires a

[6:12:01] four-fifths vote of the council. A regular ordinance can be adopted by a

[6:12:04] simple majority. So, the motion before you is to adopt ordinance 533

[6:12:10] um and adopt ordinance 533U and direct staff to contact FEMA um about ways to

[6:12:16] more narrowly tailor the process. So, the roll call vote is council member

[6:12:20] Stewart. >> Yes.

[6:12:22] » Council member Rigggins. >> Yes.

[6:12:25] » Council member Conrad. >> Are we changing code tonight?

[6:12:30] » This would change the code. >> To change code, so I'm abstaining.

[6:12:34] » Sorry. It's fine. Mayor Protoiring.

[6:12:37] » Yes. >> Mayor Silverstein.

[6:12:40] » No. I move that we defer approval of this. And

[6:12:44] » just for the record, that motion failed. >> Yes. Thank you. I move that we defer

[6:12:48] approval of this proposed second reading for a minimum of two weeks and that need

[6:12:53] well I guess we're not going to be able to talk to the FEMA

[6:13:02] seeing as how we don't have anything else on the table I guess we put it up

[6:13:07] for a vote I'll second I'll second >> I don't want I I don't want this to fail

[6:13:10] and be required to come back for a first reading again in the event that we're

[6:13:14] required to still do it >> you can make a motion just for the

[6:13:17] second reading. >> Can we put the second reading off to a

[6:13:20] time to be determined

[6:13:27] » I'm aware of >> so people can get their permits going. I

[6:13:29] mean look the we talk about we're going to help people get going. We're going to

[6:13:34] make them we can make it faster. I guess I mean how many times have I got people

[6:13:38] yelling at me saying you got too many rules. You're slowing me down. Let's un

[6:13:41] slow them down. Let's make this thing work.

[6:13:43] » Well, I'm prepared. I'm prepared to move at each meeting to approve these

[6:13:48] variances as they come up until we get this cleared up. And we've got two

[6:13:52] rebuild people sitting right here who are cheering on. Let's not make these

[6:13:56] changes. So, I I'm not hearing any outcry.

[6:14:00] » And I was prepared to vote on what it was when he came in here, which was

[6:14:04] speeding up the process, expediting and streamlining, but it changed. and it's

[6:14:09] not responsible of me to just kind of vote on something I don't understand

[6:14:14] fully, but I don't want to delay. So, >> well, the the vote has failed unless

[6:14:20] somebody I I don't think somebody can even make the same motion again.

[6:14:23] » So, is there another motion somebody would like to make or do we just move on

[6:14:25] to the next? >> You could motion could be you could just

[6:14:28] adopt this. You could move the second reading. It only needs three votes. If

[6:14:32] you do that, then it comes to effect 30 days from now. So you could take option

[6:14:36] if it's action one would be an option or you could move to continue the item

[6:14:41] report back. >> I'll move I move to bring this back in

[6:14:43] 30 days or whatever the closest to 30 days is and that in the interim we bring

[6:14:47] forward expeditiously any variance request that's currently on the table

[6:14:52] that needs to be approved and hold the hearing to get the variance approved if

[6:14:56] that's appropriate thing to do. Is there a second for that?

[6:15:01] And if we get more in the interim, we bring them back, too. If more if more

[6:15:05] houses show up, >> yes, until such time as we get this

[6:15:09] ironed out. Hopefully, we can get it ironed out sooner than later.

[6:15:13] » Mayor Silverstein, in your motion, are you providing any specific direction to

[6:15:17] staff regarding working with FEMA or is this solely to continue this item for

[6:15:22] approximately 30 days and begin scheduling variance hearings? work with

[6:15:26] FEMA as soon as they are capable of being contacted to get their um input on

[6:15:31] a simple amendment that that moves the administrative authority to the um

[6:15:35] administrator and not at the city council level.

[6:15:39] » Trevor, what was the idea you had about that getting a three-person vote? What

[6:15:42] is that? >> If you if you just um if you adopt on

[6:15:47] second reading the ordinance that was introduced on first reading at the last

[6:15:50] at the last meeting, um it will come into effect 30 days from today. So, if

[6:15:54] we vote to approve the second reading tonight, we only need three votes to do

[6:15:58] that. >> That's correct.

[6:15:59] » I'd like to make a motion to take a shot at that.

[6:16:01] » Second.

[6:16:09] » Okay, we're going to have a roll. I'm just going to make one comment before we

[6:16:11] have the roll call, which is I I think this need for speed is acting

[6:16:16] counterproductively right now, and um people may regret this decision when it

[6:16:21] backfires on them down the line. All right, roll call.

[6:16:25] » Hold on one second. Let's make sure we've got the instructions to the staff

[6:16:28] to contact FEMA in that motion. >> All right.

[6:16:33] » And and and I'll we did the same thing with the MMC amendments, which could

[6:16:37] have been far more robust in limiting in making things more narrow, but we we

[6:16:42] sped up the ones that we did and we did them and then we never came back to

[6:16:45] them. We we moved fast with the coastal commission when we maybe could have done

[6:16:50] different more things there. We pushed the governor to do certain limited

[6:16:54] things without having discussion among ourselves as to whether there were more

[6:16:57] things that we that would be beneficial to our residents. This is all being done

[6:17:02] ad hoc and um and too fast notwithstanding the fact that it needs

[6:17:07] to be done quickly. There's a difference between what what's that saying that

[6:17:11] John Mazes >> Oh yeah, John Wooden

[6:17:14] » from John Wooden. What is that? >> Be fast but careful. Something like

[6:17:18] that. >> Something like that. You'll break some

[6:17:19] shells. But isn't there a rebuild ad hoc that you guys could be exploring this

[6:17:25] more a little bit? I mean, I was ready to vote on what it was, but new light,

[6:17:30] new information came to light. So, we can take the vote and you guys can

[6:17:33] explore it some more. The city will call FEMA

[6:17:36] » and we'll get these guys permitted. >> If we're going to have three, if we're

[6:17:39] going to have three votes to amend this in a minute and it's just going to

[6:17:41] become effective in a couple weeks. >> Can I say something? And we can always

[6:17:44] have an opportunity if we don't think it's working. There's problems with it.

[6:17:48] We can go back and change it. I mean, there's nothing we're doing that is

[6:17:51] written in cement. It is. And I I understand, Bruce, you'd like to make it

[6:17:56] clean as a whistle out the door. We're not going to get that done. So, let's

[6:18:00] get something done. Go back. If we have problems with it, we can address those

[6:18:04] problems. And at the same time, we're letting people get their houses built.

[6:18:09] By the way, that's coach should also be the uh perfect is the enemy of the good.

[6:18:14] » Well, and I think that we also need to remember we have a professional staff.

[6:18:18] They've been working on this. This is what we pay them to do to be engineers,

[6:18:23] to be the professionals that are working with the other agencies and things like

[6:18:27] that to bring us forth the information. And they have been working on this for

[6:18:32] weeks if not months. Um, and this is supposed to be benefiting our property

[6:18:37] owners to get them rebuilt. >> Trevor, were you involved in the

[6:18:40] conversations? >> The drafting of this? No.

[6:18:44] » Yeah. Did What lawyer was involved in these conversations? Any

[6:18:48] » Rob? >> Rob is a lawyer, isn't he?

[6:18:52] » Okay. Not a practicing lawyer, but he but he's but he went to law school.

[6:18:56] Okay. Roll call. >> Mayor Promirine.

[6:19:02] » Yes. Council member Rigggins, >> yes.

[6:19:04] » Council member Conrad, >> Epstein. Council member Stewart,

[6:19:08] » yes. >> Mayor Silverstein,

[6:19:10] » no. >> Motion carries.

[6:19:12] » Okay, it's 10:54. Because it's after 10:30, we cannot do new business without

[6:19:17] a four fifths vote. We have an important but lengthy, I suspect, lengthy item

[6:19:23] left on the agenda, which is the afteraction report. Who has an appetite

[6:19:28] for moving that forward tonight? I don't I've seen enough.

[6:19:36] » I have uh an hour short with daylight savings time.

[6:19:39] » So, it sounds like there's no motion to move forward. In that case, um we're

[6:19:44] adjourned. >> All right.

City Council Regular Meeting March 9, 2026

Transcript