Hurricane-Force Winds Batter Western Malibu on Christmas Day

• Downed Line Results in Daylong Power Outage Impacting Holiday Festivities for Hundreds

BY ANNE SOBLE

There have been countless times when all the meteorologists were wrong about a Malibu forecast, but the unified front calling for a major Santa Ana wind event on Christmas Eve and Day wasn’t one of them.
The brunt of the winds clocked as high as hurricane force—78 mph at 3:48 a.m. at Leo Carrillo State Beach—was in the predawn hours when any visions of dancing sugar plums were replaced by flying branches and palm fronds.
Point Dume experienced wind gusts in the 25-40 mph range and intermittent electrical power outages. A downed power line made a major dent in holiday plans for Malibu Park residents as hundreds found themselves without power between 10 a.m. and 8 p.m.
Malibuites on the community’s western flank where the winds hit the hardest kept expecting their power to go, but it held fast through occasional flickering.
Tuesday’s Santa Ana winds have completely undone the benefits of the recent rainfalls, according to fire officials. Extra personnel and equipment were on standby in the area on Christmas Day, reinforcing the notion that wildfire knows no holiday.
The winds finally died down late Tuesday but were expected to pick up again on Wednesday, with ongoing red flag alerts reflecting the newly diminished humidity. Alerts are slated to remain in effect through Thursday.
It will take at least two inches of precipitation to put Malibu back where it was before Tuesday’s wind strike. Forecasts for Friday call for the possibility of light rain. Malibuites hope the meteorologists get this one right as well.

Two Sets of Malibu Wildfire Suspects Proceed to Next Court Dates

• Five Men Charged with Starting or Causing Conditions that Led to Devastating Corral Canyon Blaze •

BY HANS LAETZ

Last week’s bail hearing for three Los Angeles men provided the first details about what arson detectives say happened at the now notorious cave at the end of Corral Canyon Road the night that Malibu’s worst brushfire in 12 years was ignited.
In remarks from the bench, Judge Michael Kellogg went beyond what is usually discussed at routine bail hearings by reciting the alleged events of that night in great detail, and offered conclusions as to the chain of events and the suspects’ likely guilt.
“Careless” and “callous” were the terms that the judge— himself affected by recent Malibu brushfires—used to describe the acts by the three Los Angeles men who went before him last Friday seeking reduced bail.
Attorneys for the men argued that they are being made scapegoats by a community hungry for retribution.
At issue last week was a request by William Thomas Coppock, 23, and Brian David Franks, 27, that the two men be released on their own recognizance pending their trial.
Coppock’s bail was reduced from $230,000 to $100,000, but his public defender said Coppock is broke and would spend Christmas in jail.
The judge denied a request to release Coppock to the custody of a Los Angeles woman who said she had raised him after his mother was murdered when he was a child, and attested that “he doesn’t have a mean bone in his body.”
Coppock’s lawyer said the defendant, an employee at a Starbuck’s, had a criminal record consisting only of a seat belt violation fine that had been paid.
Codefendant Franks won a $10,000 reduction in his bail, to $230,000, based on a recalculation of state bail guidelines. He was released shortly after Friday’s hearing in Van Nuys.
Judge Kellogg noted that, although the defendants are considered innocent until proven guilty at a trial, all unproven charges must be considered to be true when a judge sets bail.
“There is nothing to show me that there wasn’t this callousness,” Kellogg said, “and a high level of carelessness. And all the sorries in the world don’t change that.”
Already free on bail is Brian Alan Anderson, 23, who was painted by prosecution documents as the ringleader of the trio of men who went to the mountaintop cave overlooking Malibu and the San Fernando Valley to drink beer and other alcohol the Friday night after Thanksgiving, as Santa Ana winds howled through the hills.
As pieced together from details revealed in court by attorneys and the judge on Friday, Anderson, Coppock and Franks went to the cave after allegedly stealing between three to four packages of precut firewood from the Ralph’s Market at Malibu Colony Plaza. Coppock also allegedly purchased lighter fluid, and someone bought a case of either 18 or 30 cans of beer, and hard liquor.
It was cash register receipts from those purchases that allowed sheriff’s arson investigators to subpoena bank records and find the three alleged arsonists, who stand charged with recklessly causing a fire with great bodily injury, recklessly causing fire to an inhabited structure, and arson during a state of emergency.
All three of these crimes are felonies, and each carries a sentence of between 2-4 years.
Prosecution reports revealed last Friday allege that the three men apparently drove to the cave and encountered two teenagers from Culver City: Dean Allan Lavorante, 19, and Eric Matthew Ullman, 18, and their girlfriends. Those men had a small bonfire going inside the cave, but left shortly after the other men arrived and started partying heavily.
Lavorante and Ullman are also charged with the same crimes, but are being tried separately because the evidence against them is different than that targeting the three L.A. defendants. The Culver City men are free on bail and will face preliminary hearings on Feb. 14.
According to a sheriff’s report read by one of the attorneys in court last week, Anderson reportedly kicked burning logs out of the cave and into the surrounding brush. A drunken Anderson allegedly ordered Coppock out of the cave to put it out.
“Anderson kicked a burning log out of the cave and said, ‘Here, put this out,’” Franks’ public defender, Douglas Jay Goldstein, said. A pillow of some sort was then lit on fire, and thrown toward Coppock, who tried to stomp out the burning logs, pillow and embers in the volatile brush and whipping winds.
“Guys were laughing,” Goldstein maintained, adding that his client not only did not start the fire, “but [he] seemed to be a good Samaritan.”
The defense attorneys maintain that the three L.A. men did not start the fire, and left the cave thinking that the fire had been put out. But Judge Kellogg, during an unusual spoken review of the state’s evidence, scoffed at that.
Kellogg said he had carefully reviewed arson investigators reports, and looked at what each man had been seen doing that hot and windy night.
The judge noted that the fire injured firefighters, one of them with second-degree burns, and one with a broken ankle.
The judge added that the arson crimes do not charge that the men actually started the fire, but that their actions caused it to spread.
Before the bail hearing began, Kellogg made it clear to attorneys that he was personally affected by the Malibu Canyon fire that took place a month earlier, when he had to rescue a friend’s horses as a firestorm approached.
He emphasized there was no local pressure in the case. “No one from Malibu is knocking on my door, saying we have to convict these men,” the judge said.
All three attorneys said they knew and trusted the judge and did not take him up on his offer to hand the case to another judge for the bail hearing. However, another judge will handle the preliminary hearing.
Because Coppock is in jail, his attorney would not allow a waiver of the laws that requires a preliminary hearing within 10 court days. That means the other two defendants must rush through hundred of pages of sheriff’s and fire department reports as they prepare for the Jan. 7 preliminary hearing date.
At that session, the state must produce witnesses and evidence showing the likelihood that a crime was committed by the defendants. The defenders will be able to cross-examine witnesses and try to knock out the charges.
Expected to testify is one woman who was at the party and gave sheriff’s deputies a lengthy description of the night’s events, which culminated in a fast-moving blaze that destroyed 53 houses between 2:30 and 7:30 a.m.
No official damages tally has yet been released, but the figure of above $100 million has been estimated by the Malibu Surfside News and was quoted as accurate by Sheriff Lee Baca.
No one was killed, but one firefighter from the Sacramento area suffered second-degree burns to his face when a burning garbage can exploded molten plastic as a stream of water hit it.

SMMC Head Seeks Override of LCP Amendment Approved by the City

• Council Members Had Publicly Rejected Previous Request to Rescind Their Votes in Controversy •

BY BILL KOENEKER

The board of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy is expected this week to consider a resolution authorizing its executive director to submit a Malibu Local Coastal Program Amendment pursuant to the LCP override procedures of the California Coastal Commission.
The amendment would include a request for a level of usages at Ramirez Canyon Park consistent with those previously approved by the Coastal Commission in 2000, in addition to a provision to allow overnight camping and handicapped access camping at the park, according to SMMC documents.
The override also includes camping in Escondido and Corral Canyon park.
Addtionally, the new submission would call for the establishment of a Malibu parks affordable access fund, using the net proceeds from events at Ramirez Canyon Park to provide inner city outreach in Malibu parks.
The revision will also include a request for acquisition and improvements of all potential trail segments and linkages to and along the Coastal Slope Trail, together with improvements of public restrooms and parking areas to serve the trails and trail linkages.
The revisions will also include a request for public camping, restrooms and parking at Escondido Canyon Park, together with related handicapped access improvements, satellite parking and trail staging areas serving the park.
In addition, the LCPA override will include a request for public camping, restrooms and parking at Corral Canyon Park, together with handicapped access improvements.
The board, which is holding a special teleconference session on Friday, Dec. 28, is expected to also consider a resolution amending the scope of work for grant funds to include additional project planning and design for camping in Escondido, Ramirez and Corral canyons.
The override follows on the heels of a request that most Malibu City Council members say they will probably not consider, a request by Joe Edmiston, the executive director of the Conservancy to rescind their vote on the SMMC’s LCPA trails and park plan that included a ban on overnight camping.
“I don’t know if we have the jurisdiction [to vote on it],” said Councilmember Andy Stern, who said he would not agree to vote on it again.
Edmiston wrote in a letter last week that what he thought was a cooperative effort between the state agency and the city was dashed when he contended the city failed to compromise in any significant way on the LCPA.
“The planning commission action approving the LCPA gave further support to our hope that proceeding through the City of Malibu would yield a mutually agreed outcome,” Edmiston added.
“So it was with some surprise, that we heard at your Dec. 5 hearing that, lo and behold, fire was an issue that required not only denial of the LCP Amendment request for specific camping sites, but a total elimination of any possibility of overnight camping in public parks in Malibu, even though camping is a permitted use in the Malibu LCP approved by the Coastal Commission,” Edmiston wrote.
The SMMC head urged the council to rescind their action within 30 days of his letter or he would take action.
Stern said it is the obligation of the coastal staff to review the LCPA and said he did not believe there was anything at this point that could be rescinded.
Stern said he thought the key element for the city for the submission of the LCPA to the coastal agency was for Malibuites “to fight it like the LCP.”
The city council member said the city needs to find a way to limit camping.
“The Coastal Commission does not automatically rubber stamp everything the staff recommends,” he added, referring to a previously published report that the CCC executive director Peter Douglas indicated he believed the LCPA submission was a waste of time because on its face it violated the Coastal Act.
Edmiston, in his letter, also took issue with the council’s action in regards to proposing a level of use for major events at Ramirez Canyon Park.
“Pursuant to what we felt were good faith negotiations with Malibu city staff, the Conservancy proposed a level of use roughly half that which was previously approved by the California Coastal Commission,” he wrote.
However, Edmiston noted the city conditioned what he called “any reasonable use,” of the park on a possible $8.5 million road that may or may not get built or approved.
“The city makes an elaborate balancing argument in favor of the alternative road, but gives the Conservancy virtually nothing in terms of public programs or events if the Coastal Commission doesn’t agree with such [an] argument.”
The Conservancy spokesperson blasted the city leaders for praising the proposed trails, but not wanting “outsiders” to either park or stay overnight in affordable camp sites, thus approving a trail system that primarily benefits Malibu residents.
However, some city officials, including the planning commission, are not swayed that there is a need for more camping on or near the coastline.
Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich, who led the opposition to overnight camping, insists there are plenty of affordable sites.
The planning commission, as part of its recommendation of the LCPA, insisted one of the conditions of approval be a comprehensive study of the need for more camping.
Edmiston complained that a ban on overnight camping means overnight visitors could only stay in “über-expensive hotel rooms and almost as expensive private campgrounds.”
City Attorney Christi Hogin did not return repeated phone calls.

• The Publisher’s Notebook •

An Improvised Malibu Christmas

BY ANNE SOBLE

It was the night before Christmas, and all of the weather forecasts were the same. Santa Claus and Santa Ana winds were being mentioned so often in the same context that the words began to slur. Three Malibu wildfires in a year were fueled by these powerful winds. The winds in October had howled demonically through my property, causing extensive damage in their own right. When it rained soon after the November fire, travel could be considered as concern about leaving during high fire danger abated. Although I have been abroad when natural disasters struck Malibu—a minor brushfire when I was in Scandinavia, wave damage and flooding while I was in South America—I have never left when a natural threat was imminent. When this week’s high wind alerts started, I wrestled with the seriousness of the danger. Holiday plans would be upended and plane tickets unrefunded. Priorities of home and profession conflicted. The decision not to leave Malibu on Monday wasn’t easy, but it ultimately made itself. The winds started late on Christmas Eve and didn’t stop. Sleep was impossible. Screaming wind blasts clocked at more than 75 mph roared down Malibu’s western flank to Leo Carrillo Beach between 3 and 4 a.m. Large branches and other debris were tossed about like twigs. Tarps on llama stalls were shredded. Part of a hay shed was pulled apart. As a child, I would have spent these darkened hours watching for Grandfather Frost, now I was wishing away a firestorm.
Every Christmas produces a rush of memories, including ones we haven’t experienced firsthand, such as when the corrals, barns and house on the land that I would acquire several decades later burned on Christmas Day in the devastating Malibu wildfire of 1956. However, this Dec. 25 would not end in ashes. The predawn hurricane-force winds turned out to be the worst, but gusts to 50 mph continued throughout the day. As the wind danger subsided, there was disappointment at missed plans, but no second-guessing. Christmas Day wound down to its last hours. The wind watch had been exhausting. Still, the brightly decorated house couldn’t be ignored. And through nothing short of legerdemain and the kindness of a stranger, a precooked holiday goose with port and current sauce and sour cherry stuffing had materialized. Wind debris cleanup was put on hold for a dinner that, while haphazardly improvised and limited to a few guests, was no less special. Someone asked whether it was frightening when the winds were at their fiercest. The answer is that the powerful winds were less about fear than awe and humility. That’s a Christmas message too.

Longtime Local Survives Wildfire with Help of Deputy

• Corral Canyon Fire Consumes World War II Veteran’s Home and Memories •

BY VANESSA HARRIS

In the wake of Malibu’s latest and most tragic wildfire of the year, it could have seemed that the flames cleared away any hopes for stories of grace. Yet over a month later, a time for gratitude and thanks for a heroic story has come to light in time for the new year.
This is especially true for 96-year-old Benjamin Kennedy who has witnessed Malibu go through many changes while residing in the town since 1932. But for him and his caretaker of 10 years, Irina Svistelina, the sight of their burning home was a change they never wanted to see. However, with thanks to Malibu locals and a Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station deputy, Kennedy and Svistelina are grateful to have made it through the disaster.
When the two received news of the fire at 5 a.m. on Nov. 24, Svistelina spent two hours convincing Kennedy of the need to leave. Kennedy refused because of his immobility and the desire to stay with a home filled with memorabilia he had accumulated throughout his life.
As the fire raged closer and closer to their home, Svistelina was convinced that they were going to burn together. She refused to leave him despite the grimness of the situation. In a last desperate measure to send for help, Svistelina ran outside to seek assistance but found no one in sight. No one, except for a black-and-white sheriff’s car parked far in the distance.
Frantically, she waved her hands in the hope that she would catch the officer’s eyes. She realized she was successful as the car instantly backed up and, as Svistelina describes, out came a “handsome, strong, and tall policeman” from the car to their rescue.
Deputy Steve Bohmert entered the endangered home and placed Kennedy over his shoulder and carried him out to his car. Svistelina followed the policeman to safety in her own car. When they reached the bottom of the hill, Bohmert put Kennedy in her vehicle and returned to the fire.
Traumatized by the day’s events, the pair realized that they did not have time to salvage anything from the engulfed home, but were thankful that the deputy had appeared to save their lives.
With nowhere to go, the two sought safety at BeauRivage, where owner and longtime Kennedy friend Daniel Forge set up a refugee camp of sorts. He provided food, coffee, and water to victims of the fire like Kennedy and Svistelina.
The relief effort continued for the two as the Malibu Rivera Motel “opened their hearts and doors at the same moment to them” says Svistelina. The staff, who she says are “warm people who warmed their hearts in a difficult time,” let them know that they could stay as long as they needed, and they would help as much as they could.
Even now as Kennedy is recovering from the stress brought on by the fire at the Veteran’s Hospital, Svistelina still seeks refuge in the hotel where she showers and rests from time to time.
While Kennedy is slowly but steadily recovering each day from the catastrophe, the loss that his home suffered will never be recovered.
The destroyed home, which included World War II memorabilia that Kennedy accumulated throughout the years, had irreplaceable personal and historical value. The collection included signed pictures of members of the Blue Angels to whom Kennedy taught navigation.
Other lost artifacts include the awards which Kennedy was given for his longstanding volunteer efforts, including the delivery of food boxes to the needy for over 36 years.
Despite these losses, Svistelina and Kennedy are grateful to all the people who played vital roles in their safety. Svistelina and Kennedy hope for an occasion to properly thank Dep. Bohmert for his courageous efforts after Kennedy’s health is restored.
They want Bohmert to know that they will forever be grateful for what he did for them.
Svistelina asks for the community’s thoughts and prayers for Kennedy’s complete recovery. She says, “So many have come to him to get light from him, and [he] is in a way seen like a god because he has helped so many throughout the years.”
She now wishes for the same sense of energy and strength to be returned to the man who gave others so much.

Three of the Five Corral Fire Suspects Arraigned Friday

• Judge Says ‘All the Sorries in the World’ Fall Short•

BY HANS LAETZ

In an unusual bail hearing that ended with the judge calling their acts “careless and callous,” two of the five Corral Canyon arson suspects were unsuccessful in getting any substantive reduction in their bail amounts, meaning at least one will face Christmas in jail.
Instead of a routine bail hearing on whether the two men were risks to the community if released on bail, Judge Michael Kellogg laid out the prosecution’s case against all five men charged with setting the Nov. 24 fire that destroyed 53 houses and severely damaged another 34.
“There is nothing to show me that there wasn’t this callousness,” Kellogg said, “and a high level of carelessness. And all the sorries in the world don’t change that.”
Kellogg rejected requests by attorneys for William Thomas Coppock, 23, and Brian David Franks, 27, that the two men be released on their own recognizance. The judge said Coppock, according to sheriff’s reports, had tried to at least put out some of the fire, and lowered his bond to $100,000.
Coppock’s attorney said his client was an indigent and would have to stay in jail over the Christmas holidays.
Franks’ bail was reduced by $10,000 due to an earlier math error, to $230,000. His attorney said he would bail out of the county jail today.
Already released on bail is Brian Alan Anderson, 23, as well as two Culver City teenagers who were part of a different group of partiers who went to the mountaintop cave overlooking Malibu and the San Fernando Valley to drink beer with girls and light a campfire at a notorious party location on State Parks lands.
The judge told attorneys he had spent a great deal of time reviewing the police reports, and noted that the accusation of causing an arson fire during a state of emergency requires a sentence of state prison time.
He said the sheriff’s department believes that Anderson, Coppock and Franks stole 3-4 packages of precut firewood from the Ralph’s Supermarket in Malibu, and then added that wood to a small campfire already set in the cave by the two Culver City teenage codefendants, Dean Allan Lavorante, 19, and Eric Matthew Ullman, 18.
Those two men apparently left the cave after the older men from Los Angeles arrived and drank between 18-30 cans of beer and other liquor. Anderson reportedly kicked burning logs out of the cave and into surrounding brush, and then allegedly ordered Coppock out of the cave to put it out, according to a sheriff’s report read by one of the attorneys.
Franks’ public defender, Douglas Jay Goldstein, said his client not only did not start the fire, “but seemed to be a good Samaritan.”
“Anderson kicked a burning log out of the cave and said, ‘Here, put this out,’” Goldstein said. “Guys were laughing.”
Anderson next allegedly tossed a burning pillow outside the cave and told Franks to put it out.
Anderson has already been released on $240,000 bail.
The three Los Angeles men will next face a preliminary hearing Jan. 7 in Van Nuys. The two Culver City men will be arraigned there Feb. 14.

Six Take Out Papers at Start of Malibu City Council Nominating Period

• Familiar Names on the City Public Policy Scene Dominate the List of Possible Candidates

BY BILL KOENEKER

The nomination period for Malibu City Council candidates in the April 8 election, when three council seats will be up for grabs, started on Monday and runs through Jan. 11.

Taking out nominating papers this week were John Sibert, Kathy Wisnicki, Wade Major, Ed Gillespie and Ryan Embree. Jefferson Wagner said he would take out papers later this week. All of the council hopefuls said they were not running on a slate.

On Tuesday, in a somewhat surprising move, Kathy Wisnicki, who is on the school board of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District and would have to give up that seat if elected to the council, announced her candidacy.

In a prepared statement, Wisnicki said she decided to run for the council since she would be up for reelection on the school board in the fall of 2008.

In her press release, Wisnicki said traffic, public safety, protecting the environment and education would be her top issues.

“[They] are the issues that concern Malibu residents every day, [and] are regional issues, Malibu’s leaders must work collaboratively with elected officials from the municipalities surrounding us to come up with creative and effective solutions,” she said.

Wisnicki claimed she would be the only parent of public school children on the city council, “bringing an important perspective to the council’s deliberations.” However, hours later Wisnicki retracted that statement, acknowledging that Councilmember Andy Stern’s son goes to Malibu High School. Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich’s children are in private school.

On Monday, Ed Gillespie, who is the current president of the Malibu Chamber of Commerce and made a previous run for city council, took out papers.

Gillespie’s run is no surprise, since he had previously made it clear he would seek office again.

He had announced last year and at several other times he would run in 2008 and had vowed he would not use his one-year term as president of the chamber to campaign. “I’m thrilled to be running again,” he said. A relatively recent resident of Malibu, Gillespie is a yacht broker, interested in the arts and said he has been watching the city council at its meetings for the last two years.

Additionally, John Sibert, who is currently on the planning commission, pulled papers.

Sibert has been on the planning commission since 2002.

Sibert said one of his top priorities is ocean water quality. “There are some things we need to do,” he said,” adding the city must not contribute to the pollution of Santa Monica Bay.

A chemist by training, Sibert said he is one of the co-founders of Save Our Coast started in the 1980s, and over the years did work in environmental chemistry.

“It is not only the environment that is one of my concerns, but we need to work with all of the jurisdictions along Pacific Coast Highway. We need to find out what Caltrans is doing before they do it,” he said.

His other focus, according to Sibert, is dealing with the powerful state agencies that have a direct impact on Malibu. “My six years on the planning commission have given me a perspective,” he added.

Sibert said he got the commissioners to insist there be no camping unless a need was shown for a controversial park and trails plan sought by the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy.

“I see no reason for 24 campsites, unless the state agencies can show it,” he said.

When asked about his role in the controversial issue surrounding Measure M, a development agreement turned down by the voters several years ago, Sibert said he took no formal position. He was not at the meeting when the commission considered the matter and did not publicly take a position on the issue.

Another potential candidate, Jefferson Wagner, announced on Tuesday he would be taking out papers later in the week.

Wagner, who is known professionally as Zuma Jay, unsuccessfully ran in the very first city council race.

A longtime activist, he has headed the Latigo Canyon Preservation Association, is a 35-year resident of Malibu, owns a surf shop in town and works as a special effects technician in the entertainment industry.

Wagner said he thought it was time for a “fresh face” on the council and said he would not shy away from trying to prevent overdevelopment within the law. “Not stop development, but prevent overdevelopment,” he emphasized.

Ryan Embree also took out papers. He ran two years ago and said a controversial decision on his candidate’s statement hurt his campaign. “It put me at a disadvantage,” he said, adding he wants to run again because he thinks he can win and to try to wrest the council away from Councilmember Sharon Barovsky, who he said has controlled the city for the last six years.

Embree eschews the term policy wonk saying it can be a pejorative, but he has been observed on a number of occasions telling the council about the fine print of some policy or another after a careful and complete reading of the documents.

Embree, who was on the city’s public safety commission for six years, said he was also moved to seek a seat on the council because of the most recent decision by the council on an attempt to ban overnight camping.

“They did a flip-flop on an issue about burning down the town,” he said.

Wade Major is a film critic who is best known in local political circles for some of the controversy he has generated during city council campaigns. When asked if his tactics are acrimonious, with a take-no-prisoners approach, Major doesn’t deny that, then says he hopes his campaign can heal those scars.

“Anybody who knows me, knows I have been at ground zero for Malibu’s darkest episodes,” said Major, who added that it is time to break from the past.

Major was successfully sued by activist and philanthropist Ozzie Silna during a strident city campaign four years ago when First Amendment rights were fought in a courtroom. Major declined to comment on the litigation and questions to his attorney.

Mayor Jeff Jennings and Councilmember Ken Kearsley are termed out and their seats are available. Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich’s term is up, but she has not yet said whether she will seek a second term. Last week Conley Ulich said she would make an announcement in January.

Nominating petitions must be signed by no less than 20 registered voters in the City of Malibu and no more than 30, according to a city official. After the closing date, there is a verification of signatures by the City Clerk for the nominees to qualify for the ballot.

The filing period for write-in candidates is from Feb. 11 to March 25. Voters may request absentee ballots from March 10 to April 1. The last day to register to vote is March 24.

‘Great Detective Work’ Credited in Identifying Suspects in Corral Fire

• Five Men Charged with Three Felony Counts Face Double-Digit Prison Terms If Convicted

BY HANS LAETZ

The rumors sweeping Malibu were exactly correct: it was cash register data from purchases made at Ralph’s Supermarket in Malibu that led sheriff’s investigators to two teenagers from Culver City and three men from Los Angeles who allegedly let a moonlight beer bust bonfire get out of control in the backcountry of Malibu Creek State Park.

The fire in the predawn hours of Nov. 24 raged out of control, destroying $100 million worth of Malibu real estate. Relatives and lawyers to some of the defendants said the young men were being made scapegoats for a fire that was out when they left the party at the end of Corral Canyon Road.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca announced last week that the five men have each been charged with three felony counts, and could face from six to 12 years imprisonment.

Key evidence will be the partly burned firewood and snacks found at the party site on state parks land—party goods that had been purchased earlier in the evening at the Malibu market.

Baca confirmed reports first printed last week in the Malibu Surfside News that the snacks and firewood had been purchased with plastic money, and that sheriff’s arson squad investigators were able to link specific items found at a campfire at the mountaintop caves with specific purchases using grocery store register tapes.

A search warrant allowed the investigators to link the purchases by credit or debit card to a specific account holder, Baca said.

“Sheriff’s arson investigators issued a press statement asking for public support in solving the crime: a citizen did respond and offered valuable assistance,” the sheriff said. A young woman who was a member of one group of partiers gave key information about the men who were in another group, the sheriff said.

“She was a member of one group, the first group of kids witnessed the second group come up and start the fire,” Baca told the News. “She is a witness, not a suspect.”

Baca said investigators went as far as Shasta County near the Oregon border to interview witnesses and suspects. “We know for a fact that items they purchased at the store were left in the debris.”

The suspects include Los Angeles residents Brian Alan Anderson, 22, William Thomas Coppock, 23, and Brian David Franks, 27. The three did not post the $240,000 to $270,000 bail and remain in custody. They are scheduled for an arraignment and bail review hearing on Friday, Dec. 21, in Van Nuys Superior Court.

Two Culver City men, Eric Matthew Ullman, 18, and Dean Allen Lavorante, 19, are also charged. They surrendered to the Malibu/Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station Friday, posted bail of $240,000 each and were released the same day. Their arraignment hearing was first slated for this Monday, then was continued without explanation to Feb. 14.

Arson Detective Irma Gonzales, indicated that the men were not part of a gang. “They were up there that night, consuming alcoholic beverages and hanging out,” she said.

“This wasn’t an oops,” said District Attorney Steve Cooley. “These charges reflect criminal recklessness that resulted in six injuries and the destruction of 55 homes and other structures.

“The law is clear. You cannot go into a high fire danger area and for whatever reason build a fire. It is not only a recipe for disaster, it is a criminal act,” he said in a press release issued last week. Although the DA said 55 homes were destroyed, the fire department counted 53 gutted and 33 structures seriously damaged.

The district attorney’s office won its requests that all five men post a bond of about a quarter million dollars each. They are charged with recklessly causing a fire with great bodily injury, recklessly causing a fire to an inhabited structure, and arson during an emergency.

All three of those crimes are felonies and each carries a sentence of between 2-4 years.

County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky credited arson investigators with “great detective work, great investigative work.”

“It is reckless, on top of the illegality, to set a fire anywhere in the mountains when there is a Santa Ana wind condition, as there was that night,” he said.

The filing of charges came 19 days after the fire swept down Corral, Latigo and Escondido canyons, destroying 53 houses and damaging nearly as many. The Los Angeles County Fire Department has yet to announce a total damages estimate, but the $100 million figure has been speculated.

The five men could be civilly liable for damages, but their assets and ability to repay are dwarfed by the damage done, observers said. There was no answer at the apparent homes of the two Culver City teens last Thursday night, and a woman who answered the door at one of the teen’s residences on Monday said she would prefer not to speak to a reporter.

Ullman and Lavorante are members of families that have lived in Culver City for generations, and both of the men graduated from Culver City High School in 2006.

In other Corral Fire news, the state fire agency released a tentative report on the injuries incurred by Sacramento-area firefighter Scott Herzog during the early hours of the fire, when he suffered second-degree burns to his face.

A preliminary Cal Fire report said Herzog’s engine was protecting a house at 26160 Fairside Road when a large plastic garbage bin across the street caught fire.

“The firefighter was approximately 3-4 feet from the burning trash can with flames less then a foot tall,” the report said, when the firefighter“sprayed water directly at the base of the flames.

“When the water hit the burning plastic, a spray of molten plastic and flames enveloped the firefighter,” the report said. Nearby paramedics treated him immediately.

Advisory View Protection Measure Goes to a Vote

• Action Is Seen as Way to Appease Growing Call for Municipal View Role

BY BILL KOENEKER

Without comment or discussion, the Malibu City Council last week unanimously approved placing an advisory question before municipal voters on the April, 2008 ballot that inquires whether they would favor adopting an ordinance that would require the removal or trimming of landscaping to restore and maintain primary views from residences.

No one knows if strong proactive views on the hot topic of involving municipal government in restoring views is held by a majority of the electorate, and the council indicated that the advisory measure is considered a way to gauge the pulse of the voters.

The council recently adopted an ordinance exclusive to the Malibu Country Estates area that addresses view protection, and was told at that time by vocal residents of other neighborhoods that view protection should be made citywide.

An advisory measure is a question that is placed on the ballot for the purpose of allowing voters to voice their opinions on substantive issues or to indicate to the legislative body approval or disapproval of the ballot proposal.

The measure will not bind the city council to any specific course of action, but can provide the council with a sense of local sentiment on an issue.

Unimpeded ocean and mountain views can translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars in property values and their loss or impairment as areas mature or are developed have caused some residents to clamor for the city to get involved in their protection, while prevailing council opinion has been that differences should be addressed privately.

Five Suspects Charged in Corral Fire

• Arson Investigators Praised for ‘Great Detective Work’ •

By Hans Laetz

The rumors sweeping Malibu last week were correct: sheriff’s investigators used cash register tapes to charge three men from Los Angeles and two teenagers from Culver City with setting the Corral Fire at a predawn outdoor party in the moonlit backcountry on Nov. 24.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca announced Thursday that the men allegedly left partly-burned firewood and snacks at the party site on state parkland—party goods that had been purchased earlier in the evening at a Malibu supermarket.

Baca confirmed reports first printed last week in the Malibu Surfside News that the snacks and firewood had been purchased with plastic money, and that sheriff’s arson squad investigators were able to link specific items found at a campfire at the mountaintop caves with specific purchases using grocery store register tapes.

A search warrant then allowed the investigators to link the purchases by credit or debit card to a specific account holder, Baca said.

“Sheriff’s arson investigators issued a press statement asking for public support in solving the crime, a citizen did respond and offered valuable assistance,” the sheriff said. A young woman who was a member of another group of partiers in the area provided key information about the alleged perpetrators, who were with a second group of people at the site, the sheriff said.

“She was a member of one group, the first group of kids [who] witnessed the second group come up and start the fire,” Baca told the News. “She is a witness, not a suspect.” Baca said investigators went as far as Shasta County near the Oregon border to interview witnesses and suspects. “We know for a fact that items they purchased at the store were left in the debris.”

The suspects include Los Angeles residents Brian Allen Anderson, 22, William Thomas Coppock, 23, and Brian David Franks, 27. Culver City residents Eric Matthew Ullman, 18, and Dean Allen Lavorante, 19, were also charged.

Three of the five suspects were arrested Thursday afternoon, deputies said, with the other two expected to surrender soon.

All will be held pending a bond of about $250,000 each. They are charged with recklessly causing a fire with great bodily injury, recklessly causing a fire to an inhabited structure, and arson during an emergency.

All three crimes carry a sentence of between 2-4 years per conviction.

County supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky credited arson investigators with “great detective work, great investigative work.” He said, “It is reckless, on top of the illegality, to set a fire anywhere in the mountains when there is a Santa Ana wind condition, as there was that night.”

The arrests came 19 days after the fire swept down Corral, Latigo and Escondido canyons, destroying 53 houses and damaging nearly as many, The Los Angeles County Fire Department has yet to announce a total damages estimate, but the $100 million figure has been speculated.

The five men could be civilly liable for damages, but their assets and ability to repay are dwarfed by the damage done, observers said.

In other fire news, the state fire agency released a tentative report on the injuries incurred by Sacramento-area firefighter Scott Herzog during the early hours of the fire, when he suffered second-degree burns to his face.

A preliminary report said Herzog’s engine was protecting a house at 26160 Fairside Road when a large plastic garbage bin across the street caught fire.

“The firefighter was approximately 3-4 feet from the burning trash can with flames less then a foot tall,” the report said, when the firefighter “sprayed water directly at the base of the flames. When the water hit the burning plastic, a spray of molten plastic and flames enveloped the firefighter.”

Nearby paramedics treated him immediately.

City of Malibu Lobs First Volley in Battle over Camping on Public Lands

• Critics Contend Council Capitulated to Textbook Mass Hysteria Fomented by Wildfire Fears

BY BILL KOENEKER

Malibuites who have become inured to criticism for impeding public beach access are beginning to see similar criticism emerging on newspaper op-ed pages and the Web of what is perceived as new efforts by local residents to block the public from using publicly owned lands in the canyons and mountains as well.

At what may have been one of the most raucous sessions in recent memory, an emotional appeal by local residents at last week’s Malibu City Council meeting pressured members to unanimously vote to seek a ban on all new overnight camping in the city in the aftermath of two recent wildfires.

At the same time, the council voted to seek a Local Coastal Program amendment policy to prohibit camping in open spaces and commercial recreational land, members approved a scaled back version of the LCPA sought by the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy for its park and trails plan.

Shortly after the hearing, the Conservancy issued a press release condemning the vote and calling it an effort “to limit access to parks in Malibu.”

The council, bowing to the public’s concerns about camping and fire despite the lack of hard data confirming any correlation, voted 5-0 to ask the California Coastal Commission to certify a Local Coastal Program amendment that would prohibit all overnight camping.

“Fortunately this isn’t the end of the battle. We will bring our case to the California Coastal Commission when, unlike the Malibu City Council, the broad public interest can get a fair hearing,” said Joe Edmiston, the executive director of the SMMC.

Edmiston accused the city and its residents of trying to have it both ways. “Obviously, the city wants the open space and trails purchased with taxpayer dollars, but they won’t allow us to provide the parking and amenities that will permit anyone but local residents to use them.”

The SMMC head said, “The Conservancy has a statutory obligation to protect access to its parkland, even if a group of affluent homeowners doesn’t want to let anyone but himself or herself in. We will do everything within our means to meet that obligation.”

Council members readily acknowledge the matter could once again result in a showdown between the city and powerful state agencies, including the California Coastal Commission, which must approve the city’s request for a LCPA.

Edmiston, who appeared disappointed and angry at the outcome, may have best summed up the council’s actions when he said, “When you say Malibu is up against the state, you have laid down the gauntlet.”

Councilmember Sharon Barovsky, who made the motion for the ban that includes only limited ADA camping at Ramirez Canyon Park, said the city would be taking on a fight and would need local support when it goes before the Coastal Commission.

“What the consequences are, if we lose [at the commission], is Mr. Edmiston will have what he wants without the city,” she said.

Councilmember Ken Kearsley, who talked about how the mission of the SMMC and the CCC is to allow public access on parkland, said the city’s efforts were to try to limit camping to get a handle on it.

Acknowledging that the council was a policy about-face and seeking a ban because of public pressure, Kearsley said, “Now you are asking us to take a crapshoot by saying no to camping. Now we are going to have it out of here and move it to the Coastal Commission and then it will go to the courts. It will be up to a judge.”

Edmiston, who at the outset of the series of hearings had said he thought the council would treat the state agency fairly, had been convinced by city officials to go before the municipality to seek a permit for the proposal. The city had persuaded Edmiston, after the threat of litigation on both sides, to proceed before the council body rather than go directly to the Coastal Commission in the form of a public works plan.

Edmiston noted that the Conservancy had made substantial compromises only to be told to scale back its plans further.

“The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy has had a statutory obligation since 1982 to implement a program to provide recreation access from downtown Los Angeles and the inner city to the Santa Monica Mountains zone in order to provide recreation opportunities for all income and ethnic groups wishing to enjoy the Santa Monica Mountains. We intend to meet our statutory obligations and fully expect the California Coastal Commission to support our position,” he added.

SMMC officials maintain they made a “good faith agreement,” with the city and had further agreed to other provisions in an effort to reach consensus.

After a year of negotiations and public hearings, the council voted for less public access than was previously allowed, according to SMMC officials.

The night before the city council meeting, Edmiston had proposed a revised plan that was outlined by the city attorney that included no camping in Charmlee, camping in Corral Canyon and Escondido Canyon and increased activity at Ramirez Canyon Park. The SMMC head also said he would waive the time for action if the council wanted to consider his revised request, but the council had been pushed in another direction by that point.

Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich, who from the outset was the lone opponent of overnight camping, praised her colleagues for their turnabout.

Councilmember Andy Stern said he supported the measure because if the council turned down the LCPA, the matter would have gone directly to the Coastal Commission without any further input from the city.

Edmiston told the council they had still not banned camping since it was going on right now in Corral Canyon at the RV park.

He said the difference is that the cost there is $40 or $50 a night and that limited camping to those who could afford that amount.

Conley Ulich replied there are 300 campsites in or near Malibu where camping is available for $15.

“We welcome people to Malibu. We just need to educate them [about the dangers of fire],” she said.

Malibu City Council Unanimously Opposes Woodside LNG Project

• Members Are More Concerned with Project Necessity and Impact than Design Differences

BY HANS LAETZ

The Australian company seeking to build a liquefied natural gas terminal halfway between Malibu and Catalina Island is pointing to an erroneous number in a new City of Malibu ordinance as proof that the city’s opposition to its twin LNG ship proposal is based on misconceptions.

The council Monday passed without discussion an ordinance expressing city opposition to the Woodside Natural Gas terminal proposed for 21 miles south of Point Dume, its nearest landfall.

The ordinance is almost word-for-word identical to one passed in 2006 opposing the BHP Billiton LNG terminal, right down to the sentence that places the LNG plant 14 miles off the Malibu coast, even though the Woodside plant site is 21 miles away.

“Typo,” said Mayor Jeff Jennings.

“The council is well aware that it’s 21 miles off the coast,” he said Tuesday. “Unfortunately, there’s a typo, but that doesn’t change the city’s position one bit,” he added.

Councilmember Andy Stern, one of the most vociferous critics of local LNG proposals, said the ordinance should have been corrected before it was voted on, but he agreed with Jennings that the wrong number is insignificant.

“The Woodside folks could have attended the meeting last night, and they chose not to,” Stern said Tuesday. “We have encouraged them to have a meeting in Malibu to educate the public on their project. They have chosen not to do so.”

The president of Woodside’s Santa Monica-based subsidiary, Steve Larson, told the council in a letter that he found it “disappointing to see this proposed action so far in advance of the issuance of the independent environmental assessment being conducted.”

“It is further disappointing to see gross factual inaccuracies in the draft resolution,” Larson wrote. He stressed that Woodside’s “OceanWay” project was substantially different than the BHP Billiton “Cabrillo Port” plan, which was jettisoned by the state last April for more than 20 stated reasons.

Some of the differences cited by Larson, however, are at odds with the actual impact of the proposed LNG terminal, which is on indefinite hold while Woodside answers questions posed by the federal and state governments before it starts its formal year-long environmental review.

For example, Larson said Woodside’s OceanWay terminal “has no permanent, fixed above-water structure, such as an offshore platform or a permanently moored barge as other projects have proposed.” Under its current plan, Woodside would have one of two twin LNG ships anchored at all times on the Malibu horizon, about as far away as the Chevron oil tankers that are visible on clear days off El Segundo.

Larson told the council that its regasification would emit less smog than the BHP Billiton scheme would have created. Government agencies acknowledged this, but asked for more information on how smog emissions from the transpacific LNG carriers would be calculated and offset.

Larson also pointed out that the Woodside project would not use seawater for cooling, as the BHP Billiton project would have. And he said safety and security would be worked out to the satisfaction of the Coast Guard, but Malibu officials are worried that local officials and the public will not be privy to those plans.

After Monday’s council vote, Woodside spokesperson Michael Hinrichs said the company was “very disappointed that the city council would take any action in opposition before a draft [Environmental Impact Report] is published. We are also shocked that the city council would vote on and pass a resolution so ridden with blatant and gross inaccuracies.”

City Ups Fire Reward to $25,000

• Information Is Sought that Leads to Alleged Perpetrators

The Malibu City Council this week took action to increase the incentive for someone with information about the person or persons who may have intentionally or accidentally started the devastating Corral Fire to step forward and break open the investigation.

A reward for information that leads to an arrest and conviction in the blaze that claimed over 4900 acres and destroyed or damaged some 90 structures was originally proposed at $10,000, then increased to $25,000 by unanimous consent of the council at its meeting Monday night.

Councilmember Ken Kearsley, who proposed the increase., said it would improve the odds of success. County officials indicate they are also exploring whether to add county funding to the total.

Arson investigators quickly determined that the fire was the result of human activity and are analyzing items found at the fire scene.

The council did not have an update at Monday’s meeting but noted that “it was in the community’s best interest to offer a monetary reward for information that directly leads” to the determination of how the conflagration started and the extent to which criminal prosecution is warranted.

City of Malibu to Post Reward for Info on Corral Fire Perpetrators

• Investigators Comb Clues that Could Lead to Partygoers Who May Have Started Blaze

BY HANS LAETZ

The Malibu City Council is slated to establish a special reward fund at its meeting next Monday and approve a $10,000 allocation for information that “directly leads to the arrest and conviction of a person or persons found to have caused” the Corral Fire two weeks ago—a fire that may cost upwards of $100 million.

Meanwhile, intensive scrutiny continues of the Corral Canyon site where the blaze that claimed over 4900 acres and destroyed or damaged 90 structures is believed to have started.

In addition, cash register data, credit card records and video surveillance pictures from Malibu supermarkets have been examined by arson detectives, an official has confirmed.

And a firefighter from Northern California, the most seriously injured person, has returned to his home in rural El Dorado County to continue recovering from facial burns suffered protecting a Malibu house.

Rumors have swept the community that youthful partygoers purchased firewood, marshmallows and party supplies at a Malibu supermarket the night of Friday, Nov. 23, just hours before fire swept down Corral Canyon.

“Investigators have looked at receipts and financial data, and this information is unquestionably going to lead us to the persons we need to talk to,” said Los Angeles Sheriff’s spokesperson Steve Whitmore.

The sheriff’s spokesperson would not address rumors that firewood and snacks—including marshmallows—purchased at Ralphs Supermarket in Malibu Colony were matched with evidence recovered at the fire origination point. The rumors have been embellished with unsubstantiated reports that lit marshmallows were used as projectiles based on where the burnt confections were found.

Arson detectives had clustered around the series of rock formations and caves overlooking the San Fernando Valley, at the north end of Corral Canyon Road, in the immediate aftermath of the fire. The caves and secluded views on state parkland have attracted hundreds of young adults on prior full-moon nights, prompting complaints from nearby residents that State Parks Department rangers need to crack down on the situation.

Whitmore would not confirm that tire impressions were collected by the dozen or so arson investigators who were combing dirt roads near the caves after the fire. Television helicopters captured pictures of deputies apparently pouring a white substance onto the dirt at the parking lot.

“All I will say is that investigators are using every single tool available in this case,” Whitmore said. “We have received literally scores of substantial tips that we’re following.”

Up to now, arson investigators will only confirm that the fire was caused by human activity, leaving open the possibility of either an accident or deliberate action. Whatever happened, the fire started on State Parks property where open flame is prohibited during a Santa Ana wind when the fire danger is highest.

The fire swept south from the cave area at about 3 a.m., Nov. 24, and in the next four hours inflicted the worst damage to Malibu since the 1993 fire that claimed nearly 400 homes. One firefighter suffered facial burns, and a total of eight were injured.

Los Angeles County firefighters are still calculating losses for the Corral Fire, which may total over $100 million once value of the 53 destroyed houses are added in to the 34 that suffered severe damage, and the dozens of destroyed power poles, cable lines and vehicles are factored into the total.

El Dorado County firefighter Scott Herzog returned home to the Sierra Nevada foothills last week, after spending nearly a week at the Grossman Burn Center at Sherman Oaks Hospital. Herzog was one of the Cal Fire strike team members pre-positioned in Camarillo when the Santa Ana winds were first hinted at in long-range weather forecasts.

Herzog’s engine company had just arrived at a house in Latigo Canyon when it was engulfed. “I looked down at my arms and I saw fire, I looked down at my legs and my pants and I saw fire, fire, fire,” he told reporters at his home fire station near Sacrmento last week.

The flames inflicted second-degree burns on Herzog’s face, but a full recovery is expected, he said.

In other fire related news, County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky is working to coordinate the myriad public agencies—some of them working at cross purposes—in the Santa Monica Mountains region to come up with unified policies on fire planning.

Some residents and Malibu officials have complained that they are being prevented from trimming brush within mandatory clearance buffer zones because of environmental concerns voiced by the California Coastal Commission.

Yaroslavsky’s field coordinator, Susan Nissman, said a January meeting will “outline a strategy for creating a Santa Monica Mountains Fire Safe Council Alliance, which will include all the stakeholders in the north Santa Monica Mountains region.”

“The wildland urban interface issues that this region confronts requires a collaborative approach that includes vegetation and fire management planning among all the stakeholders and setting priorities and goals we can all work on together,” she said in a letter to Malibu City Council members.

More Money Is Earmarked for Public Acquisition in Corral Canyon

• State Agencies Are Scheduled to Approve the Funding for Another 320 Acres of Parkland

BY BILL KOENEKER

The state Coastal Conservancy is poised to approve a $2.5 million disbursement to the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority to acquire 320 acres of Corral Canyon property at its meeting next week.

A Conservancy spokesperson indicated the 320 acres include parcels along the creek or riparian corridor that would connect Corral Canyon Park to the south with Malibu Creek State Park to the north.

Recently, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy granted $4 million in funding to the MRCA for the acquisition of additional acreage totaling 850 acres in Corral Canyon.

The acquisitions of additional acreage in the coastal canyon will link public lands north and south of the properties to facilitate development of the Coastal Slope Trail as well as facilitate implementation of the Malibu Public Access Local Coastal Plan amendment pending before the City of Malibu.

The Trust for Public Lands has already negotiated a purchase agreement from a willing seller for other property, including a northern section consisting of 199 acres. The current owner has both Los Angeles County and California Coastal Commission approvals on at least three parcels within both the northern and southern sections of the property.

Corral Canyon is one of the last remaining coastal canyons in the Los Angeles County portion of the Santa Monica Mountains with a contiguous band of natural land from the ocean to the crest of the range.

The canyon, which nearly burned in its entirety during the recent fire, encompasses an area from Malibu Creek State Park in the north and east and Dan Blocker State Beach at the mouth of Corral Creek.

The canyon contains chaparral and coastal sage scrub, and riparian woodland species, including white alders, sycamores, willow and coastal live oak.

There is a small salt marsh at the mouth of the creek, and a broad coastal bench located just east of the canyon trailhead supports what are described as some of the best remaining coastal bluff native grasslands in the Santa Monicas.

Most of the overnight camping outlined in the SMMC’s park plan is slated for Corral Canyon. All of the campsites planned, except for several ADA sites, are walk-in campsites either located on the bench or further upstream.

Do Malibu Voters Want a View Protection Law?

• Council to Consider Placing Measure on April Ballot

BY BILL KOENEKER

The Malibu City Council is expected to consider placing an advisory question to the voters on the April 2008 ballot on whether Malibu residents would favor adopting an ordinance that would require the removal or trimming of landscaping to restore and maintain primary views from residences.

Over the years, the council, during various public hearings, has heard from the public for and against citywide view preservation, according to municipal officials who said it remains unclear if there is a majority of residents who would be in favor of any such ordinance.

The council just recently adopted an ordinance exclusive to the Malibu Country Estates for a view protection measure and was told by some other residents that view protection should be made citywide.

In a memo to city council members, City Attorney Christi Hogin explained that an advisory measure is a question that is placed on the ballot “solely for the purpose of allowing voters to voice their opinions on substantive issues or to indicate to the legislative body approval or disapproval of the ballot proposal.”

Hogin stressed the measure will not bind the city council to any definite course of action, but can provide the council with an idea on the local sentiment about view preservation.

As the landscaping—much of it planted in the 1950s and ’60s—has grown, it has increasingly blocked out the views of many residents not only on the hillsides, but also in some canyons and especially on Point Dume.

Those views can translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars in property values and have caused some residents to clamor for the city to get involved in protecting what are inarguably spectacular views of the Pacific Ocean, Channel Islands and Santa Monica Mountains.

The city’s current land use regulations only protect views to the limited extent that they may be impacted by a new structure in excess of 18 feet.

All over the state those preexisting views are impaired by landscaping, according to city officials, who noted some jurisdictions have enacted view preservation ordinances that require the removal or trimming of landscaping in order to preserve and maintain views from private homes.

The suggested ballot language written by Hogin would ask the voters if the city council should “adopt an ordinance that would require the removal or trimming of landscaping in order to restore and maintain primary views from private homes.”

• The Publisher’s Notebook •

Malibu’s Furies

BY ANNE SOBLE

Pick your weather alert! Red flag conditions with Santa Ana winds and low humidity on one day, high surf and coastal flooding on the next, and storm conditions set to follow on the day after that. It’s just another week in Malibu, that iconic bastion of all things that used to be considered beachy California before one started contemplating the possibility that climate change is not a game of mind meld being conducted by a liberal political conspiracy. Even those of you who would just as soon not hear another word about the predilections of nature as manifested in the current local weather patterns are beginning to acknowledge that the pattern now going on here is that there may be no pattern at all. Confusion and the inability to predict are difficult enough for most coping mechanisms, that there is an element of ominousness increases the anxiety level of all concerned. Not only does Malibu continue to need the additional contingents of firefighters that are being kept at the ready, we need extra lifeguards and the supply of sandbags at local fire stations is being replenished as soon as it is depleted. The Malibu lifestyle calls for more fortitude and endurance than were written into most people’s purchase agreements.

We have been browsing through some of the suggestions for helping Malibu to heal that were expressed at Sunday’s community gathering at Bluffs Park. The generosity and compassion of local residents is boundless, and the matching of those in need with those who want to help took a major step forward. Still, we are puzzled that there are those who think that we can prevent fires and other disasters from occurring if we just spend enough money or alter the land. “Stop fires.” “I don’t want to have to think about losing my home.” “More people and equipment could stop a wildfire.” “Why does Malibu have so many problems?” “I moved here to get away from life’s concerns.” Thoughts like this are understandable, but untenable. Unlimited expenditures on personnel and apparatus, blocking public access to land it helped purchase, or denuding the terrain of anything green and flammable are not only not possible but they wouldn’t accomplish anything if they were. Fire, and flood, and all the other so-called disasters—because of how they affect us as individuals—will always be part of Malibu. The natural conditions that make Malibu such an extraordinary place to live also make it so vulnerable. Although some choose to regard these events as tantamount to the Malibu Furies, they are neither punishment, nor revenge. And we will endure.

Solstice Canyon Is Slated to Remain Closed until Early Spring

• Park Officials Want to Identify and Mitigate Dangers along Roads and Trails from the Corral Fire

BY ANNE SOBLE

The National Park Service has begun its formal assessment of damages at Solstice Canyon from last month’s Corral Fire and expects the federal parkland that is part of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area to remain closed to the public at least until March 1.

The closure period will allow NPS emergency assessment specialists adequate time to identify and mitigate dangers along roads and trails, as well as remove hazardous material from four historic buildings at the site that were destroyed by the fire that consumed over 4900 acres of private and public lands in the Santa Monicas.

The structures include the Matthew Keller House, a stone cottage that was originally constructed in 1865 and is considered the oldest stone building in Malibu.

Also lost were the “silo” and the “dorm,” buildings constructed between 1960 and 1964 by Space Technology Laboratories, Inc., a subsidiary of Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge (TRW), which rented 10 acres from the then owners of Solstice Canyon, the Roberts family, from 1961-1973 for a wide range of stealth scientific projects.

Two of the buildings served as residential housing for seven rangers and science interns. SMMNRA Superintendent Woody Smeck said the employees “were able to safely evacuate their homes just minutes before wind-driven flames destroyed everything.”

Housing within the park is expected to be available for all of the displaced residents by mid-December, following minor repairs and cleaning.

Smeck said, “Unfortunately with little time to react, they lost all of their personal property, including items of intense personal value such as wedding and family photos, china, jewelry, personal papers, and art work.”

He noted that the “National Park Service Family” has rallied around its affected colleagues and the Santa Monica Mountains Fund has set up a special fund within that to help them “replace the personal losses.”

The SMMF has set up an online donations network that accepts major credit cards or PayPal. Checks can be sent to the SMMF at 401 W. Hillcrest Drive, Thousand Oaks, CA 91360.

The effort, which could serve as a model for other disaster recovery groups, is designed so that “donations will be given directly to displaced employees to help cover the numerous expenses they are incurring as a result of this tragedy.”

More information about the fundraising effort is available at SMMF’s website at www.samofund.org.

To address the parkland and the burned structures, the NPS is requesting funding for demolition or stabilization, depending on the final assessments, and general clean-up.

A team of specialists that is currently surveying the burned areas will prepare a Burned Area Emergency Recovery proposal to address soil stabilization in watercourses and a survey of archaeological sites.

A proposal is also reported to be in the works that seeks increased fuels and prevention staffing to meet the park’s needs, as well as to provide outreach to the park’s neighbors in the form of community planning options and education on making homes adjoining public parkland more fire-safe.

In addition to the closure of Solstice, the NPS has placed increased restrictions on the Lobo Canyon area, prohibiting access between sunset and sunrise, an acknowledgement that the park service recognizes, in its words, that these areas can be “frequented by those with less than praiseworthy intentions.”

Smeck said the NPS family shares the concerns of the Malibu community as a whole for public safety during what is now a year-round wildfire season. “Our thoughts and prayers are with those affected by the fire. We will do everything necessary to rebuild and recover from this very tragic loss.”