Task Force Produces Draft View Protection Ordinance for Malibu

• Public Urged to Weigh In with Input on the Proposal

BY BILL KOENEKER

A majority of Malibu’s View Protection Task Force approved a draft view ordinance at its meeting May 18. When finalized, the matter will go before the city council for consideration.
“It was an arduous task, we were aided by the fact we had several accomplished lawyers, including a land use expert,” said Chair Sam Hall Kaplan.
The panel, which will conclude its task within the nine months it was given to do so (after getting a three-month extension from the council, which had originally given the panel a six-month sunset clause), has scheduled another meeting on Thursday May 28, at 3 p.m. in council chambers.
The council had debated about what kind of work product it wanted from the panel, but it ultimately decided to leave that determination up to the task force.
Panelist Barry Tyerman called the draft document the first step of the work. “We have two more meetings, we hope to see significant input from the public. After all it was the people who passed Measure E [the advisory measure on the ballot],” he said.
Tyerman added the majority of the panel believe they have come up with a balanced ordinance that is based on other cities and will withstand court challenge. “It is based on other ordinances tested by the courts,” he added.
“We didn’t try to reinvent the wheel,” agreed task force member Harold Greene, who praised the workings of the task force and the members on it. “Besides three lawyers, we had a real estate broker, Lucille Keller from the General Plan Task Force, officers of homeowners associations and others representing the whole length of Malibu,” said Greene, who noted the task force was also able to call on members and HOA officers of the Malibu Country Estates where a view protection ordinance is already in place.
“We had a chance to find out what worked and did not work. We agonized over every word,” Greene said.
The task force member said the idea of the proposed law is to create a mechanism that involves the city itself to the minimum extent possible. “We encourage private discussions, there is mediation and arbitration before its gets to the city,” Greene added.
The focus of the task force at this point is to get as much public feedback as possible during the next two meetings, according to the task force member, who said he hoped interested individuals will go on-line to the city’s website, read the draft document and submit written questions for task force response.
“We really want public comment,” added Greene, indicating the public will also have ample chance to vet the proposed law when it reaches the city council because another series of public meetings will be held if the council moves forward.
Hall Kaplan noted what he thought the task force successfully accomplished. “The thrust of the ordinance is to encourage neighbors to resolve questions of offending foliage amongst themselves and the best way the task force agreed to do this is to draft a strong view protection ordinance,” he said.
Calling it the Malibu View Restoration/Preservation Ordinance, the new law would permit a resident’s view to be restored to what existed at the time the homeowner purchased the property. If there was no view at that time, then the resident has no recourse under the proposed law.
The draft ordinance unfolds in pages of definitions of what constitutes views, foliage, trimming, heading and at last resort spells out the process of how trees may be cut down.
The process urges neighbors to first talk. If discussions between the foliage owner and the applicant fail and the initial reconciliation attempt is unsuccessful, then the matter can proceed to mediation, which is voluntary for the foliage owner. “If mediation is accepted, the parties shall mutually agree upon a mediator whose costs are the responsibility of the applicant.”
According to the draft, “if the parties still do not agree with the assistance of a mediator, the applicant shall have the right to submit the dispute to arbitration, appealable exclusively to the city council or its designee in a public forum. The parties shall bear their own costs and provide their own evidence and documentation.”
“The arbitrator has the authority to engage the services of an impartial qualified arborist, the costs that shall be paid by both the foliage owner and the applicant. Any order by the arbitrator to trim, remove or any replacement plantings shall be paid by the applicant. Continuing maintenance is paid by the foliage owner.
“The applicant and/or the foliage owner may file a notice of appeal of the arbitrator’s order to the city council or its designee.
“Any final order shall be expeditiously enforced by the City of Malibu. A final order shall be either the arbitrator’s order if not appealed, or the decision of the city council or its designee on appeal,” the proposed law states. “In the event any party fails or refuses to comply with any order…the city shall have the right to perform or engage third parties to perform the required work to comply with the order [and] invoice the responsible party.”