Malibu Surfside News

Malibu Surfside News - MALIBU'S COMMUNITY FORUM INTERNET EDITION - Malibu local news and Malibu Feature Stories

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

City Council Says No to Putting Retail Formula Ban on the April Ballot

• Majority Says Proposal Needs Work

BY BILL KOENEKER


Should the voters get to decide whether the Malibu City Council will draft an ordinance regulating retail formula stores?
Not yet, answered council members who contend that the proposed law, as currently written, would not do what it was designed to do.
Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich has pushed for such regulation for over three years, going so far as to prepare an ordinance herself.
“This is a great solution for a problem that does not exist,” said Mayor Andy Stern, who said people in Malibu complain about the proliferation of high-end retail outlets rather than chain stores.
“But that has nothing to do with this,” he added, noting that stores Malibu residents say they like, such as Starbucks, would not be allowed in Malibu.
Shopping center owner Michael Koss, who in the past has expressed opposition to the proposal, insisted there was already strong opposition to the measure and to take the matter to a vote is too costly.
Koss said the majority of shoppers like chains because they offer the best quality and prices.
Koss also said the proposed law could lower residential property values because a retail formula ban could ultimately bring an inferior shabby shopping experience to Malibu. “The majority does not want to exclude high quality,” he added.
Councilmember Sharon Barovsky said she believes many of the problems in Sacramento were caused by ballot initiatives and the unintended consequences of the popular measures being enacted into law.
“What if Ace Hardware was willing to come to La Paz or somewhere else? We could not have it. We could not have Ruby’s. The public is entitled to know what are the possibilities. What is being presented tonight is very vague,” she said, suggesting the matter should be sent back to a council subcommittee.
Councilmember John Sibert said it was the first time he had seen the proposal. “It is complicated. Even if we did decide for a vote, we have to craft the language. I don’t think we have thought this through. I’m not sure why this issue should go to the voters. We were elected to do this. I would love to do this, but it is not ready for the ballot,” he said.
Councilmember Jefferson Wagner said he concurred the drafting of the ordinance would be difficult.
The council continued to debate the merits of the measure. Conley Ulich defended it saying there was already a proliferation of chains in Malibu counting out four Starbucks, two Subways and expected others.
However, Barovsky continued to maintain, “I don’t see how this ordinance will save mom and pop stores. You will get high-end, one-of-a kind arts and jewelry stores.”
Conley Ulich originally proposed continuing the agenda item until Sept 14 since critical pages of the ordinance and staff report are missing, but that failed, whereupon Barovsky made a motion to not put it on the April ballot and send it back to the committee where it came from. That passed on a 4-1 vote with Conley Ulich dissenting.
The proposal was heard by the council in 2007 which initially sent it to committee and subsequently called for the measure to be included on a priority list for future zone text amendments.
Subsequent to that, the issue, while still in committee, was recommended for voter consideration before it made its way to the planning commission and council.
Proponents of the ordinance, including Conley Ulich, suggest something is needed to allow Malibu to keep its small town atmosphere and cite the city’s General Plan mission statement as authority for keeping Malibu’s “special natural and rural setting.”
When the measure was initially proposed it met with a firestorm of criticism from shopping center owners and other real estate interests, who attributed many other factors to the demise of mom and pop stores rather than chain stores.
One of the arguments used by opponents was that the low floor area ratio restrictions on commercial development resulted in increased price per square feet for commercial space chasing away mom and pop stores.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home