Trancas Park Settlement Agreement Negotiated by City Council and MTC

• Terms Tighten Restrictions over Youth Sports League Play

BY BILL KOENEKER

City Attorney Christi Hogin announced at a special Malibu City Council meeting this week that the council has voted to enter into a settlement agreement with a civic group, the Malibu Township Council, concluding their legal battle over Trancas Canyon Park.
The decision was made behind closed doors, but Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich wanted to air her differences with it, after Hogin made the public announcement. Mayor Sharon Barovsky afterward revealed the vote was 4-1 with Conley Ulich dissenting.
“It is my understanding the agreement gives self-determination [for the park] to the MTC. Am I incorrect?” asked Conley Ulich.
Hogin replied, “It does not give over to the MTC the right of what the city council can do. It only deals with league play.”
MTC attorney Frank Angel agreed with that assessment. “It does not turn over to MTC the keys to the park,” he said.
The settlement language states, “The city agrees, represents and warrants that it shall refrain from eliminating or otherwise changing in any way the condition of approval prohibiting league play on the multi-use sports field, and that league play shall be prohibited in Trancas Canyon Park. The field may be used for practice.”
The document states, “Within five days of execution of this agreement, the city shall cause the condition of approval prohibiting league play to be recorded against title to the property. This subparagraph 3.B expresses the parties’ intent that the city create an enforceable restriction against the title to the property which runs with the land, preventing the use of Trancas Canyon Park for league play.”
Barovsky quickly cut off Conley Ulich’s questioning of the city attorney and insisted the council turn to the agenda item at hand.
Angel said his client agreed to drop the lawsuit, if the city agreed to those terms. Angel said beside the usual legal means that allow the MTC to challenge the future actions of the city, another means is now established. “The MTC could [now] sue for breach of contract,” he said. “A settlement agreement is a contract.”
The lawsuit was never about stopping league play, but rested on complicated grounds that the city had violated the law by declaring it had the right to bulldoze and build a dog park in a Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area.
The city’s defense initially rested on a coastal permit that turned out to be for another parcel of land owned by another property owner and not owned by the city.
Hogin had publicly told the council at its last regular meeting the city might lose the dog park if MTC prevailed in the litigation.
However, the focus shifted when the Malibu West Homeowners Association entered into the picture and agreed to put up the funding for the MTC lawsuit. The HOA was never a litigant.
The Malibu West HOA was determined to thwart the city in any effort to establish league play in the future and to insist no league play become the basis for any settlement of the MTC lawsuit.
From the get-go, years ago, when the park was first discussed, the HOA and many other west Malibu residents had talked about the difference between practice fields and league play, insisting league play was a deal breaker.