MTC Attorney Says Council Declines Tolling of Trancas Park Legal Action

• City of Malibu Says Suit Is Untimely in Spite of Statute of Limitations

BY ANNE SOBLE

The attorney representing the Malibu Township Council in a lawsuit filed last month that seeks to overturn the city council’s approval of Trancas Canyon Park, has learned that the Malibu City Council turned down an MTC offer to toll the litigation for 90 days in closed session this week.
As it was going to press, the Malibu Surfside News learned that the MTC’s counsel, longtime local attorney Frank Angel, was informed of the council’s action in a voicemail from Malibu City Attorney Christi Hogin.
The civic organization had offered to toll, or stop the clock, on its legal action while a city-hosted workshop took place that may or may not lead to any substantive changes in the controversial park plans when they go before the city council again on May 26.
The MTC indicated it had to file when it did because the law under which legal action can be taken against the project, the California Environmental Quality Act, has a statute of limitations. Any legal challenge of the park plans originally approved by the city council on March 9 that were noticed on March 24 would have expired. The MTC action was filed April 23. Tolling is a way to preserve rights despite statutory deadlines.
Angel said what he finds most puzzling is that Hogin’s latest message is similar to public comments she made when the suit was filed. He said she indicated “the lawsuit was not timely,” which he said is comparable to saying, “You should forfeit your rights [to sue].”
Angel added that Hogin, who had earlier alerted The News that word of council action had been transmitted to the MTC attorney, also said park critics should have waited to see what the council does on May 26, but Angel countered, “If they did, then it would be too late to do anything about it.”
Angel said the city has a 60-day deadline from the date of service to prepare an administrative record and proceed with the case. Since the city was not willing to stop the clock, the burden is now on it to respond to why it should not rescind the permits it granted itself and decertify the Environmental Impact Report for the project, according to CEQA requirements.
MTC’s legal brief argues that the city certified a Trancas Canyon Park EIR that was incomplete, and failed to prepare and circulate a revised draft EIR “despite the addition to the final EIR of significant new information after circulation of the draft EIR,, but prior to the certification of the final EIR.”
Angel said not addressing or considering this new information in the draft EIR means the public was deprived of a “meaningful opportunity to know of and thus offer comments on substantial adverse environmental effects.”
Another reason Angel said he is puzzled by the council’s refusal to agree to a standstill is the city’s acute financial state. “If a plan is approved that is acceptable to all parties, Malibu will have expended unnecessary funds on litigation.”
The MTC showed good faith, he said, and he is concerned that the council action might mean it intends to ignore the park’s critics.

Still No Explanations for Major Malibu Power Failures

Despite repeated efforts to determine why segments of eastern Malibu have been without electrical power since 4:42 a.m. Friday morning, neither Southern California Edison, nor the City of Malibu, are able to explain what happened.
A news release issued by the city on its Web site today stated that a power circuit that starts at Cross Creek and runs along Pacific Coast Highway went out this morning. This was reportedly a planned power interruption from 9 a.m. to approximately 3 p.m., but may or may not be related to the earlier blackout. 
The city’s reverse 911 system sent calls and emails to all residents who are signed up at about 10 a.m. that indicated an outage was in effect from Carbon Canyon west that could last a day, which might mean anything from eight hours to 24 hours. That message assured residents that the water supply in Malibu is not affected.
City Emergency Services Coordinator Brad Davis, who said he initiated the reverse 911 communications, indicated that he had not been forewarned about the planned outage or the earlier east Malibu problem.
Davis added that he did not know whether the eastern outage was related to the undergrounding of utilities that is currently underway along Carbon Beach on Pacific Coast Highway.
No one from SCE, already under local fire on the issue of overloaded power poles increasing wildfire danger in the Malibu area, was responding to requests for more information.
                                                        —Anne Soble

State PUC to Address Issue of Overloaded Power Poles Next Week

• Malibu Articles Helped Draw Attention to Connection to Wildfires

A state agency that regulates public utilities will hold a hearing next Wednesday to decide how to investigate the overloaded power poles that sparked the 2007 Malibu Canyon fire.

An administrative law judge for the California Public Utilities Commission said the "prehearing conference" will determine how utilities and state regulators will hash out the issue of just who is responsible for calculating safe loads for electric line poles that have been burdened over the decades with new cable TV and cell phone cables, antennas, power supplies and other heavy gear.

The hearing comes after the Malibu Surfside News reported that three overloaded poles snapped, in winds that they should have survived, causing a 3836-acre brushfire that took out the Malibu Presbyterian Church, a landmark castle, and 12 other structures.

The Southern California Edison company says it sold partial interest in power poles to four cell companies, and that the newcomers were responsible for calculating if the poles could hold the new gear.

The cell companies say Edison, as the original owner, bore the responsibility and charged the newcomers to calculate loads and inspect the poles.

The hearing is at 1:30 p.m. on May 13 at the PUC offices, 505 Van Ness Blvd., San Francisco.

                                                —Hans Laetz

Friday Night Earthquakes Give Malibu a Jolt

•  Magnitude 4.4 Temblor Appears to Have Done Little Reported Damage; M 3.1 Quake Occurs Four and a Half Hours Later

Malibu and surrounding areas from Ventura County to the East San Fernando Valley felt what what appeared to be a series of two minor earthquakes Friday evening. 

The first was a magnitude 4.4 temblor that struck at 6:11.13 p.m., according to United States Geological Survey seismologists who put the epicenter seven miles north of Leo Carrillo Beach and six miles south of Westlake Village in the Santa Monica Mountains  (+34° 4' 8.76", -118° 52' 56.28").

That quake is tentatively determined to have occurred at a depth of 8.6 miles, possibly in one of the unnamed faults that crosses the mountains and connects to the Malibu fault that runs along the coastline on the ocean floor.

The second shaker, a magnitude 3.1 quake (or possible aftershock) registered at 10:34:14 p.m. in  the same area. but closer to the surface at a depth of 4.2 miles.

Posting to the blog after the first temblor had to wait until a thorough check of the main house and all of the outbuildings indicated that the worst of the impact was some slightly askew paintings and picture frames. 

The three Tonkinese cats that had catapulted through the house on the way to cover have now emerged cautiously and appear none the worse for wear. Outside, the howling dogs quickly quieted down and resumed their nocturnal inactivity. 

If the first temblor had occurred after dark, I wouldn't have been able to look outside and see the llama herd head to high ground in the upper corral and cluster there in what I call its "circle-the-wagons" formation. The last tine I saw the llamas do this was about a year ago when P-1, one of the National Park Service-collared mountain lions, was ambling along the property perimeter on his way to the creek for a drink of water.

As for the quake itself, magnitude 4.4 is technically classified as minor, even though this one was sharp enough to send you to a doorframe, but not powerful enough to make you consider heading outdoors. The 3.1 event was barely noticeable.

I am monitoring the USGS data on the temblors and will update the post as more information becomes available.

 

                                                —Anne Soble