Environmentalists Herald Second Win in Land Fight

State Court of Appeal Overturns Coastal Commission Approval of Soka University Master Plan

BY ANNE SOBLE

MALIBU SURFSIDE NEWS MARCH 06, 2003

The coalition of environmental groups that persuaded the state Court of Appeal last week to overturn the California Coastal Commission’s approval of the Soka University Master Plan lost no time in claiming a major victory in one of the longest and most contentious battles in the Santa Monica Mountains.

The university’s development would have severely impacted the already overtaxed Malibu Canyon traffic corridor, as well as affected Malibu Creek, and ultimately the lagoon and Surfrider Beach.

Although more legal wrangling is still possible, last week’s victors are hopeful that the current economy and Soka’s internal conditions might create circumstances that would prompt the university ownership, Soka Gakkai, to consider selling the 214-acre King Gillette Ranch on which it now operates a language school and outreach program to the federal government.

The lawsuit was brought by the Sierra Club, Save Open Space/ Santa Monica Mountains and the Monte Nido Valley Community Association. Despite the impact of development in the canyon corridor on Malibu, no legal participation took place. The alphabet soup plaintiffs were represented by local environmental litigator Frank Angel, who has racked up a formidable record of courtroom wins.

The Court of Appeal reversed a lower court ruling upholding the CCC action on the grounds that the state agency did not evaluate environmental alternatives to the master plan.

The latest court ruling was an an already modified master plan that was approximately one-fourth of what the university had hoped to construct in the early 1990s. The same coalition of environmental and civic groups successfully used litigation at that time to get the original Soka objective of close to 2,000,000 square feet of structures reduced.

The group has steadfastly alleged that the university’s developmental dealings had tacit behind-the-scenes approvals of the area’s county supervisor, Zev Yaroslavsky, and then Congressional representative, Tony Beilenson, as well as powerful political players in Sacramento. Combinations of allegations involving campaign contributions and other forms of influence peddling continued to cloud the already murky waters.

Malibu political activists have been closely monitoring the Soka scenario for possible relevance to ways to combat unfavorable components of the proposed Malibu Bay Company Development Agreement.

Whether Malibu groups have the tenacity and the funding to withstand six or more years of litigation may be the may be the determining factor in what happens with the MBC plans.

Equally unpredictable is the degree to which subsequent courts at any level will be concerned with implementing—with or without the Coastal Commission’s support—the goals of the state Coastal Act, including the protection of natural resources. Coastal activists are hoping that the concerns exhibited for significant oak woodland would be on call for wetlands and shoreline resources.

Read more about Soka