THE PLOT THICKENS IN MALIBU OFFICIALS, PARK GROUP FIGHT FOR REWRITES OF LAND PLANS.

Byline: BETH BARRETT Staff Writer

Call it ``Joe vs. Malibu, Part II.''

In this sequel, this haven of Hollywood celebrities is once again at loggerheads with the superstar of public open space: Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Executive Director Joe Edmiston.

The tensions in the tiny Ramirez Canyon community have spilled far beyond the decadelong tussle over Edmiston's development of conservancy offices on a $15 million rustic estate donated by diva Barbra Streisand.

And this time, dozens of area cities are backing Malibu and canyon leaders in their battle with Edmiston and the conservancy over a sweeping plan that would include opening new trails to the public -- but that leaders say cuts them out of the loop on sculpting what happens to thousands of acres of parkland above their tony enclave.

Plot twists in the monthslong fight have escalated the script beyond just the merits of the plan to public sparring over whether area leaders are elitist or whether conservancy leaders are flouting Malibu's zoning laws in a grab for more power.

Last week, the skirmish erupted with threats and recriminations worthy of scenes from ``Chinatown,'' the saga of powerbroker William Mulholland whom Edmiston makes no bones about admiring.

``Is the city still willing to spend significant funds to keep members of the public out of Malibu and the Santa Monica Mountains?'' the conservancy's outside attorney, Catherine Norian, asked leaders at the Sept. 11 council meeting.

``While it's not our position to comment, we cannot help but note that (requesting nearby cities to support opposition to the conservancy plan) will only enhance the city's reputation in some quarters as an elitist and exclusionary enclave.''

Already irked by a plan that he feels cuts the community out of the loop, the allusion to snobbery proved too much for Mayor Ken Kearsley, who retorted that Norian's comments were ``absolutely false, fallacious, untrue.''

``We invite 15 million people to this city every year, we spend $300,000 extra protecting those visitors,'' Kearsley said. ``You did not win me over with your diatribe of deceit and hate against the city.''

At the heart of the issue is the Malibu Parks Public Access Enhancement Plan, proposed by the conservancy and the related Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority -- composed of the conservancy, and the Conejo and Rancho Simi Recreation and Park districts.

The comprehensive plan, which needs approval from the California Coastal Commission, would have public trails that would ultimately connect five federal and state coastal parklands, including some overnight campsites.

Parkland plan

It would affect a broad swath of public parkland running east from Zuma/Trancas Canyon Park to Corral Canyon Park, and north from Pacific Coast Highway to Castro Crest in Upper Solstice Canyon.

But Malibu officials say the conservancy plan deliberately tries to circumvent the city's own local coastal plan and permitting oversight.

And after winning a court battle challenging the conservancy's headquarters permit for violating Malibu's land-use regulations, Ramirez Canyon residents fear that the new plan will reverse those gains.

But at a conservancy meeting earlier this week, Edmiston restated the view that Malibu is taking an elitist position.

``Their objections sound like the same old Malibu objections -- they don't want outsiders to come to Malibu,'' said Edmiston, never one to back down from a fight.

Under Edmiston, the nearly 30-year-old conservancy has amassed a $200 million empire of 55,000 acres stretching from Camarillo and Santa Clarita, across the Simi Hills, the Santa Susana and Santa Monica mountains and down the Los Angeles River into the Whittier Hills.

And he has tangled with Ramirez Canyon and Malibu residents before. Six years ago, Edmiston drew ire over plans to open Streisand's donated estate to visitors with reservations free of charge and to expand use of the facilities to include renting its meadows and gardens for high-priced weddings, bar mitzvahs, conferences and garden tours.

The outcry led Streisand to ask that her name be removed from the estate. The conservancy agreed to more public access and has backed away from offering the site for private galas.

Today's battle sequel revives some of the same themes, but it's not just Kearsley who is bristling at the conservancy's portrayal of Malibu and canyon leaders' concerns.

``There is nothing elitist about this,'' said Councilman Andy Stern. ``This is a real simple thing: an organization wants to come in and take over planning and other duties that normally a city does.

``It's one jurisdiction trying to carve out part of the authority of another, and we don't think that's right.''

Access questions

Undaunted, Edmiston said the conservancy isn't B-listing Malibu but rather A-listing the public with a plan that will open more of the mountains to hikers, including those with disabilities.

``They say it's wonderful when you stop development, but when it's public use of the $20 million (the conservancy has invested in the plan area) then it's, `Oh, my God, it's a land grab.' They can't have it both ways,'' Edmiston said.

Edmiston also notes that the plan must be approved by the California Coastal Commission, and that its review would be rigorous and would avoid piecemealing mountain projects.

Still, the elitist tag stings in a community of 12,500 where the income of the average bungalow-owner is more than $100,000.

It's just so ``dismissive,'' said Christi Hogin, Malibu's city attorney.

Hogin said the conservancy has dismissed the city more than once, including when it developed a ``sophisticated ... nuanced'' plan for bathrooms, parking and other amenities at trailheads.

``They reduced it to `being against access,' when it's more complicated, meaningful access,'' Hogin said.

And Councilwoman Sharon Barovsky proffers the city's historic hospitality, noting that $2.5 million was raised to clean up pollution at a lagoon near Surfrider Beach that mainly serves the public.

``The residents don't usually go down to Surfrider Beach, mostly because it's too polluted. So if we were trying to keep (the public) out I guess we'd try to get it more polluted and fewer people would go there,'' she said.

``It's absurd to say this city ... would in any way try to keep people out. It's absurd on its face.''

Edmiston sniffed at the claims of inclusion.

``(The beaches) are owned by the state of California; they're not their beaches,'' he said.

City support

But residents on Wednesday gained some allies in their quest.

Sam Olivito, executive director of the California Contract Cities Association, said the group's 75 cities unanimously voted to fall in line behind their sister.

``It's another attack on local home rule; an end run around the planning process that cities have been responsible for,'' he said.

``We believe it is an opportunity for them to bypass cities and to present a plan to the Coastal Commission that does not afford cities an opportunity to have their input or veto power.''

And Ramirez Canyon residents -- following their own subplot, fearing that the conservancy's plan could mean more catering trucks on their narrow, tree-draped road -- have hired Santa Barbara lawyer Steven Amerikaner to represent their interests.

``It has to do with following the rules,'' Amerikaner said.

``No public agency should be above the law.''

beth.barrett(at)dailynews.com

[phone]

CAPTION(S):

photo

Photo:

(color) Hikers finish a morning hike at Escondido Canyon Natural Area at the end of Winding Way Road in Malibu on Thursday.

Tina Burch/Staff Photographer