Malibu City Council
September 14, 2026

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Yolanda Bundy, Community Development Director Approved by: Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Date prepared: August 26, 2026 Meeting date: September 14, 2026 Subject: Amendments to Professional Services Agreement for Contract Planning and Management Services for Non-Palisades Fire Rebuild Projects
RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Authorize the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 1 to the professional services agreement with Casswell Consulting, Inc. for contract planning services; 2) Authorize the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 1 to the professional services agreement with California Coastal Works LLC for contract planning services; and 3) Authorize the Mayor to execute a professional services agreement with California Coastal Works LLC for management services.

FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for these services is included in the Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27 in Account No. 101-2001-5100 (Planning Professional Services) and is for Services through Fall 2029.

Table 1 summarizes the existing agreement amounts, expenditures to date, additional authorization proposed for the two-year extension period, and applicable funding sources.

Table 1 – Agreement & Amendment Compensation
Consultant /
Service
Existing
Agreement
Amount
Invoiced
to Date
2-Year
Amendment
Total
Agreement
FY 26-27
Funding
Source
California
Coastal Works $275,000 $37,121 $0 $275,000 Applicantfunded Deposits Casswell
Consulting $470,000 $329,320 $470,000 $940,000
Planning
Professional
Services
TOTAL $745,000 $366,441 $470,000 $1,215,000
Although $237,879 remains under the California Coastal Works contract planning agreement, staff does not anticipate using this contract authority during the extension City Council Meeting
09-14-26
Item

1.B.7.

period. Contract planning work is expected to be funded through applicant deposits. The remaining authority would be used only if needed to maintain service levels in the event the Department loses contract planning resources from another consulting firm.

Table 2 – Management Services Agreement
Consultant / Service Per Year Total
Agreement
FY 26-27
Funding Source
California Coastal Works $312,000 $624,000
Planning
Professional
Services
TOTAL $312,000 $624,000
The new California Coastal Works management services agreement reflects the Department’s FY 2026-2027 staffing plan, under which the Planning Manager and Principal Planner positions were placed on hold. The combined annual personnel cost of the two positions is approximately $412,000. The California Coastal Works agreement has an annual not-to-exceed amount of $312,000, approximately $100,000 less per year.

The compensation amounts are not-to-exceed amounts and are not guaranteed payments to the consultants. Consultants are paid only for services performed. The amounts shown above therefore represent maximum contract authority over the twoyear period, not guaranteed expenditures.

The agreements addressed in this report support regular Community Development Department operations. Palisades Fire recovery services are provided under separate agreements and funded through separate Palisades Fire recovery accounts.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: This item supports the City’s 2025-2028 Strategic Plan
Goal 1: Support Community Rebuilding and Long-Term Recovery Objective 1.2: Modernize development policies and procedures citywide to support resilient community development.

Project: Development Policy & Procedure Updates
DISCUSSION: The Community Development Department utilizes contract planning services to augment City staffing, process current planning development applications, and support long-range planning and inter-agency projects. Contract planners have enabled the Department to maintain service levels, address fluctuating workloads, and advance priority projects while permanent staffing needs and operational demands continue to evolve.

On May 24, 2024, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for contract planning services to address staffing vacancies and improve the development review process.

The RFP sought experienced planning professionals to support regular operations and Woolsey Fire recovery, as well as consultant support to manage digital application submittals.1 Following evaluation of the proposals, interviews, and negotiations, the City entered into two-year professional services agreements with multiple firms.

The current contract planning agreements expire in Fall 2026. At this time, staff recommends extending the agreements with California Coastal Works LLC and Casswell Consulting, Inc. Amendments to additional contract planning agreements are anticipated to be presented to the City Council for consideration at future meetings.

Consistent with the reduction in the FY 2026-2027 professional services budget, the Department has reduced its overall contract planning resources. Staff continues to monitor established performance metrics, including application processing times and workload, to evaluate the impact of these reductions and ensure service levels are maintained.

The consultants recommended for extension range in experience from former planning directors to senior planners. They currently assist with approximately 45 planning applications pending review, as well as capital improvement projects, long-range planning assignments, and special projects.

Contract planners have also provided continuity during staff recruitment and onboarding, allowing newly hired planners time to become familiar with the City’s regulations, procedures, and active caseloads before assuming full workloads. Maintaining contract planning support also provides the Department with flexibility to address changing workloads while allowing full-time staff to maintain established performance standards.

California Coastal Works
California Coastal Works LLC will provide services under two separate agreements supporting regular Planning Division operations. The first is the existing agreement for contract planning services, which staff recommends extending for an additional two-year term with no additional compensation. During the extension period, regular contract planning services are anticipated to be limited to complex applicant-funded work performed through deposits. Although funding remains in existing contract authority, staff does not anticipate using these funds and would utilize the remaining funds only as needed to maintain service levels in the event the Department loses contract planning resources from another consulting firm.

The second is a new agreement for management services, specifically working on longrange planning projects and overseeing contract planners. California Coastal Works currently provides these services under a separate agreement supporting the City’s Palisades Fire recovery efforts. The consultant provides oversight and coordination of 1 The City Council approved an amendment to the agreement for digital application submittal services on August 24, 2026; therefore, those services are not included in this report.

contract planners, reviews staff reports and other planning work products, provides guidance on conformance reviews and complex planning matters, and assists with numerous long-range planning projects. These services are particularly important during FY 2026-2027, as the Planning Manager and Principal Planner positions have been placed on hold due to the City’s budget reductions. Accordingly, staff recommends transitioning these services from the Palisades Fire recovery agreement to a new professional services agreement funded through Planning Professional Services.

Casswell Consulting, Inc.

Casswell Consulting, Inc. provides contract planning services for regular Planning Division operations. The proposed amendment extends the agreement for two years and adds $470,000 in compensation. The consultant is currently assigned to more than 70 planning applications in various stages of the permitting process, including approximately 35 applications under active review. The majority of these applications involve Coastal Development Permits.

Given the Department’s current workload and continued focus on wildfire recovery, staff recommends extending the existing agreements rather than conducting a new procurement at this time. During the two-year extension, staff will continue to monitor workloads and processing times and evaluate the appropriate use of contract planners as staffing levels change. Staff will conduct a new competitive procurement for contract planning services before the extended agreements expire.

CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute amendments to the agreements with California Coastal Works, LLC and Casswell Consulting, Inc. for two additional years; and enter into a new agreement with California Coastal Works LLC for management services.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Amendment to Agreement with California Coastal Works LLC

2. Amendment to Agreement with Casswell Consulting, Inc.

3. Professional Services Agreement with California Coastal Works LLC Updated 4/27/2026
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (the “Amendment” is made and entered in the City of Malibu on September 14, 2026, by and between the City of Malibu, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and California Coastal Works, LLC, a California limited liability company, hereinafter referred to as Consultant. City and Consultant are herein collectively referred to as “Parties” and separately as a “Party”.

The City and the Consultant agree as follows:

R E C I T A L S
A. On September 23, 2024, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Consultant for consulting services for certain projects relating to contract planning services including long range planning (the “Agreement”).

B. The Parties desire to amend the Agreement to extend the Term of the Agreement by two years, and Consultant has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

1. Section 2.0 of the Agreement (Term of Agreement) is hereby extended for two years to September 23, 2028.

2. Authority to Execute. Each person executing this Amendment represents and warrants that they are duly authorized to execute this Amendment on behalf of the Party for whom they are signing and to bind that Party to the terms herein.

3. The Parties agree that this Amendment will be considered signed when the signature of a Party is delivered physically or by facsimile transmission or scanned and delivered via electronic mail. Such facsimile or electronic mail copies will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

4. All terms and conditions of the Agreement not amended by this Amendment remain in full force and effect.

5. The effective date of this Amendment is September 14, 2026. [Signatures on the Following Page]


















Attachment 1
Amendment No. 1 to Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

_____________________
This Amendment is executed on ______________________,.

CITY OF MALIBU, a municipal corporation:
____________________________________
BRUCE SILVERSTEIN, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CALIFORNIA COASTAL WORKS, LLC, a
California limited liability company
____________________________________ By: _________________________________ TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney Name: Joseph D. Smith Title: Principal


















AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (the “Amendment” is made and entered in the City of Malibu on September 14, 2026, by and between the City of Malibu, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and Casswell Consulting, Inc., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as Consultant. City and Consultant are herein collectively referred to as “Parties” and separately as a “Party”.

The City and the Consultant agree as follows:

R E C I T A L S
A. On September 23, 2024, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Consultant for consulting services for certain projects relating to contract planning services (the “Agreement”).

B. The Parties desire to amend the Agreement to increase Consultant’s compensation by $470,000 and extend the Term of the Agreement by two years, and Consultant has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

1. Section 2.0 of the Agreement (Term of Agreement) is hereby extended for two years to September 23, 2028.

2. Section 4.0 of the Agreement (Compensation for Services), is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto to increase the compensation in the amount of $470,000 for a total not to exceed $940,000, except for work performed under an Applicant Deposit. For services not performed under an Applicant Deposit, compensation shall not exceed $19,583 per month. The compensation set forth in Exhibit B is in addition to the compensation set forth in the original Agreement.

3. Incorporation of Exhibits. All exhibits attached to this Amendment are hereby incorporated into the Agreement by this reference. To the extent there is any conflict between an exhibit attached to this Amendment and the exhibits attached to the original Agreement, the exhibits attached to this Amendment shall control.

4. Authority to Execute. Each person executing this Amendment represents and warrants that they are duly authorized to execute this Amendment on behalf of the Party for whom they are signing and to bind that Party to the terms herein.

5. The Parties agree that this Amendment will be considered signed when the signature of a Party is delivered physically or by facsimile transmission or scanned and delivered via electronic mail. Such facsimile or electronic mail copies will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

6. All terms and conditions of the Agreement not amended by this Amendment remain in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: AF63F765-25BB-8521-82A5-AA5B69CB4F07 ATTACHMENT 2
Amendment No. 1 to Agreement
Casswell Consulting, Inc.

_____________________

7. The effective date of this Amendment is September 14, 2026.

This Amendment is executed on ______________________.

CITY OF MALIBU, a municipal corporation:
____________________________________
BRUCE SILVERSTEIN, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CASSWELL CONSULTING INC., a
California corporation
____________________________________ By: _________________________________ TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney Name: Rick Casswell Title: Principal
Docusign Envelope ID: AF63F765-25BB-8521-82A5-AA5B69CB4F07 Amendment No. 1 to Agreement
Casswell Consulting, Inc.

_____________________
Exhibit B
Compensation for Services
The City shall compensate the Consultant for services performed and costs incurred under this Agreement in accordance with the fee and cost schedule. No additional compensation shall be paid for any other expenses unless such expenses are approved in advance in writing by the City Manager or his/her designee.

1. FEE
Consultant will perform the services on an hourly basis, in accordance with the rate schedule below. The Not to Exceed Fee represents all cost associated with the delivery of each task including travel time with the exception of travel expenses as described below. Consultant shall submit itemized invoices identifying the specific tasks performed, corresponding hours, and associated costs for each billing period.

Compensation for a 2-Year Extension: $470,000
Annual estimated budget: $235,000, except for work performed under an Applicant Deposit Not-to-exceed monthly: $19,583
Schedule 1 – Hourly Rate
Rick Casswell, Principal $185 (consultant rate)
$120 (consultant rate for travel to/from City of Malibu for services related to Scope of Work)
All rates listed above shall include overhead costs including, but not limited to, salaries, benefits, insurance, office expenses, mileage, and courier service. If staff substitutions are necessary, or if staff is promoted, the original rates listed above will still apply.

2. TRAVEL EXPENSE BUDGET
Reimbursement for all expenses reasonably incurred by the Consultant in connection with services provided such as lodging and transportation cost which exceed attendance of meeting in excess of 50 miles from Consultant’s address. An estimate of travel expenses shall be pre-approved by the Community Development Director or his/her designee. Mileage shall be reimbursed at the IRS prevailing rate. City will not reimburse for meals. Expenses will appear on invoices without any markup, with proof of payment, and due and payable within thirty (30) days after receipt by the City.

3. NON-BILLABLE ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD
The Consultant will bill only for time spent performing assigned professional work. All other activities associated with carrying out the contract are not billable and are therefore considered overhead or administrative functions contained within the hourly rate. Typical examples of non-billable overhead activities are:
• Discussion with staff or applicant about the cost of services or to address billing disputes. • Meetings to discuss work performance, contract, or additional services. • Travel time to and from the City of Malibu (not related to Scope of Work). • Preparation of invoices and other administrative clerical services. • Contract administration, such as preparing or discussing contract amendments. • Time spent resolving errors in the event the Consultant is responsible.

Docusign Envelope ID: AF63F765-25BB-8521-82A5-AA5B69CB4F07

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Professional Services Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made and entered into as of September 14, 2026 by and between the City of Malibu, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and California Coastal Works, LLC, a California limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). City and Consultant are herein collectively referred to as “Parties” and separately as a “Party”.

The City and the Consultant agree as follows:

R E C I T A L S
A. The City does not have the personnel able and/or available to perform the services required under this Agreement.

B. The City desires to contract with Consultant for professional services relating to project management services including oversight and coordination of planning activities and contract planning services.

C. The Consultant warrants to the City that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities to perform the services under this Agreement in a proper and timely manner.

D. The City and the Consultant desire to enter into this Agreement for the Consultant to perform the services described in this Agreement, including those set forth in Exhibit A.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

1.0 SCOPE OF THE CONSULTANT’S SERVICES. The Consultant agrees to provide the services and perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A (the “Scope of Work”), attached hereto and made part of this Agreement, except that, to the extent that any provision in Exhibit A conflicts with this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement govern. The Scope of Work may be amended from time to time by way of a written directive from the City.

2.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement will become effective on September 27, 2026, and will remain in effect for a period of two years from said date unless otherwise expressly extended and agreed to by both Parties or terminated by either Party as provided herein.

3.0 CITY AGENT. The City Manager, or his or her designee (collectively, the “City Manager”), for the purposes of this Agreement, is the agent for the City; whenever approval or authorization is required, Consultant understands that the City Manager has the authority, but not the requirement, to provide that approval or authorization.

4.0 COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES. The City shall pay the Consultant for its professional services rendered and costs incurred pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with the fee and cost schedule set forth in Exhibit B (the “Compensation For Services”), attached hereto 






 
 




Attachment 3
Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

and made part of this Agreement. The cost of services is estimated at $312,000 annually, for a total amount not to exceed $624,000 for the term of the Agreement. No additional compensation shall be paid for any other costs or expenses incurred, unless first approved by the City Manager in writing.

4.1 The Consultant shall submit to the City, by no later than the 10th day of each month, its bill for services itemizing the fees and costs incurred during the previous month. The City shall pay the Consultant all uncontested amounts set forth in the Consultant's bill within 30 days after it is received.

5.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST. The Consultant represents that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in any real property located in the City which may be affected by the services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement.

The Consultant further represents that in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it.

5.1 The Consultant represents that no City employee or official has a material financial interest in the Consultant’s business. During the term of this Agreement and/or as a result of being awarded this contract, the Consultant shall not offer, encourage or accept any financial interest in the Consultant’s business to or by any City employee or official. This Section 5.1 shall apply to any subcontractor hired by Consultant to perform service under this Agreement.

5.2 If a portion of the Consultant’s services called for under this Agreement shall ultimately be paid for by reimbursement from and through an agreement with a developer of any land within the City or with a City franchisee, the Consultant warrants that it has not performed any work for such developer/franchisee within the last twelve (12) months, and shall not negotiate, offer or accept any contract or request to perform services for that identified developer/franchisee during the term of this Agreement.

6.0 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

6.1 Termination.

6.1.1 Termination Without Cause. Either the City Manager or the Consultant may terminate this Agreement, without cause, by giving the other Party ten (10) days written notice of such termination and the effective date thereof. If the City terminates this Agreement without cause, the Consultant shall prepare and shall be entitled to receive compensation pursuant to a close-out bill for services rendered and fees incurred pursuant to this Agreement through the effective date of the notice of termination. If the Consultant terminates this Agreement without cause, the Consultant shall be paid only for those services completed in a manner satisfactory to the City.

6.1.2 Termination For Cause. If the Consultant or the City fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, or if the Consultant or the City violate any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, the Consultant or the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other party of such termination and specifying the effective date of such termination. The Consultant shall be 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

entitled to receive compensation in accordance with the terms of this Agreement for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be relieved of liability for damage sustained by virtue of any breach of this Agreement and any payments due under this Agreement may be withheld to off-set anticipated damages.

6.1.3 In the event of any termination hereunder, all finished or unfinished documents, reports, photographs, films, charts, data, studies, surveys, drawings, models, maps, or other documentation prepared by or in the possession of the Consultant under this Agreement shall be immediately returned to the City.

6.2 Non-Assignability. The Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement without the express, prior written consent of the City.

6.3 Non-Discrimination. The Consultant shall not discriminate as to race, creed, gender, color, national origin, or sexual orientation in the performance of its services and duties pursuant to this Agreement.

6.4 Insurance. The Consultant shall submit to the City certificates indicating compliance with the following minimum insurance requirements no less than one (1) day prior to beginning of performance under this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to comply with all provisions in the attached Exhibit C (“Insurance Requirements”), attached hereto and made part of this Agreement.

6.5 Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City and any and all of its officials, employees, and/or agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, to the extent they arise out of, pertain to or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or subconsultants in the performance of services under this Agreement.

Consultant’s duty to defend shall consist of reimbursement of defense costs incurred by City in direct proportion to the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault.

Consultant’s percentage of fault, for both indemnity and defense, shall be determined, as applicable, by a court of law, jury, or arbitrator. In the event any loss, liability, or damage is incurred by way of settlement or resolution without a court, jury or arbitrator having made a determination of the Consultant’s percentage of fault, and the parties cannot mutually agree on Consultant’s percentage of fault, the parties agree to mediation with a neutral third-party to determine the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault for purposes of determining the amount of indemnity and defense cost reimbursement owed to the City.

6.6 Compliance with Applicable Law. The Consultant and the City shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of the federal, state, county, and city governments, including, without limitation, Malibu Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 Minimum Wage.

6.7 Independent Contractor. This Agreement is by and between the City and 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

the Consultant and is not intended, and shall not be construed, to create the relationship of agency, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture, or association, as between the City and the Consultant.

6.7.1. The Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall have no power to incur any debt or obligation for or on behalf of the City. Neither the City nor any of its officers or employees shall have any control over the conduct of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant’s employees, except as herein set forth, and the Consultant expressly warrants not to, at any time or in any manner, represent that it, or any of its agents, servants or employees are in any manner employees of the City, it being distinctly understood that the Consultant is and shall at all times remain to the City a wholly independent contractor and the Consultant's obligations to the City are solely such as are prescribed by this Agreement.

6.7.2 Consultant shall have no authority to bind the City in any manner, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is conferred in writing by the City Manager or their designee. Consultant shall no authority to make any final decisions on behalf of the City. All such final decisions shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager or their designee.

6.7.3. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officials, officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall represent that Consultant and Consultant’s officers, employees, or agents are contract planners for the City. Consultant’s title for purpose of correspondence with the City and the public shall be Contract Principal Planner and shall report to and defer final decisions to the Community Development Director or their designee. Consultant will be provided a City email address ([email protected]) and reference the City’s physical address (23825 Stuart Ranch Road, Malibu CA 90265) for purposes of correspondence with the public. Neither Consultant, nor any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, shall obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other benefits which may otherwise accrue to City’s employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim Consultant may have to any such rights.

6.8 Copyright. No reports, maps or other documents produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be the subject of an application for copyright by or on behalf of the Consultant.

6.9 Legal Construction.
a) This Agreement is made and entered into in the State of California and shall in all respects be interpreted, enforced, and governed under the laws of the State of California. Any and all disputes arising from this Agreement shall be decided solely and exclusively by state or federal courts located in Los Angeles County. b) This Agreement shall be construed without regard to the identity of the persons who drafted its various provisions. Each and every provision of this Agreement shall be construed as though each of the Parties participated equally in the drafting of same, and any rule of construction that a document is to be construed against the drafting party shall not be applicable to this Agreement. 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

c) The article and section, captions and headings herein have been inserted for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of interpretation or construction.
d) Whenever in this Agreement the context may so require, the masculine gender shall be deemed to refer to and include the feminine and neuter, and the singular shall refer to and include the plural.

6.10 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and as so executed shall constitute an agreement which shall be binding upon all Parties hereto.

6.11 Final Payment Acceptance Constitutes Release. The acceptance by the Consultant of the final payment made under this Agreement shall operate as and be a release of the City from all claims and liabilities for compensation to the Consultant for anything done, furnished or relating to the Consultant’s work or services. Acceptance of payment shall be any negotiation of the City’s check or the failure to make a written extra compensation claim within ten (10) calendar days of the receipt of that check. However, approval or payment by the City shall not constitute, nor be deemed, a release of the responsibility and liability of the Consultant, its employees, sub-consultants and agents for the accuracy and competency of the information provided and/or work performed; nor shall such approval or payment be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility or liability by the City for any defect or error in the work prepared by the Consultant, its employees, sub-consultants and agents.

6.12 Corrections. In addition to the above indemnification obligations, the Consultant shall correct, at its own expense, all errors in the work which may be disclosed during the City’s review of the Consultant’s report or plans during or after the Term of this Agreement.

Should the Consultant fail to make such corrections in a reasonably timely manner, such corrections shall be made by the City, and the cost thereof shall be charged to the Consultant. If the City corrections occur during the Term, such charged costs shall be deducted from amounts otherwise owed to the Consultant. If the corrections occur after the Term and final payment to the Consultant, the amount charged shall be due and payable within 45 days after written notice of the City’s invoice.

6.13 Files. All files of the Consultant pertaining to the City shall be and remain the property of the City. The Consultant will control the physical location of such files during the term of this Agreement and shall be entitled to retain copies of such files upon termination of this Agreement.

6.14 Waiver; Remedies Cumulative. Failure by a Party to insist upon the performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other Party, irrespective of the length of time for which such failure continues, shall not constitute a waiver of such Party's right to demand compliance by such other party in the future. No waiver by a Party of a default or breach of the other Party shall be effective or binding upon such Party unless made in writing by such Party, and no such waiver shall be implied from any omissions by a Party to take any action with respect to such default or breach. No express written waiver of a specified default or breach shall affect any other default or breach, or cover any other period of time, other than any default or breach and/or period of time specified. All of the remedies permitted or available to a Party under 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

this Agreement, or at law or in equity, shall be cumulative and alternative, and invocation of any such right or remedy shall not constitute a waiver or election of remedies with respect to any other permitted or available right of remedy.

6.15 Mitigation of Damages. In all such situations arising out of this Agreement, the Parties shall attempt to avoid and minimize the damages resulting from the conduct of the other Party.

6.16 Partial Invalidity. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

6.17 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that each will bear his/her or its own costs, expenses and attorneys' fees arising out of and/or connected with the negotiation, drafting and execution of the Agreement, and all matters arising out of or connected therewith except that, in the event any action is brought by any Party hereto to enforce this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to all other relief to which that Party or those Parties may be entitled.

6.18 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the City and the Consultant, and neither Party has made any representations to the other except as expressly contained herein. Neither Party, in executing or performing this Agreement, is relying upon any statement or information not contained in this Agreement. Any changes, amendments, or modifications to this Agreement must be approved in advance and in writing, and executed by authorized representatives of both the City and the Consultant.

6.19 Notices. Any notice required to be given hereunder shall be deemed to have been given by depositing said notice in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:

CITY: Joseph D. Irvin CONSULTANT: California Coastal Works, LLC, a California limited liability
company
City Manager Joseph D. Smith, AICP
City of Malibu Principal
23825 Stuart Ranch Road 1330 Camino Del Mar
Malibu, CA 90265-4861 Del Mar, CA 90214
TEL (310) 456-2489 x 226 TEL (619) 943-1337
FAX (310) 456-2760 [email protected]

6.20 Warranty of Authorized Signatories and Acceptance of Facsimile or Electronic Signatures. Each of the signatories hereto warrants and represents that he or she is competent and authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the party for whom he or she purports to sign. The Parties agree that this Contract, agreements ancillary to this Contract, and related documents to be entered into in connection with this Contract will be considered signed when the signature of a party is delivered physically or by facsimile transmission or scanned and delivered via electronic mail. Such facsimile or electronic mail copies will be treated in all respects 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

as having the same effect as an original signature.

6. 21 Standard of Care. Consultant shall perform all services under this Agreement in accordance with the standard of care ordinarily exercised by members of the same profession practicing under similar circumstances at the same time and in the same or similar locality.

Consultant shall perform its services in a timely, competent, and professional manner and in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.

6.22 Public Records Act Compliance. Consultant acknowledges that the City is subject to the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 7920.000 et seq.). Consultant agrees to cooperate with the City in responding to any request for records relating to this Agreement or Consultant’s performance of services. Consultant shall promptly provide any such records requested by the City and acknowledges that such records may be subject to disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under applicable law.

6.23 Records Retention and Audit. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records relating to the performance of services under this Agreement, including all books, documents, papers, and accounting records. Consultant shall retain such records for a period of at least three (3) years following completion or termination of this Agreement, or longer if required by law or by written directive from the City. Upon reasonable notice, the City or its authorized representatives shall have the right to inspect and audit such records during normal business hours.

6.24 Ownership of Work Product. All reports, documents, data, studies, drawings, specifications, maps, photographs, and other materials prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement (“Work Product”) shall become the property of the City upon creation and shall be delivered to the City upon request or upon completion or termination of this Agreement. Consultant may retain copies for its files, if and when appropriate, but shall not use or disclose the Work Product for any purpose unrelated to this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City.

6.25 Confidentiality and Public Communications. Consultant shall maintain the confidentiality of any non-public information obtained in the course of performing services under this Agreement and shall not disclose such information to any third party without the prior written consent of the City unless required by law. Consultant shall take reasonable measures to protect such information from unauthorized use or disclosure.

Consultant shall not make any public statement, press release, social media post, or other public communication regarding the services performed under this Agreement, the City, or this Agreement without the prior approval of the City. Consultant shall conduct itself in a professional manner and shall not engage in conduct that would reasonably be expected to reflect adversely on the City in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement.

6.26 Subcontractors. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City, except to the extent subcontracting is expressly authorized in this Agreement. Consultant shall remain fully responsible for the performance of all services under this Agreement and for the acts and omissions of any subcontractors and their employees or agents.







 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

6.27 Survival. The provisions of this Agreement that by their nature are intended to survive termination or expiration of this Agreement, including but not limited to provisions relating to indemnification, confidentiality, records retention, ownership of work product, and audit rights, shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.

7.0 ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS. (City and Consultant initials required at EITHER 7.1 or 7.2, but not both)

7.1 Disclosure Required. By their respective initials next to this paragraph, City and Consultant hereby acknowledge that Consultant is a “consultant” for the purposes of the California Political Reform Act because Consultant’s duties would require him or her to make one or more of the governmental decisions set forth in Fair Political Practices Commission Regulation 18700.3(a) or otherwise serves in a staff capacity for which disclosure would otherwise be required were Consultant employed by the City. Consultant hereby acknowledges his or her assumingoffice, annual, and leaving-office financial reporting obligations under the California Political Reform Act and the City’s Conflict of Interest Code and agrees to comply with those obligations at his or her expense. Prior to consultant commencing services hereunder, the City’s Manager shall prepare and deliver to consultant a memorandum detailing the extent of Consultant’s disclosure obligations in accordance with the City’s Conflict of Interest Code.

City Initials ______
Consultant Initials ______

7.2 Disclosure not Required. By their initials next to this paragraph, City and Consultant hereby acknowledge that Consultant is not a “consultant” for the purpose of the California Political Reform Act because Consultant’s duties and responsibilities are not within the scope of the definition of consultant in Fair Political Practice Commission Regulation 18700.3(a) and is otherwise not serving in staff capacity in accordance with the City’s Conflict of Interest Code.

City Initials ______
Consultant Initials ______
[Signatures on the Following Page]








 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

This Agreement is executed on _____________________.

CALIFORNIA COASTAL WORKS, LLC, a California limited liability company:

By: _________________________________
Name: Joseph D. Smith
Title: Principal
CITY OF MALIBU, a municipal corporation:
___________________________________
BRUCE SILVERSTEIN, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney







 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK
PART A – MANAGEMENT SERVICES
The Consultant will provide management level planning services such as the following:

1. Plans, directs, coordinates, and reviews the work plan for the Community Development Department, Planning Division; meets with staff to identify and resolve problems; assigns work activities, projects, and programs; monitors workflow; reviews and evaluates work products, methods, and procedures.

2. Oversees application and permit review on planned residential, commercial, and institutional projects, use permits, variances, and zoning changes.

3. Serves as a liaison for the Community Development Department, Planning Division with other City departments, departments, and outside agencies; provides staff support to commissions, committees, and task forces, as necessary; negotiates and resolves significant and controversial issues.

4. Provides highly complex staff assistance to the Community Development Director or his/her designee; develops and reviews staff reports related to planning activities and services; may present reports to the Planning Commission, City Council and other commissions and committees.

5. As necessary, participates on a variety of boards, commissions, committees, and task forces, and attends and participates in professional groups and committees; stays abreast of new trends and innovations in the field of planning.

6. Receives, investigates, and responds to problems and complaints from citizens in a professional manner; identifies and reports findings and takes necessary corrective action.

7. As necessary, conducts site inspections; makes determinations if projects are in compliance with laws, regulations, and ordinances; makes recommendations regarding changes.

8. Reviews various documents including City Council reports, resolutions, ordinances, Planning Commission reports and resolutions for current planning applications and long range planning and code amendments.

9. Review CEQA documents as needed but does not prepare CEQA documents.

10. Provide training for staff, as needed.








 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

PART B – OTHER

1. Demonstrate an area of expertise with regulatory documents similar to those used by the City of Malibu Community Development Department, Planning Division:
i. City of Malibu Local Coastal Program
ii. City of Malibu Municipal Code Title 16 (Subdivision) and Title 17 (Zoning)
iii. City of Malibu General Plan
iv. City Maps including LCP maps, Zoning Maps, Land Use Maps, Cultural Resources Maps, Overlay Districts, etc.
v. Coastal Act
vi. CEQA Guidelines
vii. Subdivision Map Act
viii. Permit Streamlining Act
ix. City Council Policies
x. City of Malibu Planning Director Interpretations Manual

2. Perform project management duties including the maintenance of the development database and tracking of deadlines, application submittal requirements, and workload.

3. Response Turnaround Times: Respond within one (1) business day to questions from City staff and members of the public Record Keeping: Maintain proper record keeping.

Files shall be organized, up to date, and ready for public review at all times including digital records. All records shall be date-stamped and properly identified. City records, including planning files, shall not be removed from City Hall without authorization. In addition, the Development Database shall be maintained with all project milestones and reflect current status.

4. Meetings: Meetings with applicants and members of the public may be held in City Hall, on the project site (e.g., onsite visits), or virtually. In an effort to create a perception of unbiased level of customer service, socializing with applicants is strongly discouraged.

5. Demonstrate knowledge of computer applications including Microsoft Office Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, Teams, and GIS.








 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
The City shall compensate the Consultant for services performed and costs incurred under this Agreement in accordance with the fee and cost schedule. No additional compensation shall be paid for any other expenses unless such expenses are approved in advance in writing by the City Manager or his/her designee.

1. FEE
Minimum monthly retainer rate of $23,500 per month. The minimum monthly retainer represents up to 20 hours per week of services to be provided. Travel time to/from the Consultant’s business address to/from the City or to/from any other location on behalf of the City will be billed at 50% (e.g., one hour of travel is equal to 30 minutes of time). Consultant shall be compensated on an hourly basis at a rate of $295 per hour for additional services or travel time provided beyond 20 hours per week. If Consultant anticipates that the services or billable travel time for any month will exceed the amount covered by the monthly retainer, Consultant shall notify the City and obtain the City’s approval before incurring any additional fees.

Not to exceed compensation for 2-Year term: $624,000
Annual estimated budget: $312,000
Schedule 1 – Hourly Rate
Classification Amount
Principal-In-Charge
(Joseph D. Smith)
$295/hr (consultant rate)
$175/hr (consultant rate for travel to/from City for services related to Scope of Work)
All rates listed above shall include overhead costs including, but not limited to, salaries, benefits, insurance, office expenses, mileage, and courier service. If staff substitutions are necessary, or if staff is promoted, the original rates listed above will still apply.

2. TRAVEL EXPENSE BUDGET
Reimbursement for all expenses reasonably incurred by the Consultant in connection with services provided such as lodging and transportation cost which exceed attendance of meeting in excess of 50 miles from Consultant’s address. An estimate of travel expenses shall be pre-approved by the Community Development Director or his/her designee. Mileage shall be reimbursed at the IRS prevailing rate. City will not reimburse for meals unless a pre-approved per diem is authorized in writing by the City. Expenses will appear on invoices without any markup, with proof of payment, and due and payable within thirty (30) days after receipt by the City.

3. NON-BILLABLE ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD
The Consultant will bill only for time spent performing assigned professional work. All other activities associated with carrying out the contract are not billable and are therefore considered overhead or administrative functions contained within the hourly rate. Typical examples of nonbillable overhead activities are:
x Discussion with staff or applicant about the cost of services or to address billing disputes.







 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

x Meetings to discuss work performance, contract, or additional services. x Preparation of invoices and other administrative clerical services. x Contract administration, such as preparing or discussing contract amendments. x Time spent resolving errors in the event the Consultant is responsible. 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of work and/or services under this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain, provide, and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City.

General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended.

Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned, or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than 1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the services required by this agreement.

Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (statutory limits) and Employer’s Liability insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

Consultant shall submit to Agency, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers.

OTHER PROVISIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
Proof of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance and required endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance.

Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City for the contract period and any additional length of time required thereafter. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

Duration of Coverage. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the contract period, and any additional length of time required thereafter, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, or financial loss which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by Consultant, their agents, representatives, employees, or subconsultants. 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

Primary/Noncontributing. Coverage provided by Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by City shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of City before the City’s own insurance or self- insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

City’s Rights of Enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary, and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement.

Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Risk Manager.

Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees, and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

Enforcement of Contract Provisions (Non Estoppel). Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

Requirements Not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

Notice of Cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide the City with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage. If any of the Consultant’s insurers are unwilling to provide such notice, then Consultant shall have the 






 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

responsibility of notifying the City immediately in the event of Consultant’s failure to renew any of the required insurance coverages, or insurer’s cancellation or non-renewal.

Additional Insured Status. General liability, automobile liability, and umbrella/excess liability insurance policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies.

Prohibition Of Undisclosed Coverage Limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing.

Separation of Insureds. A severability of interests’ provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.

Pass Through Clause. Consultant agrees to ensure that any approved subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party who is brought onto or involved in the project/service by Consultant (hereinafter collectively “Subcontractor”), provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. However, in the event Consultant’s Subcontractor cannot comply with this requirement, which proof must be submitted to the City, Consultant may still be able to utilize the Subcontractor provided Consultant shall be required to ensure that its Subcontractor provide and maintain insurance coverage and endorsements sufficient to the specific risk of exposure involved with Subcontractor’s scope of work and services, with limits less than required of the Consultant, but in all other terms consistent with the Consultant’s requirements under this Agreement. This provision does not relieve the Consultant of its contractual obligations under the Agreement and/or limit its liability to the amount of insurance coverage provided by its subcontractors. This provision is intended solely to provide Consultant with the ability to utilize a Subcontractor who may be otherwise qualified to perform the work or services but may not carry the same insurance limits as required of the Consultant under this Agreement given the limited scope of work or services provided by the subcontractor. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with Subcontractors, and others engaged in the project and/or services, will be submitted to City for review.

City’s Right to Revise Specifications. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days’ advance written notice of such change. If such a change results in substantial additional costs to the Consultant, the City and Consultant may renegotiate the Consultant’s compensation.

Self-Insured Retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. City reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible, or require proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention through confirmation from the underwriter.







 
 




Professional Services Agreement
California Coastal Works, LLC

Timely Notice Of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.

Additional Insurance. The consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.







 
 





Agenda Item # 1.B.8.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by: Kellan Martz, Assistant City Attorney
Approved by: Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Date prepared: September 11, 2026 Meeting date: September 14, 2026 Subject: Resolution Ratifying the Director of Emergency Services’ Proclamation of Existence of a Local Emergency and Declaring the Same – Sea Level Drive Sinkhole
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 26-62 confirming existence of a local emergency, and ratifying the proclamation of local emergency by the Director of Emergency Services as a result of a sinkhole and associated hazardous conditions along Sea Level Drive in the City of Malibu.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact with the recommended action. The existence of the local emergency may help qualify the City for the possibility of reimbursement for disaster response expenditures should a Federal or State disaster be declared.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: This item supports the City’s 2025-2028 Strategic Plan Goal 3: Advance Infrastructure Resilience.

Goal 3: Advance Infrastructure Resilience
Objective 3.1: Develop and fund a comprehensive Infrastructure Resilience Plan.

Strategy: Coastal Resiliency Infrastructure
DISCUSSION: The City has adopted an emergency plan that includes an emergency services organization that is activated in the case of natural disasters. This organization allows the City to quickly respond and coordinate the functions of the City with other public agencies/organizations and those affected by the disaster. Title 2, Chapter 2.52 of the Malibu Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence of a local emergency when the City is affected by a public calamity and the City City Council Meeting
09-14-26
Item

1.B.8.

Agenda Item # 1.B.8.

Council is not in session. The Director’s proclamation must be ratified by the City Council within seven days or it will expire.

Per Malibu Municipal Code section 2.52.020 an emergency is defined as: “the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within this city caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, landslide, epidemic, riot, or earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or the imminent threat of war, but other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this city, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat.”
On September 8, 2026, a sinkhole emerged near 31630 Sea Level Drive. Based on available information, conditions associated with the sinkhole are believed to have begun developing on September 7, 2026. The sinkhole is approximately twenty-five to thirty feet deep and thirty by sixty feet wide. Conditions continue to be evaluated, and the full extent of the impacts is not yet known.

The sinkhole poses an imminent danger to homes and residents along Sea Level Drive.

At the time of the proclamation, seven residences had been red-tagged due to hazardous conditions resulting from the sinkhole, and an additional 24 residences were identified for red-tagging due to the loss of safe vehicular access. Gas service to the affected area has been shut off, and water service may also be discontinued as conditions warrant. These circumstances have significantly impaired access to affected properties and created conditions requiring immediate emergency response and protective measures.

Emergency personnel access is severely constrained and may be impassable due to the large portion of the roadway that has collapsed. The remaining intact portion of the roadway is too narrow to accommodate emergency response vehicles, including fire engines and other large apparatus. This creates a substantial risk to public safety and emergency response capabilities.

Conditions are likely to worsen with forecasted high tides and rains. Hurricane Marie has caused increased rainfall and high surf, and a Coastal Flood Advisory was issued through 11:00 p.m. on September 8, 2026. An El Niño rainy season is forecasted for fall and winter 2026. According to the NOAA Climate Prediction Center, the El Niño weather pattern is strengthening, with a greater than 90 percent chance of a very strong, or “Super,” event.

A strengthening “Super” El Niño brings a high risk of record sea levels, severe coastal flooding, and dramatic beach narrowing to the California coast this winter.

Due to the immediate and ongoing threat to persons and property, and the significant impact to access and emergency response capabilities, the Director of Emergency Services determined that conditions of extreme peril existed and proclaimed that a local emergency existed throughout the City of Malibu on September 8, 2026.

Agenda Item # 1.B.8.

The City Council was not in session and could not immediately be called into session at the time of the proclamation. Pursuant to Malibu Municipal Code Chapter 2.52, the Director of Emergency Services is authorized to proclaim the existence of a local emergency under these circumstances. The proclamation remains in effect until September 15, 2026, unless the declaration is ratified by the City Council within seven days of the proclamation.

Before the City Council today is a resolution ratifying the Director of Emergency Services’ proclamation and confirming the existence of a local emergency. If adopted, the City Council will review, and as needed renew, this action at least every 60 days. The declaration will enable City staff to take actions necessary to respond to the conditions created by the sinkhole and associated impacts to Sea Level Drive, surrounding properties, and emergency access.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 26-62

2. Proclamation of Existence of a Local Emergency
RESOLUTION NO. 26-62

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MALIBU

CONFIRMING EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY, AND RATIFYING

THE PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY BY THE DIRECTOR OF

EMERGENCY SERVICES
The City Council of the City of Malibu does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals.

A. Title 2, Chapter 2.52 of the Malibu Municipal Code designates the City Manager as the Director of Emergency Services and empowers him to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency if the City Council is not in session, subject to ratification by the City Council within seven days, when the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City exist which are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat. The City’s Emergency Operations Plan identifies the City Manager to act as the Director of Emergency Services if the City Manager is unavailable.

B. On September 8, 2026, a sinkhole emerged near 31630 Sea Level Drive. Based on currently available information, conditions associated with the sinkhole are believed to have begun developing on September 7, 2026. The sinkhole is approximately twenty-five to thirty feet deep and thirty by sixty feet wide. Conditions are continuing to be evaluated, and the full extent of the impacts is not yet known.

C. The sinkhole poses imminent danger to the homes and residents along Sea Level Drive. At the time of the proclamation, seven residences had been red-tagged due to hazardous conditions resulting from the sinkhole, and an additional 24 residences were to be red-tagged due to the loss of safe vehicular access. Gas and water service to the affected area had been shut off, and electrical service has also been shut off for approximately 13 properties. These circumstances have significantly impaired access to affected properties and created conditions requiring immediate emergency response and protective measures.

D. Emergency personnel access is severely constrained and vehicle access is cut off due to the large portion of the road that has collapsed. The intact portion of the roadway is too narrow to accommodate emergency response vehicles, including fire engines and other large apparatus, creating a substantial risk to public safety and emergency response capabilities.

E. Conditions are likely to worsen with forecasted high tides and rains. Hurricane Marie has caused increased rainfall and high surf. A Coastal Flood Advisory was issued until 11:00 p.m. on September 8, 2026, and dangerous conditions still persist. An El Niño rainy season is forecasted for fall and winter 2026. According to the NOAA Climate Prediction Center, the El Niño weather pattern is strengthening, with a greater than 90% chance of a very strong (Super) event. A strengthening “super” El Niño brings a high risk of record sea levels, severe coastal flooding, and dramatic beach narrowing to the California coast this winter.

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 26-62

_____________________
F. On September 8, 2026, pursuant to his authority under Malibu Municipal Code Section 2.52.060, the Director of Emergency Services issued an Order establishing a mandatory and immediate evacuation for the western portion of Sea Level Drive beginning at 31615 Sea Level Drive through the end of the street, including residences on the north and south sides of the street. The Order applies to all persons, except emergency personnel engaged in official duties, including residents, guests, and visitors. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, in its capacity as the City’s local law enforcement agency, was directed to effectuate the Order.

G. The Director of Emergency Services of the City proclaimed the existence of a local emergency on September 8, 2026, which proclamation will expire on September 15, 2026 unless ratified by the City Council.

H. The Director of Emergency Services now requests the City Council ratify the Director's proclamation of the existence of a local emergency in accordance with Malibu Municipal Code Section 2.52.060
SECTION 2. It is hereby proclaimed that a local emergency now exists throughout the City and that the proclamation of the Director of Emergency Services is ratified. It is further proclaimed and ordered that during the existence of this local emergency the powers, functions, and duties of the Director of Emergency Services and the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by State law and by the ordinances and resolutions of this City.

SECTION 3. The local emergency shall be deemed to continue and exist until its termination is proclaimed by the City Council. As required by law, the City Council shall review the need to continue the state of emergency every 60 days until this resolution is terminated.

SECTION 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 14th day of September 2026. _____________________________
BRUCE SILVERSTEIN, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
Resolution No. 26-62

_____________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney
(seal)
City of Malibu
23825 Stuart Ranch Road · Malibu, California · 90265-4861 Phone (310) 456-2489 · Fax (310) 456-3356 · www.malibucity.org

PROCLAMATION OF EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
(By the Director of Emergency Services)

AN EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL

EMERGENCY
The Director of Emergency Services for the City of Malibu does hereby find, order and declare as follows:

WHEREAS, the California Emergency Services Act, Government Code section 8550, et seq., authorizes the proclamation of a local emergency when conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of a city exist; and WHEREAS, Title 2, Chapter 2.52 of the City of Malibu’s Municipal Code (MMC) empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when said city is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity and the City Council is not in session; and
WHEREAS MMC section 2.52.020 defines an "emergency" as the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, landslide, epidemic, riot, or earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or the imminent threat of war, but other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this city, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat; and WHEREAS, the following circumstances exist:

Conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen as the result of a sinkhole on Sea Level Drive. These conditions, both actual and threatened, result from the circumstances described in MMC section 2.52.020 and explained more fully in this proclamation.

On September 8, 2026, a sinkhole emerged near 31630 Sea Level Drive. Based on currently available information, conditions associated with the sinkhole are believed to have begun developing on September 7, 2026. The sinkhole is approximately twenty-five to thirty feet deep and thirty by sixty feet wide. Conditions are continuing to be evaluated, and the full extent of the impacts is not yet known.

Docusign Envelope ID: B7BECEEE-2301-8D6D-80AE-5E5195B591E1 Attachment 2
The sinkhole poses imminent danger to the homes and residents along Sea Level Drive.

As of the time of this proclamation, seven residences have been red-tagged due to hazardous conditions resulting from the sinkhole, and an additional 24 residences will be red-tagged due to the loss of safe vehicular access. Gas service to the affected area has been shut off, and water service may also be discontinued as conditions warrant. These circumstances have significantly impaired access to affected properties and created conditions requiring immediate emergency response and protective measures.

Conditions are likely to worsen with forecasted high tides and rains. Hurricane Marie has caused increased rainfall and high surf. A Coastal Flood Advisory has been issued until 11:00 p.m. on September 8, 2026. An El Niño rainy season is forecasted for fall and winter 2026.

According to the NOAA Climate Prediction Center, the El Niño weather pattern is strengthening, with a greater than 90% chance of a very strong (Super) event. A strengthening "super" El Niño brings a high risk of record sea levels, severe coastal flooding, and dramatic beach narrowing to the California coast this winter.

Emergency personnel access is severely constrained and may be impassable, due to the large portion of the road that has collapsed. The intact portion of the roadway is too narrow to accommodate emergency response vehicles, including fire engines and other large apparatus, creating a substantial risk to public safety and emergency response capabilities.

The City Council of the City of Malibu is not in session (and cannot immediately be called into session);

NOW, THEREFORE, THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES HEREBY does hereby find that a local emergency exists as discussed above and proclaims that a local state of emergency now exists throughout the City; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that during the existence of said local emergency, the powers, functions, and duties of the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by city and state law, by ordinances, and resolutions of this city, and by the City of Malibu Emergency Operations Plan, as approved by the City Council on October 14, 2024.

ADOPTED this 8
th day of September 2026.

By: ______________________________
Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Director of Emergency Services
ATTEST:
__________________________
Kelsey Pettijohn, City Clerk
(seal)
Docusign Envelope ID: B7BECEEE-2301-8D6D-80AE-5E5195B591E1 This proclamation has been issued in accordance with applicable law, is in effect and carries the force of law until September 15, 2026 on which date it expires unless the declaration of local emergency is ratified by the City Council within 7 days of this date.

REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Trevor Rusin, Assistant City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: B7BECEEE-2301-8D6D-80AE-5E5195B591E1

Agenda Item # 1.B.9.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by: Kellan Martz, Assistant City Attorney
Approved by: Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Date prepared: September 11, 2026 Meeting date: September 14, 2026 Subject: Confirmation of the Director of Emergency Services Order Relating to the Sea Level Drive Sinkhole
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Confirm the Order of the Director of Emergency Services dated September 8, 2026, establishing a mandatory and immediate evacuation order for the western portion of Sea Level Drive beginning at 31615 Sea Level Drive until the end of the street, including residences on the north and south sides of the street.

FISCAL IMPACT: Los Angeles County Sheriff fees are included in the FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: This item supports the City’s 2025-2028 Strategic Plan Goal 3: Advance Infrastructure Resilience.

Goal 3: Advance Infrastructure Resilience
Objective 3.1: Develop and fund a comprehensive Infrastructure Resilience Plan.

Strategy: Coastal Resiliency Infrastructure
DISCUSSION: On September 8, 2026, a sinkhole emerged near 31630 Sea Level Drive.

Based on currently available information, conditions associated with the sinkhole are believed to have begun developing on September 7, 2026. The sinkhole is approximately twenty-five to thirty feet deep and thirty by sixty feet wide. Conditions are continuing to be evaluated, and the full extent of the impacts is not yet known.

Additionally, on September 8, 2026, the Director of Emergency Services issued a Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency in response to the sinkhole and coastal City Council Meeting
09-14-26
Item

1.B.9.

Agenda Item # 1.B.9.
erosion near Sea Level Drive. The sinkhole poses imminent danger to the homes and residents along Sea Level Drive. Seven residences were red-tagged due to hazardous conditions resulting from the sinkhole, and an additional 24 residences were red-tagged due to the loss of safe vehicular access. Gas service to the affected area has been shut off, and water service was discontinued as conditions warrant.

Emergency personnel access is constrained, and may be impassable, due to the large portion of the road that has collapsed. The intact portion of the roadway is too narrow to accommodate emergency response vehicles, including fire engines and other large apparatus, creating a substantial risk to public safety and emergency response capabilities.

Following the Proclamation and pursuant to his authority under Malibu Municipal Code Section 2.52.060, the City’s Director of Emergency Services issued the order (Order) on September 8, 2026. The Order establishes a mandatory and immediate evacuation for the western portion of Sea Level Drive beginning at 31615 Sea Level Drive until the end of the street, including residences on the north and south sides of the street.

The Order identifies the affected residences and directs the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, in its capacity as the City’s local law enforcement, to effectuate the Order.

Malibu Municipal Code Section 2.52.060 provides the Director of Emergency Services authority during a proclaimed State of Emergency or Local Emergency affecting the City to make and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property, provided such rules and regulations are confirmed at the earliest practicable time by the City Council.

Malibu Municipal Code Section 2.52.060(A)(1) requires the City Council to confirm the Order at the earliest practicable time. As today’s meeting is the earliest practicable time for the City Council to act, it is recommended the Council confirm the Order.

ALTERNATIVES: Do not confirm the Director of Emergency Services Order and terminate the order.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Director of Emergency Services Order, dated September 8, 2026

2. Proclamation of Existence of a Local Emergency
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

FOR THE CITY OF MALIBU
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2026, a sinkhole emerged near 31630 Sea Level Drive. Based on currently available information, conditions associated with the sinkhole are believed to have begun developing on September 7, 2026. The sinkhole is approximately twenty-five to thirty feet deep and thirty by sixty feet wide. Conditions are continuing to be evaluated, and the full extent of the impacts is not yet known;
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2026, the Director of Emergency Services issued a Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency in response to the sinkhole and coastal erosion near Sea Level Drive;
WHEREAS, the sinkhole on Sea Level Drive poses imminent danger to the homes and residents along Sea Level Drive. At this time, seven residences have been red-tagged due to hazardous conditions resulting from the sinkhole, and an additional 24 residences will be red-tagged due to the loss of safe vehicular access. Gas service to the affected area has been shut off, and water service may also be discontinued as conditions warrant. These circumstances have significantly impaired access to affected properties and created conditions requiring immediate emergency response and protective measures; WHEREAS, emergency personnel access is constrained, and may be impassable, due to the large portion of the road that has collapsed. The intact portion of the roadway is too narrow to accommodate emergency response vehicles, including fire engines and other large apparatus, creating a substantial risk to public safety and emergency response capabilities.

WHEREAS, Malibu Municipal Code Section 2.52.060 more specifically empowers the Director of Emergency Services during a proclaimed State of Emergency or Local Emergency affecting the City to do the following:

1. To make and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency; provided, however, such rules and regulations must be confirmed at the earliest practicable time by the city council; Docusign Envelope ID: B5499915-1E1E-8D36-8317-259BDF4BA77E Attachment 1
2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 2. To obtain vital supplies, equipment, and such other properties found lacking and needed for the protection of life and property and to bind the city for the fair value thereof and, if required immediately, to commandeer the same for public use;

3. To require emergency services of any city officer or employee, and, in the event of the proclamation of a state of emergency in the county in which the city is located or the existence of a state of war emergency, to command the aid of as many citizens of this community as he or she deems necessary in the execution of his or her duties; such persons shall be entitled to all privileges, benefits, and immunities as are provided by state law for registered disaster service workers;

4. To requisition necessary personnel or material of any city department or agency, and

5. To execute all of his or her ordinary power as city manager, all of the special powers conferred upon him or her by Chapter 2.52 of the Malibu Municipal Code or by resolution or emergency plan pursuant thereto adopted by the city council, all powers conferred upon him or her by any statute, by any agreement approved by the city council, and by any other lawful authority.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED by the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Malibu that a mandatory and immediate evacuation order is in effect for the western portion of Sea Level Drive beginning at 31615 Sea Level Drive until the end of the street, including residences on the north and south side of the street. This order applies to all people, except emergency personnel engaged in official duties, including but not limited to residents, guests, and visitors.

The following addresses are included in the evacuation order:
• 31665 Sea Level Drive
• 31649 Sea Level Drive
• 31636 Sea Level Drive
• 31640 Sea Level Drive
• 31634 Sea Level Drive
• 31715 Sea Level Drive
• 31633 Sea Level Drive
• 31685 Sea Level Drive
Docusign Envelope ID: B5499915-1E1E-8D36-8317-259BDF4BA77E 3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 • 31660 Sea Level Drive
• 31650 Sea Level Drive
• 31637 Sea Level Drive
• 31709 Sea Level Drive
• 31656 Sea Level Drive
• 31659 Sea Level Drive
• 31641 Sea Level Drive
• 31705 Sea Level Drive
• 31691 Sea Level Drive
• 31655 Sea Level Drive
• 31647 Sea Level Drive
• 31646 Sea Level Drive
• 31721 Sea Level Drive
• 31670 Sea Level Drive
• 31671 Sea Level Drive
• 31661 Sea Level Drive
• 31697 Sea Level Drive
• 31677 Sea Level Drive
• 31627 Sea Level Drive
• 31621 Sea Level Drive
• 31615 Sea Level Drive
• 31630 Sea Level Drive
• 31626 Sea Level Drive
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, in its capacity as the City’s local law enforcement, is directed to effectuate this order.

Any amendment to or rescission of this Order shall be in writing and given widespread publicity and notice.

Docusign Envelope ID: B5499915-1E1E-8D36-8317-259BDF4BA77E 4 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Dated: September 8, 2026
Director of Emergency Services
City of Malibu
Approved as to Form:

Dated:

Trevor Rusin
City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: B5499915-1E1E-8D36-8317-259BDF4BA77E 9/8/2026
City of Malibu
23825 Stuart Ranch Road · Malibu, California · 90265-4861 Phone (310) 456-2489 · Fax (310) 456-3356 · www.malibucity.org

PROCLAMATION OF EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
(By the Director of Emergency Services)

AN EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL

EMERGENCY
The Director of Emergency Services for the City of Malibu does hereby find, order and declare as follows:

WHEREAS, the California Emergency Services Act, Government Code section 8550, et seq., authorizes the proclamation of a local emergency when conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of a city exist; and WHEREAS, Title 2, Chapter 2.52 of the City of Malibu’s Municipal Code (MMC) empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when said city is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity and the City Council is not in session; and
WHEREAS MMC section 2.52.020 defines an "emergency" as the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, landslide, epidemic, riot, or earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or the imminent threat of war, but other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this city, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat; and WHEREAS, the following circumstances exist:

Conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen as the result of a sinkhole on Sea Level Drive. These conditions, both actual and threatened, result from the circumstances described in MMC section 2.52.020 and explained more fully in this proclamation.

On September 8, 2026, a sinkhole emerged near 31630 Sea Level Drive. Based on currently available information, conditions associated with the sinkhole are believed to have begun developing on September 7, 2026. The sinkhole is approximately twenty-five to thirty feet deep and thirty by sixty feet wide. Conditions are continuing to be evaluated, and the full extent of the impacts is not yet known.

Docusign Envelope ID: B7BECEEE-2301-8D6D-80AE-5E5195B591E1 Attachment 2
The sinkhole poses imminent danger to the homes and residents along Sea Level Drive.

As of the time of this proclamation, seven residences have been red-tagged due to hazardous conditions resulting from the sinkhole, and an additional 24 residences will be red-tagged due to the loss of safe vehicular access. Gas service to the affected area has been shut off, and water service may also be discontinued as conditions warrant. These circumstances have significantly impaired access to affected properties and created conditions requiring immediate emergency response and protective measures.

Conditions are likely to worsen with forecasted high tides and rains. Hurricane Marie has caused increased rainfall and high surf. A Coastal Flood Advisory has been issued until 11:00 p.m. on September 8, 2026. An El Niño rainy season is forecasted for fall and winter 2026.

According to the NOAA Climate Prediction Center, the El Niño weather pattern is strengthening, with a greater than 90% chance of a very strong (Super) event. A strengthening "super" El Niño brings a high risk of record sea levels, severe coastal flooding, and dramatic beach narrowing to the California coast this winter.

Emergency personnel access is severely constrained and may be impassable, due to the large portion of the road that has collapsed. The intact portion of the roadway is too narrow to accommodate emergency response vehicles, including fire engines and other large apparatus, creating a substantial risk to public safety and emergency response capabilities.

The City Council of the City of Malibu is not in session (and cannot immediately be called into session);

NOW, THEREFORE, THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES HEREBY does hereby find that a local emergency exists as discussed above and proclaims that a local state of emergency now exists throughout the City; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that during the existence of said local emergency, the powers, functions, and duties of the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by city and state law, by ordinances, and resolutions of this city, and by the City of Malibu Emergency Operations Plan, as approved by the City Council on October 14, 2024.

ADOPTED this 8
th day of September 2026.

By: ______________________________
Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Director of Emergency Services
ATTEST:
__________________________
Kelsey Pettijohn, City Clerk
(seal)
Docusign Envelope ID: B7BECEEE-2301-8D6D-80AE-5E5195B591E1 This proclamation has been issued in accordance with applicable law, is in effect and carries the force of law until September 15, 2026 on which date it expires unless the declaration of local emergency is ratified by the City Council within 7 days of this date.

REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Trevor Rusin, Assistant City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: B7BECEEE-2301-8D6D-80AE-5E5195B591E1

Agenda Item # 5.A.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Tyler Eaton, Assistant Community Development Director Reviewed by: Yolanda Bundy, Community Development Director Approved by: Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Date prepared: September 1, 2026 Meeting date: September 14, 2026 Subject: Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 26-002 and Zoning Text Amendment No. 26-002 – An Amendment to Chapter 2 (Definitions) of the Local Coastal Program Local Implementation Plan and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code to Add a Definition of Beachfront (Continued from August 24, 2026)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) After the City Attorney reads the title of the ordinance, introduce on first reading Ordinance No. 537 (Attachment 1), approving Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 26-002 and Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 26-002 to add a definition of Beachfront to Chapter 2 (Definitions) of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) and finding the action to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2) Direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 537 for the September 28, 2026 City Council Regular meeting and, if adopted, direct the filing of LCPA No. 26-002 (Ordinance No. 537) with the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for certification.

FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for this project is included in the Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY: This item advances Goal 1, Objective 1.2 of the 2025-2028 Strategic Plan by modernizing development policies to improve clarity and consistency.

DISCUSSION: The item before the City Council is consideration of amendments to add a new definition of Beachfront to LIP Section 2.1 (General Definitions) and MMC Section

17.02.060 (Definitions). This term is currently not defined in the LIP or MMC, and its City Council Meeting
9-14-26
Item

5.A.

Agenda Item # 5.A.
inclusion would be beneficial when applying development standards to projects whether on the beach or not. The proposed definition would not change any City practices or policies but would memorialize the City’s longstanding application of this term in its codes.

Preparation of the Beachfront definition was directed by the City Council on December 8, 2025, by Resolution No. 25-56.

The ordinance amendments and full chronology are provided within Attachment 1 and represent the operative ordinance text recommended for adoption.

On August 24, 2026 Regular City Council meeting, based on feedback received from a councilmember prior to the meeting, an alternate definition was presented to the City Council alongside the proposed definition. The alternate definition would not change the structure of the proposed definition but was intended to provide further clarification for its application. After deliberation, the item was continued to the September 14, 2026 meeting to allow more time for consideration. The Council generally agreed with the alternate version but wanted to give staff more time to make sure there were no issues with the changes, since some of the modifications came the day of the meeting. The Council also requested staff come back with a version that included the word “road” as another measure to which beachfront development would not apply if a road was in between the parcel and the beach/ocean.

Since the August 24, 2026 meeting, staff continued to work with councilmembers to further refine the definition. The objective was to make the definition clearer to all parties (staff, the public, policy makers, and legal authorities alike). The final proposed definition is included later in this report incorporating all of the Council requested modifications.

Planning Commission Recommendation
On May 18, 2026, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 26-20 (Attachment 2) recommending that the City Council approve LCPA No. 26-002 and ZTA No. 26-002.

No changes to the draft ordinance presented to the Planning Commission were recommended and Ordinance No. 537 remains unchanged. The Planning Commission discussed what standards would be applied in the event of a lot merger between a nonbeachfront parcel and beachfront parcel. Staff clarified that non-beachfront standards would still be applied to the newly formed parcel based on the criteria in the definition.

Zoning Ordinance Revisions and Code Enforcement Subcommittee Feedback The proposed definition was reviewed by the City Council’s Zoning Ordinance Revisions and Code Enforcement Subcommittee (ZORACES) at its meeting on March 26, 2026. The subcommittee voted 2-0 to proceed with the definition as recommended by staff to the Planning Commission for review. For clarity to the public, the subcommittee provided the following feedback:

Agenda Item # 5.A.
1) Clarify that the LCPA/ZTA would not be changing any City practices or policies but rather memorializing the City’s longstanding practice when applying beachfront development standards; (Achieved on both the Planning Commission staff report and this Council report)
2) In the staff presentation, include enhanced mapping of example areas using the City’s GIS and Google Earth; (Achieved on both the Planning Commission presentation and further strengthened in the Council presentation) and 3) In the staff presentation, include Broad Beach Road in the examples of when beachfront development standards apply. (Achieved on both the Planning Commission presentation and in the Council presentation) Background
When applying development standards to projects requiring setbacks, height, impermeable coverage, two-thirds calculation, and Total Development Square Footage (TDSF), the LIP and MMC provide a different set of development standards for beachfront and non-beachfront projects. Beachfront development standards allow less setbacks and increased height than non-beachfront development standards. Additionally, beachfront development is not subject to the impermeable coverage, two-thirds calculation, and TDSF limitations that are otherwise applied to non-beachfront development. Since these limitations do not apply to beachfront development, it is important for the City to clearly define what parcels are subject to beachfront development standards to prevent nonbeachfront development from mistakenly leveraging those allowances. Beachfront parcels are generally smaller and more constrained in size, which is why previous City policymakers established reduced development standards to account for their limited developable area. In contrast, many non-beachfront parcels are larger, reflecting Malibu’s rural nature and providing ample space for development. Non-beachfront parcels have limitations on development area, stricter setback and regulations related to clustering development in order to preserve natural areas while on beachfront parcels, the primary goal of the development standards is to protect beach resources related to environmental quality, public access, and scenic corridors. There are distinct differences in the characteristics of these two types of parcels in Malibu that warrant a clear definition so their purpose is not misused.

Neither the LIP nor MMC provide a definition of Beachfront or Non-Beachfront and, while in most cases the distinction between the two is obvious, there are nuances with the location of development and configuration of some ocean-fronting parcels in the City that have resulted in ambiguity for applicants, the City’s reviewers, and decision-makers. In practice, the Planning Division and the CCC through their review of development projects in the City, have historically qualified that beachfront development standards apply based on a parcel’s orientation to the coast, the zoning designation, and the location of the structure. It should be noted that the City and CCC have historically agreed on what is

Agenda Item # 5.A.
considered a beachfront parcel. Geologic characteristics associated with the location of the primary use structure, such as the footprint of a residence as it is situated on a parcel, is a defining factor and not just the location of the parcel itself.

Establishing a definition of Beachfront in the LIP and MMC would provide clarity to the public and City, improve consistency in project review, and reduce the need for case-bybase interpretations. It would also better position the City if challenges to a project's development standards were made by an applicant looking to maximize the extra code allowances of beachfront development that are intended to be for the typical constrained beachfront parcel.

Definition Framework
The proposed definition would align LIP Section 2.1 (General Definitions) and MMC Section 17.02.060 (Definitions) with the City’s longstanding practice for qualifying when beachfront development standards apply.

The structure of the proposed definition was based on the following three components:
1) Physical Relationship to the Pacific Ocean: A parcel must directly abut the ocean.

This component is important to ensure beachfront development standards are applied to parcels adjacent to the coast and not parcels adjacent to other low-lying areas, such as lagoons or blue-line streams; and
2) Consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Maps: A parcel must not be located within the General Plan, zoning code, or LCP land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) due to the lower-intensity development pattern envisioned for the RR residential land use and minimum lot size of one acre. This component is important because several parcels in the City are designated as RR and are oriented along the coast, as well as typically being larger in lot size. These lots are typically larger in size and have development that is separated from the beach by elevated landforms covered in the paragraph below. Allowing the use of beachfront development standards for these large RR parcels along the coast could allow for the parcels to develop in a relatively dense pattern that would not be consistent with the rural ambiance envisioned by the General Plan for such areas; and 3) Geologic Characteristics of a Beachfront Environment: The footprint of the primary use structure of a parcel must be reflective of geologic characteristics of a beachfront environment such as representing a low-lying coastal landform contiguous to the beach and not being separated from the beach by a coastal bluff, cliff, hill, or other prominent elevated coastal landform. This component is important because some parcels in the City are oriented along the coast and not within the RR land use designation, such as parcels in the Single Family Medium (SFM) land

Agenda Item # 5.A.
use designation; however, the location of proposed development for a primary use is separated from the beach by a coastal bluff, hill, or some other prominent coastal landform. Typically, parcels that include coastal bluffs or other prominent elevated coastal landforms are also larger in lot size than the parcels that are reflective of a beachfront environment. Allowing the use of beachfront development standards for parcels along the coast that are separated from the beach by a coastal bluff or some other prominent coastal landform would allow for development much larger than intended by the General Plan.

Proposed Definition
The proposed definition would read:

BEACHFRONT: The term “beachfront” (including “beach-front”) means a lot, parcel and/or property that (i) has at least one lot line within or directly contiguous to either the Pacific Ocean or beach directly contiguous to the ocean, (ii) does not have a zoning designation of Rural Residential, and (iii) has an existing or proposed primary use structure that is sited or will be sited directly on the beach and/or within a lowlying shoreline area contiguous to the beach or Pacific Ocean and not separated from the beach or ocean by a road, coastal bluff, cliff, hill, or other elevated coastal landform. The primary use structure must be within 300 feet from the mean high tide line at its closest point to the ocean. An ancillary structure on the beach shall not subject the lot, parcel and/or property to beachfront development standards if the primary use structure is not located on the beach. A lot, parcel, and/or property not meeting these criteria shall be considered non-beachfront.

General Plan & LCP Consistency
The proposed amendment is supported by the following General Plan Mission Statement and Land Use (LU) Element, and LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) policies.

General Plan
1) Mission Statement (excerpt): Malibu will maintain its rural character by establishing programs and policies that avoid suburbanization and commercialization of its natural and cultural resources.
2) LU Policy 1.1.1: The City shall protect the natural environment by regulating design and permitting only land uses compatible with the natural environment. 3) LU Policy 1.1.4: The City shall preserve the City's rural residential character. 4) LU Policy 1.1.5: The City shall require careful site planning which blends development with the natural topography.
5) LU Policy 2.3.2: The City shall discourage “mansionization” by establishing limits on height, bulk, and square footage for all new and remodel single-family residences.

Agenda Item # 5.A.
6) LU Policy 2.4.1: The City shall preserve and protect vistas and large open areas that contribute to the rural feeling of the area.
7) LU Policy 6.1.1: The City shall use development standards and procedures that protect the property owners' reasonable use of their land consistent with the goals and policies of this General Plan.

LUP
1) LUP Policy 5.7: New development shall conform to the hillside management provisions of the LIP, including measures to minimize impacts to scenic and visual resources and to minimize the risk from hazards. The measures include but are not limited to limiting grading and retaining walls, restricting development on steep slopes, protecting ridgelines, and applying siting and design restrictions (scenic and visual policies). The slope density criteria of the subdivision ordinance shall apply to sloping terrain and be applied in combination with the base land use designation in order to determine the maximum allowable density.
2) LUP Policy 5.25: In order to protect the rural character, improvements, which create a suburban atmosphere such as sidewalks and streetlights, shall be avoided in any rural residential designation.
3) LUP Policy 6.5: New development shall be sited and designed to minimize adverse impacts on scenic areas visible from scenic roads or public viewing areas to the maximum feasible extent. If there is no feasible building site location on the proposed project site where development would not be visible, then the development shall be sited and designed to minimize impacts on scenic areas visible from scenic highways or public viewing areas, through measures including, but not limited to, siting development in the least visible portion of the site, breaking up the mass of new structures, designing structures to blend into the natural hillside setting, restricting the building maximum size, reducing maximum height standards, clustering development, minimizing grading, incorporating landscape elements, and where appropriate, berming.
4) LUP Policy 6.7: The height of structures shall be limited to minimize impacts to visual resources. The maximum allowable height, except for beachfront lots, shall be 18 feet above existing or finished grade, whichever is lower. On beachfront lots, or where found appropriate through Site Plan Review, the maximum height shall be 24 feet (flat roofs) or 28 feet (pitched roofs) above existing or finished grade, whichever is lower. Chimneys and rooftop antennas may be permitted to extend above the permitted height of the structure.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Pursuant to CEQA, the proposed LCP and MMC amendment actions have been analyzed by the Planning Commission and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the CCC as set forth in Section

Agenda Item # 5.A.
21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 of the Public Resources Code.

PUBLIC NOTICE: The City published a Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Availability of LCP Amendments in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu on July 16, 2026 (Attachment 3). Additionally, the interested parties list for LCPAs and ZTAs were sent a courtesy email with the date of the agendized City Council item and instructions for participation. As of the writing of the report, staff has not received public comments.

SUMMARY: Staff recommends that the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 537 approving LCPA No. 26-002 and ZTA No. 26-002 to add a definition of Beachfront to LIP Section 2.1 (General Definitions) and MMC Section 17.02.060 (Definitions). If adopted after a second reading of the ordinance on September 14, 2026, staff would file LCPA No. 26-002 with the CCC for certification. The LCPA (and ZTA as a corollary amendment) would become effective upon certification by the CCC.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Ordinance No. 537

2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 26-20

3. Public Hearing Notice
Attachment 1
ORDINANCE NO. 537

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MALIBU APPROVING LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 26-002 AND ZONING TEXT
AMENDMENT NO. 26-002 TO ADD A DEFINITION OF BEACHFRONT TO CHAPTER 2 (DEFINITIONS) OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE MALIBU MUNICIPAL CODE; TO DIRECT THE FILING OF THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR CERTIFICATION; AND

FINDING THE ACTION TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The City Council of the City of Malibu does ordain as follows.

SECTION 1. Recitals.

A. On December 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25-56 to initiate the preparation of a Beachfront definition.

B. On March 26, 2026, the City Council Zoning Ordinance Revision and Code Enforcement Subcommittee (ZORACES) met to discuss the proposed amendments and provided feedback for staff to incorporate as the ordinance advances to the Planning Commission.

C. On April 23, 2026, a Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to interested parties.

D. On May 18, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment in Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 26-002 and Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 26-002, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information on the record, and adopted Resolution No. 26-20 recommending the City Council approval. No changes to the draft ordinance presented to the Planning Commission were recommended.

E. On July 26, 2026, a Notice of City Council Public Hearing Notice of Availability of Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendments was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to interested parties indicating that the City Council would hold a public hearing on August 10, 2026, to consider the proposed ordinance.

F. On August 10, 2026, prior to the opening of the hearing, the City Council continued the item to the August 24, 2026 Regular City Council meeting. No new evidence or correspondence was received in connection with the August 10 meeting.

G. On August 24, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing; however, after deliberations, the Council continued the hearing to the September 14, 2026 Regular City Council meeting.

Ordinance No. 537

____________________
H. On September 14, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed LCPA No. 26-002 and ZTA No 26-002, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information on the record.

The City Council conducted a first reading and introduction of the Ordinance and directed staff to set a second reading for adoption of Ordinance No. 537, approving LCPA No. 26-002 and ZTA No. 26-002. If adopted, the City Council directed staff to file the LCPA with the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for certification.

SECTION 2. Environmental Review.

The City Council finds that pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed LCP and Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) amendment actions have been analyzed and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the CCC as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 of the Public Resources Code.

SECTION 3. Local Coastal Program Amendment Findings.

Pursuant to LCP Local Implementation Plan (LIP) Section 19.6, the City Council hereby makes the following findings to approve LCPA No. 26-002 as stated in Section 4 of this ordinance.

A. Section 30251 of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that the scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. The Section requires that coastal development must protect scenic views, be visually compatible with surroundings, and, where feasible, restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

Highly scenic areas, including areas to and along the ocean, scenic roads, and public viewing areas, require development to be subordinate to the setting. Establishing a proper definition of “Beachfront” will ensure that only true beachfront development utilize the standards which are meant for more constrained parcels along the coast bound by the ocean and limited parcel width, and further preserve more scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas in Malibu.

B. Chapters 5 and 6 of the Malibu LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) incorporate the Coastal Act’s development policies, including Section 30251, to minimize impacts on scenic resources.

This includes restricting development and applying siting and design restrictions.

C. LIP Chapter 3 implements the LUP by requiring development standards applicable to beachfront and non-beachfront development. Non-beachfront development standards require increased setbacks and lower heights than beachfront development standards, as well as restrictions on impermeable coverage, limits on the volume of development above 18 feet (twothirds calculation), and Total Development Square Footage (TDSF) limitations. This is due to nonbeachfront parcels being larger in size where those extra limitations help to preserve Malibu’s coastal resources. Historically, the City and CCC through its review of coastal development have Ordinance No. 537

____________________
qualified that beachfront development standards apply based on a parcel’s orientation to the coast, the zoning designation, and the location of the structure. Geologic characteristics associated with the location of the primary use structure, such as the footprint of a single-family residence as it is situated on a parcel, is a defining factor and not just the location of the parcel itself. Establishing a definition of Beachfront in the LIP would further implement Chapters 5 and 6 of the LUP and Section 30251 of the Coastal Act by ensuring the appropriate application of non-beachfront development standards are being applied to parcels that do not meet the eligibility components of a beachfront parcel.

SECTION 4. Local Coastal Program Amendment.

Section 2.1 (General Definitions) of the LIP is hereby amended to add the following new definition as follows:

BEACHFRONT: The term “beachfront” (including “beach-front”) means a lot, parcel and/or property that (i) has at least one lot line within or directly contiguous to either the Pacific Ocean or beach directly contiguous to the ocean, (ii) does not have a zoning designation of Rural Residential, and (iii) has an existing or proposed primary use structure that is sited or will be sited directly on the beach and/or within a low-lying shoreline area contiguous to the beach or Pacific Ocean and not separated from the beach or ocean by a road, coastal bluff, cliff, hill, or other elevated coastal landform. The primary use structure must be within 300 feet from the mean high tide line at its closest point to the ocean. An ancillary structure on the beach shall not subject the lot, parcel and/or property to beachfront development standards if the primary use structure is not located on the beach.

A lot, parcel, and/or property not meeting these criteria shall be considered non-beachfront.

SECTION 5. Zoning Text Amendment Findings.

Pursuant to MMC Section 17.74.040(C), the City Council hereby makes the following findings to approve ZTA No. 26-002 as stated in Section 6 of this ordinance.

A. The subject zoning text amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The proposed amendment serves to enhance the Malibu General Plan Mission Statement and protect the natural environment and rural residential character by regulating land use, discouraging “mansionization,” and preserving vistas and open areas.

B. The City Council held a public hearing, reviewed the subject zoning text amendment application for compliance with the City of Malibu General Plan and MMC, and finds that ZTA No. 26-002 is consistent with the General Plan. The City Council found that the Beachfront definition is consistent with the historical application of the MMC and LCP by the City and CCC and does not change how Malibu has applied beachfront development standards previously. Rather, it clarifies what is and is not subject to beachfront development standards which differs from non-beachfront development standards.

Ordinance No. 537

____________________
SECTION 6. Zoning Text Amendment.

Section 17.02.060 (Definitions) of the MMC is hereby amended to add the following new definition as follows:
“Beachfront” (including “beach-front”) means a lot, parcel and/or property that (i) has at least one lot line within or directly contiguous to either the Pacific Ocean or beach directly contiguous to the ocean, (ii) does not have a zoning designation of Rural Residential, and (iii) has an existing or proposed primary use structure that is sited or will be sited directly on the beach and/or within a low-lying shoreline area contiguous to the beach or Pacific Ocean and not separated from the beach or ocean by a road, coastal bluff, cliff, hill, or other elevated coastal landform. The primary use structure must be within 300 feet from the mean high tide line at its closest point to the ocean. An ancillary structure on the beach shall not subject the lot, parcel and/or property to beachfront development standards if the primary use structure is not located on the beach. A lot, parcel, and/or property not meeting these criteria shall be considered non-beachfront.

SECTION 7. Submittal to California Coastal Commission.

The City Council hereby directs staff to submit the LCPA to the CCC per Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 13544(c).

SECTION 8. Effective Date.

LCPA No. 26-002 and corollary ZTA No. 26-002 approved in this Ordinance shall become effective only upon final certification of the LCPA by the CCC.

SECTION 9. Severability.

Should any section, subsection, clause, or provision of this Ordinance for any reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; it being hereby expressly declared and this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, and ratified irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 10. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance.

Ordinance No. 537

____________________
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of ____ 2026. ____________________________
BRUCE SILVERSTEIN, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
Date: _________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney

CITY OF MALIBU PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 26—20
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DETERMINING THE AMENDMENTS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 26-002 AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 26—002 TO ADD A DEFINITION OF BEACHFRONT TO CHAPTER 2 (DEFINITIONS) OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE MALIBU MUNICIPAL CODE The Planning Commission Ofthe City of Malibu does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:

Section I. Recitals.

A. On December 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25-56 to initiate the preparation of a Beachfront definition.

B. On March 26, 2026, the Zoning Ordinance Revision and Code Enforcement Subcommittee (ZORACES) met to discuss the proposed amendments and provided feedback for staff to incorporate as the ordinance advances to the Planning Commission.

C. On April 23, 2026, a Notice ofPlanning Commission Public Hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to interested parties.

D. On May l8, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment in Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 26—002 and Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 26—002, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information on the record.

Section 2. Environmental Review.

Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) amendment actions have been analyzed by the Planning Commission and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as ceitifled under Section 21 080.5 of the Public Resources Code.

Section 3. Local Coastal Program Amendment Findings.

Pursuant to LIP Section 19.6, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings and recommends the City Council adopt the ordinance in Exhibit A amending the LIP as stated in Section 4 of the ordinance.

Attachment 2
Resolution NO 26-20

A. Section 30251 of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that the scenic and Visual qualities of coastal areas be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. The Section requires that coastal development must protect scenic views, be Visually compatible with surroundings, and, where feasible, restore and enhance Visual quality in Visually degraded areas. Highly scenic areas, including areas to and along the ocean, scenic roads, and public Viewing areasi require development to be subordinate to the setting. Establishing a proper definition of “Beachfront” will ensure that only true beachfront development utilizes the standards which are meant for more constrained parcels along the coast bound by the ocean and limited parcel width, and further preserve more scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas in Malibu.

B. Chapters 5 and 6 of the Malibu LUP incorporate the Coastal Act’s development policiesa including Section 30251, to minimize impacts on scenic resources. This includes restricting development and applying siting and design restrictions.

C. LIP Chapter 3 implements the LUP by requiring development standards applicable to beachfront and non—beachfront development. Non-beachfront development standards require increased setbacks and lower heights than beachfront development standards, as well as restrictions on impermeable coverage, limits on the volume of development above 18 feet (two- thirds calculation), and Total Development Square Footage (TDSF) limitations. This is due to non- beachfront parcels being larger in size where those extra limitations help to preserve Malibu’s coastal resources. Historically, the City and CCC through its review ofcoastal development have qualified that beachfront development standards apply based on a parcel’s orientation to the coast, the zoning designation, and the location of the structure. Geologic characteristics associated with the location of the primary use structure, such as the footprint of a single—family residence as it is situated on a parcel, is a defining factor and not just the location of the parcel itself. Establishing a definition of Beachfront in the LIP would further implement Chapters 5 and 6 of the LUP and Section 30251 of the Coastal Act by ensuring the appropriate application of non-beachfront development standards are being applied to parcels that do not meet the eligibility components of a beachfront parcel.

Section 4. Zoning Text Amendment Findings.

Pursuant to MMC Section 17.74.040, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings and recommends the City Council adopt the ordinance in Exhibit A amending the MMC Title 17 (Zoning) as stated in Section 6 of the ordinance.

A. The subject zoning text amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The proposed amendment serves to enhance the Malibu General Plan Mission Statement and protect the natural environment and rural residential character by regulating land use, discouraging “mansionization,” and preserving vistas and open areas.

B. The Planning Commission held a public hearing, reviewed the subject zoning text amendment application for compliance with the City of Malibu General Plan and MMC, and finds Resolution NO 26—20

that ZTA N0. 26—002 is consistent and recommends approval. The Planning Commission found that the Beachfront definition is consistent with the historical application ofthe MMC and LCP by the City and CCC and does not change how Malibu has applied beachfront development standards previously. Rather, it clarifies what is and is not subject to beachfront development standards which differs from non-beachfront development standards.

Section 5. Planning Commission Action.

Based on the foregoing findings and evidence contained in the record the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve LCPA No. 26—002 and ZTA No. 26—002 contained in Sections 3 and 4 ofthis resolution.

Section 6. The Planning Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18”‘ day ofMay 2026.
{/6 // g/ ié SKTLAdlPEAK, Plarining Commission Chair
ATTEST:
a‘x ‘ c §c< i3 ‘ vvs
j
1 ¥ f"_ar med, t ’“T‘vgik
REBECCA EVANS, Recording Secretary
Exhibit A: Recommended Ordinance for Council Adoption
l CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION NO. 26-20 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City oflVlalibu at the regular meeting thereof held on the 1811‘ day of May, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: 5 Commissioners: Leonard, Riddick, Mazza, Kamins. Peak NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

REBECCA EVANS, Recording Secretary
0 0
0 Resolution NO 26—20

Exhibit A
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MALIBU APPROVING LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 26—002 AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 26-002 TO ADD A DEFINITION OF BEACHFRONT TO CHAPTER 2 (DEFINITIONS) OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE MALIBU MUNICIPAL CODE; AND FINDING THE ACTION TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT The City Council ofthe City of Malibu does ordain as follows:

SECTION l. Findings.

A. On December 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25-56 to initiate the preparation of a Beachfront definition.

B. On March 26. 2026, the Zoning Ordinance Revision and Code Enforcement Subcommittee (ZORACES) met to discuss the proposed amendments and provided feedback for staffto incorporate as the ordinance advances to the Planning Commission.

C. On April 23, 2026, aNotice ofPlanning Commission Public Hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to interested parties.

D. On May l8. 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment in Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 26-002 and Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 26—002, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written reports. public testimony. and other information on the record.

E. On xxx xx, 2026, a Notice of City Council Public Hearing and Notice of Availability of Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendments was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to interested parties indicating that the City Council would a hold public hearing on XXX xx, 2026 to consider the proposed Ordinance.

E. On xxx xx. 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendments, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information in the record. The City Council conducted a first reading and introduction of the Ordinance and directed staff to set a second reading for adoption of Ordinance No. xxx, approving LCPA No. 26-002 and ZTA No. 26-002.

Resoluti0n NO 26—20

SECTION 2. Environmental Review.

The City Council finds that pursuant t0 the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed LCP and Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) amendment actions have been analyzed and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the ceitifled City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 ofthe Public Resources Code.

SECTION 3. Local Coastal Program Amendment Findings.

Pursuant to LCP Local Implementation Plan (LIP) Section 19.6, the City Council hereby makes the following findings to approve LCPA No. 26-002 as stated in Section 4 ofthis ordinance.

A. Section 30251 of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that the scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. The Section requires that coastal development must protect scenic views, be visually compatible with surroundings, and, where feasible, restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

Highly scenic areas, including areas to and along the ocean, scenic roads, and public viewing areas, require development to be subordinate to the setting. Establishing a proper definition of “Beachfront” will ensure that only true beachfront development utilize the standards which are meant for more constrained parcels along the coast bound by the ocean and limited parcel width, and further preserve more scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas in Malibu.

B. Chapters 5 and 6 ofthe Malibu LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) incorporate the Coastal Act’s development policies, including Section 30251, to minimize impacts on scenic resources.

This includes restricting development and applying siting and design restrictions.

C. LIP Chapter 3 implements the LUP by requiring development standards applicable to beachfront and non—beachfront development. Non—beachfront development standards require increased setbacks and lower heights than beachfront development standards, as well as restrictions on impermeable coverage, limits on the volume of development above 18 feet (two- thirds calculation), and Total Development Square Footage (TDSF) limitations. This is due to nonbeachfront parcels being larger in size where those extra limitations help to preserve Malibu’s coastal resources. Historically, the City and CCC through its review of coastal development have qualified that beachfront development standards apply based on a parcel’s orientation to the coast, the zoning designation, and the location of the structure. Geologic characteristics associated with the location of the primary use structure, such as the footprint of a single-family residence as it is situated on a parcel, is a defining factor and notjust the location ofthe parcel itself. Establishing a definition of Beachfront in the LIP would further implement Chapters 5 and 6 of the LUP and Section 30251 of the Coastal Act by ensuring the appropriate application of non—beachfront Resolution NO 26-20

development standards are being applied to parcels that do not meet the eligibility components of a beachfront parcel.

SECTION 4. Local Coastal Program Amendments.

Pursuant to LIP Section 19.5(B), the LIP shall be amended as follows:

A. Amend LIP Section 2.1 (Definitions) to include a new definition as follows:

BEACHFRONT: A parcel is considered beachfront when one of its parcel boundary lines is the Pacific Ocean or beach directly adjacent to the Pacific Ocean, the parcel does not have a zoning designation of Rural Residential, and the site of proposed development is either directly on the beach or within a low—lying shoreline area contiguous with the beach and not separated from the beach by a coastal bluff, cliff, hill, or other elevated coastal landform. Parcels not meeting these criteria shall be considered non-beachfront.

Beachfront development standards shall only apply to parcels meeting this definition where the primary use structure is located in one of these areas. An ancillary structure on the beach shall not constitute a parcel to be beachfront ifthe primary use structure is not located on the beach.

SECTION 5. Zoning Text Amendment Findings.

Pursuant to MMC Section 17.74.040(C). the City Council hereby makes the following findings to approve ZTA No. 26—002 as stated in Section 6 ofthis ordinance.

A. The subject zoning text amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, gcneral land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The proposed amendment serves to enhance the Malibu General Plan Mission Statement and protect the natural environment and rural residential character by regulating land use, discouraging “mansionization,” and preserving vistas and open areas.

B. The City Council held a public hearing, reviewed the subject zoning text amendment application for compliance with the City ofMalibu General Plan and MMC. and finds that ZTA No. 26-002 is consistent with the General Plan. The City Council found that the Beachfront definition is consistent with the historical application ofthe MMC and LCP by the City and CCC and does not change how Malibu has applied beachfront development standards previously. Rather, it clarifies what is and is not subject to beachfront development standards which differs from non—beachfront development standards.

SECTION 6. Zoning Text Amendments.

Pursuant to MMC Section 17.74.040(D). the MMC shall be amended as follows:

A. Amend MMC Section 17.02.060 (Definitions) to include a new definition as follows:

Resolution NO 26—20
Pag€ 8 of 9
“Beachfront” means that a parcel is considered beachfront when one of its parcel boundary lines is the Pacific Ocean or beach directly adjacent to the Pacific Ocean, the parcel does not have a zoning designation of Rural Residentialj and the site ofproposed development is either directly on the beach or within a low-lying shoreline area contiguous with the beach and not separated from the beach by a coastal bluff, cliff, hill, 0r other elevated coastal landform, Parcels not meeting these criteria shall be considered non—beachfront.

Beachfront development standards shall only apply to parcels meeting this definition where the primaiy use structure is located in one of these areas. An ancillary structure on the beach shall not constitute a parcel to be beachfront ifthe primary use structure is not located on the beach.

SECTION 7. Submittal to California Coastal Commission.

The City Council hereby directs staff to submit the LCPA to the CCC per Title l4, California Code ofRegulations Section l3544(c).

SECTION 8. Effective Date.

LCPA No. 26—002 and corollary ZTA No. 26-002 approved in this Ordinance shall become effective only upon final certification of the LCPA by the CCC.

SECTION 9. Severabilitv.

Should any section, subsection, clause, or provision of this Ordinance for any reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional. such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions ofthis Ordinance; it being hereby expressly declared and this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, and ratified irrespective ofthe fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 10. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of . 2026.

BRUCE SILVERSTEIN, Mayor
Resolution NO 26—20

ATTEST:

KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(saal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney
Attachment 3

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

CITY OF MALIBU

CITY COUNCIL

NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY

OF LCP AMENDMENT MATERIALS
The Malibu City Council will hold a public hearing on MONDAY, August 10, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Malibu City Hall, 23825 Stuart Ranch Road, Malibu, CA on the project identified below.

Public comment can be submitted ahead of the public hearing to [email protected] for inclusion in the public record. To participate during the public hearing, please review the meeting agenda posted at MalibuCity.org/AgendaCenter and follow the directions for public participation.

BEACHFRONT DEFINITION
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 26-002 and Zoning Text Amendment No. 26-002 – Consider the proposed amendments to Chapter 2 (Definitions) of the Local Coastal Program Local Implementation Plan and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code to add a definition of Beachfront
The proposed amendments were previously considered by the Planning Commission on May 18, 2026, during which the Commission provided recommendations to the City Council.

Location: Citywide Project
Case Planner: Tyler Eaton, Assistant Community Development Director (310) 456-2489, extension 273
[email protected]
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Malibu Municipal Code amendment actions have been analyzed by the Community Development Director and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCP Amendment for review and certification by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 of the Public Resources Code.

The amendments must be approved by the City Council and the LCP amendment (LCPA) requires certification by the CCC before it takes effect.

A written staff report will be available at or before the hearing for the project. All persons wishing to address the Council regarding this matter will be afforded an opportunity in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS – Copies of all related documents can be reviewed by any interested person at City Hall, Malibu Public Library, and the CCC District office during regular business hours. Oral and written comments may be presented to the City Council on, or before, the date of the meeting.

IF YOU CHALLENGE THE CITY’S ACTION IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING

ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING

DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE CITY, AT OR PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.

Yolanda Bundy, Community Development Director
Publish Date: July 16, 2026

Agenda Item # 6.A.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Tatiana Holden, Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved by: Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Date prepared: September 4, 2026 Meeting date: September 14, 2026 Subject: Assessment District Formation for the PCH Wastewater Project RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction to staff to either: 1) continue with bifurcated formation of two Assessment Districts; or 2) to proceed with a single formation of an Assessment District to fund the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) Wastewater Project.

FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for these services is included in the Adopted Budget for FY 2026-27 in Account No. 310-9128-5100 (Pacific Coast Highway Wastewater Connection Line Project). All expenses related to this project will be tracked and reimbursed from an assessment district upon its formation.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: This item supports the City’s 2025-2028 Strategic Plan Goal 1: Support Community Rebuilding and Long-Term Recovery and Goal 3: Advance Infrastructure Resilience.

Goal 1: Support Community Rebuilding and Long-Term Recovery Strategy: Convert the waterfront properties impacted by the Palisades Fire from their existing septic systems to a centralized wastewater collection and treatment system potentially reducing the reconstruction and long-term maintenance costs.

Goal 3: Advance Infrastructure Resilience
Objective 3.1: Develop and fund a comprehensive Infrastructure Resilience Plan Strategy: Upgrade aging coastal wastewater infrastructure to protect public health, coastal ecosystems, and ensure compliance with environmental regulations.

DISCUSSION: At the February 23, 2026, City Council meeting, staff provided an update on the preliminary design report and received direction from City Council to proceed with City Council Meeting
09-14-26
Item

6.A.

Agenda Item # 6.A.

The anticipated project timeline for a project with a bifurcated assessment district approach is provided below.

Task Item Projected Implementation
Schedule
Engineer’s Report to Fund Design + Stakeholder Outreach (8 months)
07/01/2026 – 03/01/2027
Formation of Assessment District 1 (2 months) 03/01/2027 – 05/01/2027 Bond Issuance to Fund Design (3 months) 05/01/2027 – 08/01/2027 Project Final Design 65% completion (12 months) 08/01/2027 – 08/01/2028 Final Desing + Bids Received (9 months) 08/01/2028 – 05/01/2029 Engineer’s Report to Fund Construction + Stakeholder
Outreach (9 months)

08/01/2028 – 05/01/2029
Formation of Assessment District 2 (2 months) 05/01/2029 – 07/01/2029 Bond Issuance (3 months) 07/01/2029 – 10/01/2029
Project Construction (33 months) 10/01/2029 – 07/01/2032 On August 26, 2026, staff met with the Council Sewer Ad Hoc Committee comprised of Mayor pro tem Uhring and Councilmember Riggins. The Ad Hoc proposed to investigate revising the bifurcated assessment district formation approach to formation of a single assessment district. The modified approach will not alter the steps outlined for formation of an assessment district with the bifurcated approach but will help to streamline the process and expedite the project timeline.

Task Item Projected
Implementation
Schedule
Engineer’s Report to Fund the Project + Stakeholder
Outreach (8 months)
07/01/2026 – 03/22/2027
Formation of Assessment District (2 months) 03/22/2027 – 05/24/2027 Bond Issuance (3 months) 05/24/2027 – 08/24/2027
Final Design + Bids Received (12 months) 08/24/2027 – 08/24/2028 Project Construction (33 months) 08/24/2028 – 05/24/2031

Agenda Item # 6.A.

The project costs are summarized in the table below.

Project Estimate
Project Management $996,400
Engineering/Design $8,500,000
Permitting/Environmental $2,513,000
Construction Cost* $110,125,000
Construction Management/Inspection $8,810,000
Total Estimated Project Capital Cost $130,944,400
*If the project construction bid amount exceeds the construction cost estimate, a supplemental assessment district formation would be administered.

Next Steps:

If the new approach is approved, the next step would include the City Council’s action to initiate the single assessment proceeding. This includes receiving a presentation of the preliminary assessment engineer’s report, adoption of the necessary resolutions, establishment of a public hearing date, and authorization to mail assessment district notices and ballots to the property owners within the proposed assessment district The Proposition 218 notices and ballots include ballot instructions and explanatory materials that clearly describe the purpose of the assessment district, the design work to be funded, the methodology for the assessments, and the public hearing and balloting process. Staff will conduct community outreach meetings to respond to technical questions from the property owners and the public.

At the public hearing, Council will provide property owners and the community with an opportunity to comment on the proposed assessment district, the assessment engineer’s report, the proposed assessment methodology and the amount of the proposed assessments. The public hearing also provides the property owners the ability to change their assessment ballots prior to the close of the hearing.

The ballots are weighted according to the amount of the proposed assessment assigned to each parcel, rather than counted on a one-parcel, one-vote basis. If the tabulation shows that the ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in support, weighted by assessment amount, a majority protest exists and the City may not impose the assessment. If no majority protest exists, the City Council may consider proceeding with the formation of the assessment district.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

Agenda Item # 7.A.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Tyler Eaton, Assistant Community Development Director Reviewed by: Yolanda Bundy, Community Development Director Approved by: Joseph D. Irvin, City Manager
Trevor Rusin, Interim City Attorney
Date prepared: September 4, 2026 Meeting date: September 14, 2026 Subject: Amend LCP and Zoning Code Interpretation LCP 24/Zoning Code No. 15 to remove Issue No. PF4 (which prohibits processing of SB9 applications within the VHFHSZ of the boundaries of the Palisades Fire)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt amended Zoning / Local Coastal Program (LCP) Interpretation Nos. 15 and 24 respectively (Rebuild Policies) (attached hereto as Attachment 1) removing Issue No. PF4 with an effective date of September 14, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. This item was funded by the general fund as a part of regular City operations associated with fire recovery activities.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: This item is associated with Goal 1 of the City’s Strategic Plan which aims at supporting community rebuilding and long-term recovery following the Palisades Fire.

DISCUSSION: On December 10, 2025, YIMBY Law filed suit (Case No. 25STCP04761) against Governor Newsom, the State of California, and four jurisdictions (the City of Los Angeles, Pasadena, Malibu, and Los Angeles County) challenging the Governor’s Executive Order (EO) N-32-25 and the local policies adopted under it (in Malibu, this was implemented through Issue No. PF4 in Malibu’s Rebuild Policies). Specifically, the lawsuit claims the Order exceeds the scope of the Governor’s emergency authority and is inconsistent with SB 9.

City Council Meeting
09-14-26
Item

7.A.

Agenda Item # 7.A.

Malibu has reached a conditional settlement (Attachment 2) that would result in the City being dismissed from the pending lawsuit if the Council elects to rescind Issue No. PF4.

In such case, the parties have agreed that the City would not be liable for any potential attorney’s fees award in the lawsuit, should YIMBY be successful and be awarded such fees by the Court. The conditional settlement agreement does not require the City to take any action. However, should the City fail to rescind Issue No. PF4 by September 29, 2026, the conditional settlement agreement will be null and void and the City will remain in the lawsuit.

Background
On March 12, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 524, the Disaster Rebuild Ordinance, establishing development standards to facilitate the rebuilding of structures destroyed or damaged by the 2024 Broad Fire, 2024 Franklin Fire, and 2025 Palisades Fire, or in future disasters. The associated LCP Amendment was certified by the California Coastal Commission on April 10, 2025. Generally, property owners may replace a destroyed structure “like-for-like” with up to 10 percent additional height, bulk, or square footage under LIP Section 13.4.6 and MMC Section 17.60.020(C). Through March and April 2025, staff held a series of neighborhood meetings related to the ordinance, which surfaced a number of implementation questions. Staff compiled those questions and the corresponding staff-level policy answers into a single interpretation document for Council consideration entitled as “Rebuild Policies”.

On July 30, 2025, the Governor issued EO N-32-25 which temporarily suspended the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 9 in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) located within the boundaries of the Palisades and Eaton Fires through August 6, 2025. It also authorized local agencies to thereafter elect to use SB 9 review in such areas in whole, in part, or not at all. The Governor issued the order due to “[C]oncern about the potential for widespread SB 9 development concentrated in neighborhoods rebuilding from destructive fires in very high fire hazard severity zones to crowd evacuation routes, and while SB 9 already requires development in these zones to meet updated ingress and egress standards, and allows local governments discretion to deny a project that would have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety that cannot be mitigated, the unprecedented scale of this disaster calls for affording local governments increased discretion to ensure that SB 9 development in the rebuilding areas appropriately accounts for fire safety concerns.”
SB 9, codified in Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411, allows (subject to its provisions) property owners in single family residential zones to split their lots and build up to two residential units on each resulting parcel pursuant to a ministerial process.

Agenda Item # 7.A.

As the entire City of Malibu is located in a VHFHSZ, pursuant to the EO, staff brought forward a new item to add to the Rebuild Policies: Issue No. PF4. The policy states:

The City of Malibu will not accept or process applications under Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 for any project within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within the boundaries of the Palisades areas.

Staff presented the revised draft, including Issue No. PF4 (amongst others) to the Council at a Special City Council meeting on August 27, 2025. The City Council reviewed each issue in the policy document over a series of public meetings and formally adopted the Rebuild Policies (including Issue no. PF4) on October 15, 2025.

It should be noted that the EO does not have an expiration date, but the Governor (or a new Governor) could rescind the EO at any time. Given the State’s current defense in the lawsuit, it is unlikely that the EO will be rescinded by Governor Newsom.

Continued applicability of the Coastal Act and the Malibu LCP SB 9 includes a savings clause that is codified in Government Code sections 65852.21(l) and 66411.7(o) which provides that nothing in the statute supersedes or in any way alters or lessens the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976. Malibu's Local Coastal Program is the City's certified implementation of the Coastal Act, a State Law.

This means that a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) remains required for all SB 9 projects in the Coastal Zone under the LCP whether in the Palisades Fire area or not.

Should the Council rescind Issue No. PF4, a CDP will still be required for any SB 9 project in the Palisades Fire area, as that area lies entirely within the Coastal Zone.

SUMMARY: If the City Council adopts the proposed changes to the Rebuild Policies, removing Issue No. PF4, City Staff will accept, and process, SB 9 applications for projects located within the boundaries of the Palisades Fire. Such projects still require a Coastal Development Permit and must be complaint with the City’s LCP. Upon such action by the Council, the City and YIMBY will file a stipulated request to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice as to the City within 10 days.

Note the changes to the Rebuild Policies are provided in red text within Attachment 1. All language within Attachment 1 that is not in red text has been approved previously by the Council and will remain in place.

ATTACHMENT:

1. Redlines of Council Rebuild Policies Removing Issue No. PF4

2. Settlement Agreement
LCP and Zoning Code Interpretation
(Interpretation of the provisions of the Malibu Local Coastal Program and local Zoning Ordinance as approved by the City Council)
LCP Number: _ 24_ Dated: _October 15, 2025_
Zoning Code Number: 15 Amended: _September 14, 2026_
Community Development Director: Yolanda Bundy
Planning Manager: Tyler Eaton, Assistant Community Development Director Interpreting Body: City Council
MMC and LCP Sections: Various Sections within Title 17 of the MMC and the LCP Title: Rebuild Policies
The City of Malibu has historically been subject to wildfires and other natural disasters that have destroyed property. The City has established a series of ordinances to guide the rebuild process following those disasters. In March of 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 524, the “Disaster Rebuild Ordinance”, which provided relief to those impacted by the 2025 Palisades Fire, 2024 Franklin Fire, and 2024 Broad Fire, but also set new regulations for the rebuilding of structures lost in past and future disasters. Generally, property owners are allowed to replace structures destroyed by a natural disaster with an additional 10 percent height, bulk, or floor area per the Malibu Local Coastal Program’s (LCP) Local Implementation Plan (LIP) Section 13.4.6. Additionally, Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) Section 17.60.020(C) allows for structures destroyed in a natural disaster to be replaced with an additional 10 percent height, bulk, or square footage. In implementing the regulations set forth in Ordinance No. 524 that provide relief from the regular development standards, questions have arisen regarding issues related to the ordinance and rebuilding after disasters. To provide additional clarity, the following interpretations are hereby adopted to provide consistent guidance and application of these provisions:

Issue No. 1: What is “like-for-like”? Property owners are allowed to replace their previous structures that were destroyed “like-for-like” plus 10 percent additional square footage, height, or bulk.

Current Policy: “Like-for-like” means a replacement structure that is compliant with LIP Section

13.4.6 (if applicable) and MMC Section 17.60.020(C) in that it is sited in substantially the same location and is within 110 percent the same height, bulk, or square footage of the previous structure.

Bulk (volume) is the constraining factor. A replacement structure cannot exceed 110 percent the volume of the previous structure. The extra 10 percent bulk (volume) can be allocated to extra height or extra square footage so long as it does not exceed 110 percent the bulk (volume), square footage, or height of the previous structure. For example, adding 10 percent extra square footage may result in not being able to add extra height because the extra bulk was already expended on the extra square footage. Or vice versa, if the extra 10 percent bulk has already been expended on extra height, then the applicant may not get extra square footage. Previously existing bulk can be shifted around so long as the replacement structure is sited within substantially the same location as the previous structure, ATTACHMENT 1
and the shifting of bulk does not exceed 110 percent the height or square footage of the previous structure. For non-beachfront properties, if bulk is shifted to other parts of the structure and the bulk exceeds 18 feet in height and is outside the original building envelope, the shifted bulk will require a site plan review pursuant to MMC Section 17.62.040. The design of the structure may change. For example, a craftsman style design can be rebuilt as a modern design as long as the structure is within 110 percent the same height, bulk, and square footage of the previous structure.

Issue No. 2: What qualifies as a replacement structure being located in the same “general location” (MMC Section 17.60.020(C)) or “sited in substantially the same location” (LIP Section 13.4.6(A)).

Both the MMC and LCP require that replacement structures be sited in the same general location as the previous structures.

Current Policy: Replacement structures must be sited within 50 percent of the previous structure’s footprint and envelope to be considered “substantially” in the same location. Relocations beyond 50 percent of the original footprint require a De Minimis Waiver pursuant to LIP Section 13.4.11 or a Coastal Development Permit (if the findings for a De Minimis Waiver are not met).

Issue No. 3: Calculating bulk. Bulk is defined in the LIP as “the total interior cubic volume as measured from the exterior surface of the structure.” The term is not defined in the MMC.

Current Policy: Property owners may rebuild their structures in line with the LIP definition of bulk; meaning the cubic volume (bulk) shall not exceed 110 percent the previous structure’s volume.

Issue No. 4: What is considered a “lawfully erected” structure under MMC Section 17.60.020? MMC Section 17.60.020(C) allows for lawfully erected structures that do not conform to the current design and development standards (or lot development criteria) in the City to be reconstructed if they were destroyed or damaged in a natural disaster.

Current Policy: Unless evidence demonstrates the contrary, a structure will be considered to be “lawfully erected” if: (1) it has a building permit or the required approvals from a government agency who had jurisdiction over the subject location when the structure was erected, or (2) the evidence demonstrates the structure existed prior to the date of the City’s incorporation-- except structures located on a beach, coastal bluff, within an environmentally sensitive habitat area, or other sensitive coastal resource area must be shown to have existed prior to the California Coastal Act. Evidence that may be used to demonstrate the above includes, but is not limited to, aerial and GIS imagery, photography, city records, Los Angeles County Assessor data, and California Coastal Commission records. For any structure destroyed or substantially damaged by the 2025 Palisades Fire only, “lawfully erected” shall also include any structure that physically existed immediately prior to the 2025 Palisades Fire, so long as (i) the structure was not part of an open code enforcement violation pertaining to the construction of the structure, (ii) the structure did not violate any applicable law that is beyond the authority of the City of Malibu to waive or excuse (e.g., a structure that was built entirely or partially on property belonging to someone other than the owner of the structure), and (iii) the structure has a building permit that allows the structure to exist in some form (e.g., a remodel or addition for which a building permit was not issued would not disqualify the whole structure that existed immediately prior to the fire from being considered “lawfully erected”, so long as there is building permit for the structure to exist in some form).

Issue No. 5: Basements and Subterranean Garages. MMC Section 17.40.040(A)(13)(c) discounts the first 1,000 square feet of basements towards a property’s total development square footage (TDSF). Based on this language, some property owners are requesting that new basements do not count towards the 110 percent square footage allowed in a like-for-like rebuild.

Current Policy: The square footage for new basements and subterranean garages shall be included in the 110 percent square footage calculation. A replacement structure cannot exceed a 10 percent increase in size/square footage, which would occur if the square footage of new basements was not included in the calculation.

Issue No. 6: Water tanks and pools. Water tanks and pools that have a draft hydrant and which can be connected to by the Los Angeles County Fire Department may be necessary for rebuild structures to have adequate fire flow to fight fires. MMC Section 17.62.080(A)(4) allows for water tanks, pools and other water storage devices to be permitted as long as they are required or recommended by a government agency.

Current Policy: If water tanks and pools are required or recommended by a government agency, the development standards for new structures within the subject zoning district shall be required except that the square footage needed for water tanks shall not be counted towards a property’s TDSF.

Issue No. 7: Combining square footage between multiple structures. Some property owners are seeking to combine square footage from multiple structures into one structure. For example, a property owner may have had a home with a detached gym but is now proposing to combine the detached gym’s square footage with the home. LIP Section 13.4.6 states that a replacement structure is exempt from a CDP if the replacement structure (1) is for the same use, (2) does not exceed the floor area, height, or bulk of the destroyed structure by more than 10 percent, and (3) is sited in substantially the same location. This section implies that each structure shall be placed in the same general location and rebuilt to the same general size.

Current Policy: MMC Section 17.40.050(B) sets the zoning standards for required distance between buildings. Main buildings shall be at least 10 feet apart. Main building and accessory building shall be at least six feet apart. If structures that are proposed to be replaced are 10 feet or less in distance apart, they may be combined. However, as stated in LIP Section 13.4.6, the structures must maintain the same use. If an uninhabitable structure (such as a garage) is combined with a habitable structure, the square footage of the uninhabitable area must be maintained. This policy avoids unintended consequences that could be caused through the consolidation of dispersed structures into a larger home that could have impacts on views or other sensitive resources.

Issue No. 8: No net loss. California’s “No Net Loss” law (SB 166) “prohibits a city, county, or city and county from reducing, requiring, or permitting the reduction of the residential density to a lower residential density that is below the density that was utilized by the Department of Housing and Community Development in determining compliance with housing element law, unless the city, county, or city and county makes written findings supported by substantial evidence that the reduction is consistent with the adopted general plan, including the housing element, and that the remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need. The city, county, or city and county may reduce the residential density for a parcel if it identifies sufficient sites, as prescribed, so that there is no net loss of residential unit capacity.” Some property owners, during the rebuild process, are seeking to convert multifamily structures into single-family structures if allowed by the subject zoning district.

Current Policy: In order to maintain compliance with State Law, the City is requiring that property owners who are seeking to convert their multifamily structures to single-family structures replace those lost units in the form of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). For example, a triplex (three units) that is proposed to be replaced by a single-family residence shall also include two ADUs to ensure there is no net loss. However, where State law allows flexibility, staff may allow less density on a lot than previously existing.

Issue No. 9: 10 percent increases must comply with current zoning regulations. MMC Section

17.60.020(C) allows nonconforming structures to be replaced (up to 110 percent height, bulk, and square footage) and maintain their nonconforming aspects in relation to the applicable zoning regulations.

Current Policy: The 10 percent increases must comply with current zoning regulations. As stated in MMC Section 17.60.020(C), increases to height or bulk above 18 feet shall require a site plan review (SPR) on non-beachfront properties. Similarly, 10 percent increases into required yard setbacks shall only be allowed with a SPR as listed in MMC Section 17.62.040. However, de minimis encroachments into required setbacks may be allowed at the discretion of the Community Development Director / Planning Manager. This policy allows legally established structures that do not conform to the current codes to be rebuilt but prevents their nonconformities from expanding.

Issue No. 10: Is a wave action report required for a beachfront rebuild of a residence for a Planning Verification? MMC Section 17.40.040(A)(5)(b) states that new construction on beachfront lots must have their lowest finished floors elevations be determined by a comprehensive wave action report. In contrast, additions to an existing structure measure height based on an existing finished floor elevation.

Current Policy: The LIP definition of “New Development” explicitly excludes replacement structures (destroyed in a natural disaster) from being defined as new development and thus not subject to the rigorous review of new development requirements within the LCP. Because the LCP does not include replacement structures as “New Development”, the structures shall also not be considered “new construction” for planning (zoning) purposes.

For all replacement beachfront structures, the structure’s height above sea level shall be determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) flood plain regulations as stated in MMC section 17.60.020(C)(1) with no additional sea level rise requirements imposed by the City. Onsite wastewater treatment systems and seawalls that are being built along with the replacement beachfront structure will be required to be designed by the applicant’s coastal engineer with no additional sea level rise requirements imposed by the City. The design must be provided in either a (i) coastal engineering or wave uprush report, or (ii) letter certified and stamped by the applicant’s coastal engineer, who must be a California licensed civil engineer experienced in the practice of coastal engineering.

Issue No. 11: Rooftop decks. Rooftop decks are referenced in LIP Section 3.6(E) as allowed, specifically for beachfront properties, and have been allowed historically in the City for non-beachfront properties. Rooftop decks are becoming more common and have been permitted on both beachfront and non-beachfront structures throughout the City’s history.

Current Policy: Rooftop decks are allowed for both beachfront and non-beachfront rebuilds.

Structures that include rooftop decks shall be conditioned to prohibit furniture that exceeds the railing height and to ensure that any lighting on the deck complies with the City’s Dark Sky Ordinance.

Rooftop deck railing height shall be included in the maximum height allowance for the replacement structure.

Issue No. 12: Survey requirement. Residents have expressed concerns about providing surveys in their Planning Verification applications. Staff have been able to accept other forms of evidence to verify compliance with LIP Section 13.4.6 (if applicable) and MMC Section 17.60.020(C) such as historical surveys, City approved plans, and Los Angeles County and California Coastal Commission records. However, there have been discrepancies in the available information. An example of a discrepancy is when the Los Angeles County Assessor information regarding lot area differs from what has been represented on historical plans.

Current Policy: Staff will require a survey in the Planning Verification phase to demonstrate compliance with the LIP Section 13.4.6 and MMC Section 17.60.020(C). The submitted survey in the Planning Verification phase can be used in Building Plan Check. 2025 PALISADES FIRE ONLY
The following issues are addressed only for structures destroyed in the 2025 Palisades Fire and do not apply to other structures that were destroyed in any other natural disaster as these projects are subject to special orders from the Governor.

Issue No. PF1: Projects that were deemed complete prior to the fire but never approved or permitted.

There are some property owners who had projects in the system before the fire for additions and other improvements to their previously existing structures.

Current Policy: If a project was approved or the application was deemed complete before the 2025 Palisades Fire, and the structure was destroyed in the fire, the property owner is allowed to construct both the replacement structure and the deemed complete application as long as all required permits are obtained and as long as the deemed complete application does not require a variance. The owner may have to submit additional documentation for a project that has not yet received approval from the City. If the deemed complete application requires a site plan review, minor modification, or stringline modification, such approval must still be obtained. In these instances, the replacement structure and the deemed complete application will be considered the “like-for-like”. However, If the deemed complete application is for new square footage for the structure that was destroyed in the fire, and the new square footage in the deemed complete application exceeds 10 percent of the square footage of the previous structure, the applicant/owner shall not be allowed to obtain more square footage than what is authorized in the deemed complete application. In other words, the applicant/owner shall not get an additional 10 percent square footage on top of the square footage allowed under the deemed complete application if the deemed complete application was for more than 10 percent the square footage of the previous structure. The applicant in such case may only build the structure proposed in the deemed complete plans.

Issue No. PF2: Seaward projections. Governor Gavin Newsome’s Executive Order (N-20-25), states that replacement structures may not “expand farther seaward on the beach than the structure or facility” that existed immediately before the 2025 Palisades Fire.

Current Policy: A replacement structure is not allowed to expand farther seaward than the structure that existed before the fire but it may shift previously existing square footage more seaward so long as the area being shifted does not go farther seaward than the structure’s “predominate seaward projection”. MMC Section 17.40.040(A)(7)(c)(1)(b) defines a beachfront structure’s “predominate seaward projection” as “that portion of a structure closest to the ocean, which has a width (i.e., the dimension which is on a plane parallel to the ocean front) at least 30% of the maximum width of the structure.” If one floor is further seaward than another, and the floor that is further seaward meets the definition of “predominate seaward projection”, then the floor that is further landward may extend out to a point no further seaward than the “predominant seaward projection” of the structure but shall still be limited by the stringline rule as required in MMC Section 17.40.040(A)(7)(c). Both the deck and the dwelling are viewed as separate structures.

Issue No. PF3: Are building code required interior accesses on beachfront lots counted towards the 10 percent increase in square footage allowed? With the new FEMA regulations shifting beachfront properties to higher elevations, some property owners may have homes that extend significantly above PCH than before and thus require new interior access staircases to access the home from ground level (Pacific Coast Highway).

Current Policy: An interior access that is required by the building code and is necessitated by the new finished floor requirements based on the FEMA flood elevations will not be counted towards the 10 percent additional square footage allowed for rebuilds.

Issue No. PF4: Governor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Order (N-32-25) states that local jurisdictions within the boundaries of the 2025 Palisades Fire may prohibit or restrict the acceptance and processing of applications under Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 for projects located in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

Current Policy: The City of Malibu will not accept or process applications under Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 for any project within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within the boundaries of the Palisades areas.

Legislative Record: On October 15, 2025, the City Council reviewed every issue and adopted the corresponding policies. On September 14, 2026, the City Council rescinded Issue No. PF4 related to Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 from this policy and upheld all the remaining policies.
.\45084363.1

CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
This Conditional Settlement and Release Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into by and between Plaintiffs Yes In My Back Yard, Sonja Trauss and Andrew Slocum (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants City of Malibu (“City”) and City Council of Malibu (collectively “Defendants”).

Plaintiffs and Defendants are referred to sometimes individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
This Conditional Settlement Agreement is made with reference to the following facts:

A. Whereas, on July 30, 2025, the State of California’s Governor, Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-32-25 following Governor Newsom’s proclaimed State of Emergency in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, due to fire and windstorm conditions that caused multiple fires in those counties in January 2025. Executive Order N-32-25 ordered/purported to order Government Code sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 suspended in very high fire hazard severity zones, which included areas within the City of Malibu.

B. Whereas, the City Council of Malibu adopted a policy declaring that the City of Malibu would not accept or process applications under Government Code sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, for any project within a very high fire hazard severity zone within the boundaries of the Palisades Fire areas. The policy was adopted as part of a LCP and Zoning Code Interpretation (LPC No. 24, Zoning Code No. 15) of the City’s Ordinance No. 524, on October 15, 2025 and specifically it consists of the City’s policy for Issue No. PF4 (the “Policy”).

C. Whereas, on or about December 11, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. 25STCP04761 (the “Subject Action”). The Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint (collectively “Complaint”) are the operative pleadings at this time. The Complaint specifically as to these Defendants sought to have the City’s Policy rescinded and to have applications under Government Code sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 and applicable California law processed.

D. Whereas, on or about March 20, 2026, the Parties reached an agreement to settle and resolve the Subject Action in its entirety subject to certain conditions detailed in this Settlement Agreement.

E. Whereas, Plaintiffs and Defendants now desire to fully and finally settle and resolve any and all rights, claims, disputes, causes of action and alleged claims which currently arise out of and as set forth in the Subject Action and Complaint. The Parties expressly intend that this settlement shall further pertain to any claims for attorneys’ fees, witness fees, and/or other costs.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and promises, mutual covenants and warranties set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

Docusign Envelope ID: D01A107C-F210-889F-82E3-EE9004B13C34 Docusign Envelope ID: D1227989-EA43-8BC1-81E1-D5C63F3FF859 ATTACHMENT 2
.\45084363.1

CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
In consideration of the matters recited above, which are incorporated by reference here, and in consideration of the mutual covenants and representations set forth below, the Parties agree as follows:

1. Recitals. The Recitals are incorporated into and are a part of this Conditional Settlement Agreement.

2. In consideration of this Conditional Settlement Agreement, and the promises set forth herein, Defendants agree the City Council of Malibu will bring an agenda item in public session within the next three months to consider rescinding the Policy. Should the Council act, in its discretion, to rescind the Policy with an effective date on or before September 29 , 2026, this Settlement Agreement shall be valid and all of its terms shall apply. Should the Council fail to rescind the Policy within this period of time this Settlement Agreement shall be null and void. In addition, should the Council act to rescind the Policy, the City shall process, in accordance with the requirements of State law, any application the City has already received pursuant to Government Code sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, since the adoption of the Policy within 60 days of the Policy being rescinded. Upon the City Council’s action to rescind the Policy, Defendants agree that Executive Order N-32-25 and the Policy will not apply to the processing of SB 9 applications or SB 9 projects within the City’s control. The Settlement Agreement will become “Effective” on the date that all Parties have signed this Settlement Agreement.

3. Upon execution of this Agreement, Plaintiffs shall file a notice of conditional settlement in the Subject Action. In consideration for Defendants’ agreements set forth herein, and expressly conditioned upon Defendants’ rescission of the Policy with an effective date on or before September 29, 2026, the Parties shall file a stipulated request to dismiss the Subject Action with prejudice as to Defendants and to retain jurisdiction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 within 10 days of City Council’s action to rescind the Policy.

4. Release and Waiver of Claims. Except for the obligations of this Agreement, and conditioned on the rescission of the Policy on or before September 29, 2026, Plaintiffs and Defendants, on behalf of themselves and their members, successors, assignees, agents, insurers, attorneys, and other representatives, hereby waives and releases any and all demands, causes of action, claims for relief, obligations, damages, losses, costs, expenses and/or liabilities of any kind or nature whatsoever, known or unknown, anticipated or unanticipated, fixed or contingent, which they may now have, claims to have, or may hereafter have or claim to have against each other and their successors, assignees, elected officials, agents, insurers, employees, directors, attorneys or officers (the “Released Parties”), including but not limited to claims relating to or arising out of or alleged in the Lawsuit, or issues of fact or law alleged, or that could have been alleged, in the Lawsuit. The claims released in this paragraph are collectively referred to below as the “Released Claims.”

5. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. The Parties to this Agreement will bear their own attorneys’ fees and all costs in the Lawsuit, including all attorneys’ fees and costs arising from this Agreement. Each Party waives the right, if any, to otherwise recover attorneys’ fees and costs from the other Party or Parties.

Docusign Envelope ID: D01A107C-F210-889F-82E3-EE9004B13C34 Docusign Envelope ID: D1227989-EA43-8BC1-81E1-D5C63F3FF859 .\45084363.1

6. Civil Code § 1542 Release. New Facts and Law. Plaintiffs understand that if the facts giving rise to this Agreement are found later to be other than or different from the facts now believed by it to be true, or if new facts or law come to the attention of the Parties, or any of them, they accept and assume the risk of such possible difference in the facts or law, and Plaintiffs agree that the release above shall be and remain effective, notwithstanding such different or new facts or law. Therefore, Plaintiffs acknowledge that they have been informed of and are familiar with the provisions of California Civil Code § 1542, which provides as follows:

A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS

THAT THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT

KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT

THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF

KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY

AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR
OR RELEASED PARTY.

Plaintiffs expressly assume the risk that, after the execution of the Settlement Agreement, additional or further damages, which are currently unknown or undiscovered, may manifest in relation to the Incident. This Settlement Agreement specifically releases and extinguishes forever all claims against the Defendants of every kind, nature and description whatsoever, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, and any and all rights of the Plaintiffs which might otherwise accrue pursuant to California Civil Code § 1542 and any comparable state or federal statute or rule of law. By this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs expressly acknowledge that they are familiar with and expressly waives and relinquishes the benefits and protections afforded by Civil Code § 1542 and any comparable state or federal statute or rule as to the claims described herein.

7. Negotiated Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that the terms of this Agreement, including the waiver and release described in Section 4, was negotiated and drafted by the Parties with the assistance of counsel. Accordingly, any rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguity is to be construed against the drafting party shall not apply to the interpretation of this Agreement

8. City Reservation of Discretion. The Parties recognize and acknowledge that the City is under no obligation to rescind the Policy, and that the City reserves all of its discretion and the full measure of its police powers to evaluate the proposal to rescind the Policy in accordance with applicable procedures, standards and requirements. It is understood and agreed by the Parties that this Agreement shall not be construed in any fashion as an advance determination and does not provide the Parties with any expectation as to the outcome of the legislative review process.

Failure of City to rescind the Policy as above described will not constitute a default of this Agreement, but instead will constitute a terminating event for this Agreement.

9. Entire Agreement. Each Party warrants that no promise, inducement, or agreement not expressed herein has been made to it in connection with this Agreement, and that this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement among the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof.

Docusign Envelope ID: D01A107C-F210-889F-82E3-EE9004B13C34 Docusign Envelope ID: D1227989-EA43-8BC1-81E1-D5C63F3FF859 .\45084363.1

10. Written Modification. It is expressly understood and agreed that this Agreement may not be altered, amended, modified or otherwise changed in any respect whatsoever except by an executed written agreement signed by all Parties. The Parties hereto agree that they will make no claim at any time or place that this Agreement has been orally altered or modified or otherwise changed by oral communication of any kind or character.

11. Severability. If for any reason any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid, unenforceable or contrary to any existing or future law to any extent, such provision shall be enforced to the extent permissible under the law and such invalidity, unenforceability or illegality shall not impair the operation of or otherwise affect those portions of this Agreement which are valid, enforceable and legal.

12. Binding Effect. This Agreement is and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective heirs, affiliates, predecessors, successors and assigns. Each person executing this Agreement represents and warrants for the benefit of the Parties that it, he or she is authorized to enter into this Agreement and to bind itself, his or her principal(s) to this Agreement.

13. Titles and Captions. Paragraph titles or captions contained in this Agreement are stated only as a matter of convenience and for reference and in no way define, limit or describe the scope of this Agreement or any provision within it.

14. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced pursuant to the laws of the State of California.

15. Venue. The Parties stipulate that the Superior Court in the County of Los Angeles shall continue to have jurisdiction over this matter to enforce this Settlement Agreement and the terms herein pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6.

16. Assistance of Counsel. Each of the Parties warrants and represents to the others that it has read and understands this Agreement, and has been represented by counsel of its choice in the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement and that this Agreement is executed voluntarily and without duress or undue influence on the part of, or on behalf of, any of the Parties.

17. Cooperation. The Parties to this Agreement agree to cooperate with each other and to execute such additional documents, papers and pleadings as may be necessary to give effect to the Agreement.

18. Counterparts; Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be signed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall be deemed one and the same instrument. The Parties further agree that this Agreement may be transmitted by facsimile or other electronic means and that the reproduction of signatures by facsimile, PDF or other electronic means will be treated as binding as if originals.

WHEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY DECLARES THAT THE

TERMS OF THIS SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT HAVE BEEN

COMPLETELY READ AND ARE FULLY UNDERSTOOD, AND BY EXECUTION Docusign Envelope ID: D01A107C-F210-889F-82E3-EE9004B13C34 Docusign Envelope ID: D1227989-EA43-8BC1-81E1-D5C63F3FF859 .\45084363.1

HEREOF VOLUNTARILY ACCEPTS THE TERMS WITH THE INTENT TO BE LEGALLY BOUND THEREBY.

I HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE HAS BEEN CAREFULLY READ AND IS FULLY UNDERSTOOD.

Dated: PLAINTIFF, Yes In My Back Yard
By: Sonja Trauss
Its: Executive Director
Dated: PLAINTIFF, Sonja Trauss
Sonja Trauss
Dated: PLAINTIFF, Andrew Slocum
Andrew Slocum
Dated: DEFENDANTS, CITY OF MALIBU and

CITY COUNCIL OF MALIBU
By:

Bruce Silverstein, Mayor
///
///
///
///
///
Docusign Envelope ID: D01A107C-F210-889F-82E3-EE9004B13C34 7/19/2026
7/17/2026
7/19/2026
Docusign Envelope ID: D1227989-EA43-8BC1-81E1-D5C63F3FF859 7/28/2026
.\45084363.1

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Dated: PATTERSON & O’NEILL, PC
By:

RYAN J. PATTERSON
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

YES IN MY BACK YARD, SONJA
TRAUSS and ANDREW SLOCUM
Dated: BEST, BEST & KRIEGER, LLP
By:

TREVOR RUSIN
Attorneys for Defendants
CITY OF MALIBU and CITY COUNCIL

OF MALIBU
Docusign Envelope ID: D01A107C-F210-889F-82E3-EE9004B13C34 7/19/2026
Docusign Envelope ID: D1227989-EA43-8BC1-81E1-D5C63F3FF859 7/23/2026