Ventura Council Advised It Can Revoke, Alter RV Park’s Permit : Floods: The city attorney warns that the property owner may have to be compensated for loss of earnings.

Ventura can legally revoke or alter the permit for the Ventura Beach RV Resort after last month’s rains flooded the park, but it may have to compensate park owner Arnold Hubbard for any loss of earnings, City Atty. Peter D. Bulens has told the City Council.

Dozens of motor homes and trailers were damaged or destroyed in the Feb. 12 flood when the Ventura River crested its banks and flowed through the East Main Street park, which is built in the flood plain near the river’s mouth.

Bulens told the council late Monday that Hubbard apparently violated some conditions of the 1985 permit agreement by allowing people to live there for months at a time.

Although the agreement requires RV users to stay no more than 30 consecutive days without leaving for at least 14 days, some visitors, including one who spoke at Monday’s City Council meeting, were allowed to check out then check back in 24 hours later.

Bulens said the agreement contains language saying it is null and void if any of its 69 conditions are violated.

But he warned that some cities that have tried to enforce similar agreements have become entangled in lengthy court battles with property owners who believed that their rights were violated.

Bulens also told the council that the city could add new conditions to Hubbard’s permit to build the park in a flood plain if the city believes that they are necessary to protect public safety.

“There is no law that says you cannot change your mind to say, ‘We made a mistake,’ ” Bulens said. However, he added that current case law “casts doubt on the city’s ability to do this without paying anything.”

Hubbard left the meeting after Bulens’ report and did not hear testimony from those who support or oppose rebuilding the park.

Donald McDonald, a former park visitor who escaped the flood, said he was allowed to check out and back in to the park within 24 hours as long as he did not stay more than 28 days in a row on each visit.

He said he understood Hubbard’s interpretation of the permit to be correct--that so long as he stayed less than 30 days at a time, he would not have to leave for the 14-day interim.

That rule applied to all visitors, “and it was enforced strictly,” he said.

Rick Sharp, whose 35-foot RV and car were washed away, said he was one day late in buying insurance.

Now Sharp has nothing and is living with a friend, he said.

Andy Prokopow, a spokesman for the Environmental Coalition of Ventura County, said of the short warning given to park visitors: “If the flood had occurred in the middle of the night, there would have been numerous drownings.”

Prokopow warned that backing off from changing or revoking Hubbard’s permit would set a bad precedent for the city.

Marc Chytilo, a lawyer representing Friends of the Ventura River, said the group sympathizes with the RV owners, but wants the council to consider revoking Hubbard’s permit because the site is not safe. He also suggested doing a full hydrologic study of how the river works.

Environmentalist Paul Tebbel said: “When the park was built, it was built in the river channel. That’s what it is. It’s not a flood plain; it’s a channel.

“The park should be shut down whenever we get any place near flood danger,” he added.

However, Jim Barroca, a spokesman for the Ventura Chamber of Commerce, urged the council to let Hubbard reopen the park, saying it has brought in $159,000 in tax revenues since the year it opened.

“It was a terrible thing; nobody denies it,” Barroca said of the flood. “But let’s leave the park there. It’s a nice entrance to the city.”

After reports that visitors were not warned of the flood danger until moments before the river crested, city staff has recommended that Hubbard be made to install sirens, signs and other warning systems in case of a flood.

But Alex Sheydayi, assistant director of public works in charge of the county’s Flood Control District, warned that relying on warning systems for such an unpredictable river “is false security.”

“This is a flood plain,” he said. “The fact is, the Ventura River is a wild river and it can run and meander wherever it wants.”

The City Council directed its staff to check the legal ramifications of amending or revoking the park’s permit, citing at least three violations of the permit agreement: the poor warning system, the near-continuous residency of some visitors and a berm that Hubbard has built near the river’s edge out of mud left at the park by the floodwaters.

And at the request of Councilman Gary B. Tuttle, the council asked staff to look into the feasibility of:

* Requiring Hubbard to provide ample notice of the flood threat in the form of signs, evacuation warnings and evacuation route maps.

* Requiring that Hubbard establish a monitoring system to ensure that tenants do not overstay their legal welcome.

* Carrying bonds or insurance to protect the city from suits in future floods.

The council asked staff to provide an accounting of how much the city spent on the flood and how much it might have to spend in future floods.