Malibu Cliffhanger Has Echoes of Florida

It’s a seesaw election--a virtual tie that has voters in one coastal area wondering whether recounts and the courts will end up deciding the winner.

No, we’re not talking about the presidential election in West Palm Beach. This nail-biter is local ballot Measure P in Malibu. Three weeks after the Nov. 7 election, the Malibu slow-growth measure that pitted environmentalists against developers was locked in an exact tie: 3,137 votes for and 3,137 votes against.

The deadlock was finally broken this week when Los Angeles County election officials tallied provisional ballots and determined that Measure P passed by six votes.

That final 3,178-3,172 total is scheduled to be certified today by the registrar-recorder’s office.

But as in Florida, it may be too soon to tell which side really won.

Opponents of Measure P say they are considering a recount. They have five days after the supervisors act to file a request.

If a recount confirms that the measure passed, both sides are apparently anticipating it will take a court fight to determine whether it will ever be implemented.

Measure P, called the “Right to Vote on Development Initiative,” would allow residents of the affluent beach community to vote on whether large new developments--especially those over 25,000 square feet--should be built.

In their official ballot argument, supporters said Measure P would “protect Malibu’s small-town character.”

Opponents contended that it was probably unconstitutional and so unwieldy that developers could easily manipulate it.

“This is like Florida,” said Stephen Hoye, a Measure P supporter who observed this week’s count of provisional ballots. “We’ll be certified the winner and then will be contested. . . . I suspect soon we’ll all be sitting around looking at chads.” Measure P opponent James Sutton, a Mill Valley lawyer who specializes in election issues and represents the Malibu Bay Co., a developer, said Thursday no decision has been made about seeking a recount--which would be done by hand by county election officials.

“When the provisional ballots were being counted, I joked, ‘For the next few hours, guys, nobody can mention Florida!’ ” Sutton said. “It just curdles my blood to see people in Florida touching the ballots like they were doing. In California, that’s taboo.”

A second growth-control initiative on the Nov. 7 ballot--Measure N--was approved by a wider margin, 3,278 to 2,930. It calls for approval by voters as well as the City Council before development agreements can be approved for parcels larger than 30 acres.

Opponents of Measure P say that the passage of Measure N may end up nullifying Measure P. Measure P backers disagree. So if a recount of Measure P is coming, a court challenge may be close behind.

Marcia Ventura, spokeswoman for the county registrar-recorder, said a recount will probably take four days and cost the side requesting it $4,513. If the results are overturned, she said, the winning side gets its money back.