From building approvals to sewage, Pepperdine University has a well documented history of the struggle to build and grow the Malibu campus. President Banowsky labeled this history the “Malibu Miracle” given the challenges the school faced at every step.
One little-known piece of this story involves the government jurisdiction the University falls in. Despite the Malibu address, Pepperdine actually exists outside of the city limits, a product of a legal dispute when the local Malibu community was pushing for cityhood the second time in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The council which drew the city limits cut the university in half, a prospect which drove Pepperdine to seek exemption from the new city.
As different as modern-day Malibu is with respect to its numerous restaurants and stores, forty years ago the city was vastly different and was led by neighborhood committees favoring a more rural existence. This included many slow-growth lobbying campaigns carried out by some of the old Malibu locals.
This attitude extended to Pepperdine when they opened the campus in 1972, with many locals viewing the college with a skeptical eye. As Assemblyman Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica) said in 1988, “Historically, Pepperdine has been a symbol of aloof, ambitious, large-scale development in a community that is scared as hell of such expansion.”1
Senior Vice President for Administration and Chief Operating Officer Phil Phillips said in an interview with the Beacon: “I think more and more people who move to Malibu see Pepperdine as a benefit to the community and we want it to be that. Part of our strategic plan is to enhance that relationship. It’s very important to us that we are a good neighbor, a responsible neighbor, a contributing neighbor, and all of that flows from who we are. The most important reason is not for any kind of expediency. It’s about living out who we are. We’re a Christian institution. We want those values, those Christian virtues to be represented in our interactions with the city of Malibu.”
Cityhood and “Serving Two Masters”
Malibu had attempted to incorporate as a city in 1976 but failed. Former Dean Dr. David Baird writes in the original unpublished manuscript for “Quest for Distinction: Pepperdine University in the 20th Century” that “From the perspective of the MTC [Malibu Township Council], the County of Los Angeles was in league with those economic forces that wanted to develop the community. The only way to shield the community from the rapacious forces of development was to incorporate.”
Dr. Baird also said the MTC felt “To control development, specifically expansion of Pepperdine and the installation of a sewer, the Malibu community wanted to incorporate as a city.”
In 1988 the MTC initiated this new effort for city-hood, bolstered by “widespread anti-county sentiment”2 after an $86-million LA County proposal to build a new regional sewer system in Malibu was delayed by more than 1,000 Malibu locals who did not want the County’s system because they felt it could be growth-inducing.
The boundary line for the proposed city cut the Pepperdine campus into two halves, with one outside the city, solely in LA county jurisdiction.
Dr. Baird writes, “Although the county, in a six year process and after seven public hearings, had already permitted the fine arts center, law school expansion, tennis center, as well as 11 other projects, these would have to be reapproved by the city if the boundaries prevailed.” At stake was a $100-million investment. Davenport at the time argued that this was akin to the university “serving two masters”3 and was unacceptable.
Phillips said, “In 1987, our development program zone [was approved by the county] which outlined all of our development, including Drescher. At that time we didn’t have Drescher. And it had been very difficult to get those approvals–years of time and planning and compromise and negotiation led to those approvals.”
Given that they would have had to restart and get re-approvals with no guarantees at the Malibu city level, Pepperdine made the decision to appeal for an exemption from cityhood.
Phillips said, “I think that was really the driving force in us saying we can’t be part of this event. It was never like, ‘we don’t like the city.’ It was just very practical. We had made an investment.”
At the time, President Davenport had said that “We were just faced with an untenable situation with regard to city-hood and we didn’t think it was the right time for us” leaving open the possibility of Pepperdine accepting an annexation in the future.4
City Council member Doug Stewart has lived in Malibu for 23 years and in the immediate area for almost 40 years total. He said in an interview with the Beacon “As much as we’d love to have the Pepperdine operation within the city limits I think it’s probably best for both we’ve got it set up the way it is.”
City Council member Paul Grisanti ran for city council the first time in 1990 for the first City Council. He said in an interview with the Beacon:
Given the risk to Pepperdine’s approved projects, “I think that [Pepperdine being exempted from the city] was a really good decision at the time. And since that time, I’ve been involved with Pepperdine and I’ve done my best to help them through each of their trips back to the county and Coastal Commission.”
As a result of the line drawn by the cityhood movement in 1988, President Davenport and then Vice President for Administration Andrew Benton began a lobbying campaign at the state level to get the university exempted from the boundary. After seeking help from the state senate and finding none, they approached the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), the state agency that oversees incorporation policy. After an initial vote against Pepperdine, they reconsidered their decision in a 4-3 vote, granting the university its exemption in July 1988.
Assemblyman Hayden gave credit to President David Davenport for increasing Pepperdine’s involvement in the community but said “bad feelings [had] re-emerged because of Pepperdine’s ambivalence about where it wanted to belong.”5
Phillips said, “Those first years when I was working ‘93 through probably ‘99 [after LAFCO granted the exemption], most of the city council members were sort of anti-Pepperdine and would blame us for things. But then we had one city council member who [thought] it should be one community united. And then slowly that became the norm and then everyone on the city council [saw] Pepperdine was a non-issue and as part of the community working collaboratively.”
After securing its initial approvals from LA county, Pepperdine would expand to build the George Page dorms, Drescher campus, and Baxter drive.
Pepperdine and the City Today
Today, some locals still view the university critically. Some said the university had a monopoly as to receiving water supplies during the time of the Woolsey fire. But Pepperdine has actively spoken about how Pepperdine’s water supplies were used by firefighters to save even more houses than had the university not been in existence.
Overall it seems the city council and the surrounding community are happy with the university. Pepperdine has worked marvels in promoting economic and community well-being through mutual “synergy” as Phillips called it. Phillips said, great local restaurants “tell us they couldn’t exist without the Pepperdine community.” He also highlighted Step Forward Day and the thousands of combined hours across the 34 years of the program’s existence that go into serving both Malibu and the surrounding communities. Additionally, the campus is used as an emergency hub for medical emergency evacuations and fire-fighting launch point which provide services to the community at large.
When asked about the impact Pepperdine has had on Malibu, Grisanti said:
“Pepperdine is very good for the city of Malibu as an economic engine because you’re year-round people. You’re not here for three weeks in the summer and then you’re gone. You’re here supporting the restaurants and the stores. And not everybody wants to buy the things that Pepperdine students want to buy, but there are some of us who had kids and we had the same kind of interest as the students have. And [Pepperdine’s presence] really gave lots of different shopping choices for the young people in the community.”
Stewart did not know of any definitive studies on the economic impact of Pepperdine, but he thought anecdotally people suggested that it had an impact. He did think it noteworthy that many of the kinds of businesses that are normally associated with colleges (such as restaurants like Dominos or Pizza Hut) are not prevalent in Malibu. He said “I don’t know if the entrepreneurs don’t see the Pepperdine students as willing to come over to the commercial area, or if there just isn’t much activity to support it.”
Besides economic benefits, Grisanti said, “I think without Pepperdine there, we would be an older town than we are now. And even though you guys, theoretically are outside the city limits, the students are still out and about and the parents of the students come here and all of that stuff is going on constantly. And that’s good for Malibu.”
In terms of the relationship between Pepperdine and the Malibu community now, Stewart said that he tried to think of any improvements that could be made. He said “I scratched my head and [realized] I couldn’t think of any. The relationship is very good. And I think for college students it’s great to be in a city like Malibu for your education.”
Unlike some larger universities, Stewart said:
“You don’t see problems being brought into the city by the [Pepperdine] college students. In fact, college students I see at Ralph’s and everywhere else are some of the nicest people you ever meet. […] And part of that I think, is also due to the fact that Pepperdine does give back and you do have your programs where you volunteer in the city. You do proactive things, but not just in our city, you do it for the surrounding areas. And I think that’s a good thing. And it’s a very strong and positive relationship that I think benefits both of us and it’s probably the best structure you can have out of this.”
In terms of big growth and development, both Grisanti and Stewart suggested that slow growth policy was still able to win out while having Pepperdine present. Both cited census data remaining constant around 10 to 12 thousand over decades.
Grisanti said, “The County had a General Plan [for a sewer] which called for a population of around 200,000 souls for the Malibu [area] (90265). […] So we’ve effectively stopped that from happening. Pepperdine has a population of around 5,000 and the city of Malibu has a population of around 10,000. I can’t imagine what it would be like if there were 10 times as many people.”
Stewart said, “I think we’ve lived up to our vision statement very well. It’s about maintaining a rural setting, non-urbanization, and it’s been for the benefit of all those of us that live in Malibu but also for the 15 million visitors every year. […] Obviously, we could do things differently and do them better. But this little town has not been overrun by shopping centers necessarily, and definitely not by overdevelopment. So I think the end result after 30 odd years has been very positive.”
After years of collaboration and mutual synergy it seems the best outcomes possible came about both for Pepperdine and the city of Malibu.
Footnotes
1. Garcia K. Aloof pepperdine?: Many dislike its decision not to join proposed city of malibu. Los Angeles Times (1923-1995). Aug 22 1988:2
2. Garcia K. Pepperdine, athletic club opposed to malibu cityhood. Los Angeles Times (1923-1995). Feb 18 1988:2
3. Garcia K. Aloof pepperdine?: Many dislike its decision not to join proposed city of malibu. Los Angeles Times (1923-1995). Aug 22 1988:2
4. Ibid
5. Ibid
Caden and Nate, excellent article. Very well written and researched. Great example of good journalism. Impressed with seeing this quality and substance in a student publication so as to best represent Pepperdine, its students and the entire WAVE community. You did us all proud!
Thank you for reading and your kind words Mr. Katch!