Palos Verdes Estates officials wanted to keep 'riffraff' out, ex-police chief testifies

Palos Verdes Estates residents accused of harassing and assaulting visiting surfers were shielded from the repercussions of their behavior by city officials, the city's former police chief told a Los Angeles judge. He added that local police had a history of turning a blind eye to residents' transgressions.

Timm Alan Browne made his statements while testifying Friday in a beach access trial in which Palos Verdes Estates is accused of violating the California Coastal Act by failing to stop the harassment of outsiders who came to surf its wave. Judge Lawrence P. Riff is overseeing the bench trial.

Browne said he saw evidence of an improper dynamic between city officials and residents while riding along with one of his police officers, shortly after he assumed leadership of the department in 1998. The officer stopped a motorist over a "pretty flagrant" traffic violation, Browne recalled.

"And the officer went up and started a conversation with the driver, retrieved his driver's license and registration, and I stayed where I was at the back quarter of the violator's car," Browne said from the stand.

"He went back to the unit, did something, wrote something down, and went back up, carrying their information - driver's license and registration back - and encouraged them to have a nice day. They go off and we returned to the vehicle. I was a little confused, as clearly it was a violation of the California vehicle code. I said 'Why, what's going on? Why didn't you write them a citation?'" Browne said.

"He said, 'We don't write citations for residents of the city.' I said, 'I'm sorry, what?' He said that if they present a driver's license that has a listed resident in the city of Palos Verdes Estates, we do not issue a citation. And I advised him that would change," Browne said.

Fennemore Craig PC director Kurt A. Franklin had called Browne to the stand just minutes earlier. Franklin represents two surfers who claim that officials and residents worked together to keep visitors from returning to their tony community south of Los Angeles.

The issue stemmed from the city's point break, which has tantalized surfers for decades, and the actions of local surfers known as the Lunada Bay Boys, who enforced surfing's unwritten codes in the water. But they took it several steps further, according to the lawsuit, attacking visitors and vandalizing their vehicles so they would not come back. One of the plaintiffs, an out-of-town former police officer Cory Spencer, testified Tuesday that a Bay Boy aimed his surfboard at him and cut his arm with its fin while they were in the water.

The Bay Boys' conduct, Browne testified on Friday, was a problem, and he set out to fix it. He installed cameras to monitor surfers in the water. He purchased water skis so his officers could patrol the waves, and all-terrain vehicles so his officers could patrol the bluffs. He also spoke to the media to spotlight the problem and pressure the Bay Boys to stop their behavior. Some members of the Palos Verdes Estates local government and city council did not care for the effort, Browne said.

The city manager said "he was not happy with my efforts to address this problem with the Lunada Bay area, or surfing in general along the coast. It brought too much attention. It would bring outsiders to our community. We didn't want that. His words, not mine," Browne said.

A member of the city council referred to outsiders as "riffraff," Browne testified.

Best Best & Krieger LLP is representing Palos Verdes Estates at trial. BBK partner Christopher M. Pisano has declined to comment.

Franklin sued Palos Verdes Estates in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2016. Judge Amy D. Hogue dismissed the case against the city in 2020, finding that it could not be held liable for the presence of a fort, constructed by the Bay Boys, under the Coastal Act if there was no evidence that the city built or consented to its construction. Spencer et al. v. Lunada Bay Boys et al., BC629596, (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Aug. 4, 2016).

In February 2023, a panel headed by Presiding Justice Laurence D. Rubin of the 2nd District Court of Appeal, Division 5, reversed Hogue's ruling, holding that the city could be held responsible for the unpermitted structure. More significantly, it held that the totality of the Bay Boys' conduct constituted a "development" under the Coastal Act. Spencer v. City of Palos Verdes Estates, 2023 DJDAR 1626 (2nd Dist., op. filed Feb. 27, 2023).

Palos Verdes Estates disagreed.

"If public entities can now be found liable for violating the Coastal Act based upon the conduct of private citizens on public property, they will be exposed to the potentially significant civil and daily fines imposed by the Coastal Act. This can amount to as much as $30,000 per violation, and $15,000 per day for each violation, both of which are payable to the state," read the petition to the state Supreme Court signed in April 2023 by Edwin J. Richards, Antoinette P. Hewitt and Kevin J. Grochow of Kutak Rock LLP. The Supreme Court denied the petition.