Surfers close to settlement with Palos Verdes Estates over Lunada Bay Boys

LOS ANGELES (CN) — Eight years of litigation over one of the most infamous surf gangs in the country — the Lunada Bay Boys — could soon be at an end.

Lawyers for the wealthy city of Palos Verdes Estates, two surfer plaintiffs who tried visiting Lunada Bay in 2016, and a supposed member of the Bay Boys told a Los Angeles County Superior Court on Tuesday that a settlement was within reach.

"On the major terms, we’ve got a pretty good agreement in principle," Palos Verdes Estates attorney Christopher Pisano told Judge Lawrence Riff. "There are a couple sticking points, but I don’t think it’s something we'd give up on on the five-yard line."

The attorney for Alan Johnston — the last remaining alleged Bay Boy still attached as a defendant — agreed, saying, "It sounds like we have an agreement in principle."

The plaintiffs' attorney Kurt Franklin hesitated to join in the chorus of optimism, sounding like he felt his clients were getting the short end of things.

"At a high level, the plaintiffs have made substantial concessions," Franklin said. "And I think the current position ignores that."

The parties have been through a number of mediation sessions with a different judge, Timothy Dillon, and will likely go back to him later in the week. One obstacle that remains is just how to loop the five-member Palos Verdes Estates City Council into the negotiations. The Brown Act means that a majority of the board can't convene to discuss city issues without having an official meeting. And so any mediation session must take place with, at most, two council members. Choosing just two can be a tricky political decision. Choosing none, on the other hand, and the plaintiffs might feel like they're making concessions before the other side is.

"It is difficult when you try to bring the political decision makers — two of the five — into the settlement process," Pisano acknowledged.

Cory Spencer and Diana Reed sued the city of Palos Verdes Estates over Lunada Bay, a city-owned beach hidden below the cliffs known for its premier big wave breaks — large waves, in lay terms — but also its localism, with a clique of regulars staking out a beach as their own and bullying and harassing outsiders. In their complaint, Spencer and Reed call the Lunada Bay Boys "a criminal street gang" that had engaged in "assault, battery, vandalism, intimidation, harassment [and] extortion" over the years. The suit originally named 12 Bay Boys as defendants; all but Johnston settled, at some point or another, agreeing to pay between $35,000 and $90,000 and to stay away from Lunada Bay for a year.

The plaintiffs claim the Bay Boys and Palos Verdes Estates violate the California Coastal Act, which strictly regulates all development near the coastline in order to ensure public access to every beach. The Bay Boys' harassment and the city's condoning of it constituted a Coastal Act violation, they say.

The parties entered negotiations about two weeks ago, during a break in a bench trial that began Aug. 5. The plaintffs had struggled to present hard evidence that localism at Lunada Bay was part of an organized effort, rather than just locals behaving poorly. They also struggled to show the city had deliberately looked the other way. Judge Riff had, on a number of occasions, urged both sides to settle.

Franklin has said that the lawsuit is not motivated by money, and that what the plaintiffs really want is for the city to install a number of improvements to the beach that encourages people to visit, such as welcome signs, a safer trail leading from the surrounding bluffs down to the rocky beach, water fountains and bike racks. They also want increased police presence, and a promise to report all incidents of localism to the California Coastal Commission.

Riff ordered the parties back to the negotiating table, paraphrasing the character Hyman Roth in "The Godfather Part II," who said, "I'm going to take a nap. When I wake up, if the money is on the table, I'll know I have a partner. If it isn't, I'll know I don't." Translation: come back next week, tell me if you've reached a settlement.

The parties were ordered back to court Sept. 10. If there is no settlement by then, the trial will resume shortly after.

Follow @hillelaron

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit