|
For nearly thirty years, the California Coastal Commission has been charged with protecting California's 1,100 mile coastline. The commission makes key decisions on coastal development, public access, offshore drilling and marine habitat protection. On April 6, 2005, the California Supreme court started hearing oral arguments to determine the fate of the California Coastal Commission casting into doubt the control of one of the world's most scenic and popular coastlines.
The ruling is likely to result in a significant reshaping of a body that sets parameters on such politically volatile issues as offshore oil drilling and development near coastal tidelands. The court will also decide if more than 100,000 of the commission's land use and regulatory decisions since 1976 need re-evaluation.
The California Coastal Commission was established by ballot measure in 1972 and made permanent by the California Coastal Act in 1976. The commission has made its share of enemies, especially among seaside residents and real estate developers who complain the commission routinely tramples on private property rights and harbors an extreme environmental agenda. Supporters of the commission argue that it has prevented unbridled development of the California coastline, reduced offshore drilling, and significantly expanded public access to beaches.
The 1999 lawsuit that led to the current court battle stemmed from one of the coastal commission's "cease and desist" orders. A retired French entrepreneur, who lives in Newport Beach, was told he could not create an artificial reef using worn tires, plastic rope, jugs, and pipe to create a habitat for sea creatures. When he received the commission's order, he sued, arguing that the commission lacked authority because eight of the twelve voting members of the commission are appointed by the legislature.
Two years later, an appeals court blocked the commission's order and declared the California Coastal Commission unconstitutional. The court enjoined the commission from granting or denying permits for coastal development. The court concluded that an agency subject to the political influence of the legislature cannot perform regulatory functions, including enforcement powers that are reserved for the executive branch.
A final ruling from the California Supreme Court is expected in 90 days. Under the most extreme scenario, the commission could be stripped of its authority and be relegated to an advisory body. A more conservative (and likely) solution would be to remove the legislature from the process entirely, and give the governor sole control over the selection of the 12 members of the commission.
| 
