HomeMy WebLinkAboutBeach-Environmental Control - Proposition 20 - The Coastal Z Pp-opo6mccJ ZO c0&15TAL_R!55��_ t--
�4
POUNSM- AREA OF INIFLLOJIM APPROVED BY CITY COUN�__ ,
~<zmcm zo F=ce. ).
------------------------
1�s ....................................
AMENDMENTS
U
xawruxcCITI MASTER PAN OF ARTERIAL
coNNosaN COUNCIL
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
LEGEND:
-1. A FREEWAY
MAJOR- —120'R/W
PRIMARY—100'R/W
"E
�E *
9 SECONDARY-
_80 R/W
NOTE:
------ SOLID LINES INDICATE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
NOT NECESSARILY ULTIMATE RIGHT OF WAY
DASHED LINES INDICATE AREAS WHERE NO
RIGHT.1 EX
=Ixm SYMBOL DENOTES PRIMARY COUPLET
pm MIR,m*j
0000
-Alp
%N,
CERTIFICATIONS: %
PLANNlw ComssloN
PLA.—I I—.1_4TC._ClX-
11T I Tl=l:.IAI I T11 1%
:F,
N
CITY COUNCIL
.TTUT
�14
11 11 T. E
CIO' -
.CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH
ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA
o
FlEl
AUK
M—0 M ZONMUCL.
-0 so 40 ab.0 do 0 BOt N Al2ot i�SEAO E.�OD4t�S O�VtI�CIEA- /
Q. Is any expertise in economics, taxation, or employment problems
required?
A. NO.
Q. Is there any provision for representation for Labor, business;
agriculture or home owners?
.A. No.
PERMIT PROCEDURE
Q. For how long a period must all permits have the approval of the
commissions?
A. Until 91 days after final adjournment of the 1976 Legislature.
However, for many purposes the permit procedure is made retroactive
to April 1, 1972 , so that the effective period would be almost 5 years.
�. If a person had secured a permit from a city or county to buiZd,
repair or remodel a house after April 1 , 1972 but before the November
election, would he have to stop construction if Proposition No. 20
were adopted?
A. Yes , unless a court decided he had acquired a "vested right" under
the permit, whatever that may mean. Also , if he had secured a permit
before April 1 , 1972 but had not commenced construction and performed
s—bu s�antial work on the development, it could be found that he had no
"vested right" and therefore he would not be permitted to proceed.
EFFECTIVE MORATORIUM
Q. Would Proposition No. 20 estabZish a moratorium on buiZding within
the Permit Area?
A. The proponents deny this , but the Initiative has been booby-trapped
with interlocking provisions that result in a virtually complete mora-
torium.
�. Does this effective moratorium apply only to housing?
A. No. It applies to all development , which includes the placement
or erection of any solid material or structure, the discharge of gaseous,
liquid, solid, or thermal waste ; grading, dredging and mining; change
in land-use density , including subdivision and lot splits ; and alteration
of the size of any structure.
For example, any city in the Permit Area would have to go hat in hand
to the regional commission to Seek approval to repair a sewer line .
Harbor improvements and redevelopment projects would be subjected to
long delays.
- 7 -
All public recreational development would be subject to
the moratorium. Public agencies planning to build
breakwaters, launching ramps, campgrounds , public toilets ,
roads , parking facilities , etc. to increase recreational
opportunities on the public beaches would be precluded
from proceeding without seeking a permit from the regional
commissions .
How is the moratorium spelled out?
A. By the provisions of the Initiative restricting the granting of
permits , by its built-in time delays , and by its encouragement of
lengthy law suits. a
l
Q. What are these restrictions?
A. The Initiative provides that no permit will be issued unless the'
Development is consistent with the objectives. of the Coastal. Zone plan
to be adopted by the Commission , one of which is "avoi ante of irre-
versible and irretrievable commitments of coastal zone resources. "
Any structure , any grading, any street,' any water or sewer
line can be considered an irreversible commitment. Even
if the Commission chose to disregard this virtual directive
against the granting of �any� permits , the language would be
used as the basis for en3less lawsuits by anyone wishing to
stop any construction for any purpose .
Q. What are the built-in time delays?
A. Under existing laws , anyone planning to build a house , or any
structure or development , must secure a permit from local governments.
Depending on the size of the project, two months to a year is consumed
in the process.
Having secured the permit, the builder, under Proposition No. 20 ,
would then have to seek approval from the new regional commission,
which is allowed 90 days to set a public hearing to consider the matter.
The regional commission then has 60 days to make a decision. Assuming
the decision is favorable , the permit may be appealed by "any person
aggrieved by approval" to the State Commission, which is allowed
another 60 days in which to act.
Thus , up to 7 months of additional time would be required in pro-
ceedings before the new agencies.
Still more time is allowed for appeals , however.
Again assuming the decision of the State Commission is favorable , any
"aggrieved" person may, within 60 days of the decision , file a petition
for a writ of mandate and seek a judicial review of the permit.
i �
8 -
This sequence of events adds 9 mont`ns to the time it has already taken
to secure permit approval from lo--:al governments . In most instances ,
this would mean that from one to two years would elapse before 'a
disputed permit approval would finally be taken to the courts .
How long it would take the courts to render a final decision (presumably
any -disputed permit could go through the entire appeals system, all the
way to the U.S. Supreme Court) is anybody 's guess .
As a practical matter, it would seem that no one could expect
to receive final .affirmative action on any contested permit
during the life of the Commission. V
Q. What is meant by an "aggrieved" person who may challenge any
permit in the courts?
A. Apparently anyone--a disgruntled neighbor, or any person , with no
property ownership or immediate interest in the area involved. There
is no provision that such "aggrieved" person even be a resident of
California.
Any single individual could tie up any proposed development in the
courts for years without even posting a bond.
EFFECT ON COURT CASE LOADS
Q. Nora mould Proposition No. 20 affect court case toads?
A. Proposition No. 20 ' s provisions encouraging legal challenges to each
and every permit approval are a striking example of the "unprecedented
explosion of litigation" recently cited by U.S. Chief Justice Warren E.
Burger. Justice Burger suggested that Congress accompany each bill
likely to provoke reaction in the federal courts with an estimate of
how many legal challenges might result, and provide court personnel to
handle the additional caseload.
The same problem applies at the state level. Proposition No. 20 would
inevitably clutter up the courts with legal challenges for years , but
makes no provision to increase court personnel to handle the enormous
new burdens it would add to the court load.
Q. Are any proposed developments within the Permit Area exeZuded from
the ,jurisdiction of the new State bureaucracy?
A. Any proposed structure, road, pipeline , etc.--public or private--
falls within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Repairs and im-
provements not in excess of $7,500 to existing single-family residences
are excluded, but even in this instance, the Commission may require that
a permit be obtained if the repairs "invol-ve a risk of adverse environ-
mental effect" .
� I
9 -
STATUS OF LARGE CITIES
$. Aren 't the areas of large cities excluded from the new State
controls?
A. No. The Initiative provides that residential areas of cities which
are zoned, stabilized and developed to a density of four or more dwelling
units per acre __ma be excluded, at the regional commission 's option, when
so requested by the city or county involved. The same applies to com-
mercial or industrial areas which are zoned, developed and stabilized.
"Stabilised", however, is defined as urban land wherein
80 percent of the lots are built upon to the maximum
density or intensity of use permitted by applicable
zoning regulations in effect on January 1, 1972. It is
very doubtful whether gnL city is "stabilised" under
that definition.
Thus , land use decision-making for a substantial portion of their areas
would be forfeited to the State by such major coastal cities as San
Diego, Long Beach, Los Angeles , Santa Barbara, San Francisco, and
Eureka, and, depending on court interpretations of the Coastal Zone area,
by San Jose, Oakland, Sacramento, Stockton and other inland c t: es .
DEMOCRACY IN "INACTION"
Q. Would permits be granted by majority vote of the members of each
regional commission?
A. For many kinds of developments a 2/3 vote is required. For all
Ethers, a majority vote is needed. But because the commissions have
an even number of members (unlike most boards and commissions) it would
take a two-vote edge for a majority--for example, a 7 to 5 vote for the
12-member commissions.
Furthermore, granting a permit requires not just a majority or two thirds
of a quorum at any meeting, but a majority or two-thirds of all
commisefon—members , whether in attendance or not.
Q. Does the Coastal Zone Commission structure increase or lesson
effective citizen partioipation in community affairs ?
A. Citizen participation would become virtually meaningless. The
majority views of any community could be thwarted by action of less than
a majority of the commission members, or by the action of even one
"aggrieved" person who need not be a resident of the community.
Q. What would happen if all residential development along the coast were
halted?
A. Houses are built to meet the needs of people. If people are denied
Sousing in one area, pressures will be created in other areas : foothills ,
desert areas and prime agricultural land in the valleys.
10 -
COST TO TAXPAYERS, PROPERTY OWNERS , GENERAL PUBLIC
Q. How much would the taxpayers have to pay to support this new
A. The Initiative appropriates $5 ,000 ,000 in State funds to finance the
Uperations of the commissions , but this is a ridiculously unrealistic
figure.
Until the courts determine the boundaries of the Coastal
Zone no one knows how large an area is involved, . used
on the very narrowest interpretation, at least 1, 500, 000
acres would be included. . At an estimated master planning
cost of $10 per acre, this would invo lve. a minimum cost
of $15, 000, 000 for zoning alone.
To this must be added the cost of hearing permit applications . If the
commission members actually heard them all , they certainly would have
to work five full days a week, at $50 per day--the amount of compen-
sation provided for in the Initiative. On such a full time basis , the
78 regional commissioners would receive more than a million dollars a
year for four years.
C�. Is it realistic to expect that the commissions would meet on a
full time basis ?
A. No. The bulk of the work necessarily would be done by paid staff.
The Initiative anticipates this by providing that hearing procedures
need not be followed for developments not in excess of $10 ,000 and in
cases of "emergency" . In such cases , permits could be issued by the
executive directors. Emergencies are not defined; presumably they
would be all permit applications the commission members wouldn 't have
time to consider.
In effect, this means that the bulk of decisions would be
made by six regional planning "czars"--another step of
removal from any local control.
Q. Are there any provisions in Proposition No. 20 for compensation to
property owners for lose of the use of their land?
A. No.
The proponents of Proposition No. 20 claim they circulated their
Initiative because the Legislature did not pass the Sie ro ty and Grunsky
bills (AB 200 and SB 100) . Each of these bills , prior to the time the
Initiative petitions were circulated, contained this unequivocal
language:
"It is not the intent of the Legislature by the enactment of this act
to take private property for public use without ,just compensation in
violation of the United States or California Constitution. "
This language, however, was not inserted in the Initiative and is not
contained in Proposition No.=. 0
i
Q. What would happen to assessed valuations in the Permit Area?
A. If land cannot be used, it cannot readily be sold, and values drop
sharply. Thus, local tax revenues from bare land would be greatly
reduced.
Q. Are there any provisions in Proposition No. 20 for the State to
reimburse local governments for Lost revenues?
A. No . They would have to be made up by higher taxes on others , such
as homeowners and owners of other developed property .
Q. Could the State of California be forced to compensate property
owners for lost property values?
A. Undoubtedly there would be a deluge of lawsuits against the State
seeking redress for inverse condemnation. The State 's taxpayers face
the possibility of incurring obligations running into the hundreds of
millions of dollars , should Proposition No. 20 pass .
COASTAL OPEN SPACE
�. Is open space along the coast in desperately short supply, as
proponents of Proposition No. 20 cZaim?
A. The COAP inventory of land use for the half-mile area along the
Pacific Ocean shows that more than 75% of the land is in open space
and more than 41% is already in public ownership. The balance between
open space and developed areas is shown in the table on the following
Page.
- I
W�
STATE CAPITOL / ' COMMITTEES
SACRAMENTO.CALIFORNIA / BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
85814 HEALTH AND WELFARE
TEL.: (916) 445.4264 JAMES E. WHETMORE TRANS INDUSTRIALRELATIONS
PORTATION
THIRTY-FIFTH SENATORIAL DISTRICT
ORANGE AND LOS ANGELES COUNTIES JOINT COMMITTEES
EDUCATIONAL GOALS AND
EVALUATION
SEISMIC SAFETY
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON AGING
AMERICAN REVOLUTION
BICENTENNIAL COMMISSION
OF CALIFORNIA
tCALIFORNIA EMERGENCY COUNCIL
CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE SERVICES
VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
March 13 , 1972
Mr. Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
P. O. Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Dear Mr. Jones :
Thank you very much for your letter of March 8 and
enclosed copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council
commending EDICT Foundation for development of the California
Coastline Study Plan.
It is most helpful to me to have the thoughts of the
Council on this matter, and I appreciate your advising
me of the action taken by the Council.
Cordially yours ,
JAMES E. WHETMORE
Senator, 35th District
JW/ro
BOARD OF GOVERNORS, NATIONAL SOCIETY OF STATE LEGISLATORS
'Row-
ROBERT H. BURKE
COMMITTEES
Rules
.Z. MEMBER Education
'4 L. oR vualifornia �Ee gislatu re Transportation
LP
70th ASSEMBLY DISTRICT
March 30, 1972
rn
co
Mr. Paul C. Jones, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
P.O. Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Dear Mr. Jones:
I appreciate receiving a copy of Resolution No. 3450,
adopted by the City Council of Huntington Beach on
March 6, 1972, commending EDICT Foundation for develop=
ment of the California Coastline Study plan.
Thank you for keeping me informed. I am always glad to
know the opinion of the City Council on legislative
matters.
.Sincerel
ROIERT H. BURKE
RHB:kh
ANAHEIM COSTA MESA FOUNTAIN VALLEY GARDEN GROVE HUNTINGTON BEACH LEISURE WORLD LOS ALAMITOS
MIDWAY CITY ROSSMOOR SANTA ANA SEAL BEACH SUNSET BEACH WESTMINSTER
(PROFC;SE�`)-.
-. CITY COUNCIL RE50LUTION
i uTJ T INGTON Ci.L .�O iidIA
FERRUAPY 7., 1072
DT
AL 01-L C��H :�_ T l y =�1
Where As: "he marine environment of the Cal 1 lorni.a coastline is a ma or factor
affecting plAhli c health', the economy anc. Other � r the quality ^f
a5C2ct., O:. v
life in Cal orni.a -a d the C��" Of mil g.ton Bea•^:'• and
Vlhere as: -',Ie citizens of this "All American are vitally concerned about the
maintenance of our local coastline a5 a na.t:;r.al '.'esourCB for future
gene'.-•ations; and
b he-re a` : Ttie:re i-.a%.' been numerous ` C171^ f1C DIarnings of.a Continuing reelection
in tyie ci;ali t. aa y of mrin(. 1 f e of our t .delands., beaches heS •3•nd off-shore:
water and 1
',where as: A. n:_;O.LnFr i',crcentag.e Of bur ra-11-ne sj;eci- -a : have (l p--e^ �:d, or
'^ delieloned 'ahnorma.l Chara'Ct,-'ri:Ries affcctLng their Value as resources;
and
,Jl ;iere as : There i 5 a .^.e-d. for iricr(e3sci. kno :' .dge.. of industrial and
C'ivi C of f l—.:t s released off U—, `;al a..�—L n i.a Coast and. the-l-r relationship
ionship
to dete.riat on of th-e env-lron-'iP!^ ,: a.nd
s. h1here as : The 'Fr* • 1.,JCCiatlon based in ;t?" r=tt .. 9each (.31ifJj'" ti has d,,veloped
Plans f, a. ylifa:I,ia Cca�, _n., �.. i� to systemati.cwl:J cc .lee; a:::l
Bcienti.fic infor.,in.t,icr util*.�G i.:^a 'he tec`:nic .i :1nd .Iici._ a,7erial
i n :ero i y, r.y -
f t ', St•3Ce n�1U�t, v as a f st .� ep in r Ver.` i.nz t'-`s
trend. and
Where as: ThJ:; st.udy `:ray)- :.'also serve as a na J.ona1 demonstration model. of the
social, eCOIiC"iC Arid nlara erial•asp,cts ^ ' conversion fr.w.r. defense.
relates', research and develo;%i:eit ac't:vit.i.es to civilian research and
development act,ivit:i_es; and
Whereas: Dresi.dent °•;ix� n has called fcr Increased federal- flzndi^g of civilian
research and development activities .relative to urban and environmental
ills in the cities of America; .
Therefor': Be it resolved, that the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach
does hereby; 1) cammend the EDICT Foundation for development of the
California Coastline Study plan as a public service, 2) offer to
cooperate with the EDICT Foundation in implementation of this study
through the office of th'e City- Ad;rd_nistrator, 3`) urge all concerned
government and industrial interests throu&hcut California .to join in
support of this, important study and 4) instruct the C .ty Administrator
to send copies of this rPsalutiolZ to the F'r silent, California Congress-
ional .neleeation., governor, California State Legislature and
other potentially interested. elements of goverrsnent and industry.
a.
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To ijyte Mi a I-e-r. C:;r : AulniiLra➢os- l<++atB ,Duty 2.39 i9 1
From Vinzent. :-. hloornou•e, Oirecr4r. In Re
Harlxor:, Beathes9 d Development
Pursc,ent to your request, I am subutit;ting a recommendation for a pol.bc:y
ar�atecnenL t.o be adopted by the City Council and to be sent to the
Chairman, Clarice Gilchrist, State Park and Recreation Comrrissia",
Po 0. Box 2M, Sacramento, California.
The City of Huntington Beach respectfully requests that the State of
California, Parks and itecraation .fission adopt a policy for developing
the two state beach parks within t e corporate limits of the City of
iiutzr;ngton Beach In cong,-5rmance with the aesthetic and envirortmenr.a.l
standard3 that have been established by the City for its municipal
beact& >
The Ci':y is seriously concerned with tha total planning of the tine (9)
miles of Its coastline. We are particularly concerned with the
devei.rament. procedures presently bein used on the Huntington Beac2; and
Bola Chica State Parks, Recent neu-spaper articles indictate that addi-
tiona. parking will be added to the Bols€a Chic& State Park with the
lncl u-ten of a chain link fence the entire 2-3/4 miles„ The City wants
co go cr *ec.ord that it is in opposition to the fencing of over five (5)
miles our coastline witti chain link fencing. It iti not r-.nlv ae_-
thecicaslf and environmentally unappealing, but it prevents 0-? put-, i.r..
from eas•; access cc its OWn beaches.
We feel that the City has developed a model ftzility and we Like
to present this plan co the State as a guideline depicting at, :ine.iranmental
atno phe unequalled in the State of Caiifornia.,
Vincent G Moorhouse, Directnr
Harbors . Beaches, Development
VGM/pr
cc: Erx zrc.nrental Cnuncii
P
HUHMNAM B11 AM POLICE DEPATUM P
OFFa CE toENO1RARDaF4
'O: DOYLE d MLER, CITY ISTRAIOR DATE: 7/27/71
FROG: E 1UZ W_ ROMAILLE, CHIEF OF FOLIO
SQ&MCT: E' 24MG BOs SA CH ICA S`%AM BMM PROMM i S
During the .Tuly 22nd City gesent sates, the issue of the proposed fencing
of the B^lsa Chies State Park came up. It was indicated that some prop-Dsais
and surgpFtiors wou.d be made at som later date by the City witl regards to
the State's proposal for fencing_
Prior to f:)rar,:latinq any particular stand on the part of the City, Z wotp1d like
to make the following information and suggestions available:
-his Department finds itmelf increasingly unable to mrfoxm its primary
function within the major geographical boundaries of the City during
the sumar wnths, primarily because of the problem on the
-beachos ducting that period. The Bolen Chica State Beach is the prime
problem from this Department's point of view.
Du:-=^.g the period of June 11. 1970 to September 13, 1970, one thousand
ani f^_tty seven (1,047) arrests tie wade by our officers on all City
and _-Stane bei -lies and adjacent areas twy. 1) . It should be noted that
only tttr,ixt-y five f 35) of these arrests took place at the Hu.-t inrgtoab State
BPvc}.: which presented very little in the way of problems to th s Depart-
men! . while six hundred and fifty six (656) took place at the RcLes Chica
State °srk. It is our feeling that the major differences &..i a.-! a-meLtnt:s
of a_-Teats rsn be attributed to the fencing at the Hun}ingt.srI Ztate Park
are `..:, i resen-- of Randers on duty, plus the fact that the 9-rea 26.s
1:c3hted during the night time lours.
Dux:nq April of 1971, our Special Enforcement Detail started its staff
avfol-•.'o.mant proqram. During the first week of operation _r_ April, 1971,
SF4'iri�y sever, + 77) arrests were made on our beaches- Fifty nin=_ (59) of
that; 2r.rests t,ok place at the Bolaa Mica State Beach. -�t ha- become
very G-iident, doing the beginning of this year, that Bolsa Chlca State
Bead: has acquired a reputation for an area where the illir_iL use Ot
narcotics, and alcohol can take place irAescrim-irately be:-ause
of the taay i.ngxess and egress to the beach, plus the fact that a very
minimal number of State guards are assigned and no lighti-ng ;z avai.laue.
It is my ewn cp:nior 4-hat we should Rio everything is our poser t.:. e:catirage the
State to fPn_e the Bolsa Chi--. State Park. I do rat feel it is i:tir to the ccomuity
of Hunting—r. 8"cb to have the majority of our available personnel continually cq�9—
isigned to this ore small aredt to the neglect of all others within this comma:y/
DOYLE KUT- ER, CITY faa#iMLSTM 'QtR
BE. MMING BOLSA CHICA STATE DRAM PROP YES Page 2,
July 21, 1971
In addition to encouraging the States to follow this action, I tUnk every effort
should be made for the California Department of Paela and Recreatacn to meet with
the CalAf rnira Oivisi.)n of Highways, and ourselves, aat1 gr•ake prot•aaicns for no
parking on Pacific Coast Highway outside of view oar these parks.
Further, it should be encumbant upon tha States to matte eure that a reasonable
number of entrance/exit paints are available to both existing State B-aches. This
would help alleviate the fxazendous traffic jams presently taking p:.acd at botch
beaches, ani the extreme number of fatal injury and property damage accidents occer-
ring beca-ki!Fm of th s c-ngest.ion in these two areas could be sigaif--'ca-;t.ly decreiazd.
X W. ROBITtLLLE
Chief of Police
EJR:fl
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION Ok. THE CITY COUNCIL OF `.['HE CITY
OF HUNTINGTCN BEXCH REQUEST NG THE STATE PARK
AND RECREATION COMMISSION TO ADOPT A POLICY
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF BEACHES LOCATED W TH,N
'L"iE CuRFORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY CF HUNTING'TON
BEACH
WHEREAS5 the City of Huntington Beach, a coastal city ; is
vitall.' ncncerned wl-h the preservation, planning and c:l elop-
ment of beaches within the corporate limits of said City ; and
IT c ` ty has devoted much time and study to the needs of
the oublic in conjunction with the planning and devel.-pr.^.ent of
its and
Th c: ty ras %established standards which protect and pre-
serve both the natural environment and aesthetic, of i. rs
beachej:, wi ile a, tt,,e same time allowing the pubilc free �:nd
easy to all beach and recreation areas . Such standards
InClude ous•a;, , gutters , sidewalk,_;, landscaping, park-ng fa-
cil �t . .end some aesthetically-pleasing, low-metal-picket
fennL:: v::th many openings for pedestrian beach userq ; and
h.`n , chair. link fencing without frequent pede:• an
open i nv.-, i.: not impat ible,
Nuts . THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Count, 1 of the
t ;.n tngton Beach that it requests the state Para{ ,nd
hec`C•,?a.t_.;on Comr.i ,sion to revlea and consider- the poll,,,, and
standard:, tcopy sttached hereto) developed by this city Ic_r
the ??r•—1c 'vat ion , -Manning and development of beaches , and to
implement same for the betterment of beaches all over the state,
if °,u( h .action i- deemed foasible by the Commission .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
-)f• Huntington Be.--+.ch is opposed to the proposed fencing t_f the
two-and-tt:ree--qu.lr•ter miles of the Bolsa Chica State Park, and
1 <
restate:' its opposition to the existence of the present chain
link :fence at the state beach between Beach Boulevard and the
San-';a Ana Rive. . Such fencing 1s not only aesthetically and
environmentally unappealing, but it prevents the public from
eaE:l pedestrian access to its own beaches .
BE -', T PURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereb% di-
rectet t,) mail copies of this resolution to Senators Ja�:Rs E.
Whe'•:m,;1 t� and De-nnis E. Carpenters Assenblymen Kenneth Cory and
RuLort H. 1;urkE: , -state Director of Public Works James A . Mce ,
s-`at : Par: and Recreation Commission Chairman Daniel D.
Villa:sic-U%la , state '.'apartment of Park and Recreation D� -rector
Wij-l;a : i'er.n Mott, .3r. , and Administrator of R.esource.-
Ncrm. n D. ;.'vermore .
�,ASOSLD AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Hunt Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 2nd
day ; r A> gul-_L, ! U7I.
Mayor
ATTES`--'
City Cleric
APPROVEE) AS TO FORM:
G-ty hat rney
2.
• • • DOYLE MILLER
J� 4' City of Huntington Beach Adntinietraiyr
Officer
BRANDER D. CASTLE
P.O. SOX 190 CALIFORNIA 9UM Adminis tr Ass rtan`
ator
DON P. BONFA
City Attorney
WARREN G. HALL
MAYOR Treasurer
Or. Donald D.Shipley
PAUI C. JUNES
COUNCILMEN
CitV Clefk
Ted W. Bartlett
Alvin M. Coen
Norma Brandel Gibbs
Jack Green
Jerry A.
George C..McCracken - January 18 , 1971-
r
TO:. Rogers Morton, Secretary of. the I terior Designate
Chief of the U. S . Park Service w lS.--n '
Senator Allan Cranston 7
Senator John Tunney
Congressman Richard Hanna
Congressman Craig Hosmer
Congressman John Schmitz
Gentlemen:
The Pacific Ocean beach in the city of Huntington Beach, California
is the most intensively used beach on the West Coast of the United
States . Ninety percent of the people who use this beach now and
in the future are not residents of the city of Huntington Beach.
It is really a regional, and even a national beach in its use and
significance . The ocean front is the surfing capital of the
continental United States .
-On the oceanfront in the .city of Huntington Beach there are now
three publically owned beaches , two of these recreational areas are
the Bolsa Chica State Beach and the Huntington State Beach. The
third beach is the Huntington Beach city beach which was purchased
and developed at considerable expense by the City of Huntington
Beach .
The Federal Government , including the President of the United States ,
has said that it is essential that critically needed beaches and
open space in heavily populated areas be acquired in the public
interest .
Even though the city of Huntington Beach has been for more than a
decade the most rapidly growing city in the United States (1958
population was about 10 , 000 , 1970 population was 125 , 000) we do
not have the many millions of dollars that would be required to
purchase the remaining privately owned ocean beach in this city .
JAMES R. WHEELER EARLE ROSITAILLE OLLIN C. CLEVELAND KENNETH A. REYNOLDS
Director of Public Works Police Chief Building Director Pianni"q One•for
VINCE.NT G. MOORHOUSE -
FRANK B. ARGUELLO RAYMOND PICARD D.re,.tor Harbors. WALTER W.JOHNSON NORMAN L. WORTHY
c met..0 Director fire Chief Beaches& Development Library Director. Recreation & Parks Director
-op
As you are aware , Orange County and Los Angeles County are the
most rapidly growing urban areas in the United States .
The U. S. Park Service has stated that critically needed beaches ,
especially in highly populated areas , be acquired for the
American people in perpetuity. The Pacific Ocean. beach in the
city of Huntington Beach is such an area and is of national
importance in this respect .
Enclosed is detailed information concerning the ocean beach in
this city. We realize that as far as urban areas are concerned,
this beach should become a National. Seashore under the jurisdiction
of the U.S. Park Service .
When it is convenient , officials of the City of Huntington Beach,
will be glad to come to Washington, D. C. to confer with the
Department of the Interior and the U. S . Park Service and discuss
this- beach in detail . It is urgent that this entire beach be
publically owned so that at least some of the recreational and
open space needs on the Pacific Coast of the United States may
be met . We urge such action in the national interest .
Sincerely,
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
Donald D. Shipley
Mayor
DDS :gbs
ICE MEMORANDUM
To °Mr. Doyle Hiller, City Administrator Date April 6, 1970
From --_Vincent G. Aborhouse, Director In Re Application - Denis L. Lync
Harbors, Beaches, & Development
As requested, I am submitting eight (8) copies of a communications
that our Engineering Department received pertinent to the appli-
cation of Mr. Denis L. Lynch for a permit to retain the construction .
trestle at the Santa Ana River.
Y feel that copies of this application should be circulated and that
we, the city, file a letter stating our concern for the affects
this structure might or night not have on the coastal erosion of
our beaches.
k
1
Vincent G. Hoorhouse, Director
Harbors, Beaches, d Development
VGWpr
t
Enclosuress 8
i
� r:
r;
r
G
y. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. 0. BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053
No. 5 k
10 March 1970 !
s
TO WHOM IT'MAY CONCERN:
Application has been made by Denis L. Lynch, 1481 Placentia
Avenue, Newport Beach, California 92660, for a permit to retain
the construction trestle used to construct the ocean outfall
line on the north side of Santa Ana River, Orange County,
California. :':
This existing structure, 36 feet wide by 2,000 feet long, will
be modified to 60 feet wide by 2,000 feet long and used as a
` public recreation pier.
Drawing showing plan and location of the proposed work is repro-
duced on the reverse of this sheet. Interested persons are
invited to inspect this drawing and to submit, so as to reach
f, this office on or before 10 April 1970, any written comments or
objections they may have to the proposed work. The determination
as to whether a permit will be issued will be based on an eval-
uation of all relevant factors including, the effect of the proposed
` work on navigation, fish and wildlife conservation, pollution,
...: and the general public interest. Comments on these .factors will
be accepted and made part of the record and will be considered
in determining whether it would be in the public interest to
grant a permit.
FOR THE DISTRICT ENGINEER: '
4
_ S J. 'BLACK
LTC, CE
Deputy District Engineer
..:_'i44.'..rr-.�'..rci_•%1_�Y•C:S$P'.`.iLk.�'K"w'lh"v8l�o.Y+o'-4��..idSi3�ia"Ike'4.intieisS.T•ifMny.-vFF.MG=:Ci+w:c�a_i.^
r
Isf'
l t/4" moo' Soo'
O w! v 0 C O ZNX f 2~ fT to N K*4&
PLAN
o zq, Sow ►oo'
Cl]AFsf H�6LIWAY No. 1 ,c,cti x
" L�PyWK
09 Fisz(No }
a AN& AVER
`3 -ai2•x Jew
�.� ��c,►���xiq� �0�1.�iG�a�foN oF ��t�tiNb . :.
`�.,t �•MHW
4I tl*p PK4407Ito. Zdzo1 -H
M&W
OMW60 COUNTY GdL't F`b�1 A
'e' �,Ljj
•.:�� h�TtG�! a-A: . too t�� �-3.10
CRAIG HOSMER COMMflTEESe
MEMBER OF CONGRESS JOINT COMMITTEE ON
CALIFORNIA ATOMIC ENERGY
INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS
Congrefo of the Oniteb Otateo
J�ogze of Repregentatibe.0
Wagbinston,P.C. 20515
April 13, 1970
Dear Mr. Jones:
Thank you for your letter enclosing a resolution
adopted by the City Council of Huntington Beach,
relative to the development of the coastal. zone of
the State of California.
I am happy to have the views of your Council
on the proposed plan for development of the coast
and will keep them in mind when considering legis-
lation affecting our coast.
With kindest regards, I am
Sin rely yours,
CRAIG HOSMER
CHIEF Member. of Congress
Mr. Paul C. Jones, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
P. 0. Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
RESOLUTION N0. 3150
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
MATTERS RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE COASTAL
ZONE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .
RESOLVED., that .the City Council of Huntington Beach
declares to the people of California that , in the interval
until a Comprehensive Ocean Area Plan is prepared and
$dopted, ' adverse modifications and uses of the resources with-
in the coastal zone will be discouraged within those areas
under our jurisdiction. Prohibition (exept when necessary
for the public health, safety or welfare) would include but
not be limited to:
(1) the destruction of an estuary, saltwater marsh,
slough, river mouth,• lagoon, bay or coastline , any part of
which lies within the coastal zone;
(2) the reduction in the area of lands available for
public beach or shoreline recreation activities within the
coastal zone;
(3) the reduction in, or limitation on, legal public
. access to the water from land within the coastal zone ;
(4) the substantial interference with the line of sight
from the nearest existing public street or highway within the
coastal zone to the water' s edge or the seaward horizon, or
both;
(5) the filling or dredging for purposes that are not
consistent with uses which are necessary to, and dependent
upon, the coastal zone environment .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of Hunting-
ton Beach does hereby call upon the State of California and
the federal government", during the interval until the comple-
tion and adoption of the Comprehensive Ocean Plan Area, to
,5 . l
evaluate proposed modifications and uses of the resources
within the State ' s area of responsibilities according to the
.same criteria .
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach at a regular meeting held on the 6th day
of April, 1970.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City &Werk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ity At7yl6�fi—ey
2.
I
Res. No. 3150
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss :
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I , PAUL C. JONES, the duly elected ; qualified and
acting City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-
officio Clerk of the City Council of said City , do hereby
certify that the whole number of members of the City Council
of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing
resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of
more than a majority of all the members of said City Council
at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th
day of Anriii_, 19_ZQ_, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmen:
Shipley, Bartlett . McCracken , Kaufman , Matney, Coen,
S Green
NOES Councilmen:
None
ABSENT: Councilmen:
None
City Clerk and EoWofficio Clerk
of the City -Council of the City
of Huntington Beach, California
fHE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT IS A CORRECT
COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ON FILE IN THIS-OFFICE
ATTEST...... - - 1"t -- - -----------�--- ........... _197U.
--------------7 G�% --... `� - ----------
City Clerk and Ex-o..-Ao Clerk of the City Council
of the City o H _an Cal.
�� Depub
PT of
C S. 31S'0
March 16, 1970 y c®UGI1.
PIT 19:
LITY C
TO: City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution recommending matters relating to
development of the coastal zone of the,
State of California
The attached resolution is sent , at the request of the
Mayor, for study, prior to adoption at the April 6th
meeting.
Respectfully Submitted,
DON P . BONFA
City Attorne
DPB:mw
Attachment
I''
t __
April 9, 1970
The Honorable Alan Cranston
Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20000
Dear Senator Cranston:
The City CouncV1 of Huntington Beach, at its regular
meeting held b6nday,, April 6-, 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150$ recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of Califorif-i-a.
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the State 's area of respon-
sibilifties, until completion and 'adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw:pa
Enclosure
April 9, 1970
The Honorable Craig Hosmer
House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Hosmer:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
meeting held Monday,, April 6, 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150, recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The City urges the State of California and Federa
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the State's area of respon-7
s ., until completion'MP
letion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No,a" 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw:pa
Enclosure
April 9, 1970
The Honorable Richard T. Hanna
1516 Longworth
House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Hanna:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
meeting held Monday, April 6, 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150., recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State' of California,..
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the State's area of respon-
sibilities, until completion and adoption '6f the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw:pa
Enclosure
April 9., 1970
Congressman
35th Congressional District
103 Cannon
House Office Building
Washington., D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman:
The City Council of Huntington Beach at its regular
meeting held Monday, April 6. 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150,, recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The ,City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of,,the resources within the State's area of res op:7
p ,
sibilities, until completion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a -'copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
e on s i d e ra t i on,.I.��,
i_,
Y
Sincerely yours,
PauIC. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw:pa
Enclosure
April 9, 1970
The Honorable Kenneth Cory
Assembly Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Assemblyman Cory:
The City Council of Huntington Beach., at its regular
meeting held Monday,, April 6, 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150, recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the State"'s area, of respon-
sibilities, until completion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ.,aw.-pa
Enclosure
April 9,, 1970
The Honorable Robert H. Burke
Assembly Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Assemblyman Burke:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
me'eting held Monday, April 6,, 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150, recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government�-�,io evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the State's area of respon-
sibilities, until completion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw4.pa
Enclosure
April 9, 1970
The Honorable James E. Whetmore
Senate Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Senator Whetmore:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
meeting held Monday., April 6, 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150, recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the Staters area of respon-
sibilities, until c6mpletion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Ar', a. Plan.
En" losed is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw:pa
Enclosure
April 9, 1970
The Honorable John G. Schmitz
Senate Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Senator Schmitz;
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
meeting held Monday, April 6; 1970, adopted Resolution
ZD
No. 3150, recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the States area of respon.-
sibilities, until completion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclose' d is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw: pa
Enclosure
r
April 9, 1970
The Honorable George Murphy
, Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20000
Dear Senator Murphy:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, r at its regular
meeting held Monday, April 6. 1970, adopted Resolution
No. 3150., recommending matters relating to development
of the coastal zone of the State of California.
The City urges the State of California and Federal
Government to evaluate proposed modification and uses
of the resources within the State' s area of respon-
sibilities 'j until completion and adoption of the com-
prehensive Ocean Area Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 3150 for your
consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw:pa
Enclosure
r
MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL
-_--- STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
~y !
LEGEND
_=_= FREEWAY
MAJOR. ..120'R/W
PRIMARY. 100'R/W
SECONDARY 80'9/W
NOTE
>; L. SOLIO LIES INDICATE EYISTtW RIGHT Of WAY
NOT NECESSARILY ULTIMATE RIGHT Of WAY
DASHED LINES 04MATE AREAS WHERE NO
�\ I RIGHT.Of WAY EXISTS
UVASYMBCL DFNDTES PRIMARY COLLET
CERTIFICATIONS:
1 I
CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH J.,
ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA \ /
• .... .... .._. ao s4 AIRMILWD CXAAt4-OR.W-MTM Wes.ANEW COLAW
-� 1
•
1' CITIZENS AGAINST the COASTAL INITIATIVE
870 MARKET STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 (415) 781-3751
a. . 1127 WILSHIRE BLVD. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90017 (213)481-2555
233 A STREET. SUITE 1107 SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 9 1 1 (714) 233.7146
September 20, 1972 SEp 2 51972
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
To the Honorable City Council:
If you haven' t read the fine print of Proposition No. 20--the
so-called Coastal Initiative--please do so now. A copy of the
Initiative is enclosed; also enclosed is a Fact Sheet which, in
question and. answer form, discusses the proposal in depth.
Whether your constituency is located on the "coast" or
elsewhere, the issue is of vital importance to everyone concerned
with the continued viability of local government.
The Initiative is so loosely and ambiguously drawn that court
interpretation would be required to determine its scope and the
meaning of many of its sections.
Its adverse effects in terms of public recreational opportuni-
ties, local property taxes, planned public projects, employment,
and traditional concepts of property rights would wreak havoc in
the areas directly affected and create a disturbing precedent for
all areas of the state.
Planning would become a nightmare of conflicting jurisdictions,
with new regional commissions created whose boundaries do not conform
to existing regional planning agencies. Coastal cities would be cut
in two, with local decision-making on permit applications and zoning
pre-empted by a new State bureaucracy.
The election is only a few short weeks away. We earnestly
solicit your support in opposition to this highly dangerous
Proposition.
Sincerely,
Cam.-tsi,
:Edwin W. Wade
- ohn F. Crowley A. L. Hamilton
Mayor, City of Long BeaM Secretary-Treasurer Los AngeZes Attorney
Past President, League of San Francisoo Labor and Counsel to
California Cities Council (AFL-CIO) Environmental Croups
CO-CHAIRMEN
IL
THE COASTAL ZONE INITIATIVE (PROPOSITION No, 20)
FACT SHEET
The legal questions raised in this
analysis have been submitted to Hasaard,
Bonnington, Rogers and Huber, Attorneys
at Law, and in their opinion the legal
points raised are subject to court ohal-
longs, review and determination.
CITIZENS AGAINST THE COASTAL INITIATIVE
870 Market Street 1127 Wilshire Blvd. 233 A St. , Suite 1107
San Francisco, CA 94102 Los Angeles , CA 90017 San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: 415/781-3751 Phone : 213/481-2555 Phone: 714/233-7146 I
WHERE IS THE COAST? And who is trying to do what -to California?
Most people think of the California coast as the shorelands immedi-
ately adjoining the Pacific Ocean. Because of its great scenic
beauty and ecological importance , this area has for some time beeri
the subject of concerted study by state , federal and local agencies
to develop appropriate land use policies .
Five years ago , the California State Legislature directed that a
comprehensive study be made of land use and ownership of the coastal
area. Recently completed, this in-depth survey , funded by the State
with financial assistance from the federal government, includes o a
detailed inventory of existing land uses of the entire California
coastal area lying 1/2 mile (880 yards) inland from the mean high
tide line . It is known as the California Comprehensive Ocean Area
Plan, or COAP.
Based on the COAP studies, measures have been introduced in
the State Legislature providing for State controls over
coastal area land use, providing for compensation for lands
withdrawn from private ownership and for the diminished
value of lands restricted by zoning from various uses, and
for reimbursements to local taxing agencies for revenues
lost because of lowered assessments resulting from such
withdrawals and diminished values .
These measures have not been adopted because of the adamant oppo-
sition of "preservationists" dedicated to a policy of establishing
a moratorium on the use of all public and private land in the
coastal area, with no provisions for compensation to property owners
for diminished values , or to counties , cities and local districts
for loss of tax revenues.
When their own bills incorporating these policies failed of passage ,
the preservationists , spurning any compromise , qualified Proposition
No. 20 through initiative petition, for . the November 7 ballot.
WHAT PROPOSITION NO. 20 DOES
Q. Briefly, what does Proposition No. 20 do ?
A. It establishes a California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission
and six regional commissions , directed to :
(a) develop a master plan for the Coastal Zone for sub-
mission to the Legislature at the eginning of the
1976 session;
(b) review all permits for land use granted by local
governments , with full powers to rescind them, for
all land within a 1 ,000 yard Permit Area.
2 -
No house or other structure in the area could be built , and no
remodelling or repairs of single-family homes in excess of $7 ,500
could be undertaken, without securing approval from the appropriate
regional commission--a new layer of bureaucracy, superimposed on
all existing agencies that now control the granting of permits.
Permit restrictions are so severe that as outlined herein it is a
certainty that virtually no permits would be granted for a five
year period.
PRESENT CONTROLS
g. Does the State of California presently exercise any controls
over local land use--not ,just in the coastal area, but statewide?
A. Yes. While local control of planning, zoning and subdivision
regulation is maintained, laws passed by the 1971 Legislature
require cities and counties to deny approval to tentative or final
subdivision maps unless specific criteria are met.
Findings which compel denial include inconsistency with applicable
general and specific plans , physical unsuitability of the site for
the type of density of development, design or improvements likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, design or im-
provements which are likely to cause serious public health problems ,
and design or improvements which conflict with public access
easements.
Q. What is the area of the Coastal Zone established by Proposition
No. 20?
A. Nobody knows for sure. The Initiative is so ambiguously drafted
That the area required to be included in the Coastal Zone master plan
would undoubtedly have to be determined by the courts.
COASTAL ZONE DEFINED
Q. How is the Coastal Zone defined in Proposition No . 20?
A. As "that land and water area of the State of California from the
border of the State of Oregon to the border of the Republic of Mexico ,
extending seaward to the outer limit of the state jurisdiction ,.
including all islands within the jurisdiction of the state, and ex-
tending inland to the highest elevation of the nearest coastal
mountain range , except that in Los Angeles , Orange, and San Diego
Counties, the inland boundary of the coastal zone shall be the highest
elevation of the nearest coastal mountain range or five miles from the
mean high tide line , whichever is the shorter distance. "
.Q. Why isn 't there a five mile limit in the case of counties other
than Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego?
A. Who knows?--but that's the way the Initiative is drafted.
3 _
Q. Are there coastal plain areas that extend further than five miles
to the highest elevation of the nearest coastal mountain range in
counties other than Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego?
A. Yes. Monterey County is one example.
�. From any given coastal location, in what direction is the highest
elevation of the nearest coastal mountain range?--due east?--at a
right angle from the particular location?--or where?
A. Who knows? The courts would have to decide. Although the Coastal
Zone boundary has been referred to as a "ridgeline" , that definition
Toes not appear in the Initiative.
Q. What is the "highest elevation of the nearest coastal mountain
range"?--a nearby hill, or a far array peak?
A. The courts would have to decide. A Coastal bill , introduced in
the 1972 session of the Legislature, limited the nearest applicable
elevation to 750 feet above sea level. However, that bill was opposed
by the sponsors of Proposition No: 20 , and no such definitive language
appears in the Initiative.
COUNTIES AFFECTED
g. Only 15 counties--DeZ Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma, Marin,
San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego--are represented
in the Coastal Zone regional commissions. What about other counties
fronting on San Francisco Bay ?
A. The area of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation
and Development Commission is excluded from the Permit Area, although
not from the Coastal Zone.
However, the BCDC's area of jurisdiction is the Bay and only that land
100 feet inland from the Bay. Therefore, it mould appear that the Land
area in Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, Solanp and Napa Counties
lying between 100 feet and 1, 000 yards (3, 000 feet) from the bay shore
would be included in Proposition 20 's Permit Area. Also, all land in
those counties lying from the bay shore to the highe8t. elevation of
the nearest coastal mountain range (wherever that is) would be included
in the Coastal Zone master plan. Yet none of these counties would have
any rep resentattion on the commissions; hearing permit applications or
developing master planning.
Also, the land area lying between 100 feet ..and 1 ,000 yards .from the
bay shore in those counties represented in the commissions--San Mateo,
San Francisco, Marin and Sonoma, would be included in the Permit Area.
Q. Would land in any additional counties be included in the Coastal
Zone and Permit Areas?
4 -
A. Very possibly. The Initiative defines "sea" as "the Pacific Ocean
and all the harbors , bays , channels , estuaries , salt marshes , sloughs
and other areas subject to tidal action through a connection with the
Pacific Ocean, excluding nonestuarine rivers and creeks. "
Under this definition, the coastline of the sea runs , among
other places, around San Francisco Bay, up and down the
shoreline of the Sacramento and San Joaquin ship channels ,
and up and down the stretches of the Sacramento and San
Joaquin Rivers that are subject to tidal action. Thus , . San
Joaquin, Sacramento , Yolo, and possibly other counties seem
to be included. Again, these counties would have no
representation on the commissions hearing permit applications
or developing master planning.
Q. How would the extent of the Coastal Zone area subject to State
master planning be determined in Central Va ley counties?
A. Presumably, all the land running from the shores or "coasts" of
The two ship channels or the two tidal-action rivers extending to
the nearest coastal mountain range would be included. As the banks
of the channels and rivers would seem to be the "coast" of this
unusually defined "sea" , the land area included would extend from
those banks of the channels or rivers that have tidal action--to the
Sierra Nevada on one side and the Coast Range on the other.
Q. Is there any county in California that wouldn 't be affected?
A. Possibly not. Proposition 20 contains still another " joker" :
"If any portion of any body of water which is not subject
to tidal action lies within the permit area, the body of
water together with a strip of land 1, 000 feet wide eur-
rounding it shall be included. "
Inasmuch as the waters of rivers adjoining the line of tidal action
are included for a distance of 1 ,000 yards , it would appear that a
reasonable interpretation of the above section would mean that the
entire length of the rivers and their tributaries also would be
included, together with all land within 1,000 feet of their banks.
Most counties in California contain streams that eventually flow into
the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, under the terms of Proposition No. 20 ,
vast , undetermined areas in almost every county of California could
be included in the so=called Coastal Zone or the Permit Area, or both.
In the final analysis , the exact boundaries would have to be determined
by the courts .
AIM OF SPONSORS?
�. How is it possible for Proposition No. 1'0 to be so ineptly drawn?
i
A
5
A. It may , or may not, be ineptly drawn. If the aim of its sponsors
is to secure State control over zoning of the largest possible area in
California, and to establish a moratorium on building in the largest
possible area , the Initiative is a very clever piece of draftmanship.
For example , the Sieroty Bill (AB 200) and the Grunsky Bill (SB 100) --
introduced in the 1972 session of the Legislature, and supported by the
sponsors of Proposition No. 20--excluded the jurisdiction of the San
Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, "together with
all contiguous areas 2,900 feet landward thereof" . That language would
have excluded from the Permit Area, the bayfront portions of San
Francisco , San Mateo, Marin and Sonoma Counties , as well as Santa Clara,
Alameda, Contra Costa, Solano and Napa Counties.
The proponents of Proposition No. 20 claim to have qualified it for the
ballot because AB 200 and SB 100 failed of legislative adoption.
However, in their Initiative , they did not include in the section
dealing with BCDC, the language, "together with all contiguous areas
2 ,900 feet landward thereof" . One can only wonder whether this
omission was deliberately planned to greatly expand the area of the .
so-called Coastal Zone.
STRUCTURE OF PROP. NO. 20 BUREAUCRACY
Q. How is the new bureaucracy created by Proposition No. 20
structured?
A. The Initiative creates a California Coastal - Zone Conservation
Commission and six regional commissions in the 15 coastal counties
only.
Four of the regional commissions contain 12 members , one contains 14
members and one contains 16 members. The State Commission contains
12 members.
Q. Are the commission members eZected?
A. No. All are appointed.
In the case of the regional commissions , half of the memberships are
drawn from local officials ; the other half, so-called public members ,
are appointed by the Governor, the Senate Rules Committee and the
Speaker of the Assembly.
Each regional commission appoints one of its members to serve on the
State Commission, accounting for 6 members. The other 6 are appointed
as above.
Q. What quaZifications must so-caZZed public members have to be
appointed?
A. They must have "expertise in conservation, recreation , ecological
and physical sciences , planning and education. "
� I
- 12 -
Open Space (Recreational , Agricultural and Undeveloped)
Number of Acres Percentage-
Recreational - public camp grounds and
developed parks 3,179 .58%
Recreational - public parks in wilderness
state 60, 332 11. 07
Recreational. - golf courses and resorts 4 ,688 . 86
Agricultural and grazing* 201 , 336 36 . 94
Other undeveloped land* 144 , 479 26 . 51
414 ,014 75.96%
Developed Areas
Government facilities--access roads , trails
and parking 1 ,633 . 30
Government facilities--harbors , marinas ,
educational facilities , etc. 26 ,742 4. 91
Transportation 11,454 2 .10
Commercial 14 ,574 2 . 67
Communication, mining and industrial 18 ,724 3.43
Residential--primary homes , including cities 53 ,090 9 . 74
Residential--vacation homes 4 ,185 . 77
Fa rms to ads 657 .12
131 ,059 — W.048
Total 545 ,073 100 .00%
*Of these categories , more than 130 ,000 acres are publicly owned (Forest
Service , etc. ) but not designated as public park lands .
Moreover, it should be remembered that all of the seashore up to the
mean high tide is publicly owned by the State, or if privately owned,
is subject to a public trust.
Q. Is the publicly owned coastal land Zocated almost exclusively in the
sparsely settled areas in the northern part of the state?
A. No. In San Diego County, 59 .66% of the coastal land is publicly
owned; in Orange County, 28.41% is publicly owned; and in Los Angeles
County , 66. 69% is publicly owned.
PARK LAND
Q. I's there a shortage of accessible park land for public use?
A. The COAP Inventory reveals that there is--only 3,179 acres have
Seen developed for public enjoyment. But an additional 60 , 332 acres
exists in public parks not developed for the use of the general public,
and twice that amount oTcoastal land is publicly owned open space not
designated as park land.
Q. Is it necessary to institute a five-year building moratorium in
order to provide public access to the beaches?
- 13 -
A. No. More than 41 per cent of the beach lands are publicly owned,
and the State can acquire access easements across private lands
through eminent domain. Also , local governments can and do require
public access roads to the beach when considering development permits .
If the $5, 000 ,000 appropriated by Proposition No. 20 to
provide starting money to finance a cumbersome new layer of
bureaucracy were used instead to provide access to the beaches ,
public recreational opportunities would be greatly increased.
At an average estimated cost of $3 ,500 per 500 feet of
22-foot-wide easements from highways to the sea, 1 ,428 access
roads could be built for $5 ,000 ,000 , or one for every . 8 mile
of shoreline in California. If easements were 50 feet wide ,
one could be built for every 2. 1 miles of shoreline.
GAINERS, LOSERS
Q. Who mould gain from Proposition No . 20?
A. Only a favored few would benefit from the coastal "deep-freeze" :
those with the physical and monetary resources to enjoy the beaches
by back-packing and horseback riding and who would "lock up" the
beaches from the general public; and those owners of established beach
homes in exclusive areas whose property values would increase when
people of moderate means are prohibited from sharing the same amenities .
Q. Who would lose by Proposition No. 20?
A. The great majority of home owners and other property owners in at
Feast 15 coastal counties , and all of those counties , cities and school
districts within them. Depending on court determination of the actual
extent of the Coastal Zone, property owners and local governments in
large addition—aT areas of the state also would lose.
Eventually, every home owner could lose, for the Initiative
would establish a precedent in every area of the state for
appropriating private property without paying for it.
All of the state 's taxpayers stand to lose , for they would incur a
contingent liability for redress of inverse condemnation.
Labor would lose--for the economic aspects of the deep-freeze in those
areas directly affected would have a chilling effect on employment.
i
How is taking away land values without paying for them any
f ferent from stealing?
A. Every voter will have to answer that question for himself.
i l
- 14 -
If you believe that it is the responsibility of the Legislature to
develop reasonable, well thought-out. State guidelines and controls
to protect and enhance the coast 's scenic and recreational resources
--reconciling the legitimate points of view of all Californians--you
on Proposition No. 20.
If you are concerned over high taxes, and if you wish to protect the
value of your own home--you will vote NO on Proposition. No . 20. •
If you believe in fair play, and in meaningful local participation
in decision making--you will vote NO on Proposition No. 20.
If you believe in conservation--butare opposed to confiscation--you
will vote NO on Proposition No. 20.
An act to add and repeal Division 18(corn- 27103. "Development" means, on land, in or commissions, selected by each regional commLs-
matlieing with Section 27000) of the Public under water, the placement or erection of any solid sion from among its members.
Resources Code,and to add and repeal Sec- material or structure;discharge or disposal of any (b) Six representatives of the public who
Nan 111128.2 of the Business and Profes- dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid, solid, shill not be members of a. regional commission.
Is Code,relating to the California coas- or thermal waste; grading, removing, dredging, 27201. The following six regional commis-
am.and making appropriation therefor. mining, or extraction of any materials; change in signs are hereby created:
the density or intensity of use of land, including, (a) The North Coast Regional Commission
TU peagle of the State of California do enact but not limited to, subdivision of land pursuant for Del Norte, Humboldt, and Mendocino Counties
as amb aw to the Subdivision Map Act and any other division shall consist of the following members:
of land, including lot splits: change in the intensity (1) One supervisor and one city councilman
SEC aWN I. Division Ig(commencing with of use of water, ecology related thereto, or of from each county.
Section 27000) is added to the Public Re- access thereto;construction,reconstruction,demo- (2) Six representatives of the public.
sources Code,to read: lition, or alteration of the size of any structure. (b) The North Central Coast Regional Com-
including any facility of any private,public,or muni- mission for Sonoma, Marin, and San Francisco
cipal utility, and the removal or lagging of major Counties shall consist of the following members:
DIVISION 19. CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZONE vegetation. As used in this section, "structure" (1) One supervisor and one city councilman
CONSERVATION COMMISSION includes, but is not limited to,any building, road, from Sonoma County and Marin County.
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND pipe, flume, conduit, siphon, aqueduct, telephone• (2) Two supervisors of the City and County
FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS OF POLICY line,and electrical power transmission and distri- of San Francisco.
bution line. (3) One delegate to the Association of Bay
270t10. This division may be cited as the Cali- 27104. "Permit area" means that portion of Area Governments.
(bawls Coastal Zone Conservation Act of 1972. the coastal zone lying between the seaward limit (4) Seven representatives of the public.
27001. The people of the State of California of the jurisdiction of the state and 1,000 yards (c) The Central Coast Regional Commis-
bez+eby find and declare that the California coastal landward from the mean high tide line of the sea sion for San Mateo, Santa Cruz, and Monterey
sons is a distinct and valuable natural resource subject to the following provisions: Counties shall consist of the following mem-
belonging to all the people and existing as a delicate- (a) The area of jurisdiction of the San Fran- bers:
ly balanced ecosystem;that the permanent protec- cisco Bay Conservation and Development Commis- (1) One supervisor and one city council-
UN of the remaining natural and scenic"resources sion is excluded. man from each county.
of the coastal zone is a paramount concern to (b) If any portion of-any body of water which is (2) One delegate to the Association of Bay
pnreseat and future residents of the state and nation; not subject to tidal action lies within the permit Area Governments.
that in order to promote the public safety,health, area, the body of water together with a strip of (3) One delegate to the Association of Mos-
and welfare,and to protect public and private pro- land 1,000-feet wide surrounding it shall be in- terey Bay Area Governments.
perty, wildlife, marine fisheries, and other ocean cluded. (4) Eight representatives of the public.
resourees,sad the natural environment,it isneces- (c) Any urban land area which is (1)a resi- (d) The South Central Coast Regional Com-
n" to preserve the ecological balance of the denlial area zoned,stabilized and developed to a mission for San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara,
coastal sane and prevent its further deterioration density of four or more dwelling units per acre and Ventura Counties shall consist of the fol-
and destruction; that it is the policy of the state on or before January 1, 1972; or(2)a commercial lowing members:
to preserve,protect,sad,where possible,to restore or industrial area zoned, developed,and stabilized (1) One supervisor and one city council-
n»soirees of the coastal sone for the enjoy- for such use on or before January i, 1972. may, man from each county.
of the current and succeeding generations;and alter public hearing, be excluded by the regional (2) Six representatives of the public.
to protect the coastal sane it-is necessary: commission at the request of a city or county (e) The South Coast Regional Commission
(a) To study the coastal zone to determine the within which such area is located. An urban land for Los Angeles and Orange Counties shall con-
ecological planning principles and assumptions area is "stabilized" if 80 percent of the lots sist of the following members:
needed to ensure conservation of coastal &one are built upon to the maximum density or inten- (1) One supervisor from each county.
rwaonrces. sity of use permitted by the applicable zoning (2) One city councilman from the City of
(b) To prepare, based upon such study and regulations existing on Jasuary 1, 1972. Los Angeles selected by the president of such
is full consultation with all affected governmental Tidal and submerged lands, beaches, and city council.
agencies,private interests,and the general.public, lots immediately adjacent to the inland extent of (3) One city councilman from Los Angeles
a comprehensive,coordinated,enforceable plan for any beach or of the mean high tide line where County from a city other than Los Angeles.
the orddrly, long-range conservation and manage- there is no beach shall not be excluded. (4) One city councilman from Orange County.
meat of the natural resources of the coastal zone, Orders granting such exclusion shall be sub- (5) One delegate to the Southern-California
to be known as the California Coastal Zone Con- ject to conditions which shall assure that no Association of Governments.
servatlos Plan. significant change in density, height, or nature (6) Six representatives of the public.
(c) To ensure that any development which occurs of uses occurs. (f) The San Diego Coast Regional Commission
In the permit area during the study and planning An order granting exclusion may be revoked for San Diego County, shall consist of the following
period will be consistent with the objectives of this at any time by the regional commission, after members:
division. public hearing. (1) Two supervisors from San Diego County
(d) To create the California Coastal Zone (d) Each regional commission shall adopt a and two city councilmen from San Diego County,
Conservation Commission,and six regional coastal map delineating the precise boundaries of the at least one of whom shall be from a city which
some conservation commissions, to implement the permit area within 60 days after its first meet- lies within the permit area.
provision of this division. iug and file a copy of such map in the office of (2) One city councilman from the City of
CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS the county clerk of each county within its region. San Diego, selected by the city council of such
27100. 'Coastal gooe*means that land and water 27105. "Person" includes any individual, city.
area of The State of California from the border organization, partnership, and corporation, in- (3) One member of the San Diego Compre-
of the State of Oregon to the border of The Republic cluding any utility and any agency of federal, hensive Planning Organization.
of Mexico, extending seaward to the outer limit state,and local.government (4) Six representatives of the public.
of the state jurisdiction, including all islands within 27106. "Sea" means the Pacific Ocean and 27202. All members of the regional com-
the jurisdiction of the state, and extending inland all the harbors, bays, channels, estuaries, salt missions and public members of the commis-
to the highest elevation of the nearest coastal marshes, sloughs, and other areas subject to sion shall be selected or appointed as follows:
mountain range, except that In Los Angeles,Orange, tidal action through a connection with the Pacific (a) All supervisors, by the board of super-
AM San Diego Counties, the inland boundary of Ocean, excluding nonestuarine rivers and creeks. visors on which they sit;
the 'eoastal zone shall be the highest elevation b( ) All city councilmen except under sub-
of the nearest coastal mountain range or five miles CHAPTER$. CREATION, MEMBERSHIP,AND sections (e) (2) and(f) (2). by the.city selection
b— the mean high tide line, whichever is the POWERS OF COMMISSION AND REGIONAL COM- committee of their respective counties;
?r distance. MISSIONS (c) All delegates o/ regional agencies, by
_1101. "Coastal zone plan" means the Cali- Article 1. Creation and Membership of Com- their respective agency;
fornia Coastal Zone Conservation Plan. missions and Regional Commissions (d) All public representatives, equally by the
27102. (a) "Commission" means the Califor- 27200. The California Coastal Zone Con- Governor, the Senate Rules Committee and the
Ma Coastal Zone Conservation Commission. servation Commission is hereby cre;rted and shall Speaker of the Assembly, provided that the extra
(b) "Regional commission"means any regiobal consist of the following members: member under (b) (4) and the extra members
coastal zone conservation commission. (a) Six representatives from the regional under (c) (4) shall be appointed by the Governor,
j
the Senate Rules Committee and the Speaker of mission or any regional commission shall partici- 27302. The coastal zone plan shall be consis-
the Assembly respectively. pate, in any official capacity whatsoever, in any tent with all of the following objectives:
Article S. Organization proceeding, hearing, application, request for ruling (a) The maintenance,'restoration, and en-
27220. Each public member of the commis- or other official determination, judicial or other- Io ancement of the overall quality of the coastal
-or -of a regional commission shall be a wise, in which any of the following has a finan- zone environment, including, but not limited to,
rson who,as a result of his training,experience, cial interest: the member or employee himself; its amenities and aesthetic values.
and attainments, is exceptionally well qualified to his spouse; his child; his partner; any organization_ (b) The continued existence of optimum pop-
aatalyze and interpret environmental trends and in which he is then serving or has,within two years ulations of all species of living organisms.
isI .-on. to appraise resource uses in light prior to his selection or appointment to or employ- (c) The orderly,balanced utilizationandpre-
of the poiides set forth in this division, to be ment by such commission or regional commission, servation, consistent with sound conservation prin-
responsive to the scientific, social, esthetic, re- served, in the capacity of officer,director,trustee, ciples, of all living and nonliving coastal zone
creatiml, and cultural needs of the state. Ex- partner, employer or employee; any organization resources.
peruse in conservation, recreation, ecological within which he is negotiating for or has any (d)Avoidance of irreversible and irretrievable
and physical sciences, planning, and education arrangement or understanding concerning prospec- commitments of coastal zone resources.
shall be represented on the commission and tive partnership or employment. 27303. The coastal zone plan shall consist
regional commissions. 27232. In any case within the coverage of Sec- of such maps, text and statements of policies and
27221. Each member of the commission and tion 27230, the prohibitions therein contained shall objectives as the commission determines. are
each regional commission shall be appointed or not apply if the person concerned advises the com- necessary.
selected not later than December 31, 1972. mission in advance of the nature and circumstances 27304. The plan shall contain at least the follow-
Each appointee of the Governor shall be sub- thereof, including full public disclosure of the facts ing specific components:
ject to confirmation by the Senate, which may potentially give rise to a violation of (a) A precise, comprehensive definition of
.27222. In the case of persons qualified for this article, and obtains from the commission a the public interest in the coastal zone.
membership because they bold a specified of- written determination that the contemplated action (b) Ecological planning principles and
fice, such membership ceases when their term of will not adversely affect the integrity of the com- assumptions to be used in determining the suita-
office ceases. Vacancies which occur shall be mission or any regional-commission. Any such bility and extent of allowable development.
filled in the same manner in which the original determination shall require the affirmative vote of (c) A component which includes the follow-
member was selected or appointed. two-thirds of the members of the commission. ing elements:
27223. Members shall serve without com- 27233. Nothing in this article shall preclude (1) A land-use element.
pensation, but shall be reimbursed for the actual any member of the commission or any regional com- (2) A transportation element.
AM necessary expenses incurred in the perfor- mission, who is also a county supervisor or city (3) A conservation element for the preser-
manee of their duties to the extent that reim- councilman, from voting or otherwise acting upon vation and management of the scenic and other
bursement is not otherwise provided by another a matter he has previously acted upon in such natural resources of the coastal zone.
public agency. Members who are not employees designated capacity. (4) A public access element for maximum
of other public agencies shall receive fifty dol- 27234. Any person who violates an
Itrs =50) for each full day of attends meetings y provision visual and physical use a�enjoyment of the coastal
( attending n6 of this article shall, upon conviction, and for each zone by the public.
of the commission or of any regional commission. such offense, be subject to a fine of not more than a (5) A recreation element.
27224. The commission and regional com- ten thousand dollars ($10,000)or imprisonment in (6) A public services and facilities element
missions shall meet no less than once a mouth the state prison for not more than two years, or for the general location, scale, and provision in
a place convenient to the public. Unless both. the least environmentally destructive manner of
rwise provided in this division, no decision Article 3. POWERS AND DUTIES public services and facilities in the coastal.zone.
permit applications or on the adoption of 27240. The commission and each r
the coastal zone plan or any part thereof shall regional com- This element shall include a power plant siting
P aelzaloa, may: study.
be made without a prior public hearing. All (a) Accept grants,contributions,and appro- (7) An ocean mineral and living resources
meetings of the commission and each regional priations; element.
commission shall be open to the public. A (b) Contract for any professional services (8) A population element for the establish-
majority affirmative vote of the total authorized it such work or services cannot satisfactorily be ment of maximum desirable population densities.
membership shall be necessary to approve any performed by Its employees; (9) An educational or scientific use element.
action required or permitted by this division, (c) Be sued and sue to obtain any remedy (d) Reservations of land orwaterinthe coas-
unless otherwise provided. to restrain violations of this division. Upon tat zone for certain uses, or the prohibition of
27225. The first meeting of the commission request of the commission or any regional commis- certain uses in specific areas.
shall be no later than February 15, 1973. The sion, the State Attorney General shall provide (e) Recommendations for the governmental
first meeting of the regional commissions shall necessary legal representation. policies and powers required to implement the
be no later than February 1, 1973. (d) Adopt any regulations or take any action coastal zone plan including the organization and
27226. The headquarters of the commission it deems reasonable and necessary to carry out authority of the governmental agency or agencies
shall be within the coastal zone. the provisions of this division, but no regulations which should assume permanent responsibility for
Article 2.5. Cosfiicts oflaterest shall be adopted without a prior public hearing. its implementation.
27230. Except as hereinafter provided none 27241. The commission and regional commis- Article A. Planning Procedure
of the following persons shall appear or act, in sions may request and utilize the advice and ser- 27320. (a) The commission shall, within six
any capacity whatsoever except as a representa- vices of all federal, state, and local agencies. months after its first meeting,publish objectives,
tive of the state, or political subdivision thereof, Upon request of a regional commission any federally guidelines, and criteria for the collection of data,
in cosbectfon with any proceeding, hearing, aP- recognized regional planning agency within Its the conduct of studies, and the preparation of local
ptieation, request for ruling or other official region shall provide staff assistance insofar as its and regional recommendations for the coastal zone
Asteminitfon, judicial or otherwise, in which resources permit. plan.
So Qse tat zk4w plan, or the commission or any 27242. All elements of the California Com- (b) Each regional commission shall, in co-
nciaoal commission is involved in an official prehensive Ocean Area Plan, together with all staff operation with appropriate local agencies, prepare
capacity: and funds appropriated or allocated to it, shall its definitive conclusions and recommendations,
(a) Any member or employee of the commis- be delivered by the Governor and shall be attached including recommendations for areas that should be
sion or regional commission; and allocated to the commission at its first meeting. reserved for specific uses or within which specific
(b) Any former member or employee of 27243. The commission and each regional com- uses should be prohibited, which it shall, after
the commission or regional commission during mission shall each elect a chairman and appoint public hearing in each county within its region,
the year following termination of such member- an executive director, who shall be exempt from adopt and submit to the commission no later than
ship or employment; civil service. April 1, 1975.
(c) Any partner, employer, an employee of a CHAPTER 4. CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZONE (c) On or before December 1. 1975,the com-
-ember or employee of the commission or any CONSERVATION PLAN mission shall adopt the coastal zone plan and submit
lonal commission, when the matter in issue Article 1. Generally it to the Legislature for its adoption and imple-
.� one which is under the official responsibility 27300. The commission shall prepare, adopt, mentation
of such member or employee, or in connection and submit to the Legislature for implementation CHAPTER 3. INTERIM PERMIT CONTROL
with which such member or employee has acted the California Coastal Zone Conservation Plan. Article 1. General Provisions
or is scheduled to act, in any official capacity 27301. The coastal zone plan shall be based 27400. On or after February 1, 1973. any
whatsoever. upon detailed studies of all the factors that signi- person wishing to performany development within
27231. No member or employee of the com- ficantly affect the coastal zone. the permit area shall obtain a permit authorizing
�Qcb development from the regional commission 21405. Notwithstanding any provision in this 27426. Any person may maintain an action for
and. If required by law, from any city, county, chapter to the contrary, no permit shall be required the recovery of civil penalties provided IoSections
state, regional or local agency. for the following types of development: 27500 and 27501.
Except as provided in•Sections 27401 and27422, (a) Repairs and improvements not in excess 27427. The provisions of this article shall be
permit shall be issued without the affirmative of seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) in addition to any other remedies available at law.
to of a majority of the total authorized member- to existing single-family residences; provided,that 27428. Any person who prevails in a civil action
ship of the regional commission,or of the commis- the commission shall specify by regulation those brought to enjoin a violation ofthisdivisionor to re-
slan on appeal• classes of development which involve a risk of cover civil penalties shall be awarded his cdsts,in-
27401. No permit shall be issued for any of adverse environmental effect and may require that eluding reasonable attorneys fees.
tke lollowfag without the affirmative vote of two- a permit be obtained. CHAPTER 6. PENALTIES
thirds at the total authorized membership of the (b) Maintenance dredging of existing navigation 27500.. Any person who violates any provisioi
regional commission, or of the commission on channels or moving dredged material from such of this division shall be subject to a civil fine not b
Appeal: channels to a disposal area outside the permit exceed ten thousand.dollars($10,000).
(a) Dredging, filling, or otherwise altering area, pursuant to a permit from the United States 27501. In addition to any other penalties,any
any bay,estuary, salt marsh, river mouth,slough, Army Corps of Engineers. person who performs any development in violation
or lagoon. Article 2. Permit Procedure of this division shall be subject to a civil fine not
(b) Any development which would reduce the 27420. (a) The commission shall prescribe to exceed five hundred dollars (E500)per day for
sine of any beach or other area usable for public the procedures for permit applications and their each day in which such violation persists.
recreation. appeal and may require a reasonable filing fee and CHAPTER 7. REPORTS
(c) Any development which would reduce or the reimbursement ui expenses. 27600. (a) The commission shall file annual
impose restrictions upon public access to tidal and (b) The regional commission shall give written progress reports with the jGovernor and the Legis-
submerged lands, beaches and the mean high tide- public notice of the nature of the proposed develop- lature not later than the[fifth calendar day of the
line where there is no beach. ment and of the time and place ofthe public hearing. 1974 and 1975 Regular Session of the Legislature,
(d) Any development which would substan- Such hearing shall be set no less than 21 nor more and shall file its final report containing thecoastal
Bally interfere with or detract from the line of sight than 90 days after the date on which the applica- zone plan with the Governor and the Legislature
toward the sea from the state highway nearest the tion is filed. not later than the fifth calendar day of the 1976
coast. (c) The regional commission shall act upon Regular Session of the Legislature.
(e) Any development which would adversely an application for permit within 60 days after the CHAPTER S. TERMINATION
affect water quality, existing areas of open water conclusion of the hearing and such action shall 27650. This division shall remain in effect
free of visible structures, existing and potential become final after the tenth working day unless an until the 91st day after the final adjournmentof the
commercial and sport fisheries, or agricultural appeal is filed within that time. 1976 Regular Session of the Legislature, and as of
uses of land which are existing on the effective 27421. Each unit of local government within that date is repealed.
date of this division. the permit area shall send a duplicate of each SEC. 2. Section 11528.2 is added to the Business
27402. No permit shall be issued unless the re- application for a development within the permit and Professions Code, to read:
gional commission has first found,both ofthe follow- area to the regional commission at the time such 11528.2 The clerk of the governing body or the
inB: application for a local permit is filed, and shall advisory agency of each cityortounty or city and
(a) That the development will not have any advise the regional commission of the granting of county having jurisdiction over am part of the
substantial adverse environmental or ecological any such permit. coastal zone as defined in Section 27100 ofthe
effect. 27422. The commission shall provide,by regula- Public Resources Code,shall transmit to the office
(b) That the development is consistent with, tion. for the issuance of permits by the executive of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Com-
findings and declarations set forth in Sec- directors without compliance with the procedure mission within three days after the receipt thereof
lions 27001 and with the objectives set forth in specified in this chapter ih cases of emergency or one copy of each tentative map of any subdivision
Section 27302. for repairs or improvements to existing structures located, wholly or partly, within the coastal zoue
The applicant shall have the burden of proof not in excess of twenty-five thousand dollars and such Commission may, within 15 days therE-
on all issues. make
27409. All permits shall be subject to reason- ten thousand dollars $10,000 •Non mnts ien encase el after, gencyrrega ding the effectof the proposed
able terms and conditions in order to ensure: ( ) R ypere local agency g proposed
mils shall not be effective until after reasonable subdivision upon the California Coastal Zone
(a) Access to publicly owned or used beaches, public notice and adequate time for the revie*of Conservation Plan. This section doesnotexempt
recreation areas, and natural reserves is increased such issuance has been provided. If any two mem- any such subdivision from the permit re-
to the maximum extent possible by appropriate bers of the regional commission so request at the quirements of Chapter 5(commencing with Section
dedication. first meeting following the issuance of such permit, 27400)of Division 18 of the Public Resources Code.
(b) Adequate and properly located public recrea- such issuance shall not be effective and instead the This section shall remain in effect only until
lion areas and wildlife preserves are reserved. application shall be set for a public hearing pur- the 91st day after the final adjournment of the
(e) Provisions are made for solid and liquid suant to the provisions of Section 27420. 1976 Regular.Session of the Legislature, and as
waste treatment,disposition,and management which 27423. (a)An applicant,or any person aggrieved of that date is repealed.
will minimise adverse effects upon coastal zone by approval of a permit by the regional commission SEC. 3. If any provision of this act or the
resources. may appeal to the commission. application thereof to any person orcircumstances
(d) Alterations to existing land forms and vege- (b) The commission may affirm, reverse,of is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other
tation, and construction of structures shall cause modify the decision of the regional commission. provisions or applications,of the act which can be
minimum adverse effect to scenic resources and If the commission fails to act within 60 days given effect without the invalid provision or ap-
minimum danger of floods, landslides,erosion,sil- after notice of appeal has been filed,the regional plication, and to this end the provisions of this
tation, or failure in the event,of earthquake. commission's decision shall become final. act are severable.
27404. It, prior to the effective date of this (c) The commission may decline to bear appeals SEC. 4. There is hereby appropriated from
division, any city or county has issued a building tint it determines raise no substantial issues. the Bagley Conservation Fund to the California
permit, no person who has obtained a vested right Appeals it hears shall be scheduled for a de novo Coastal Zone Conservation Commission the sum
thereunder shall be required to secure a permit Public hearing and shall be decided In the same of five million dollars ($5,000,000) to the extent
from the regional commission; providing that no manner and by the same vote as provided for that any moneys are available in such fund and if
substantial changes may be. made in any such decisions by the regional commissions. all or any portions thereof are not available then
development, except in accordance with the pro- 27424. Any person, including an applicant for from the General Fund for expenditure to support
4 visions of this division. Any such person shall be a permit, aggrieved by the decision or actionof the the operations of the commission and regional
deemed to have such vested rights if,prior to April commission or regional commission shall have a coastal zone conservation commissiuus during
1, 1972, he'has in good faith and in reliance upon right to judicial review of such decision or action the fiscal years of 1973 to 1976, inclusive, pur-
the building permit diligently commenced construe- by filing a petition for a writ of mandate, pur- suaat to the provisions of Division 18(commencing
tin and performed substantial work on the develop- suant to Section 1084 of the Code of Civil Pro- with Section 27000) of the Public Resources Code.
t and incurred substantial liabilities for work cedure, within 60 days after such decision or action SEC. S. The Legislature may, by two-thirds
materials necessary therefor. Expenses in- has become final. of the mpinbership concurring, amend this act
curred in obtaining the enactment of an ordinance 27425. Any person may maintain an action for in order to better achieve the objectives set forth
in relation to the particular development or the declaratory and equitable relief to restrain viola- in Sections 27001 and 27302 of the Public Re-
issuance of a permit shall not be deemed liabili- tion of this division. No band shall be required sources Code.
ties for work or material. for an action under this section. EFY
o rcCE � ME,
IRVINL COMPANY STATEMENT ON PROP . 20 E1
S EP 21 1972
By Raymond L . Watson
Executive Vice President CITY OF HUNTINGTON REACH
The Irvine Company ADRNISTRATIVE OFFICE
One of the most controversial. measures on the November ballot
will be the Coastal Initiative , Prop . 20 . Many Californians will
be against it ; many will be for it .
We will. be among those against. it .
The Irvine Company takes this position reluctantly.
We applaud the initiative ' s broad objectives : the protection ,
restoration and enhancement of the coastal environment . It is its
proposed mechanism for attaining these objectives that forces us
to oppose the initiative .
That mechanism, in our opinion , is unrealistic, unnecessary,
perhaps unconstitutional. and certainly unfair.
We share such concerns with many others , including Gov.
Ronald Reagan ' s chief adviser on environmental issues , Secretary
for Resources Norman B. Livermore , .Jr. ; the coastal cities of
Newport Beach and Long -Beach; and the entire Orange Coast
legislative delegation.
With them, we support the concept of state guidelines governing
coastal land use and conservation. That this environmental
requirement will soon be met by the Legislature is as much a certainty
as it is a necessity. But it must he responsibly met with
responsible legislation.
The Irvine Company has worked for the passage of such
legislation in the past ; we will continue to do so in the future .
It is regrettable that the issue of coastal. legislation, after
much governmental debate , remains unresolved . Nevertheless , it
is closer to resolution by our lawmakers now than ever before . , 1
Page 2
There is greater understanding of the need. for - - and the wide
implications of - - coastal legislation now than ever before . '
For these and other reasons there is no reasonable justi.-
fication for plassage of Prop. 20 . It goes too far,
If passed , it would have a very severe imp�ict on hundreds
of thousands of property-owners , private and public, who are
undeserving of the cumbersome , restrictive controls it would
inflict.
The best arguments against the measure are found in the
reading of it, which, in our opinion, too few have done.
Analysis of the measure compels us to conclude that it will
not , despite the claims of some of its advocates , open up California' s
coastal lands_ to greater public access . It will instead ,
through the creation of a preservationist-oriented commission
system and extraordinarily rigid requirements for development of
any kind, effectively shut down the coastline for at least
three years .
Under the initiative , virtually all public and private
improvement programs -- from bike trails to home construction --
within a 3 , 000 foot-wide coastline "Permit Area" will require
approval from a 12-member regional commission , only two members of
which would be elected representatives from Orange County.
The initiative would thus remove the planning process further
from the people, including those very individuals and organizations
who deserve credit for the intensifying , and effective , environmental
controls now being imposed by government at the local level.
f
Page 3
Developed and undeveloped areas would be subject to the
bureaucratic maze set forth in Prop . 20 . Its "Permit Area," for '
,xa ple , encompasses not only the essentially unused coastal
resources between Newport Leach and Laguna Beach , but also large
populated areas of both cities .
Requiring regional. commission approval in these areas would
be any home addition , remodeling, repair or replacement project
costing more than $7 , 500; any duplex, apartment or business
expansion project of any cost; and any library, regional park,
beach park, road improvement, school, hospital, sewerage, water,
civic or cultural project , however essential to the community.
If such projects manage to clear the regional commission
hurdle , they would then be subject to appeals "by any person
aggrieved by approval" to another, more distant layer of govern-
ment; a 12-member state commission, on which there may be no
Orange County representation.
If an appeal is denied at the state level , the appellant
may then, under terms of the initiative act , file a lawsuit --
without the conventional requirement of posting a bond. And,
according to the act , this appeal process may be initiated by
any person from anywhere . There is no provision in Prop. 20
that he even be a resident of California.
It is the Irvine Company' s opinion that Prop. 20 ' s frustratingly
obstructive machinery for the processing of permits constitutes ,
practically speaking, a moratorium on the exercise of: property
rights along the coastline through 1976. And the initiative
..provides no property tax relief whatsoever during this period.
rd8U 4
We surmise that this effective moratorium is the product of
over-zealousness , and not calculation, by the well.-meaning Olen and
women who authored the initiative .
In any case , the gross unfairness of such inverse condemnation ,
directly affecting all "Permit Area" property-owners and taxpayers ,
is exacerbated by Prop. 20 ' s failure to provide for balanced
membership on its proposed state and regional commissions . Under
the act , experts in the fields of conservation and ecology are'
assured representation on the commissions , as they should be.
But nothing is mentioned of any representation in the certainly
equally appropriate fields of economics , enpl.oyment , property use,
taxation and government finance.
There is no arguing that California needs a strong coastal
land management program. The Coastal Initiative cannot , in our
opinion, produce this program. Its major product would be
litigation, to clarify its intent and to compensate the property-
owners and taxpayers injured by its excesses.
Our state legislators and local representatives , who are
directly answerable to the people, unlike Prop . 20 ' s regional
commissioners , are the appropriate makers of rules governing
local property use . They are the appropriate source of a balanced
system of land management because their public service careers
rest on their sensitivity to the needs of all the people , not
just to the concerns of any one group. They must. consider all
of the issues , in marked contrast to the oversights of Prop. 20.
The narrowly focused environmental concerns of Prop. 20
leave virtually unaddressed such substantive issues as legal
rights , the economy of the state , the jobs of private citizens,
and the existing very pressing housing and recreational needs of
. of California. � I the people .
Page 5
The real world must be considered . It is not considered
enough in the Coastal Jni.tiative .
As a corporation that must cope with acid respond to the real.
world , including the basic need to profit from our investment
in balanced land use planning and management , the Irvine Company
has no choice but to oppose Prop . 20 . We are aware that our
public opposition to the ballot measure, which is to be accompanied
by a financial contribution to the Citizens Against Proposition 20 ,
may engender abuse from some environmentalists .
But we do not apologize . We feel a responsibility to act
on our convictions , just as do those who may disagree with our
position.
We do not believe we are among Prop. 20 ' s targets ; but we
would be among its victims . With passage of the measure and here we wish to make our self-interest abundantly clear we foresee our nearly completed master plan for joint public and
private use of Irvine ' s undeveloped coastal lands becoming subject
to redundant governmental scrutiny and unwarranted punitive
delays at unfair cost to the company and to the people of
California .
This would occur even though our plan from the. outset has
been prepared in consultation with all interested government agencies
and has been reviewed and privately complimented by some of the
present supporters of the Coastal Initiative.
The Irvine Company is currently burdened with enormous
holding costs and property taxes on all of its undeveloped lands
within the Coastal Initiative's "Permit Area." Property taxes
alone on these lands amount to more than $3,000 a day. That is
� f1
Pii gc 6
more than $1 million a year. With profitable use of our property
banned , as we fear it would be , under Prop . 20 , this tax burden '
would surely be unanimousiy regarded as unjust .
Realistically, we do not expect the Irvine Company' s interests
to be weighed heavily by voters 'in considering the merits of
Prop. 20 . There are enough other facts to be considered .
That there has been some irresponsible , short- sighted
development along the California coastline in years past is one
of these facts . That there is a need for more effective manage-
ment of coastal resources in accordance with sound state-wide
planning criteria is another.
But it is also an indisputab.l.e fact that major steps already
have been and are being taken by local , county, state and
federal agencies to protect California's coastal assets for
future generations. In Orange County, for example, S6 percent
of the shoreline is already publicly owned. In Iluntington Beach,
Laguna Beach, South Laguna, Capistrano Beach and San Clemente
the public shoreline has been recently expanded by public agencies
at all levels. And the Irvine Company is actively encouraging
creation of public beaches , regional parks and coastal walkways
in the area between Corona del Mar and Laguna . This latter
effort has been endorsed by the State Park and Recreation
Comi:ii.s:-,ion .
Only ecological extremists could express dissatisfaction
with this kind of response by the public and private sectors to
regional recreation requirements.
There is no need to grind down current efforts to meet
these requirements. There is no need for Prop. 20 , which betrays
its stated intent of orderly management of the coastal zone by
TIn g e_ 7
the timely (love.lohmc>>t of s.ir)yi:liiilj; to
.lilt Irvine Compan'Y r.an survive the inequities that would be
imposed by Pi-op . 20 ; a more important question is whether the
thousands of other homeowners , businessmen and. land-owners trapped
in the "Permit Area" can survive . And , if so , to what degree.
t
11 # # #
i' QCf r A BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR YOU
Ir
Sept, 20, 1972
C'OiTEACT: JERRY COLLINS ( 644-3387 F C l5 Q U E
i
DiV'IM', CO. A14NOIJNCES OPPOSITION TO PRO11. 20 JEP r= 1 1972)
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
NEWPOR'T i.EACH -- The Irvine Company today announced pubJq4kyATIVE OFFICE
i
i its onuosItion to Propc ition 20, the Coastal Initiative.
i
Raymond L. Watson, executive vice pro;;ident of the land plannj.:^,g
and manarrement firm, said the measure "goes too far. "
He said the company supports the concept of state guidelines
governing coastal land use and eonsex•vation. "That this environmental
requirement will soon be met by the 1rg1Z;lature is , much a certainty
sas it Is a necessity. But it must be responsibly met with respclls ible
I
j leg�.slet!on. "
I
! Prof. 20, he said, fails to meet this need.
i
"We applaud the init iat ive's broad objectives: the protection,
l
restoration and enhanecinent of the c(xi2tal environment. " he said.
"It is its proposed mechanism for attaining these objectives that
forces us to oppose tide initiative. "
He called it "unrealistic, unnecessary, perhaps unconstitutional
i
and certaInl.y unfair. "
i
If -)a „scd, Watson ,;aid, Prop. 20 "would have a v:----y severe
i
impact on hundreds Of' tIIOU3a,nds of property owner::r, private and
public, wt-lo are tuideserving of the cumbor.�owe, restrictive controls
j it Mould inflict. "
i
He said a multi-layered :Lind remote system of :Mate and rcglon.al
more --
i '11w I,vinc Coml',nrty•r5(1 Newport Cenlcr 06ve Newport Beach.Callformn Q6G0•(714)l;•14-3011
•
MVINE PROP 20
add
proroscd by ' thQ lnitluUlve could re.,J,ult In an "effective"
moratorium without p.rop,--rty tax relief against any private
or public improvement project "however essential to the colimiunity. 11
He pointed out that under. Prop, 20 experts In the fields of
conservation and ecology are assured representationon the commissions
"as they should be. " but no representation is assured in the
"certainly equally appropriate" fields of employment, economics
pirvop6rty use, taxation and government finance.
Approvals from the commissions, he toted, would be required for
any home home addition, remodeling, repair or replacement project
costing more than �`?,,7,500; any duplex, apartment or- bi,siness expansion
-project ; any library, regional park, beach park, road iinprDvement,
school., hospital, sewerage, civic or cultural project within a
3,000-foot-wide "Permit Area" running the length of the California
coastline.
The "Permit Area,•" he -noted, encompasses not only the undeveloped
lands between Newport Beach and Laguna Beach, but also large
popul,,.:,ted areas of both cities,
"There is no argu1ng that California needs a strong coastal
:Land man, ,cmcnt program. " he said. "The Cousbal lnitiative cannot.,
In our opinion, produce this program. Its major product would be
litigation., to clarify Its Intent and to compensate property-owners
and taxpayers Injured by Its excesses, "
Watson said he doesn't believe the Irvine Company is among
Prop, 20's targets; "but we would be amonl.- its victims."
more
IRVII PROP. 20
add 2-2-2-2-2-2
As a consequence, he said tie company has no choice but to
appose the initiative. This will Include financial support of
the campaign against Prop. 20'.
"With passage of the measure and here we; wi.-�h to make our
self-interest abundantly clear -- our nearly completed master plan
for joint public and private use of Irvine' s undeveloped coastal
lands would be subject to redundant government scruLlaiy and unwarrented,
punitive delays.' at great cost to - the company and to the people of
Califor:-iia," he said.
This would occur, he added, even though the Irvine Coast Plan
has been prepared in consultation with all interested government
agencies and has been reviewed and "private complimented" by some
of the present supporters of the' Coastal Initiative.
Watson also struck at the initidtive 's encouragement of appeals
by any individual, whether or not a, Californiat resident, against
regional commission approval of any project. These appeals may
be made to the state commission and then, if denied, to the
courts. No bond is required of anyone filing a lawsuit,
lie said while there has been some "irresponsible., sk-iort-sighted
development" along the California coastline in years past, there is no
disputing the fact Llv_it major steps hitive been and are being taken by
local# county, state and federal agencies to protect California's
coastal assets for future generations. He cited the recent expansion of
public beach park areas in the cities of Huntington Beach. Laguna Beech,
South Laguna, Capistrano Beach Lind San Clemente. "And the Irvine Company
Is actively encouraging the creation of public be.ich,-::,, regional parks
and wal.kwuys in the arc--;.i between Coroii;.t del V1;.Lr and :L,agun::L."
-- more --
� —
IAVIN PROP. 20
add 3-3-3--3-3-3-3
he :;<x'Id, could be curtailed by the Initiative.
"There is no ncc(l for Propositlon 20, which betrays Its �;tatcd Intent ,
of orderly of the coasttrl zone by denying the timely
development of anythin,-, to manage, " he said,
"The Irvine Company.. " Watson Concluded, "can survive the Inequitles
that would be Imposed by Proposition 20; a more Important question- Is
whether the thousands of other homeowners, businessmen and land-owners
trapped in the 'Permit Area# can survive, And, If no, to what degree?"
c;CFr-
EP a 7 4972 -
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
C I T Y O F H A L F M 0 0 N B A Y
City Hall - 501 Main Street
Half Moon Bay, California 94019
TO: All Cities in the State of California
SUBJECT: Proposition 20
Gentlemen:
At their regular Council meeting of September 19th, 1972, the
City Council of the City of Half Moon -Bay passed a Resolution
opposing November ballot proposition #20, more properly known
as the Coastal Zone Conservation Act. A copy of our Resolution
is here enclosed. This matter is of vital concern to this and
all other cities located along the coast of California. We
solicit your support in helping us all retain proper local
controls over our local affairs, by successfully working to
defeat this ill conceived initiative.
This proposition, if passed, would have a devastating effect
on the principle of home rule for all cities here in California.
It would immediately remove the decision-making power from
coastal communities by virtue of their occupying lands which
have been determined to be a "statewide resource". The next
"statewide resource" might well be determined to be mountainous
areas, followed next by the valley areas. Soon no local com-
munity will have the ability to determine its own destiny - a
frightening thought to those of us who cherish the principle
of home rule.
The City Council of Half Moon Bay is urgently soliciting the
support of all cities in the state in the defeat of this
Proposition. They encourage you to pass similar resolutions_
and to give them wide publicity.. Thank you very much for
your attention to this most important matter.
Sincerely,
A
j ;�.�
r d Mor nsen
tty Manager
Enc.
WFM/bd
� I
i
I
I
RESOLUTION NO. 46-72
WHEREAS, The Coastal Zone Conservation Act will appear on the
ballot during the November election, end
WHEREAS, this initiative would create an appointed, not elected,
governmental agency to control the destinies of almost three
and a half million Californians who live near the ocean
i
shore, and
WHEREAS, if the people of California went statewide land planning,
such planning must apply equally to all areas of the State, -
not just the coast, now
I
' THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
! Half Moon Bay cn:i:iders .Tha Coastal Zone Conservation Act
discriminatory and it should be roundly defeated so that the
people' s elected representatives can get on with the job of
completing sensible environmental and zoning controls over
California' s coastline, and
I
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests all citizens to
assist in the defeat of Proposition 20. It is on the ballot
because its sponsors have ignored all reasonable efforts by
the State, by local government, by labor, by business and by
civic organizations to devE,lop an orderly land management
policy for California through the legislative and regulatory
process.
' s « . s . • s s
r
1
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Half Moon
Bay, California, on September 19th, 1972, at a regular meeting
thereof, by the following vote:
AYES, and in favor thereof: Councilmen Adreveno, Cardoni,
Para, Mello, Marmont
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
s/ Jose h Marmont
Mayor of the City of Half Moon Bey
ATTEST:
Deputy Clerk of thb City of Half Moon Bay
I hereby approve the foregoing resolution this 19th day of
September, 1972.
s/ Joseph Mermont
Mayor aT the City of HalfMoon Say
I , the Deputy City Clerk of the City of Half Moon Bay hereby
certify that the above is a true And correct copy of a resolution
duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay by
the above vote at a meeting thereof duly held and called on the above
date.
Ter tl-
Deputy Clerk of the City of Half Moon Bay
i
I
r
21 September 1972
TO: City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Endorsing and Supporting
the California Coastline Initiative
Known as Proposition 20
At the request of the City Council, we transmit
resolution endorsing and approving the passage. of
Proposition 20 , the California Coastline Initia-
tive .
Respectfully submitted,
DON P. BONFA
City Attorne
DPB:WM:bc
Attachment
F
i
I�
E' I
I
I
28 September 1972,
TO: Mayor and Members of the Council
City Administrator
FROM : City Attorney
I
SUBJECT : Proposition 20; California Coastline
Initiative
At; the request; of Councilman Green, and in light of,"
• direction from the Council, to prepare resolution st.tp-
porting subject proposition for adoption at: its meeting
on October 2 , 1972 , we are enclosing a sununary of Prop-
osition 20, together with an analysis of its effect; on
the city of Huntington Beach .
Respectfully submitted,
DON P . BONFA
City Attorney
DPB : ahb
Enc .
e
SUMMARY OF PROR: t: ITION TWENTY
AND ITS EFFECT ON :��JNTINGTON BEACH
Proposition 20 would create the :'alifornia Coastal Zone Con-
servation Commission consisting of six public members appointed
by the Governor, the Speaker, and the Senate Rules Committee
(two each ) and six representatives chosen by and from six
regional commissions (one each ) . Regional commissions would con-
sist of twelve , fourteen or sixteen members . Half (six , seven
or eight ) of the membership of each regional commission would
be elected representatives of counties and cities arid the balance
public members appointed by the Senate Rules Committee , the
Speaker, and the Governor. All appointments would have to be
made by December 31 , 1972 . The state and regional commissions
would be required to study the coastal zone , prepare a state-
wide plan for it , conservation and management and regulate its
development by an interim permit system while the plan is being
prepared . The plan would have to be completed and submitted to
the legislature by the end of 1975 . The commissions , the permit
system and the initiative statute would cease to exist after the
.1976 session of the legislature . The legislature by a two-thirds
• vote could amend the initiative statute to achieve its objectives
better.
The initiative defines the coastal zone planning ,jurisdiction
as three miles seaward and inland to the highest elevation of
the nearest coastal mountain range , except that the inland
boundary in Los Angeles , Orange and San Diego Counties is five
miles inland or the nearest mountain range , whichever is the
shorter distance . !
Proposition 20 requires the commission to prepare , adopt: acid sub-
mit a California Coastal Lone Conservation Plan to the legisla-
ture by December 1 , 1975 . The Coastal Zone Plan is defined as a
comprehensive , coordinated plan for the orderly , long-range
conservation and management of the natural Ike,;ources of the
coastal zone . 'Phe measure apecifi.e , objectives* and outlines
eac rat:: to he Included In the plan as follows : ( 1) land IrSP ;
{ � ) trar7::pOrtation ; ( ;� ) can:;c rvatl.c.�ri; ( �I ) E:ubl.lc a.cceSS >'
5 ) r•F.•creatl.ori; (f: ) public Service:: and f.';_rc: ilitl.e . , Including
a :;tud,y of ipeclfled factors concerning power plant siting;
( 7 ) ocean mineral. rev,;ources and ocean living, resources :, ( 8) edu-
cational and scientific ; (9 ) population . Other items to be
included in the plan are : (1 ) definition of public interest
•
Summary of Prop ,sition Twenty Page 2
in coastal zone; (2) ecological planning principles and assump
tions to be used in .determining the extent and suitability of .
allowable development; (3) reservation of land or water in the
coastal zone for certain uses or the prohibition of certain use's
in specific areas ; and (4) recommendation for legislative , ad-
ministrative , and private actions needed for implementation.
The plan must also include recommendation for governmental poli-.
cies and powers required to implement the coastal zone plan.
The commission will meet monthly, commencing February 1973 • Each
regional commission in cooperation with the appropriate local
agencies , must prepare its definitive conclusions and recommen-
dations , including recommendations for areas that should be re-
served for specific uses or within which specific uses should
be prohibited. After' a public hearing in each county in the
region , the conclusions and recommendations are adopted by each
regional commission and submitted to the commission .
The commission (after consulting with local , regional , state and
federal agencies , etc . ) must prepare and adopt a coastal zone
plan by December 1, 1975 , and submit it to the legislature .
r The measure defines_ the permit area as that portion of the coastal
zone lying between three miles seaward and inland one thousand
yards from mean high tide of the sea (Pacific Ocean and all har-
bors , bays , channels , estuaries , salt marshes , sloughs subject to
tidal action through a connection with the sea) . The precise .
boundary of the permit area must be determined by each regional
commission within two months of its first meeting.
On request of a city or county , residential areas zoned , stabi-
lized and developed to a density of four or _more 'dwelling units
per acre prior to January 1, 1972, or commercial or industrial
! zones developed and stabilized for puch use prior to January 1 ,
1972 , may be excluded from the permit area by a regional com-
mission. An area is stabilized if 80 ;percent of the lots are
built upon to the maximum extent permitted by zoning existing on
January 1, 1972 . The jurisdictional area of BCDC also is ex-
cluded. Included are nontidal bodies of water in the permit
area and one thousand feet of surrounding land . Any order of
exclusion shall be subject to conditions which shall assure
that no significant change occurs in density , height , or nature
of uses .
After February 1 , 1973 , every person or corporation (public or
private ) wishing to undertake any development within the permit
area must obtain a permit from the regional commission, and if
required by law , from the county or city . No permit may be
issued without a majority vote of the regional commission at a
Summary of Proposition Twenty Page 3
public hearing. Development i:: very broadly defined and includes ,
among other things , dredging, excavation, lot splits , reconstruc-
tion, demolition or alteration, and change in density or intensity
_ "_' use of water or access thereto . Exceptions are limited to re-
pairs to single-family residences not in excess of $7 ,500 and
maintenance dredging. Permits may be issued by the executive
officer in cases of emergency ^^ for repairs or improvements to
existing structures not in exc- ;-, of $25,000 and other develop-
ments not in excess of $10 ,000 . Proposition `.'0 expressly grand-
fathers. in all development for which a permit was obtained and
vested .rights established prior to the effective date of the
initiative .
f
Two-thirds vote of a regional commission, or state commission on
appeal , is required for the following uses :
( 1) Alterations of water areas .
(2) Developments which would reduce the size of any beach
or other area usable or potentially usable for public recreation .
( 3) Developments which would reduce or impose restrictions
on public access to the coast .
( 4 ) Developments which would substantially interfere with
the line of sight toward the sea from the state highway nearest
the coast .
(5) Development:: which would adversely affect water quality,
existing areas of open water free of visible structures , existing
and potential commercial and sport fisheries , or agricultural
uses of land existing on the effective date of the act .
Each local agency shall send the regional commission a duplicate
of applications for building or ottler• development permits . Per-
mit applications to the regional commissions are followed by
a public hearing between twenty-one to ninety days later. The
application for permit must be acted upon by the regional com-
mission within sixty days after conclusion of the hearing. Pro-
visions are made to challenge denials and conditions imposed by
an appeal. to the commission and the rtght to judicial review.
Violation:3 of the act aro tibJect to a $1.0 ,000 fine . Provisions
are made .1r, the act i',_>r cont'llcting actt.vit.le:, cat' nv:�mbers and
employee^ of t;he coninil.,:; t_c,n a.nd reg.lonal co nnl.sr3l.or, .
t The act is automatically repealed orr the 91 .3t day :after final
adjournment of the 1976 legislature .
- i
Effect on Hunt-.igton Beach Page 4
The initiative will remain in effect for about four years, .un-
til the 91st day after adjournment of the 1976 Legislature.
It provides for two major objectives :
( 1) Preparation of a statewide coastal development
plan for an area (in Orange County) five miles inland
from the mean high tide line. This area would embrace
the entire city of Huntington Beach .
(2 ) During such four year period, prohibition of de-
velopment within 3,000 feet of mean high tide line
(of the ocean and of tidal waters extending inland)
without a permit from the Regional Commission for
Orange County and Los Angeles County .
Orange County would be represented on the twelve member Regional
Commission by one city councilman and one county supervisor, plus
any Orange County resident who might be among the six "represen-
tatives of the public . " There is no residence requirement for
these "representatives of the public . "
The immediate effect on Huntington Beach would, of course, flow
from the permit requirement . Exempt from regional permit are
repairs and improvements not exceeding $7 ,500 to single family
residences .
At the request of the City of Huntington Beach, the Regional
Commission may (but is not required to) exclude from the permit
area (1 ) residential areas developed before January 1 , 1972
to a density of four or more dwelling units per- acre, where
80 percent of the lots had been built upon to the maximum
density permitted, and (2) commercial or industrial areas
where 80 percent of the lots had been built upon by January 13.
1972 to the maximum permitted density .
Any such Regional Commission order excluding any such built-up
area from the permit area must contain conditions to assure
that no significant change occurs in density , height, or nature
of uses. Although the built-up area of downtown Huntington
Beach would be subject to exclusion from the permit area, the
commission order which so excluded it would not allow "Top of
the Pier" type development, since such development would be
likely to involve changes in density , height , and nature of uses .
i
In the undeveloped area of the city within 3 ,000 feet of mean
high tide line, not excluded by Regional Commission order from
i the permit area, a -regional permit would be required for any new
f construction, even for one single family residence . This would
include construction (or demolition or alteration) by the city
S
4
0
Effect on Huntington Beach Page 5
itself of any building, road, water line, or sewer line.
The City of Huntington Beach will be :^equired to send to the
Regional Commission a duplicate of each application for a build-
ing permit (except single family residential alterations of
$7,500 or less) or for a development, within the permit area,
and shall advise the Regional Commission of the granting of
any such permit .
An eight member vote would be required for approval of any de-
velopment which would substantially interfere with or detract .
from the line of sight toward the sea from the state highway
nearest the coast . Since "sea" is defined to include inland
tidal waters , this requirement might affect development on the
landward side of Pacific Coast Highway in the Huntington Harbor
and Bolsa Chica areas .
The measure would require a regional permit for expansion of
the Edison Company facility and for construction of the MWD
facility . No permit fdr any development or construction could
be granted unless the Regional Commission found affirmatively
that the project would have no substantial adverse environ-
mental or ecological effect .
The Regional Commission must act on a permit application within
at least 150 days, since a hearing must be held no later than
90 days after application and the Commission must act no later
than 60 days after the hearing.
The civil penalties of up to $10,000 for violation by any per-
son, and of up to $500 per day for development by any person
in violation of the measure, may be sued for by any person.
One prevailing in such an action, or in any action to enjoin
a violation, shall be awarded reasonable attorney fees . The
City of Huntington Beach could be sp sued for any alleged vio-
lation, since the measure defines "berson" to include any agency
of federal, state, or local government . An administrative ap-
peal can be taken by "any aggrieved person" to the state com-
mission from either the granting or denial of any permit . "Any
aggrieved person" would also be permitted to seek judicial re-
view of the granting or denial of any permit .
Atta.clied is a map of Iuntington Beach prepared by the Planning
Dfj-pn.rtment . The area oeaward from the heavy black line is the
are,,a within three thouoand feet of the high tide line (of the
ocean and of tidal water-s extending inland) within which there
would be a prohibition of development without a permit from the
Regional. Commis-Jon for Orange and Los Angeles Counti.e:. . The
areas which are shaded are 80 percent developed , and are the
area. within which the Regional Commis':lon may but is not re-
quired to exclude from the permit area.
pphoP061710N EW-4
MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
t_
LEGEND
_—. FREEWAY
( �+ MAJOR. ..120'R/W
PRIMARY 100'R/W
-- ;— -- -- SECONDARY 80'R/W:
't
��� • i NOTE:
;r SOLro LOWS WAXATE EXtSTM RK.NT OF WAY
\\rrh NECESSARILY ULIWAATE RwNT Of WAT
t.. i .
DASHED LIME?NDICATE AREAS WHERE ND
RK.RT.Of YAW EXMTS
mWo SYMBOL MWITES MWARY COIPLET
CERTIFICATION$' �IE- \`\,,. ��.-�' • I _
011
Ono
I i
oc �1
CITY OF 9y
HUNTINGTON BEACH
J
ORANGE COMITY CALIFORNIA
L '
APMUNU
•••�••� �t.0� GoleueTWaLc�-Io/�1yN&E/1�-`4
5-M C/FA�1
NOW
I�-
I
i
f'
October 17, 1972
Winston Updegraff
Orange County League of Cities
282 Cajon
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Dear Sir:
D The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular meeting
held Monday, October 16, 1972, adopted Resolution'No. 3577
endorsing and approving the California Coastline Initiative
known as Proposition 20.
Enclosed is a certified copy of said Resolution for your
information.
Sincerely,
PAUL C. JONES
City Clerk
By
Assistant City Clerk
PCJ:p
Encl.
October 17, 1972
Coastal Alliance
P. 0. Box 4i61
Woodside, CA 94062
Gentlemen:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular meeting
held Monday, October i'6, 1972, adopted Resolution No. 3577
endorsing and approving the California Coastline Initiative
known as Proposition 20.
Enclosed is- a certifie.'.d copy of said Resolution for your
information:
Sincerely,
PAUL C. 3ONES
City Clerk
By
Assistant City Clerk
PCI:P
Encl.
R
October 17, 1972
Southern California Association of Governments
1111 W. 6th Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Gentlemen:
DThe City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular meeting
held Monday, October 16, 1972, adopted Resolution No. 3577
endorsing and approving the California Coastline initiative
known as Proposition 20.
Enclosed is a certified copy of said Resolution for your
information.
Sincerely,
PAUL C. JONES
City Clerk
By
Assistant City Clerk
PCJ:p
Encl.
, -
RESOLUTION NO.
_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL O£ THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH EXPRESSING ITS OPPOSITION
TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTLINE INITIATIVE
ir'HEREAS, the City of Newport Beach is a coastal community
encompassing recreational ocean shoreline, a protected recreational
bay, and an estuarine area of recreational and environmental signi-
ficance; anti
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach has
an intense interest in conserving the natural features of these
coastal resources within the City' s boundaries by regulating land use
.and development along the ocean and bay shorelines; hnd
WHEREAS, the California Coastline Initiative would change
the existing method of regulating land use by local government through
the creation of a statewide California Cbastal Zone Conservation
Commission and six regional commissions; and
WHEREAS, the statewide and regional commissions would be
responsible for developing and submitting to the Legislature for
consideration by December 1, 1975, a California Coastal Zone Conserva-
tion Plan; and
WHEREAS, in addition, said commissions would inherit strong
new regulatory control over essentially all development within those
coastal areas presently regulated and controlled by local government,
thereby adding a new level of planning and land use regulation to
the existing governmental framework; and
WHEREAS, if adopted, the California Coastline Initiative
would constitute an infringment on the right of local government to
regulate and control land development within its boundaries;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach hereby expresses its extreme opposition to the
California Coastline initiative as an improper attempt to usurp the
authority and right of local government to plan and controlland use
development within its boundaries .
ADOPTED this 28th day of August, 1972.
ATTEST: Mayor
City Clerk DON;mh
8/24/72
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
P ty✓s ''.yF
4 •�' SENATE
m 10 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95814
LIFOR
JAMES R.MILLS
PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE -
September 1, 1972
TO: City and County Clerks
FROM: James R. Mills
RE: Coastal Bike Ride
I will appreciate your distributing
the' enclosed notice to your local elected
officials. Distribution need not be made
to coastal legislators.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Enclosures
zq
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SENATE
SACRAMENTO.CALIFORNIA 95814
two N�
DAMES R.MILLS
PRESIOENT PRO TEMPORE
September 1, 1972
MEMO TO: Coastal Legislators
County Supervisors
Mayors
City Councilmen
FROM: James R. Mills
RE: Participation in the Coastal Bike Ride
The California Coastal Alliance has asked me to lead a
bicycle ride down the coast from San Francisco to San
Diego to generate support for the Coastline Initiative .
(Proposition 20) .
We will leave San Francisco on September 14 and arrive
in San Diego September 25.
I would like to invite you to join us for all or part
of this exciting ride. There will be rallies, dinners,
and press conferences along the way.
Attached is a copy of the itinerary, along with a listing
of the Coastal Alliance coordinators in each of the
counties we will bike.
For publicity purposes, please notify the coordinator for
the coastal county in which you will join us. The co-
ordinator will provide you with the final scheduling
details.
Attachments
COUNTY BIKE RIDE COORDINATORS
for the
CALIFORNIA COASTAL ALLIANCE
Los Angeles County San Luis Obispo County
Dianne Weaver Mrs. Carol Bodine
6022 Wilshire Blvd. 205 Ranchito Lane
Los Angeles 90036 San Luis Obispo 93401
(213) 936-8251 (805) 544-3731
Monterey County San Mateo County
Malcolm Bauer Gil Workman
25679 Carmel Hill Dr. 2060 Sharon
Carmel 93921 Menlo Park 94025
(408) 624-3254 (415) 854-5475
Orange County Santa Barbara County
Sally Spurgeon Carroll Pursell
17731 Palmento Way 624 Chelham Way
Irvine 92664 Montecito 93103
(914) 552-7283 (805) 969-4589
San Diego County Santa Cruz. County
Anne Higginbotham Peter Scott
2848 E1 Cajon Blvd. 1135 Branciforte Avenue
San Diego 92104 Santa Cruz 95060
Day: (714) . 280-4848 (408) 423-5031'
Evening: (714) 270-3970
San Francisco County Ventura County ,
Ellen Johnck Pat Ellison
2454 Clay Street 367 Homer Avenue
San Francisco 94115 Ventura 93003
Day: (415) 556-8713 (805) 643-3340
Evening: (415) 922-1590
w:
ITINERARY
for
PROPOSITION 20 BIKE RIDE
September
14 Leave San Francisco, 10 :00 a.m.
(Lands End - vista point - near Golden Gate Bridge)
to Bean Hollow State Beach - 48 miles
15 Bean Hollow State Beach to Monterey
(Custom House Plaza) - 62 miles
16 Monterey to Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park - 45 miles
17 Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park
to San Simeon State Beach - 55 miles
18 San Simeon State Beach to Pismo State Beach - 50 miles
19 Pismo State Beach to Lompoc (La Purisma Mission
State Historic Park) - 45 miles
20 Lompoc to Goleta (U.C. Santa Barbara Campus) - 50 miles
21 Goleta to Oxnard (McGrath State Beach) - 45 miles
22 Oxnard to Santa Monica - 50 miles
23 Santa Monica to Long Beach
(American Youth Hostel at Armed Forces YMCA) - 35 miles
24 Long Beach to San Clemente State Beach - 48 miles
25 San Clemente State Beach to San Diego
(final rally in La Jolla) - 45 miles
9/l/72
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY. RONALD REAGAN. Governor
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
ROOM 1015, RESOURCES BUILDING Phone 445-3993 b
1416 NINTH STREET • SACRAMENTO 95814
t
W. W. ADAMS, Chairman
E. F. DIBBLE, Vice Chairman
RONALD B. ROBIE, Member
ROY E. DODSON, Member
MRS. CARL H. (JEAN) AUER, Member
BILL B. DENDY, Executive Officer
September 5, 1972
DECEIVED
'TY
.,. C4cF?1t
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS
197 SEP 7 All S : 3 9
Water Quality Control Plan
Ocean Waters of California
By letter of August 18, 1972, the Regional
Administrator of the Federal Environmental
Protection Agency, Paul De Falco , Jr. , informed
the State Board that the Water Quality Control
Plan for Ocean Waters of California adopted by
the Board July 6, 1972, has been approved.
The Plan now constitutes water quality standards
applicable to the interstate and coastal waters
of California under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
Bill B. Dendy
Executive officer
r
22 June 1972
TO: City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT : Resolution Supporting Assembly Bill to
Create Coastal Corridor Review Board
At the direction of the City Administrator, we transmit
the attached resolution in support of AB 1837 , intro-
duced by the Honorable Robert H . Burke , to create the
Coastal Corridor Review Board which will study State
Highway Route 1 between the Santa Ana River and the
Orange-Los Angeles county line . Said board is to submit
a report , together with its recommendations , to the
Legislature by January 10 , 1975 .
Respectfully submitted,
C112.
DON P. BONFA
City Attorney
/lm
Attachment
97
L/
22 June 1972
TO: City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution supporting SB 860
relating to Coastal Resources
At the direction of the City Administrator, we
transmit the attached resolution in support of
Senate Bill 860, introduced by the Honorable Dennis
E. Carpenter, relating to coastal resources , recreat-
ing the California Coastal: Resources Board under the
California Coastal Resources Act of 1972, providing
for regulation of the use of the coastal zone, and
appropriating funds to carry out the provisions
of the above act .
Respectfully submitted,
DON P. BONF
City Attorney
/er
Attachment
o�
July 7, 1972
The Honorable Dennis Carpenter
Senate Post Office
State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95801
Dear Senator Carpenter:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
D meeting held Monday, July 3, 1972, adopted Resolution
No. 3528 supporting Senate Bill 860 relating to Coastal
Resources.
Enclosed is a certified copy of said resolution for
your information.
Sincerely yours,
PAUL C. JONES
City Clerk
By;
ss stant City Clerk
PCJ:ED:aw
Enc.
i
July 7, 1972
The Honorable James E. Whetmore
Senate. Pos't"Office
State Capitol
Sacramento--; Cal .founia
s
Dear Senator Whetmore:
The City Council of Huntington Beach, at its regular
meeting held Monday, July 3, 1972, adopted 'Resolution
N 3528 supporting Senate .Bill 860 relating to Coastal
DRe$ources.
Enclosed is' a certified copy of said resolution for
your information.
Sincerely yours,
PAUL C. JONES
City Clerk. ..
By:.
Ass stant ClEy C er
PCJ:ED:aw
Enc.
i
RESOLUTION NO. 3528
tL�«�
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF HUNThNGTON BEACH SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 860
RELATING .TO- COASTAL RESOURCES
WHEREAS, it. is- appropriate that the general plan of a
county or city .in. clude.* a coastal element and that regulations
governing the use_.of. such coastal zone be adopted and funds
appropriated therefor.; and
_3enate Bill 860 *,:creates the California Coastal Resources
Board udder the California Coastal Resources Act of 1972 ,
provides for. regulation: of 'the. use .of the coastal zone , requires
that -the- general plan -af a county or city include a coastal
elements: as :defined .in" :such act , and appropriates funds .to
carry ,out the_ provis-ion's.; of such act ,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE._-TT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City. ofHuntington Beach that It does support Senate Bill
860. relat.ing to 'coastal resources and the regulation thereof:
-BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is. directed
to trAhsmit: copies. of. this resolution to the. Honorable Dennis
E. ' CArpenter.. and. other. ippropriate legislators in the California
State :Senate
PASSED `AND ADOPTED.by the .City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach; at- a- regular meeting- held on the 3rd day of
July ,- 19.72 .
Mayor
ATTEST:
PAUL C.. .JONES,- City`-'Cl.erk'_ APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Assistant City Cler _ City Attorney .
Sky -�,•_ > 7+.,.. t- - 5 p aa
irea'►
�1 mkt �y�1 � -
i K L? �L,L'I �IA
- -
GtNJk�TCY =t3F 4IiItIG i 3 s s. _ =
: 'CITY: Off' NUNTIN+ N
I,. FAUL C. : Ji?l�fS the duly elected, qualified and
;+ -
` ` acting City :Clerk 4t the City vf_Hunt 'ngton -Beach; and
`ofiicxo Clerk of the.'City Cocil 'of said. City, do Yiereby
certify, that; the whole giber of. members' of. the City Council
of the City of Huntington Beach .is seven; that ahe. Foregoing
',:r$8oluti oa waa passed aad adopted by the affirmative-.vote: of
mttr�e ttin a Grit of ell;the ®embers of. said Cit Council
Y y
at A. r®guiar 4 - aneeting.'thereof. held on the 3rd .
day :o#' by the folowing vote:
AXES C6"ei lne
Gress '-Matne .Duke C"
11BSEf�t'P Caugclme�a:
Paul C.- Jones.
y lark- and ex'=o is ci► Cler
- of the City C�iuncil of:"the City
of Huntington Beach, California
Assistant C t Clerk
lElE A QING °INSTR1lMtjgf' tS :C�RRECI
COPY 'OF THE I -INAL b FILE fPi �EI�
ATT
E
t AUL C
r
J4NES
-
�; i.�ty �l�r&. aiid �x o�s�a a�=.�4te Ety Coutict� '
-----------
of.
_ _5
STATE CAPITOL • •
COMMITTEES
SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95814 EDUCATION
916-445.8377
ELECTIONS AND
REAPPORTIONMENT
DISTRICT OFFICE TRANSPORTATION
17732 BEACH BOULEVARD VICE CHAIRMAN
HUNTINGTON BEACH,CALIFORNIA
82647
714-842-1494
C� T*f-a x n� ��� isX tore
c� �
ROBERT H. BURKE
ASSEMBLYMAN, SEVENTIETH DISTRICT
April 14, 1970
Mr. Paul C. Jones, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Post Office Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Dear Mr. Jones:
Thank you for furnishing me with a copy of your Reso-
lution No. 3150 concerning matters relating to develop-
ment of the coastal zone of the State of California.
I am pleased to know the views of the City Council in
this regard, and hope you will continue to keep me
informed.
Sincerel
"
RO ERT H. BURKE
RHB: c
0
-TIIMENT OF THE ACTION OF C Y COUNCIL
Council Chamber, City Hall
Huntington Beach, California
Monday, May 1, 1972
Mayor Coen• called the regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Huntington Beach. to order at Ax:3V 7 :00
o'clock P.M.
i
Councilmen Present: Shipley. Bartlett, Gibbs , Green, Matney, Duke, Coen
ti Councilmen Absent: NnnP
s .
APPOINTMENTS - OCEAN & SHORELINE PLANNING STEERING COMMITTEE
Mayor Coen appointed Councilman Duke to serve as Council Representative
to the 'Ocean' and Shoreline Planning Steering Committee , and reappointed
Mrs . Margaret Carlberg, Chairman of the Environmental Council, to serve
as alternate representative .
*,�r*****,Mc�****,+rdr*�*****�Ir,Mc**rk`,�r,►r,�r******,rF*******,+hk**�
On motion by Bartlett the -regular meeting: of
j the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach adjourned. at 12:00 A .M
Motion carried . by the fo'llowin,g vote :
;AYES : Shipley ,Bart lett ,Gibbs ,Greon,
Matney, Duke , Coen P1 C . Jones
'NOES : None City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk
ABSENT: None of the City Council of the City
of Huntington Beach, California
ATTEST:
Alvin M. Coen
Pn„1 r _• .101-1Aw Mayor
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
County of Orange ) ss :
City of Huntington Beach )
I , PAUL C . JONES , the duly elected, qualified and acting City Clerk
of the City of Huntington Beach, California, do hereby certify that
the . above and foregoing is a true and correct Statement of Action
of the City Council of said City at their regular
meating held on the Ist day of. May 19 -72 ,
WITNESS my hand and seal of the said City of Huntington Beach -this
the3rd day of May 19_72
Paul C . Jones
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk
of the `C-ity Council:- cf the—City
of Huntington Beach, California
y
l BY
' De ty
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To City Administrator Date 18 February 1972
From City Attorney In Re Resolution; Coast-
line Study Support
Dr. Shipley, sponsor of the subject resolution, requests that the matter
be presented under administrative items at the 7 : 30 session of Council
meeting, February 22, 1972 , inasmuch as he will not be present at the
afternoon session.
DON P. BONFA � U� � �
City Attorney
DPB:ahb AU - FEB 2 2 1972
Attachment CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
d� ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
To Paul Jones Date 2/23/72
Please see that the resolution concerning
the -California oas. ine Stuidy epor
requested by: Counclman Shipley , is
placed on the agenda for t e ne.x
regular meeting .
p
PLEASE REPLY TO —� ✓✓�`
Signed .g.ran.d.e;rt DCastl e
Date Signed
RodifOrm SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBONS INTACT. _
4S 4GS PART 3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH REPLY.
RESOLUTION NO . 3450
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY .COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF r
HUNTINGTON BEACH "COMMENDING EDICT FOUNDATION FOR !
. .DEVELOPMENT OF CALIFORNIA • COASTLINE SrCUDY PLAN
1
WHEREAS , the marine environment of the California coastline
is a major factor affecting public health , the economy and other
aspects; of the quality of life ' in California and the city of
H"untington Beach ; and
The citizens of ,this "All American City" are Vitally con-
cerned about• the maintenance of our local cons"tline. .as a natural
resource. for future generations; and
There have been numerous scientific warnings of' a,' continuing
reduction in the quality of marine 11fe cif our- tidelands , beaches
and' off-shore water; and
A growing percentage of out marine specimens have disappeared ,
-�� or developed abnormal characteristics affecting their value as
resources ; and
There is a need for increased scientific knowledge of. 'in-
dustrial and civic effluents released off the .-California coast
and their relationship to deterioration of. the environment ; and
The. EDICT Foundation based in Huntington Beach , California
has developed plans for a California Coastline Study to system-
atically collect and organize scientific information utilizing
the technical and managerial skills of the aerospace industry as
a first step in reversing this undesirable trend; and
This study may also serve as a national demonstration model
of the. social, economic and managerial aspects of conversion f
from defense related research and development activities to
civilian research and development activities; and
President Nixon has called for increased federal funding of
civilian research and development activities relative to urban
1 , - j
. E
r
` t
and environmental .ill.s in the cities of America.; I,
NOW, '.THEREFORE, BE .IT RE.8OLVED that the City Council - of the
City of Huntington Beach does hereby :
1 . Commend the EDICT Foundation for development of the
California Coastline Study plan. .as a pubs i.c service ;
k
2 . Offer to cooperate, with the.. EDICT Foundation in im-
plementation of this study through the office of the City Ad-
ministrator; �•
3. Urge all concerned government and Industrial interests
th.r-oughout' California to ,join in support of this important :study ;
and
4 . Instruct the' City Administrator to send copies of this
resolution -to the President , California. congressional delegation ,
Governor , appropriate members of the California leginlatui-e , and �{
other potentially interested elements of government; and industry . j
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of,
Huntington Beach at a. regular meeting thereof held on the 6th
day .of March 1972 .
Mayor. .
f
ATTEST : '
City erk
i
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
E
ity At o ney.
i
• I
2 .
Res. No. 3450
f
i
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) s s :
CITY OF HUNTINGTON NEAC11 )
I , PAUL C. JONES, the duly elected , qualif1 ed and !
' t
fitting City Clerk of. the City of Huntington Beach , and ex-
officio Clerk of the City Council of said City , do hereby
certify that the whole number of members of the City Council
of .the City of Huntington Beach is' seven; ".that the .foregoing
resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of
f.
more than a majority of all the members of said City Council
at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th �.
day of March by the following vote :
AYES : . Councilmen:
Shipley., Gibbs, Green, Coen, McCracken i
NOES: Councilmen:
None
ABSENT: - Councilmen:
Bartlett, Matney
City Clerk and -officio Clerk
of the City Council of ' the City
of Huntington Beach, California
is
"HE FOREGOING INST9UMENT IS A CORRECT
COPY
OF 'HE mMAL�0,14 FILE IN 7uLS OpFICF
AIT
Ciidd f .= k,ouva Citymaxi9
` " Of ik = = F
March 8, 1972
The Honorable Dennis Carpenter
Senate Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Senator Carpenter
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at
its regular meeting held Monday, March 6, 1972, adopted
Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Foundation for
development of the California Coastline Study Plan.
Do Enclosed isa copy of said Resolution. We urge all con-
cerned governmental and industrial interests to join in
support of this important study.
Sincerely yourso
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw
Encl.
t
b
Al
March 8, 1972
The Honorable James Whetmore
Senate Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Senator Whetmore:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at
its regular meeting held Monday, March 6, 1972, adopted
Resolution- No. 3450, commending EDICT Foundation for
development of the California Coastline Study .Plan.
DEnclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all con-
cerned governmental and .industrial interests to join in
support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw
Encl.
r
r
March 8, 1972
The Honorable Robert 'H. Burke
Assembly Post Office
Sacramento, CA 95801
Dear Assemblyman Burke:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at
its. regular meeting held Monday, March 6, 1972, adopted
Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Foundation for
Ddevelopment of the California Coastline Study Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all con-
cerned governmental and industrial interests to join in
support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
1
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw
Encl.
}
I
I R
March 8, 1972
The Honorable 'John G. Schmitz
House Office Building
rnWashington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Schmitz:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at
its regular meeting held Monday, March 6, 1972, adopted
Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Foundation for
development of the California Coastline Study Plan.
Q .Enclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all con-
cerned governmental and industrial interests to join in
support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk .
PCJ:aw
Encl.
m �
March 7, 1972
The Honorable Richard T. Hanna
House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Hanna:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at
its regular meeting held Monday, March 6, 1972, adopted
Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Foundation for
(� development of the California Coastline Study Plan.
D
Enclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all con-
cerned governmental and industrial interests to join in
support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ;aw
Enclo
t
March 7, 1972
I
i
The Honorable Craig Hosmer
House Office Building
Washington, D.C., .20515
Dear Congressman Hosmer:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at
its regular meeting held- Monday, March 6, 1972, adopted
Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Foundation for
development of the California Coastline Study Plan.
DEnclosed is a copy. of said Resolution. We urge all con-
cerned governmental and industrial interests to join in
support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw
Encl.
March 7, 1972
i
i
The Honorable John V. Tunny
Senate House Building
Washington, D.C: 20515
Dear Senator Tunny:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,
at its regular meeting held Monday, March 6, ,,1972,
adopted Resolution No. 4 0 commending EDICT Found-
ation 3 5
P , g
ation for development of the California Coastline
(� Study Plan.
i Enclosed is a copy of said Resolution: We urge all
concerned governmental and industrial interests to
join in support of. this important study:
I
Sincerely yours,
i
i
f Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJiaw
Encl.
March 7, 1972
The Honorable Alan Cranston
Senate House Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Senator Cranston:
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,
at its regular meeting held Monday, March 6, 19729
adopted Resolution No. 5450, commending EDICT Found-
D ation for development of the California Coastline
Study Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all
concerned governmental and industrial interests to
i j*oin in support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
Paul C. Jones
F
City Clerk
PCJsaw
I
Encl.
tea-
i
i -
March 7, 1972
i
i
I
President Richard M. Nixon
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
{ Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. President:
i
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,
at its regular meeting held Monday, March 7, 19729 .
adopted Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Found-
ation for development of the California Coastline
DStudy Plan.
Enclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all
concerned governmentali and industrial interests to
join in support of this important study.
Sincerely yours,
Y
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:p
Encl.
March 7, 1972
The Honorable Ronald Reagan
State Capital Building
Sacramento, CA 95801r
Bear Governor Reagan,-,
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,
at its regular meeting held Monday, March 7, 19729
adopted Resolution No. 3450, commending EDICT Found-
ation for development of the California Coastline
Study Plan.
DEnclosed is a copy of said Resolution. We urge all
concerned governmental and industrial interests to
join in support of this important study.
jSincerely yours,
I
i
Paul C. Jones
City Clerk
PCJ:aw
i
Encl.
State of California
RONALD REAGAN, Governor
Sacramento 95814
This will acknowledge receipt of your resolution(s). It has been brought
to the attention of Governor Reagan.
We appreciate your courtesy in furnishing this office with a copy.
Sincerely,
BRucE NESTANDE
Special Assistant to the Governor
SUBJECT
55524-401 8-71 2500 OSP
t3 MAR -
f37? o
- ` ern
Mr. Paul C. Jones ,
City Clerk
P. 0. Box 190 us
Huntington Beach, California ••
ca
w
'' ENATE BILL No. 860
Introduced by Senator Carpenter
March 15, 1972
An act to amend Sections 51201 and 65302 of the Government
Code, and to amend Section 6301 of, and to add Section
21108and Division 15 (commencing with Section 24001) to,
} the .Public Resources Code, relating to coastal resources,
and making an appropriation therefor.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 860, as introduced, Carpenter. Coastal resources.
Enacts the California Coastal Resources Act of 1972.
Creates the California Coastal Resources Board and
• prescribes its membership, powers, and duties. Designates
the California Advisory.Commission on Marine and Coastal
Resources as the technical-advisory committee to the state
board and.prescribes its powers and duties.
Provides for regulation of the use of the.coastal zone, as
defined, by specified criteria and state coastal zone master.
plan required to be adopted by the state board.
Appropriates a sum of $250,000 to the state board for
okpenditure, without regard to fiscal year, to carry out the
provisions of.this act.
Requires that the general plan of a county or city include
a coastal element as defined and provided for in this act.
t� Operative January 1, 1973.
Vote—%; Appropriation—Yes; Fiscal Committee—Yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows.-
1 'SECTION 1. Section 51201 of the Government Code is
2 amended to read:
3 51201. As 'used in this chapter, unless otherwise
• • 4 apparent from the context:
4FM 2WA)21) IS
SB 860
1 (a) "Agricultural commodity"means any and all plant +� •
2 and animal products produced in this state for.
3 commercial purposes.
4 (b) "Agricultural use" means use of land for the
5 purpose of producing an, agricultural commodity for
6 .commercial purposes.
7 (c) "Prime 'agricultural land". means any of the • •
8 following:
9" (1) All land which qualifies for rating as class I or class
10 II in the Soil Conservation Service land use capability s.
11 classifications.
12 (2) Land which qualifies for rating 80 through 100 in.
13 the Storie Index Rating.
14 (3) Land which supports livestock used for the
15 production of food and fiber and which has an annual
16 carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal unit °
17 per acre as defined by the United'States Department of
18 Agriculture.
19 (4) Land _planted with fruit- or nut-bearing trees,
20 vines,bushes or crops which have a nonbearing period of
21' Tess than five years and which will normally return during
22 the.commercial bearing period on an annual basis from
23 -the production of unprocessed agricultural plant 24 . production not less than two hundred dollars '($200) per
25 acre.
26 (5) Land which has returned from the production of
27 unprocessed agricultural plant products an annual gross
28 value of not less than two hundred dollars ($200) per acts r
29 for three of the previous five years. f
30. (d) "Agricultural preserve"means an area devoted to
31 either agricultural use, recreational use as defined in
32 subdivision {ter}• (o) , or open space use as defined in
33 subdivision J* (p) ,or any combination of such uses,and
34. compatible uses as designated by a.city-or county, and . •
35 established by resolution of the governing body of a city
36 or county after a public hearing.
37 (e) "Compatible use" is any use determined by the
38 county .or city administering the preserve pursuant to
39 Section 51231 or Section 51238, or by this act to be •
40 compatible with the agricultural, recreational, or open •. •
u
SB 860 —30— —3— SB 860
1. CHAPTER T REPORTS 1 space use of land within-the preserve and subject to
2 2 contract.- "Compatible use" includes agricultural use,
3 24551. .The state board shall file annual progress 3 recreational use or open space use unless the board or
4 .reports with the Governor and the Legislature not later 4. council finds after notice and hearing that such use is not
5 than the fifth calendar day of each regular session of the 5 compatible with the agricultural, recreational or open
6 Legislature, and shall file its final report with the 6 space use to which the land is restricted by contract
7 Governor and the Legislature when it .adopts the state • • 7 pursuant to this chapter.
8 plan. After the final report no annual progress report 8 (f) "Board"means the board of supervisors of a county
9 shall be submitted by the state board. 9 which establishes or proposes to establish an agricultural
10 The final report shall contain the state plan required to ., 10 preserve or which enters or proposes to enter into a
11 be adopted by the state board. 11 contract on land within an agricultural preserve pursuant
12 SEC. 6. No provision of this act shall impair any 12 to this chapter.
13 existing lease or contract entered into with the state or 13 (g) "Council" means the city council of a city which
14 any county or city, or agency thereof. 14 establishes or proposes to establish an agricultural
15 SEC. 7. If any provision of this act or the application 15 preserve or which enters or proposes to enter into a
16 thereof to any person or circumstance is held in 16 contract on land within an agricultural preserve pursuant
17 such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or 17 to this chapter.
18 applications of the act which can be given effect without 18 (h) Except where it is otherwise apparent from the
19 the invalid provision or application, and to this end the 19 context, "county" or "city" means the county or city
20 provisions of this act are .severable. 20 having jurisdiction over the land.
21 SEC. 8.. There is hereby appropriated from the 21 (i) A "scenic highway corridor"is an area adjacent to,
22 General Fund to the California Coastal Resources Board 22 and within view of, the right-of-way of:
23 the sum of two hundred.fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) 23 (1) An existing or proposed state scenic highway in the
24 for expenditure. to support the operations of the state 24 state scenic highway system established by the
25 board, without regard to fiscal year, pursuant to the 25 Legislature pursuant to Article 2.5 (commencing with
26 provisions_ of Division 15 (commencing with Section 26 Section 260) of Chapter 2 of Division 1 of the Streets and
27 24001) of the Public Resources Code. 27 Highways Code and which has been officially designated
28 It is the intent of the.Legislature that the Governor in 28 by the.Director of the Department of Public Works as an
29 each budget, beginning with the fiscal year 1973-1974, 29 official state scenic highway; or
30 will provide adequate funding to enable the state board 30 (2) A county scenic highway established pursuant to
31 to effectively carry out its responsibilities under this act. f " 31 Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 260) of Chapter 2
32 SEC. 9.. This act shall become operative on January 1, 32 of Division 1 of the Streets and Highways Code, if each
33 1973. • • 33 of the following conditions have been met:
34 (A) The scenic highway is included in an adopted
35 general plan of the county or city; and
36 (B) The scenic highway corridor is included in an
37 adopted specific plan of the county or city; and
O 38 (C) Specific proposals for implementing the plan,
39 including regulation of land use, have been approved by
• • 40 the advisory committee on a master plan for scenic
4WO 2W0.313 MI - 4WD VM40 22
SB 860 —4— —29— SB 860
1 highways, and the county or city highway has been 1 to receive further state funds or federal funds
2 officially designated by the Director of the Department 2 administered by the state for any purpose relating to any
3 of Public Works as an official county scenic:highway. 3 use of that portion of the coastal zone situated within the
4 0) A "wildlife habitat area" is a land or water area 4 planning unit's `boundaries until the planning unit has
5 designated by a board or council, after consulting with 5 gained approval of its element or has complied with the
6 and considering therecommendation of the Department 6 order. The loss of funds to the planning unit resulting
7 of Fish and Game, as an area'of great importance for the • • 7 from such failure shall be in addition to any other penalty
8 protection or enhancement of the wildlife resources of 8 provided by law.
9 the state. 9 24402. The Attorney General, at the request of the
'10 (k) A "saltpond" is an area which, for at least three ; 10 state board or any person who has a direct interest in the
11 consecutive years immediately prior to being placed 11 matter, or upon his own motion, may bring an action in
12 within an agricultural preserve pursuant to this chapter, 12 the name of the people of the State of California to enjoin
13 has been used for the solar evaporation of sea water in the 13 the violation of this division.
14 course of salt production for commercial purposes. 14
15 (l) A "managed wetland area" is an area, which may 15 CHAPTER 6: INVERSE CONDEMNATION.
16 be an area diked off from the ocean or any bay, river or 16
17 stream to which water. is .occasionally admitted; and 17 24501.. Any parcel of land within the coastal zone that
18 which, for at least three consecutive years immediately 18 is designated on the state plan as reserved or earmarked
19 prior to being placed within an agricultural preserve 19 for beach, park, open space, other recreational purposes,
20 pursuant to this chapter, was used and maintained as a 20 natural history or wildlife preserves, or other public use,
21 waterfowl hunting preserve or game refuge or for 21 or for use 'by any public utility having, the right of
22 agricultural purposes. 22 eminent domain, and is not redesignated for other uses
23 (m)' A "submerged area" is any land determined by 23 or acquired within 10 years after such designation, shall
24 the board or council to be submerged or subject to tidal 24 be deemed to have been taken by the state or such public
25 action and found by the board or council to be of great 25 utility, and the owner of the parcel may bring an action
26 value.to the state as open space. 26 in inverse condemnation requiring the taking of such
27 (n) A "coastal and estuarine area" .means any 27 parcel by the state or the public utility, as the case may
28 undeveloped estuary, water, or land beneath the water 28 be, and a determination of the fair market value payable
29 seaward of the mean high tide line, or any undeveloped 29 as just compensation for such taking. In such inverse
30. land including the offshore islands within the jurisdiction .30 'condemnation action,the court may,in addition,or in the
31 of the State of California, lying within the coastal zone as 31 alternative, if it finds that the rights of the owner have
32 defined by subdivision (d) ofSection'24101 of the Public' 32 been interfered with, award damages for any such
33 Resources Code. 33 interference by the state or the public utility.This section
34 +* (o) "Recreational use" is the use of land by the, • , 34 shall not affect the state's or public utility's authority to
35 public, with or without charge, for any of the following: 35 do any of the following:
36 walking, hiking, picnicking, camping, swimming, 36 (a) Institute a condemnation action.
37 boating, fishing, hunting, or other outdoor games or 37 (b) Take immediate possession of the particular parcel
38 sports for which facilities are provided for public 38 of property sought to be condemned.
39 participation. Any fee charged for the recreational use of
40 land as.defined in this subdivision shall be in a reasonable • • .
4W) 2N9)50 24 4N90 9MMS 5i
SB 860 —28 —5— SB 860
1 board,each planning unit shall test proposed uses against S 1 amount and shall not have the effect of unduly limiting
2 the state plan, granting permits for uses conforming to 2 its use by the public.
3 the--state plan and denying them for uses which fail to 3 *e (p) "Open space use" is the use or maintenance of
4 conform to the state plan. Nothing in this section permits 4 land in such ' a manner as to preserve its natural
5 or requires the reservation, use, or taking of private 5 characteristics, beauty, or openness for the benefit and
6 property for beach, park, open space, other recreational 6 enjoyment of the public, to provide essential habitat for
7 purposes, natural history and wildlife preserves, or other • . 7 wildlife, or for the solar evaporation ofIsea water in the
8" public use without payment of just compensation. .8 course of salt production for commercial purposes,if such
9 24304. The provisions of Sections 24301, 24302,. and 9 land.is within:
10 24303 notwithstanding, the permit granted for a .use, 10 (1) A scenic highway corridor, as defined in
11 together with such supporting documents or evidence as 11 subdivision (i).
12 the state board shall by regulation require, shall be 12 (2) A wildlife habitat area, as defined in subdivision
13 forwarded to the state board within 10 days after the date tt3 13 0).
14 of such grant by the planning unit, and such use shall not 14 (3) A saltpond, as defined in subdivision (k).
15 be effected before a date 40 days after such permit is 15 (4) A managed wetland area,as defined in subdivision
16. granted by the planning unit. - 16 (1).
17 24305. If the state board finds that the use proposed' 17' (5) A submerged area, as defined in subdivision (m).
18 fails to conform to the criteria or the state plan,as the case . 18 (6) A coastal and estuarine area, as defined in
19 may be, the board shall so inform the granting planning 19 subdivision (n).
20 unit, within 30 days of the grant of the permit, specifying 20 SEC. 2. Section 65302 of. the* Government Code is
21 in writing the particulars in which the proposed use fails 21 amended to read:
22 so to conform, and order the agency to rescind its action 22 65302. The general plan shall consist of a statement of
23 approving the use and reexamine the proposal, making. 23 development policies and shall include a diagram or
24 special findings as directed by the state board. In such 24 diagrams and text setting forth objectives, principles,
25 .instance,the state board may,when necessary to prevent 25 standards, and plan proposals. The plan shall include the
26 the proposed use from proceeding, obtain an injunction 26 following elements:
27 against a planning unit, or any individual member 27 (a) A land-use element which designates the proposed
28 thereof, or any private person or public entity seeking to 28 general distribution and general location and extent of
29 . effect the proposed use. j 29 the uses of the land for housing, business, industry, open
30 24306. A finding of nonconformity made by the state 30- space, including agriculture, natural resources,_
31 board pursuant to Section 24305 may not be made by the �� 31 recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty, education,
32 board without a public hearing. 32 public building and grounds, solid and liquid waste
33 33 disposal facilities, and other categories of public and
34 CHAPTER 5. PENALTIES AND MISCELLANEOUS • • 34 private uses of land. The land-use element shall include
35 PROVISIONS 35 a statement of-the standards of population density and
36 36 building intensity recommended for the various districts
37 24401. Any planning unit which fails either to submit 37 and. other territory covered by the plan. The land-use
38 an element or to gain board approval of its element as 38 element shall also identify areas covered by -the plan
39 required by this division,or which fails to comply with an 39 which are subject to flooding and shall be reviewed
40 order of the state board upon appeal, shall be ineligible- . • 40 annually with respect to such areas.
4 Wi(1 3 Wif13M Ki
4Wi1) 2Wilfil 26
SB 860 —6— —27—
SB 860
1 (b) A circulation element consisting of the general • 1 priorities dictated by the projected overall needs of the
2 .location and extent of existing and proposed major 2 state, and shall thereupon formally adopt such amalgam
3 thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and 3 of coastal elements as the state plan after noticed public
4 other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated 4 hearings.
5 with the land-use element of the plan. 5 Prior to the adoption of the state plan the state board
6 (c) A housing element, to be developed pursuant to 6 shall hold open public hearings in each coastal county.
7 regulations established under Section 37041 of the Health • • 7 24248. The state board shall, upon adoption of the
8 and Safety Code,consisting of standards and plans for the 8 state plan,cause it to be published in accordance with the
9 improvement of housing and for provision of adequate 9 provisions of Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
10 sites for housing. This element of the plan shall make A 10 11371) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government
11 adequate'provision for the housing needs of all economic 11 Code..The state plan shall direct and require all planning
12 segments of the community. 12 units to apply it as the test of all uses of the coastal zone
13 (d) A conservation element for the conservation, , 13 proposed thereafter, and all proposals or applications for
14 development, and utilization of natural resources 14 permits for a use not conforming to the state plan shall be
15 including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, 15 denied by the planning units.
16 rivers and other waters, harbors, fisheries, wildlife, 16 24249. The state board' shall make a continuous
17 minerals;and-other natural resources.That portion of the 17 review of the state plan, revising and changing. it in
18 conservation element including waters shall be 18 cooperation with the recommendations submitted by the
19 developed in coordination with any countywide water 19 planning units.
20 agency and with all district and city agencies which have 20
21 developed,served,controlled or conserved water for any • • 21 CHAPTER 4. PERMITS
22 purpose for the county or city for which the plan is 22
23. prepared. The conservation element may also cover: 23 24301. During the interim between the operative
24 ' (1) The reclamation of land and waters. 24 date of this division and state board approval of the
25 (2) Flood control. 25 criteria, a planning unit may grant permits without
26 (3) Prevention and control of the pollution of streams 26 reference to this division,except that a permit is required
27 and other waters.- 27 from both the planning unit and the state board for a use
28 (4) Regulation of the use of land in stream channels 28 that causes any of the following:
29 and other areas required for the accomplishment of the 29 (a) Any reduction of public beaches or other public
30 conservation plan. 30 recreation areas within the coastal zone.
31 (5) Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion 31 (b) Any reduction of, or restriction upon, legal public
32 of'soils, beaches, and shores. '" 32 access to public coastal land and waters.
33 .(6) Protection of watersheds. 33 The planning unit and the state board may not issue
34 (7) The location,quantity and quality of the rock,sand • • 34 such a permit unless,after public hearing,a fording of fact
35 and gravel resources. 35 is made that the. proposed use is compatible with
36 (e) An open-space element as provided in Article 10.5 36 shoreline preservation interests.
37 (commencing with Section 65560) of this chapter. 37 24302. Upon adoption of criteria by the state board,
38 (f) A seismic .safety element consisting of an 38 Section 24301 shall not be applicable and a planning unit
39 identification and appraisal of seismic hazards such as. 39 may grant permits for uses conforming to such criteria.
40 susceptibility to surface ruptures from faulting,to ground • • 40 24303. Upon adoption of the state plan by the state
48RU 2M)73 29 48M.2SM343 83
SB860 —8=
—25— SB 860
1 Public Resources Code with respect.to planning units as • 1 in order that the committee.can diligently and promptly
2 defined by such division. 2 carry out its responsibilities under this chapter.
3 The requirements of this section shall apply to charter 3
4 cities. 4 Article: 4. Development of State Plan
.5 SEC. 3. Section 6301 of the Public Resources Code is 5
6 amended to read: 6 - 24241. The state board shall, upon receipt of the draft
7 6301. The Except as otherwise pro vided in Di vision 15 • • 7 of recommended criteria from the advisory committee,
8 (commencing with Section 24001), the commission-has 8 conduct public.hearings in each of the coastal counties
9 exclusive jurisdiction overall ungranted tidelands and 9 upon all parts of the draft, to review and, where
10 submerged lands owned by the state, and of the beds of 4 10 necessary, to revise and amend the drafts on or before
i 1 navigable rivers,streams,lakes,bays,estuaries,inlets,and 11 July 1, 1974; thereafter the state board shall adopt criteria
12 straits, including tidelands and submerged lands or any 12 and cause them .to be published in accordance with the
13 interest therein, whether within or beyond the 13 provisions of Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
14 boundaries of the state as established by law, which have 14 11371) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government
'15 been or may be acquired by the state (a) by quitclaim, 15 Code. ..
16 cession, grant, contract, or otherwise from the United 16 , 24242. Prior to adopting the criteria, the state board
17 States or any agency thereof, or (b) by any other means. 17 shall consult.with and receive a report from the Council
18 All jurisdiction and authority remaining in the state as to 18 on Intergovernmental-Relations evaluating the advisory
19 tidelands and submerged lands as to which grants have 19 committee draft of recommended criteria.
20 been or.may be made is vested in the commission. 20 ' 24243. Upon adoption of criteria, the state board shall
21 The commission shall exclusively administer and • 21 transmit them to all planning units. By letter of
22 control all such land'',and may lease or otherwise dispose 22 transmittal accompanying the criteria to each planning
23 of such lands,as provided by law,upon such terms and for 23 unit, the state board shall direct each planning unit to
24 such consideration,if any, as are determined by it. 24 apply the criteria to the planning of that portion of the
25 The provisions of this section do not apply to land of the 25 coastal zone within each planning unit's jurisdiction,and,
26 classes described in Section 6403,as added by Chapter 227 26 within 18 months after the planning units receive the
27 of the Statutes of 1947. 27 state board's criteria,the planning units shall develop and
28 SEC. 4. Section 21108 is added to the Public Resources 28. transmit their coastal elements to the state board for
29 Code, to read: f 29 approval and incorporation into the state plan. The
30 21108. All state agencies, boards, and commissions 30 element shall be prepared by the planning units after
31 shall,with respect to any projects subject to Section 21100 ` t 31 properly noticed public hearings and after contact with
32 which they propose to carry out, any part of which is 32 all affected private owners and public agencies.
33 within the coastal zone as it is defined in subdivision (d) 33 24244. In prescribing the criteria,the state board shall
34 of Section 24101, transmit a copy of the detailed • • 34 prescribe a uniform methodology,format,and scale"to be
35 statement of the environmental"impact of the proposed 35 used by planning units in their formulation of their
36 project, prepared pursuant to Section 21100, to the 36 coastal.elements.
37 California Coastal Resources Board. 37 24245. The state board shall approve coastal elements
38 SEC. 5. Division 15 (commencing with Section 24001) 38 which conform to the criteria and shall remand to the
39 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 39 submitting.planning unit any coastal element failing to
• . • 40 conform, with specific instructions. to correct and
VM 2WAM0.3 33 4FAD 2SW325 y
SB 860 —26— —7- SB 860
1 resubmit its coastal element to the state board within six • 1 shaking, to ground failures, or to effects of seismically
2 months of the remand. In the event the state board 2 induced waves such as tsunamis and seiches.
3 remands a coastal element, the state board shall at once 3 (g) A noise element in quantitative, numerical terms,
4 . transmit to the planning unit whatever order is necessary 4 showing contours of present and projected noise levels
5 to prevent any use which fails to conform to criteria and 5 associated with all existing .and 'proposed major
6 which ,is possible under the defective. coastal element. 6 transportation. elements. These include but are not
7 Injunctive relief shall be available to enforce the order • • .7 limited to the following:
8 against a planning unit or against any private person 8. (1) Highways and freeways,
9 threatening adverse_use.The state board shall specifically 9 (2) Ground rapid transit systems,
10 instruct any.planning unit as to the corrections required , r: W. (3) Ground facilities associated with all airports
11 to conform its coastal element to the criteria and shall 11 operating under a permit from the State Department of
12 direct the planning-unit.to make them. 12 Aeronautics.
13 24246. The state board shall undertake to inventory 13 These noise contours may be expressed in any standard
14 the land and other resources of the coastal zone, 14 acoustical scale which includes both'the magnitude of
15 determining. first from the appropriate departments of 15 noise and . frequency of ' its occurrence. The
16 the executive branch of state government what the 16 recommended scale is sound level A, as measured with
17''projected public needs demanding land use in the coastal 17' A-weighting network of a standard sound level meter,
18 zone shall be successively in the years 1975, 1980, 1990, 18 with corrections added for the time duration per.event
19 and 2000, -for beach, -park, open space, and other 19 and the total number of events per 24-hour period. .
20 recreational purposes; for housing,.for commercial, or 20 Noise contours shall be shown in minimum increments
21 industrial development; including port and • 21 of five decibels and shall be continued down to 65 db(A).
22 transportation facilities; and for natural history and 22 For regions involving hospitals, rest homes, long-term
23 wildlife preserves. The state board shall, projecting such 23 medical or mental care,or outdoor recreational areas,the
24 needs against existing resources, determine priorities for 24 contours shall to be continued down to 45 db(A).
25 use of the coastal zone. 25 Conclusions regarding appropriate site or route
26 Such priorities for'use of the coastal zone based upon 26 selection alternatives or'noise impact upon compatible.
27 the overall needs of the state shall govern the state board 27 land uses shall be included in the general 'plan.
28 in the development of the state plan. 28 The state, local, or private agency responsible for the
29 24247. The state board shall, within six months after 29 construction or maintenance of such transportation
30 receipt of all coastal elements develop a single, 30 facilities shall provide to the local agency producing the
31 comprehensive land use plan for the entire coastal zone ; 31 general plan, a statement of the present and projected
32. which shall be known as-the state plan. 32 noise levels of the facility,and any information which was
33 The state-board shall receive and amalgamate all of the 33 used in the development of such levels.
34 coastal elements,, reconciling conflicts and • • 34 (h) A scenic highway element for the development,
35 inconsistencies between them, into the state plan. The 35 establishment, and protection of scenic highways
36 state board shall then test this amalgam of coastal 36 pursuant to the provisions of Article 2.5 (commencing
37 elements against the priorities for use of the coastal zone 37 with Section 260) of Chapter 2 of Division 1 of the Streets
38 developed by the state board as provided in Section 24246 38 and Highways Code.
39 and, insofar as it is necessary, shall so modify or alter the 39 . (i) A coastal element as defined and provided for in
40 amalgam of coastal elements that it shall satisfy the • • 40 Division 15 (commencing with Section 24001) of-the
,WiO 28WtG 31
SB 860 — 10— —23— SB 860
1 The Legislature further finds` and declares that the •. • 1 river mouth, slough, or lagoon within the coastal zone.
t
2 water area is.as vital to the welfare of the people as the 2 (d) Regulation of substantial interference with the
3 .land area of he coastal zone; and that such water:area 3 line of sight so as to prevent any substantial lessening.of
4 should be included within the scope of the state plan. _ 4 public views or vistas toward the coast from the public
5 The Legislature further finds and declares that the 5 street or highway nearest the coast.
6 planning and management of the coastal zone is 6 (e) Regulation of reduction of public beach or other.
7 primarily the responsibility of planning units, as defined , • 7 public recreation areas within the coastal zone.
8 .in Section 24101. 8 (f) Regulation of 'reduction of, or restriction upon,.
9 24003. It is the intent of the Legislature that the state 9 ' legal public access to public coastal lands and waters.
10 board shall be the principal state agency which, with the s 10-. (g) Recognition- of private property rights in the
11 planning units,should have primary responsibility for the 11 coastal zone and the necessity for payment of fair
12 planning and management of the resources of the coastal { 12 compensation in the event of any taking or destruction
13 zone. The state board, in exercising any power granted t 13 thereof, as provided in Section 14 of Article 1 of the
14 pursuant-to this division,shall conform to and implement 14 California Constitution, including the recognition that
15 the policies .of-,this chapter and shall; at all times, 15 -the creation of a public benefit, which, although it does
16 coordinate its activities so as to achieve a unified and 16 not involve a physical,seizure of private property, may
17 effective program for the management of the coastal 17 destroy a valuable incident or right of private.ownership,
18 zone resources of this state. 18 thereby causing a private owner to contribute to the
19 24004. No provision of this division or any ruling, 19 regulatory scheme in a way disproportionate to the
20 requirement, policy, or plan of the state board is -a • • 20 .benefits received by him, may constitute a taking with
21 limitation on any of the following: 21 respect to such private owner; and provision of formulas
22 (a) . On the power of a city 'or county to adopt .and 22 for evaluating and compensating such private losses as
23 enforce additional regulations, not in conflict therewith, 23 -may result from"coastal zone use restrictions for general
24 imposing further conditions, restrictions, or limitations 24 public benefit under the state plan.
25 with respect to any land or water.use or other activity 25 �(h) .Standards to be applied by. planning units in
26 which might waste or.degrade the resources of the coastal- 26 measuring the comparative need or desirability of the
27 zone .of the state. 27 kind or location of any other proposed use of the coastal
28 (b) On the power of any city or county to declare, a 28 zone not dealt with in this section,to determine whether
29 prohibit, and abate nuisances. 29 to include such uses within the planning units element,
30 (c) On the power of the Attorney General, at the 30 and as the test for the granting of permits after adoption
31 request of the state board, or upon his own motion, to a 31 of criteria and until superseded by board approval of the
32 bring an action in the name of the people of the State of 32 element.
33 California to enjoin any waste - or: pollution of the • • 33 In providing the components required by this section,
34 resources of the coastal zone or any nuisance. 34 the advisory committee shall, insofar as possible, refer to
35 (d) On the power of a state agency in_the enforcement. 35 specific-locations, employing maps and charts.
36 or administration of any provision of law which it is 36 24234. The advisory committee shall, in its draft of
37 specifically permitted or required to enforce, or 37 -recommended criteria,recommend'adoption by the state
38 administer. 38 board of rules, regulations, and procedures for the
39 (e) On the right of any person to maintain at any time 39 implementation of this division,, including, but not
40 any appropriate action for, relief against any private • • - 40 limited to, recommendations for:
4WO 2FB)130 40 4W41 2.."IA13
SB 860 -24- -9- SB 860
1 (a) Emergency procedures. • 1 DIVISION 15. CALIFORNIA COASTAL
2 (b) A uniform methodology of planning to be 2 RESOURCES ACT OF 1972
3 employed by the state board and planning units in their 3
4 respective' formulation of the state plan and coastal 4 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
5 elements, including uniform scale and format. 5 AND POLICY
6 (c) The amount and means of future funding to carry 6
7 out the provisions of this division. • 7 24001. This division shall be known and may be cited.. '
8 (d) Change in the structure or .operation of state' 8 as the California Coastal Resources Act of 1972.
9 agencies in addition to that prescribed by this division to 9 24002. The Legislature hereby finds and declares that
10 better achieve the purposes of this division. • 10 the people of the state have a primary interest in the
11 24235. Two-thirds. or more of the members of the 11 conservation, control, and utilization of the coastal zone
12 advisory committee shall approve by formal vote, as 12 resources of the state, and that the quality and character .
13 provided by rules adopted by a majority of the advisory r 13 of all the coastal zone resources .of the state should be
14 committee at its initial meeting, any component, 14 protected for use and enjoyment by all the people of the
15 standard, prohibition, or recommendation which the 15 state.
16 advisory committee is required or empowered by this 16 The Legislature further finds and declares that
17 - division to develop before it shall be included in the draft 17 ' activities and factors which may affect the character,
18 of recommended criteria which is submitted to the state 18 quality, or condition of,the coastal zone resources of the "
19 board. No additional vote on the entire draft shall be 19 state should -be regulated to attain the best balance
20 required. Any member or members who so desire may • • 20 between preservation and development- of those
21 submit a minority report upon any part or parts of the 21 resources which is reasonable, considering all demands
22 draft criteria. 22 being made and to be made on those resources and the
23 24236. The advisory committee shall, in the 23 .total values involved, beneficial and detrimental,
24 performance of its duties under this article, consult both 24 economic and social, tangible and intangible.
25 with appropriate governmental officials and experts from 25 The Legislature further finds and declares that the
26 the academic and private sector in all fields pertinent to 26 health, safety, and welfare of the people of the state
27 use of the coastal zone,-including, but not limited to, 27 require that there be a statewide program to rationally
28 littoral and estuarine ecology; population growth and 28 plan and manage the preservation and the use of the
29 urbanization, waste management, hydrology and beach 29 coastal zone resources; that the state should be prepared
30 conservation, landscape architecture, marine biology, 30 to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the
31 coastal zone geology, meteorology. and climatology, , ,.' 31 character and quality of the coastal zone resources in the
32 zoning and land use regulation, marine law and law of 32 state from degradation; that the coastal zone resources
33 tidelands and submerged lands, commercial fishing, port • • 33 are influenced by and in turn influence social, economic,
34 development and administration, land use planning, 34 and ecological patterns for the entire state; that factors of
35 offshore mining, offshore petroleum extraction, and 35 . water quality, ecology, climate, topography, population,
36 public finance. 36 recreation, agriculture, industry, and economic
37 24237. .The state board shall provide the advisory 37 development vary along the coast; and that a statewide
38 committee with . adequate executive officers and 38 program for coastal zone resources management can be
39 planning staff from among the personnel attached to and 39 most effectively administered within a framework of
40 made a part of the state board pursuant to Section 24227 • • 40 local planning and statewide coordination and policy.
4Wi0 2860315 77 4PM 9860115 37
)
SB 860 —22— -- 11— SB 860
1 to safeguard against imminent harm to, or loss of; land, • ! 1 nuisance or for any other private relief.
2 water, fish, wildlife, vegetable, mineral, scenic or other 2
3 resource of the coastal zone.' 3 CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS
4 (b) Public uses or activities under a suggested 4
5 schedule of priority actions for the state or for agencies 5 24101. As used in this division:
6 to provide for the long-term conservation and husbandry 6 (a) "State board" means .. the California Coastal
7 of natural and other resources of the coastal zone and for • • 7 Resources Board.
8 such development of the coastal. zone as shall be 8 (b) "Advisory committee" means the California
9 necessary in the public interest within the next 10 years, 9 Advisory Commission on Marine and Coastal Resources
10 including, but not limited to, specific provisions . 10 created ,pursuant to Chapter 10 (commencing with
11 consistent with sound ecological practices for all of the 11 Section 8800) of Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government
12 following: 12 Code.
13 (1) Increased beach access. 13 (c) "Person" also includes any city, county, district,
14 (2) Improved beach conservation. .14 the state or any department or agency thereof. "Person"
15 (3) Reservation of adequate public recreation areas. 15 includes the United States, to the extent authorized by
16 .(4) Improved commercial and sport fisheries. 16 federal law.
17 ' (5) Reservation of adequate and properly located 17 (d) "Coastal zone" means that area of.the State of
. 18 wildlife preserves. 18 California extending from its northern border with the
. 19 (6) Port development or improvement. 19 State of Oregon to its southern border with the Republic
20 (7) Improved waste management. 20 of Mexico, extending seaward from the mean high tide
21 (8) Improved water quality. . . • • 21 line of the Pacific Ocean to the limit of the state's
.22 (9) Development of sufficient water resources for all 22 jurisdiction, including all islands and other offshore lands
23 uses. 23 within or subject to the jurisdiction of the state, and
24 (10) Development of sufficient energy resources for 24 extending inland from the mean high tide line of the
25 all uses. _ 25 Pacific Ocean three miles or to the highest elevation of
26 (11) Designation of powerplant sitings. 26 the nearest coastal range of mountains or any ground
27 (12) Maintenance and development of. sufficient 27 elevation of 750 feet above sea level, whichever is the
28 public.transportation facilities. 28 shorter distance.
29 (13) Reservation of sufficient open-space lands for 29 (e) "Planning unit" means a city, county, district, or
30 agricultural and public purposes. 30 other political subdivision of the state having a part of the
31 In prescribing the reservation of lands or waters in the . f 31 coastal zone within-its boundaries and having authority to
32 ,coastal zone for any of the purposes of this section, the 32 zone or otherwise regulate land use in that portion of the
33 advisory committee shall first weigh competing needs in 33 coastal zone.
34 terms of the limited total resources of the coastal zone 34 . (f) "Element" means the coastal element required by
35 and of the comparative necessity or desirability for 35 the provisions of subdivision (i) of Section 65302 of the
36 location of a particular kind of activity or facility within 36 Government Code to be a part of the general plan of each
37, the coastal zone or for location of any particular activity 37 planning unit and which shall be a comprehensive and
38 or facility in a particular place within the coastal zone. 38 detailed land-use plan, consisting of maps and text,
39 (c) Regulation of dredging, filling, or otherwise . 39 regulating use of that portion of the coastal zone within
40 altering.the natural state of any bay, estuary, salt marsh, • • 40 the jurisdiction of the planning unit and subject to
48M 2860270 68 - 4WA) 2MOM 42
SB860 — 12— -21— SB860
1 approval by the state board. Nothing in this division shall , ! 1 board. Such planning staff and executive officers as have
2 be construed as expanding the physical area of 2 ' .been allocated to the research, - compilation; and
3 jurisdiction of each planning unit subject to the 3 development of the -California. Comprehensive Ocean
4 provisions of this division; and the responsibility of each 4 Area Plan shall be attached to, and made a part of, the
5 planning unit for planning and management of the " 5 state board.
6 coastal zone shall be limited to the actual physical area of 6 Such funds as have been appropriated or allocated as of
-7 its jurisdiction as provided for by law other than this • • 7 the first day of the first calendar month which
8 division. 8 commences following the operative date of this division,
9 (g) "State plan" means the state coastal zone master 9 to the research for, and preparation of, the California
10 plan, consisting of maps and text, adopted by the state 10 Comprehensive Ocean Area Plan shall be considered to
11 board as provided in Section 24247. 11 be funds appropriated or allocated to the administration
12 (h) "Coastal resources" means the resources and 12 of. laws, the administration of which is within the
13 amenities of the ocean, the continental shelf and slope, f' 13 jurisdiction of the 'state board.
14 the coastal lands and beaches, the tide and submerged 14 24228. The state board is hereby designated the
15 lands, and all other elements of the marine and coastal 15 California Coastal Zone Authority for all purposes stated
16 environment as defined in Section 8806 of the 16 in any federal act heretofore or hereafter enacted. The
17 "Government Code. 17 state board is hereby authorized to give any certificate or
18 (i) "Permit" means an authorization by a planning .18 . statement required by any federal agency and to make
19 unit for a use of land. in the coastal zone; including 19 application for federal funding of state coastal resources
20 without limitation a zoning or rezoning ordinance, a • • 20 planning or management pursuant to any such federal
21 zoning variance or conditional or special .use permit, a . 21 act.
22 building or construction permit, and other use 22
23 authorization materially affecting coastal resources.. 23 Article 3. Technical-Advisory--Committee-- --- ------
24 0) "Coastal county" means any county which has part 24
25 of the coastal zone within its boundaries. 25 . 24231. " The California Advisory Commission on
26 (k) "Criteria" means those standards developed and 26 Marine and Coastal 'Resources created pursuant to
27 published by the state board to govern planning units in 27 Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 8800) of Division
28 the formulation of coastal elements. 28' 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code shall. act.-as the
29 29 technical advisory committee to the state board.
30 CHAPTER 3. CREATION, MEMBERSHIP AND 30 Nineteen members of the advisory committee shall
31 POWERS OF STATE BOARD -• { 31 constitute a quorum for the purpose of transacting any
32 32 business of the advisory committee.
33 Article 1. Creation and Membership 33 24232. The advisory committee shall, as soon as
34 of State Board • • 34 practicable after the operative date of this division,
35 35. except, however, no later than July 1, 1973, submit to the
36 24201. There is in the Resources Agency the 36 state board a draft of recommended.criteria.
37 California Coastal Resources Board consisting of the 37 24233. The draft of recommended criteria submitted
38 following 15 members appointed by the Governor: ' 38 by the advisory committee shall include components for:
39 (a) Nine members from a list of nominees submitted 39 (a) Public uses or activities under a suggested
40 by the boards of supervisors of coastal counties. There • • 40 schedule of emergency actions for the state or agencies
4W 286014.3 43
14i n.y;l'ii w
SB 860 —20— —13— SB 860
1 not to exceed 10 years, to purchase any private land for • 1 shall be one nominee from each coastal county. In
2 public purposes to carry out the provisions of this , 2 making appointments pursuant to this subdivision, the
3 division. 3 Governor shall, to the extent practicable, seek to appoint
4 24224. In preparing its required studies -the state 4 persons from the field of conservation, engineering,
5 board shall utilize the advice and services of all 5. biological sciences, and ecological sciences.
6 appropriate federal, state, and local agencies. 6 .(b) Six public members.
7 24225. The state board shall appoint an executive • • 7 24202. Each public member ,of the state board
8 director, who shall be charged with administering the 8 appointed pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 24201
9, responsibilities of the state board, and a vice executive 9 shall be a person who, as a result of his training,
10 director who shall be responsible for the planning of the. 10 experience, and attainments, is exceptionally. well
11 water area of the coastal zone. ' 11 qualified to analyze and interpret environmental trends
12 24226. The state board shall do all of the following: 12 and information, to appraise resource uses in the light of
13 (a) Conduct and support research, studies, surveys, 13 the policies.set forth in this division, to be responsive to
14 and inventories necessary to make informed decisions,for 14 the scientific, social, aesthetic, economic, recreational,
15 the proper planning and use of the coastal zone,. 15 and cultural needs of the state, and to formulate and
16 including studies to determine the effect of currents and 16 recommend a state plan to promote the improvement of
17 tides upon the coastal zone. 17 the quality of the coastal zone resources. At least one of
18 (b) Plan for the use of the coastal zone in order that 18 such public - members shall be knowledgeable in
19 the course of future development may be directed to 19 oceanography. The Governor in making such
20 promote economic efficiency, the general welfare, and • • 20 appointments shall seek -to assure that expertise in
21- the orderly.and beneficial conservation and development 21 conservation; recreation, ecological and physical
22 of the coastal zone.. 22 sciences,planning,economics,architecture,engineering,
23 (c) Review, analyze for its effect on the coastal zone, 23 and education will be represented on the state board.
24 and, where necessary, seek to influence, any activity 24 24203. The members of the state board shall be
25 contemplated by any .local, regional, state, or federal 25 appointed not later than January 15, 1973, for terms
26 agencies, or private person or entity outside the coastal 26 commmencing January. 15, 1973. Each member of the
27 .zone which may have a director an indirect influence 27 state board shall have an equal vote.'Each member of the
28 upon the coastal zone or the state plan. 28 state board,shall be `a resident of this state and shall
29 (d) Perform such other functions -as it deems i 29 represent the state at large and not any particular portion
30 necessary to enable orderly development of the coastal 30 thereof.
31 zone in accordance with the state plan. ; 31 24204. All the appointments of the members of the
32 (e) Do any and all other things necessary to carry out _ 32 state board shall be subject to confirmation by the Senate
33 the provisions of this division; including those matters 33 at the next regular or special session of the Legislature;
34 specifically set forth in this division. i 34 however, any such member shall have, and be able to
35.. 24227. On February 1,- 1973, the California 35 exercise, all the powers,duties,and responsibilities as are
36 Comprehensive Ocean Area Plan, -as provided for in 36 prescribed by this division.prior to his confirmation. Such
37 Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 8800) of Division 37 confirmation shall be made not earlier than 30 days and
38 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code,or such elements of 38 not- later than 90 days after such appointment. If any
39 it or research materials collected in preparation for it as 39 .person is not confirmed within such period, a vacancy is'
40 then exist,shall be delivered by the Governor to the state • • 40 created in his office as a member of the state board on the
8M 28W250 64 41W) 2N )M) 46
SB860 —14— — 19— SB860
1 91st day after such appointment. • 1 conducted by any member upon authorization of the
2 24205.. The Governor shall designate the chairman of , 2 state board, and he shall have the powers granted to.the
3 . the state board from the membership of the state board. 3 state board by this section,but any final action of the state
4 The person so designated shall hold the office of 4 board shall be taken by a majority of all the members of .
5 chairman at the pleasure of the Governor. The state 5 the state board at a meeting duly called and held.
6 board shall elect a vice. chairman from among its 6 - All hearings held by the state board or by any member
7 members. The Director of Navigation and Ocean • • 7 thereof shall be open and public.
8 Development shall serve as secretary to the state board, 8 . 24222. The.state board may:
9 but shall not be a voting member. 9 (a) Accept grants, contributions, and appropriations
10 .24206. Each member of the state board shall receive i, 10 from any public agency, private source, or individual for
11 the actual and necessary expenses incurred by him in the 11 the purposes of this division.
12 performance of his official duties, including travel 12 (b) Appoint hearing panels or other committees from
13 expenses, and a compensation of not to exceed one ,� 13 its membership and appoint advisory committees from
14 hundred dollars ($100) for each day of his attending the 14 _ other interested public and private groups,
15 meetings of the state board. When necessary, the 15 (c) Contract for, or employ, any professional services
16 members of the state boar_d may travel.within or outside 16 when it determines that such work or services cannot
17 the state. 17 satisfactorily be performed by its officers and employees.
18 24207. Four members of the state board shall be 18 (d) Sue and be sued in all actions and proceedings and
19 appointed for terms expiring on January 15, 1974. Four 19 in all courts and tribunals of competent jurisdiction to
20 members of the state board shall be appointed for terms • • 20 obtain remedy, including prohibitionary and mandatory
21 expiring on January 15, 1975. Four members of the state 21 injunctions to restrain violations of the provisions of this
22 board shall be appointed for terms expiring on January 22 division. Upon request of the state board, the State
.23 15, 1976. Three members-of-the -state-board- -shall--be---- - -- -= - -----23-Attorney--General- -shall--provide---necessary--legal----
24 appointed for terms expiring on January 15, 1977. 24 representation. The state board shall be deemed a
25 Thereafter all members of the state board shall be 25 department within the meaning of Section 11157 of the
26 appointed for terms of four years. Vacancies_ shall be 26 Government Code.
27 immediately filled by the Governor for the- unexpired 27 (e) Pursue cooperative coastal zone planning and
28 portion of the terms in which they occur. 28 management with the States of Oregon,Washington,and
29 24208. Before entering upon the duties of his office ' 29 Alaska, the Dominion of Canada, and the Republic of
30 each member of the.state board shall execute an official 30 Mexico.
31 bond to the state in the "penal sum of twenty-five s 31 (f) In addition to those specifically required or
32 thousand dollars ($25,000) conditioned upon the faithful 32 authorized by this division, adopt any regulations it
33 performance of his duties. 33 deems reasonable and necessary to carry out the
34 24209. The state board shall maintain its headquarters • • 34 provisions of this division, except, however, that. no
35 at Sacramento and may establish branch offices in such 35 regulations shall be adopted without a prior public
36 parts of the state as the state board deems necessary.The 36 hearing on the proposed regulations in accordance with
37 state board shall hold meetings-at such times and at such 37 Article 4 (commencing with Section 11420) of Chapter
38 places as shall be determined by it or the chairman. The 38 4.5 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government
39 state board shall hold no fewer than four meetings each 39 Code.
40 calendar year.The Governor shall designate the time and • • 40 24223. The state board may contract for an option,for
4PM 2PM170 48
- _ r
SB 860 -- 18— — 15— SB 860
1 within two years prior to-his appointment as a member . • . • 1 place for the first meeting of the state board, but in no
2 . of the state board or employee or any person or 2 event shall it be scheduled for a date later than February
3 -organization with whom he is negotiating or has .any 3 .25, 1973.Eight members of the state board shall constitute
4 arrangement concerning prospective.employment, has a 4 a quorum for the purpose of transacting any business of'
5 financial interest. ' 5 the state board.;
6 Any person who violates any provision of this section is 6 Subject to the provisions of this section, all meetings of
fine
7 guilty of a felony and shall be subject to a-- ne of not to • • 7 the state board shall be covered by the provisions of
8 exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or imprisonment in 8 Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1
9 the state prison for not to exceed two years, or both. 9 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
10 . 24218. The provisions of this article shall not apply if . 10 24210. There is in the state board a subcommittee on
11 the person described therein advises the state board in . 11 revenue and finance. It shall consist of three members
12 advance of the nature and :circumstances of the 12 selected by the chairman,'each of*whom shall have an
13 contemplated action-and makes public a full disclosure of ,� 13 equal vote, and the chairman of the state board shall
14 ' the facts which potentially give.rise to a violation of this 14 appoint the chairman of the subcommittee.
15 article, including any personal financial i interest, and 15 24211. The subcommittee shall consult-with the State
16 obtains from the state board a written determination that 16 Controller, the Director of Finance,and any other expert
17 the interest is not so substantial as to be deemed likely to ' 17 in public finance in carrying out its duties under Section
18 affect the integrity of the services which the state may 18 24212.
19 expect from- such -person or that such contemplated , _19 24212. The subcommittee on revenue and finance
20 action will not otherwise constitute a violation of this 20 shall advise the state-board on methods of current and
21 article. Such determination shall require an affirmative • • 21 future financing of the provisions of this division,
22 vote of two-thirds of the members of the state board. • 22 including, but not limited to, all of the following:
23' 24219. -Notwithstanding .any -other provision of this 23 (a) A means of compensation to a local government
24 article or of any other law;members of the state board or .24' for loss of tax base when restrictions on industrial or
25 any state board who hold the office of county supervisor 25 commercial development are. imposed in the broader
26 or city councilman and who have voted upon a matter in, 26 interest of the rest of the state and the public.
27 their capacity as a county supervisor or city councilman, 27 (b) Provision for compensation of landowners for
28. may vote upon such matter-as, a'member of the state 28 losses in land, values resulting from development
29 ' board, as the*case may be. t 29 restrictions applied to obtain public benefits for the
30 . 30 region as a whole which could-not be justified by the local
31 Article 2.- Powers and Duties �' 31 government normally' having jurisdiction over the
32 32 particular land.
33 . 24221. The state board may hold any hearings and' 33 (c) An estimate of the cost to the state to purchase
34 conduct any investigations in any part of the state • . 34 private property for public urposes in conformance .
35 necessary to carry out the provisions.of this division, and 35 with the provisions *of this division_.
36 for such purposes has the powers conferred upon heads 36 24213. The subcommittee shall meet at the pleasure
37 of departments: of the state by Article 2 (commencing 37 of its chairman. It shall report to .the state board its
38 with Section 11180), Chapter 2 of Part 1 -of Division 3 of 38 findings within six months after the effective date of this
39 Title 2 of the Government Code. 39 division.
40 Any hearing or investigation by the state board may be • • 40 24214. A member of the state board may authorize no
4NW 28W210 W ` - 4HSU 2lifi111W6 50
I
SB 860 — 16--
17= " SB 860
1 more than one voting proxy to represent him at any state • • 1 matter if the chairman of the state board makes a written
2 board meeting which the member cannot attend. The 2 determination in advance that the purposes of this
3 proxy shall be designated in a written-statement which 3 division shall be promoted by such action or appearance
4 shall be filed with the secretary of the state board at any 4 by the former member or employee.
. 5 time prior to the beginning of the meeting. 5 Any person who violates any provision of this section is
6 6 guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of
7 Article 1.5.. Conflicts of Interest • • 7 not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) or
8 8 imprisonment in the county jail for not to exceed one
9 24215.. No person who has been a member or 9 year, or both.
10 employee of the-state board, after his employment or ! 10 24216. No person who is a partner, employer, or
11 term of office has ceased, shall knowingly act as -an 11 employee of a member or employee of the state board
12 attorney, agent, or employee for anyone other than the 12 shall act as an attorney, agent, or employee for anyone
13 state in connection with any judicial or other proceeding, . 13 other than the state in connection with any judicial or
14 hearing, application, request for a ruling, or other 14 other proceeding, hearing, application, request for a
15 determination, contract, claim, controversy, study, plan, 15 ruling, or other determination, contract, claim,
16 or other particular matter in which the state board.is a 16 controversy, study, plan, or other particular matter in
17 party or has a direct and substantial interest and in which 17 which the state board is a party or has a direct and
18 he participated personally and substantially as a member 18 substantial interest and in which such state board
19 or employee, through decision, approval, disapproval, 19 member or employee participates or has participated
20 recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, • . 20 personally and substantially as a state board member or
21 or otherwise, while so employed. 21 employee through decision, approval, disapproval,
22 No person during his term as a member or employee 22 recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation
23 of the state board, or for one year after his membership 23 or otherwise, or which is the subject of his official
24 or employment .with the state board -has ceased, shall 24 responsibility.
25 appear personally before or communicate with the state 25 Any person who violates any provision of this section is
26 board,any court or governmental agency,as an attorney; 26 guilty of a.misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of
27 agent; or employee for anyone other than the state in 27 not to exceed five thousand dollars - ($5,000) or
28 connection with any proceeding,-hearing, application, 28 imprisonment in the county jail for not to exceed one .
29 request for a ruling, or' other determination, contract, 29 year, or both.
30 claim,controversy,study,plan,or other particular matter 30 . 24217. No person who is a member or employee of the
31 in which the state board is a party or has a direct and ;- 31 state board shall participate personally and substantially
32 substantial interest and which was under.his official. 32 as a member of the state board or employee, through
33 responsibility as a member or employee at any time • 33 decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, the
34 within a period of one year prior to the termination of • 34 rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise, in a
35 such responsibility. " 35 judicial or other proceeding,hearing application,request
36 Nothing in this section shall prevent a former member 36 for a ruling, or other determination, contract, claim,
37 or employee of the state board, with outstanding 37 controversy, study, plan, or other particular matter in
38 scientific or technological qualifications from acting as an 38 which, to his knowledge, he, his spouse, minor child,
39 attorney, agent, or employee or appearing personally in 39 partner,or any organization in which he is serving,or has
40 +connection with a particular scientific or technological • • 40 served as officer, director, trustee, partner, or employee
• 1860 2860210 66
4-M +wir� cv
c
tP�•^�F r!•
r dP a
C
m mBab
i -0
P
C,gQFpI
For Your Information
Compliments of
SENATOR DENNIS E. CARPENTER
34th Senatorial District
California Legislature
Sacramento Office: District Office Address
f State Capitol P.O. Bog CC
Sacramento 95814 Irvine, Calif. 92664
i OCK REFERENCE INFORMATION OI GEST
FOR SB 860 (Carpenter)
AUTHORITY: There shall be a fifteen-member state board to monitor permit
approvals and denials to be administered and controlled by
each local planning organization. The development of criteria
will be formulated by each coastal county ' s existing local
government agencies over a one-year period and then submitted
to the state board. A comprehensive standardized state plan
will then be adopted by the state board which will then be
used statewide as the gudelines for permit letting. No re-
gional or "middleman level of government" is used in any phase
of Senator Carpenter' s program.
COASTAL ZONE : The zone definition will be amended to read: No more than
three miles inland or less than one-thousand yards inland
from the mean high tideline with the actual zone boundary
to be established by the local governmental agencies some-
where between those two extremes . This definition of the
coastal zone embodies the philosophy of Senator Carpenter' s
bill which is confidence in the ability of local government
to establish and to govern its own zone area as based on
local geography, population densities , existing permit cri-
teria, and natural resource wealth areas which it alone under-
stands and can distinguish best.
INTERIM While the final state plan is being formulated, each local
PERMITS: entity will continue to issue permits based on existing permit
criteria and environmental-development oriented laws which
already are in existence. There are no moritoriums and no
overlapping, repetitive permit processes.
FINANCING: SB 860 establishes a "finance subcommittee" within the state
board which shall establish, within six months , and there-
after monitor a) a program of tax easing for the property
owner due to development restrictions imposed by the state
plan (option purchase program) , b) methods of reimbursement
to local government for loss of tax base due to permit de-
nials with the resultant tax relief eligibility for the
property owners , c) compensations to the property owner due
to land value losses because of development restrictions , '
and d) the establishment of a cost-price index of privately
owned coastal property as a basis for a fair market value
purchase price should purchase by the state for public use
be necessary.
FUNDING: SB 861, a companion bill , establishes a bond issue to be
approved by the public for $200, 000 , 000. 00 (two hundred
million dollars) which is intended as a START in financing
this type of public undertaking.
+++++++++++++++
f
* I}
Y Y
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT
WASHINGTON
April 25 , 1972
/141
Mr. Paul .C . Jones
City Clerk
Post Office Box 190 2b'
Huntington Beach, California 92648 $ .
Dear Mr. Jones: 0
The President has asked me to thank you for
your letter and accompanying copy of Resolution 3450 of
the City Council of Huntington Beach supporting a
California Coastline Study Plan.
The City Council of Huntington and the EDICT
Foundation are to be commended for their environmental
concerns . Such thoughtful actions will contribute much
toward making this Nation a better place to live.
The Council may be interested to know that the
Congress has authorized the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
to make a comprehensive study of all Federal shorelines
and that the National Park Service has a study underway
of all National lakes and seashores .
It is a pleasure to take note of your action.
You may be assured that we share your concern for the
environment .
Sincerely,
C . D. Ward
Assistant to the Vice President
SACRAMENTO`ADDRESS COMMITTEES
STATE CAPITOL 95914 SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CIVIL
TELEPHONE: (916) 443.5831 DISORDER,CHAIRMAN
EDUCATION
DISTRICT ADDRESS ELECTIONS AND REAPPORTIONMENT
3912 CAMPUS DRIVE DENNIS E. CARPENTER INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL
NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92660 INSTITUTIONS
(714) 557.3200 THIRTY-FOURTH SENATORIAL DISTRICT NATURAL RESOURCES AND
ORANGE COUNTY WILDLIFE
WATER RESOURCES
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE JOINT COMMITTEES
EDUCATIONAL GOALS AND
o EVALUATION
LEGISLATIVE RETIREMENT
.� MASTER PLAN FOR HIGHER
s' EDUCATION
COMMITTEE ON SPECIAL EDUCATION
COMMISSION OF THE CALIFORNIAS
aa•
CA LIFORNIA ADVISORY COMMISSION ON
MARINE AND COASTAL RESOURCES
March 14 , 1972
"ECF
c;'-
Hui !T� iis�.`"_r ^.r.C,'ILIF.
Mr. Paul C. Jones
City Clerk . 35
City of Huntington Beach ` �'� ��
P.O. Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Mr. Jones, I have received your City Council' s Resolution
No. 3450 , dated March 8, 1972 , in which you set forth
your commendation for the EDICT Foundation for develop-
ment of their California coastline study plan.
May I take the opportunity to send to you, as soon as
it is in print, a copy of my own coastline plan so that
your City Councilmen can read it and compare to the EDICT
representation and perhaps lend your support, or non-support,
to that particular issue.
Thank you very much for the benefit of your views and for
calling this study to my attention.
DENNZS E. CARPENTE
Senator, 34th Distri t
DEC:Rmd
JOHN V. TUNNEY 6'L,
CALIFORNIA
', uffob ziafe$ Zenafe
wAT 1.9c72os10
March 22,
2
Paul C. Jones, City Clerk
Post Office Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Dear Mr. Jones:
I have received the information you were kind enough to make
available to me. It was, indeed, thought provoking and it contained
excellent detail which will be of valuable assistance to me as I study
proposals before the Senate dealing with this subject.
I would very much appreciate your keeping me informed in the
future. Your ideas and suggestions will enable me to be more effec-
tive in the Senate.
With kind regards.
Sincere ,
TURTEY
U. S. Senator