Comments on: Coastal Commission Holds Sacto Lovefest

By: Fire The Coastal Commission, Not Just The Boss | MyGovCost | Government Cost Calculator

Wed, 02 Mar 2016 06:55:56 +0000

[…] corruption. On Douglas’ watch commissioner Mark Nathanson served five years for bribery and Douglas is on record that more of that was going on. The CCC has made the coast a millionaires’ enclave and driven development into hotter inland […]

By: Paul Beard

Paul Beard — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:13:07 +0000

Nava repeats an irrelevancy that I unfortunately did not have the chance to correct at the conference.

No one denies that the Commission approves most permit applications. They clearly do, thanks in large part to excellent court precedents that force it to allow *some* development on individuals’ lands. But those approvals are severely conditioned on waivers of rights and the relinquishment of money or interests in real property (e.g., open space). Unfortunately, because they either lack an appreciation of their rights or the money/will to fight, most property owners feel compelled to accept a conditioned permit. The Commission cleverly uses the permit process to extort things from property owners it otherwise couldn’t—and it’s the permit conditions (not outright permit denials) that are the subject of the vast majority of the litigation against the agency.

By: pedronava

pedronava — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:34:27 +0000

Fascinating to see how my remarks were “cherry-picked”. Why no mention of facts I stated, for instance, that since 1997 to the present, 87% of all regular Coastal Commission regular calendar items are approved and only 4% are denied. 9% are withdrawn.

You also failed to print that from 1997 to the present there were 23,194 Local Coastal Development Permits issued and less than 5% for a total of 65, were denied. Hardly seems to be an environmental regulator run amok.

Oh and by the way, the Sierra Club has been preparing a “Report Card” on Commission votes for almost 2 decades, the the average earned by the Commission is 51%. Again a far cry from how the Commission has been demonized by those who stand to gain by spreading hysteria and fear.

By: centralcoast

centralcoast — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:22:56 +0000

Hardly a Lovefest. The author is so biased against Peter Douglas and the Coastal Commission, this is not reporting.
The impact of the Coastal Act on private property rights vs public good has never been a rational discussion and this reporter and Ventura Capitalist have not helped the public debate.
I agree with Secretary Laird if we voted on it today, knowing what we now know we would still pass the Coastal Act.
The stakes and costs are higher than 40 years ago. We must recommit to saving this dynamic and limited natural resource.
Climate change and the current economy can be opportunities to find out if we will put our money/time/talent where our mouths are OR NOT.

By: Lloyd Billingsley

Lloyd Billingsley — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:03:12 +0000

Per Sarah Christie’s comment, CalWatchdog watches waste, fraud and abuse in state government, stories such as corrupt UC Davis official Jennifer Beeman, jailed for embezzlement. Coastal Commissioner Mark Nathanson was jailed for bribery but Mr. Douglas did not name him. Neither did he name one or two others he said he thought worthy of prison. If you know who they are, please pass along and CalWatchdog will report.

By: Ventura Capitalist

Ventura Capitalist — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:37:17 +0000

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

James Madison
The Federalist No. 47
January 30, 1788

By: 4oceans

4oceans — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:15:24 +0000

No one at the conference ‘challenged’ the notion of climate change because anyone even remotely familiar with the California coast can easily see that it is a dynamic environment undergoing radical changes right now, at this instant. Everyone agrees that we must begin to plan, adapt and strategize for sea rise, which will likely be at least 4.5-ft over the next 80 years (compared to just 8-inches in the last century). Rather than put all our natural resources, public infrastructure and private property at risk, why not plan ahead??

By: Sarah Christie

Sarah Christie — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:55:09 +0000

Were we at the same conference? Peter Douglas’ response to Mr. Schmitz was during the Q&A when he was called upon by moderator Bill McGavern. He came “out of his seat” because people in the audience called for him to stand so that they could hear him better. This sort of slanted reporting makes his point about how the media does such a poor job of covering the Coastal Commission, oversimplifies issues and manufactures confusion. As for those unanswered questions, the panel format limits the amount of information one can convey. The Commission’s budget and staffing levels are readily available, as well as economic studies about the value of coastal recreation, open space and public access and projections about sea level rise. What, exactly, is the watchdog watching?