Protecting the Coast--Always

Gov. George Deukmejian has his head in the sand when he talks about abolishing the California Coastal Commission.

The subject came up at the governor’s press conference on Tuesday, when Deukmejian was asked about the nearly $2-million reduction that he proposed for the commission in his 1985-86 budget, which would eliminate 16 staff positions.

Deukmejian argued that the commission had gone “far beyond what it was originally intended to do” when created by Proposition 20, an initiative statute approved at the 1972 election. The governor has the notion that once the commission has approved local coastal-protection plans “there would no longer be a necessity for the Coastal Commission.”

The original commission was scheduled to expire after it completed the statewide coastal plan in 1975, but was made permanent in a law enacted by the Legislature in 1976 and was continued under 1981 amendments that at the same time abolished regional commissions.

So far, 123 local plans have been submitted to the commission and 104 have been approved--although some with suggested changes. While the governor blames the commission for dragging out the process, the major delays have come in the development of the plans at the local level, not in the commission’s review of them.

The governor seems to believe that once the local plans have been adopted there will be nothing left for a state commission to do. But the development of the coastal plan is only the first step in a continuing process. The commission is required to oversee the implementation of the local plans through zoning ordinances. The commission also is needed to hear appeals of actions taken under the local plans, and to rule on amendments to plans.

The local plans come up for review every five years. Without a commission there would be no one to see that they are kept up to date with the intent of the state law.

Further, the commission has authority under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act to review federal projects, such as offshore oil development, that have a potential effect on the state coastline or submerged lands. Given the federal government’s zeal to lease the California coastline for oil and gas development, this would seem to be a particularly inopportune time to abandon such authority.

The adoption of a local plan does not mean that the portion of the coast covered by that plan is guaranteed protection for all time. Political winds can shift quickly, particularly at the local level. One commission staff member said, “My main fear is that there are as many decisions out there waiting to be un-made (at the local level) as there are that have been made.”

California needs a strong state coastal commission to make certain that attempts to un-make decisions do not leave its shoreline unprotected.