Panel Failed Job on Hellman Vote

* Re “Approval for Hellman Doesn’t End Fight,” Sept. 13:

I have no doubt that if developers knew of a way to drain the Pacific Ocean to create more space along the coast for their housing projects, they would be seeking a vote of approval from the Coastal Commission to do so. And going by their vote in favor of the Hellman Ranch project and its golf course, the majority of the commission would probably grant approval to the developers as long as they agreed to create some kind of special beach park to accompany the houses in the wake of the ocean’s recession.

Trade-offs should never be made that allow developers to destroy one part of nature in exchange for saving another part. There are certain open spaces which need to remain untouched by development, even if they are currently in a degraded state. The classification of “degraded” should never be used as an excuse to irrevocably alter something that was formed by the interwoven hands of God and nature and was undoubtedly made to become degraded by the hands of man at some point along the way. Instead, every acre of the Seal Beach wetlands should be preserved and restored to its original good condition.

I am impressed and encouraged by environmental groups that are positioning themselves to continue fighting against the Hellman project and the damaging precedent it would set. But the fact cannot be overlooked that none of this legal wrangling would be necessary if all the panel members in the Coastal Commission had simply done their jobs by upholding the Coastal Act and voting against the ardent self-interest of the developers.

M.L. HERRING

Orange