Over 86 handwritten (some illustrated), individually written letters to the California Coastal Commission were deep-sixed in a file drawer and deliberately mischaracterized as “form letters” when it suited the CCC to rule in favor of destroying the one accessible recreational resource in a park acquired with public funds by its “sister” agency, the Santa Monica Mts. Conservancy. On the other hand two letters by jealous neighbors “required” the CCC to table and hear their challenge to the placement of a new manufactured house in a trailer park.

The CCC rules as it wishes, violates the Brown Act that requires transparency, and ignores evidence submitted by citizens before it rules–ignorantly and deliberately on public issues.

Sorry, but sometimes we just have to admit that Santa Claus does not exist and that our cherished environmental heroes are backstabbers with a corrupt agenda.
The CCC has no monitor except us, and ignores us with impunity. It is unelected and its tenure lasts longer than that of any governor or elected official.

My comment regarding the California Coastal Commission engaging in degradation of the environment still stands. There are many ways to degrade the environment - some have direct impact and are visible, others indirect and apparent years after the fact.

Yes, the California Coastal Commission’s job is supposed to be to ensure development is consistent with the Coastal Act. But given the inherent dysfunctionality of the commission’s structure and process… coupled with the fact all decisions boil down to one person’s yea or nay - that consistency, I have documented in the film, is more often than not open to interpretation - usually Mr. Douglas’, and to the determent of many people, and the environment in California.

However, to suggest that the State Lands Commission or the California Coastal Commission engage in similar practices is absolutely looney. For one, it was the State Lands Commission that stopped the deal in the first place. Second, a member of the California Coastal Commission organized what little local opposition there was to the deal.

Asserting that the Coastal Commission “engages in environmental degradation in exchange for [an easement] is way off the mark. That statement only serves to illustrate your complete failure to understand the authority and obligations of the Coastal Commission.

The Commission’s job is to ensure that development is consistent with the Coastal Act. In large part that means protecting access to the beach and protecting natural resources in the Coastal Zone. If a property owner wants to develop land and that development closes access to the coast, the commission is obligated to act to maintain or restore that access. Obtaining an easement is but one way to maintain or restore that access so you and other Californians can continue to access and enjoy the California Coast.