FILE ITEM AS EXTRA IS A QUORUM
FILE ITEM.
ONE A. B. SEVEN FORTY SEVEN
ASSEMBLYWOMAN COVER EUROSTAT
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS.
OFFICE.
FEELS A LOT OF WORK FOR A LONG
TIME.
YES MISTER CHAIR IT HAS.
SO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE THIS
MORNING.
MISTER CHAIR AND SENATORS.
ON AB SEVEN FORTY SEVEN CREATES
UNDER THE STATE WATER RESOURCES
CONTROL BOARD AND ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS OFFICE TO REJECT
JUDICATA IMPORTANT WATER RIGHTS
MATTERS.
THIS BILL IS GOOD GOVERNANCE
LEGISLATION THAT ENSURES
CALIFORNIA'S WATER RIGHT.
HOLDERS RECEIVE CONSTITUTIONAL
DUE PROCESS AND FAIRNESS.
THIS BILL IS THE RESULT OF
CONSTRUCTIVE CONVO COLLABORATION
AND COMPROMISE.
WITH THE ADMINISTRATION CREATING
A SOLUTION THAT APPROACH
IMPROVES TRANSPARENCY
ACCOUNTABILITY AND THE OVERALL
FUNCTION OF CALIFORNIA'S WATER
RIGHTS ADMINISTRATION.
A CRITICAL COMPLEX ISSUE
REQUIRING NEUTRALITY AND
EXPERTISE.
AB SEVEN FORTY SEVEN IS A
SUCCESSOR TO AB THREE ONE THREE
WHICH PREVIOUSLY PASSED THIS
COMMITTEE AND OTHERS WITHOUT A
SINGLE NO VOTE.
AND PASSED THE LEGISLATURE WITH
OVERWHELMING BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.
UNFORTUNATELY IT WAS VETOED BY
THE GOVERNOR.
SINCE THEN WE HAVE ENGAGED IN A
COOPERATIVE EFFORT WORKING WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION TO REACH WHAT
WE COLLECTIVELY BELIEVE ISABEL
BENEFITING ALL PARTIES.
CURRENTLY THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD SERVES
AS PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE IN ITS
SEMI A JEW BECAUSE JUDAH KATORI
HEARING AGAINST WATER USERS.
THE WATER BOARD'S CURRENT
HEARING PROCESS APPEARS BIASED
AND FOR WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS
LACKS FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS.
AB SEVEN FORTY SEVEN FIXES.
THE ISSUES OF BIAS AND FAIRNESS
BY CREATING AN ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS OFFICE UNDER THE STATE
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD.
IT WILL DO THE FOLLOWING. ONE
INSURE EXPERT UNBIASED ATTORNEYS
QUALIFIED TO ACT AS HEARING
OFFICERS ARE TASKED WITH
ADJUDICATING WATER RIGHTS
MATTERS. TO REMOVE BUILT IN
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST WHICH
INAPPROPRIATELY CONSOLIDATE
POWER WITHIN THE STATE WATER
BOARD. THREE RESTORES DUE
PROCESS AND FAIRNESS TO
CALIFORNIA'S WATER RIGHTS
MANAGEMENT AND FOR BOLSTERS
CONFIDENCE AMONG WATER RIGHTS
HOLDERS IN THE PROCESS.
UNTIL TWO THOUSAND SIXTEEN THE
WATER BOARD HAD NEVER DECIDED
AGAINST IT STAFF IN ANY
ENFORCEMENT ACTION.
IN MARCH OF THAT YEAR SEVERAL
SMALL CENTRAL VALLEY IRRIGATION
WATER DISTRICT UNDERTOOK AN
UNPRECEDENTED BUT NECESSARY
EFFORT AND SUCCESSFULLY PROVED
TO THE WATER BOARD.
THAT THEIR STAFF AND MEET
SIGNIFICANT ERRORS IN
ALLEGATIONS LEVIED AGAINST THE
DISTRICT.
THAT RULING IN FAVOR OF THE
WATER DISTRICT IS THE LONE
EXCEPTION NOT THE RULE AND GIVEN
THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCESS MENU WATER RIGHTS
HOLDERS FEEL COERCED TO SETTLE
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS INITIATED
BY THE BOARD RATHER THAN PURSUE
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION.
THE STRUCTURE PROPOSED AN EIGHTY
SEVEN FORTY SEVEN HAS A POSSE
POSITIVE PRECEDENT.
MOST STATE AGENCIES CURRENTLY
SEND THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS TO THE STATE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS.
ALLOWING NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY
JUDGES TO FAIRLY HERE AND DECIDE
THEY ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.
THIS PROCESS NOT ONLY FOLLOWS
COMMONSENSE IT EMBODIES THE
CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT ARE
ESSENTIAL TO OUR POLITICAL
SYSTEM AND CONSTITUTION.
THANK YOU AND I ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE TODAY.
THEY GROW MUCH.
IN SUPPORT [inaudible]
MORNING.
LL HAPPEN WESTERN GROWERS
ASSOCIATION AND WE ARE IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
A WE DO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE
FUNDING PIECE --
BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
WE CAN WORK THAT OUT NEXT YEAR
THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR
MEMBERS I'M OUT OF ROBIN WITH
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER
ASSOCIATION WE SUPPORT THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL THAT
WOULD ESTABLISH ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS OFFICE FROM WITH IN THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL
BOARD AS DISCUSSED WE THINK IT
WILL HELP ENSURE.
THAT THESE AYE WATER RIGHTS
MATTERS ARE HEARD FROM AN
IMPARTIAL DECISION MAKER AT THE
WATER BOARD WILL HELP A LOT OF
WORK MORE EFFICIENTLY DISCHARGED
EXISTING ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES.
UNDER THE WATER CODE AS NOTED IN
THE ANALYSIS WE DID PREVIOUSLY
REQUESTED AMENDMENT SPECIFYING A
ROLE FOR THE GENERAL FUND IN
FINANCING THAT ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS OFFICE --
AS WATER RIGHTS FEE HOLDERS KNOW
THOSE FEES HAVE INCREASED
DRAMATICALLY OVER THE PAST
FIFTEEN YEARS BUT WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING ON THAT ISSUE
WITH THE AUTHORED THIS COMMITTEE
AND OTHERS.
IN THE FUTURE --
WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR'S LEADERSHIP ON THIS
IMPORTANT ISSUE WHEN WE ARE
DRIVE OUT TODAY THANK YOU SO
MUCH.
GOOD MORNING CATHY COLOR THE
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
CAROLYN JENSEN WITH KP PUBLIC
AFFAIRS ON BEHALF OF WESTLANDS
WATER DISTRICT AND OR THANK
THANK YOU.
ANY FURTHER SUPPORT ANY
OPPOSITION IS MEASURE
[inaudible]
ANY OPPOSITION.
HEARING AND SEEING NONE
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ON THIS
YOU KNOW THIS OBVIOUSLY WAS
INFORMED BY THE VETO OF THE A.
B. THIRTY THREE THIRTEEN LASHED
YEAR.
ON UNITE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND
THAT THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN
WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION AND LITERALLY THE
REASON FOR THE DELAY.
IT'S NOT ANY LAST MINUTE
MANEUVERING BUT IT'S JUST ARE
SIMPLY TRYING TO FIGHT FULLY AND
FINALLY GET THAT AGREEMENT WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION.
THAT A KIND OF PULLED EVERYBODY
TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH THIS
ALTERNATIVE FOR HEARINGS GIVING
THE WORKLOAD OF THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD SO I
THANK YOU FOR YOUR GOOD WORK ON
THIS AND WE'LL CALL THE
CHALLENGES WE FACE THE BILL'S
BEEN MOVED.
WE HAVE A QUORUM WORKS WE CAN'T
DO IT WE NEED ONLY LOOK PEOPLE.
WELL.
GOOD FAMILY ONE MORE OF HUESO IS
TO PEOPLE AT BY VIRTUE OF HIS
STRENGTH HIS CHARACTER NOT BY
THE SIZE OF WHAT PHYSICAL SIZE.
PHYSICAL SIZE I WAS THINKING
ABOUT MEDIA BATTERED HIM.
FIFTY SO STRUGGLING ABOUT.
THAT OKAY SO WILL.
FOR ASSEMBLY MEMBER IN LIMON
PUBLIC RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL
EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM RELATING
TO THE HOLLISTER RANCH.
THANK YOU CHAIR AND MEMBERS
ASSEMBLY BILL TWENTY FIVE THIRTY
FOUR IS A STATEWIDE BILL WITH
BOTH THE STATE AND DISTRICTS
DISCIPLINE ANAHIT ONE MOMENT TO
ESTABLISH QUORUM CYCLICAL ROLE
CENTERS HERTZBERG.
AIRFORCE RIGHT HERE STONE ALLEN.
NOW IN HERE HUESO.
HUESO HERE JACKSON MCGUIRE.
MONNING IF MONNING HERE STERN
STERN HERE VITA.
BEFORE JUST HOLD ON ONE MORE
SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AB SEVEN
FORTY SEVEN DO PASSED TO
APPROPRIATIONS CYCLICAL THE ROLE
CENTERS HERTZBERG AYE HERTZBERG
AYE STONE.
ALLEN.
ALLEN AYE HUESO.
HUESO AYE JACKSON MCGUIRE MONEY.
MONEY IN AYE STERN STERN AYE
BITE OUT. FIVE PEOPLE WILL OPEN
OKAY GREAT FOR THE ERUPTION
APOLOGIZE THANK YOU VERY DECADE
THINGS HERE.
AHEAD THIS BILL BILL SURPRISE US
BUILT ON THE PREMISE THAT ACCESS
TO OUR PARKS BEACHES AND PUBLIC
RESOURCES SHOULD BE AVAILABLE
FOR EVERYONE TO ENJOY REGARDLESS
OF THEIR ZIP CODE.
THE BILL DOES TWO THINGS ONE IT
CREATES A GRANT PROGRAM IN ORDER
TO INCREASE THE ABILITY OF
UNDERSERVED AT RISK POPULATIONS
TO PARTICIPATE IN OUTDOOR
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION
PROGRAMS.
AND TO THE BILL TAKES AN
IMPORTANT STEP TOWARDS REMOVING
BARRIERS THAT HAVE PREVENTED THE
PUBLIC FROM ACCESSING AND
ENJOINS MY THREE POINT FIVE MILE
STRETCH ON THE COSTA HOLLISTER
RANCH IN SANTA BARBARA COUNTY.
PUBLIC ACCESS AT THE LARGE
SECTION OF THE COAST HAS NOT
BEEN ACHIEVED FOR THE PAST
THIRTY SIX YEARS.
THIS CONTRADICTS THE CLEAR
LEGISLATIVE INTENT THAT
ENVISIONED AND FACE A FEAST
ACCESS PROGRAM AS WELL AS THE
APPROVED IN NINETEEN EIGHTY TWO
ACCESS PLAN.
WE HAVE HEARD FROM THOUSANDS OF
INDIVIDUALS CONCERNED WITH THE
LACK OF COASTAL AXIS AND IT IS
CLEAR THAT CALIFORNIANS WANT THE
STATE TO ASSIST IN REACHING AN
EQUITABLE OUTCOME.
PROVIDING CHILDREN AND EVERYONE
WITH ACCESS TO OUTDOOR
EXPERIENCES IMPROVE THEIR LIVES
AND THE OVERALL WELL BEING OF
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITIES.
I HAVE WITH ME TODAY JENNIFER
LOW KEY LOOK CRAZY AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE STATE LANDS
COMMISSION SUSAN JORDAN FOUNDER
OF THE COASTAL PROTECTION
NETWORK AND MONEY GO THERE BUT
NOT BUILT.
WITH THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL IS HERE TO ANSWER
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.
GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS JENNIFER
LA BECAUSE HE AND THE EXECUTIVE
OFFICER OF THE STATE LANDS
COMMISSION.
ENSURING A PROTECTING PUBLIC
ACCESS TO OUR TIED IN SOME MERCH
LANDS ON OUR COASTAL LANDS IS
ADAM A CORE FOUNDATIONAL
ELEMENTS OF CALIFORNIA OF WHO
CALIFORNIA IS AS A SOVEREIGN
STATE.
THIS --
VALUE OF PUBLIC ACCESS HAS BEEN
RECOMMITTED TO BY THE STATE TIME
AND TIME AGAIN STARTING WITH THE
STATE CONSTITUTION VARIOUS COURT
DECISIONS LAWS REGULATIONS
MISSION AND VALUES STATEMENTS OF
YOUR STATE AGENCIES.
THIS BILL AS IT RELATES TO THE
HOLLISTER RANCH --
ELEMENT MERELY PROVIDES
ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO THE STATE
AGENCIES CHARGED WITH ENHANCING
PUBLIC ACCESS TO OUR COASTLINE.
IT DOES NOT SET PRECEDENT --
IN PACKED THE VARIOUS AGENCIES
DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY IN TERMS
OF EVALUATING WHAT OPTIONS ARE
AVAILABLE TO ENSURING IN
PROTECTING PUBLIC ACCESS AGAIN
THIS BILL MERELY PROVIDES
ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO THE STATE
AGENCIES CHARGED WITH.
ENSURING PUBLIC ACCESS SO THAT
WE CAN --
ARE AGENCIES CAN FULLY EVALUATE
THE OPTIONS.
AND ENSURE PUBLIC ACCESS IS
ACHIEVED WHILE ALSO
ACKNOWLEDGING AND RESPECTING
PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS THANK
YOU AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.
SUSAN JORDAN ON THE DIRECTOR OF
THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL
PROTECTION NETWORK AND I WORK IN
RESIDE IN SANTA BARBARA.
IN NINETEEN SEVENTY SIX THE
COASTAL ACT WAS PASSED IN
NINETEEN SEVENTY NINE INDIVIDUAL
PARCEL OWNERS IN SUBDIVISIONS
LIKE SEA RANCH AND HOLLISTER
RANCH.
COMPLAINED THAT THEY COULD NOT
PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS AS A
CONDITION OF THEIR PERMITS AS
REQUIRED BY THE COASTAL ACT DUE
TO COMMONLY HELD ROADS.
SO THE LEGISLATURE DID THEM A
FAVOR A VERY BIG FAVOR THE
LEGISLATURE CREATED A SPECIAL
SECTION IN THE COASTAL LACK
THREO SIX ONE OH POINT.
THREE THAT ALLOWED INDIVIDUAL
PARCEL OWNERS IN SUBDIVISIONS TO
PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION IN
EXCHANGE FOR PROVIDING AND
FUNDING SUBDIVISION WIDE PUBLIC
ACCESS.
AT NO TIME DID THE LEGISLATURE
CONSIDER EXEMPTING HOLLISTER
RANCH FROM THE PUBLIC ACCESS
REQUIREMENTS OF THE COASTAL ACT
AND THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
AFTER HOLLISTER REFUSED TO
COMPLY WITH RIO --
SIX ONE POINT THREE THE
LEGISLATURE WENT A STEP FURTHER
THE LEGISLATURE GAVE HOLLISTER
RANCH ITS OWN SPECIAL COASTAL
ACT SECTION THREE OH SIX ONE OH
POINT EIGHT THAT SET THE AMOUNT
OF THEIR IN THE FEE.
ALLOWED THEM TO MOVE FORWARD
WITH CONSTRUCTION ON THE
CONDITION THAT SUBDIVISION WIDE
PUBLIC ACCESS WOULD BE PROVIDED
EXPEDITIOUSLY AND IN A TIMELY
MANNER THAT'S THE LANGUAGE IN
THE STATUTE.
HERE WE ARE THIRTY SIX YEARS
LATER AND HOMES IN HOLLISTER
RANCH SELF FOR MANY MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS BUT THE PUBLIC STILL HAS
NO ACCESS AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE
A MODEST RESIDENTS I SAW A
LISTING JUST YESTERDAY. FOR
TWENTY ONE MILLION DOLLARS.
IF YOU RESPECTED MEMBERS OF THE
LEGISLATURE YOUR STAFF EVERYONE
IN THIS ROOM AND PEOPLE POSSIBLY
WATCHING WENT AND DROVE TO
HOLLISTER RANCH TOMORROW YOU
WOULD BE TURNED AWAY AT THE
GUARD HOUSE --
AND THAT'S JUST THE BASIC ISSUE
THE PURPOSE OF AB TWENTY FIVE
THIRTY FOUR IS TO START THE
PROCESS FOR OPENING SUBDIVISION
Y. PUBLIC ACCESS AND HOLLISTER
RANCH.
THE LEGISLATURE ENVISIONED IT
AND REQUIRED IT BACK IN NINETEEN
EIGHTY TWO YES IT IS THIRTY SIX
YEARS LATER BUT I SAY BETTER
LATE THAN NEVER THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
BEFORE WE GO --
TO FURTHER INDIVIDUALS AND
ORGANIZATIONS FOR IS ONE ASK THE
AUTHOR.
BUT A QUESTION BECAUSE PROCESS
MATTERS AND I SPOKE WITH SENATOR
JACKSON WITH RESPECT TO THIS
PROCESS HOPEFULLY SHE ACTION AS
QUESTION I GET A CHANCE TO LOOK
AT IT BEFORE.
BUT YOU KNOW IN THE LAST MEASURE
WE JUST HEARD THIS IS A RESULT
OF A YEAR LONG NEGOTIATION WITH
THE GOVERNOR A WITH THE FINAL
CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE HERE
TODAY.
I GET A LETTER FROM THE THE
CHAIR OF THE COSTA COMMISSION
THAT SAYS THAT I DON'T KNOW THIS
IS A OR THIS ISSUE RECENT NEWS
ARTICLES.
WHAT I WANNA KNOW IS I JUST ON
THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE A THIS
LAST WEEK ON BEHALF OF LORENA
GONZALEZ FLETCHER AND AND AND
ARGUED EXACTLY WHAT YOU'VE
ARGUED?
BUT I WAS ON THE PHONE FOR
PEOPLE COASTAL COMMISSION A
PREVIOUS LIFE SAME THING EVERY
YEAR LAST YEAR WE HAD CENTER
HILLS BILL RELATING TO THE SAME
ISSUE WE JUST DID A GRANTS
PROGRAM ON THIS VERY THING WHEN
YOU MAKE THE POINT THAT WE
CONTINUALLY DO THIS.
WHAT'S THE COMPELLING INTEREST
TODAY AS TO WHY IN THE LAST WEEK
OF THE LEGISLATURE IN A TO GET
DOESN'T MATTER YOU ISSUES IS
AGNOSTIC THIS ABOUT.
THE INTEGRITY OF LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS AND WHY.
IT DAY TO ESTABLISH THESE SUB
ACCOUNTS AND ACCOUNTS FOR THESE
PROGRAMS I DID READ THIS REPORT
THAT AUGUST EIGHTEENTH.
NINETEEN EIGHTY ONE I DID DO MY
HOMEWORK AND MY ADOPTED AMENDED
NINETEEN EIGHTY TWO SENATOR
JACKSON'S WE'RE BOTH RIGHT.
BUT THE POINT IS THAT.
I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE
COMPELLING REASON IS BEFORE THE
WILL THE REAL SAY IN THE OTHER
SIDE INDEPENDENT OF WHAT.
THEIR ARGUMENTS I DON'T CARE I
CARE ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE
AT THIS INSTITUTION.
WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF
CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE ENGAGED
THAT'S A COMPELLING COMPELLING
REASON AND THEY'VE COME FORWARD
IN THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS.
AND THE THINNING GAUGE FOR
THIRTY SIX YEARS BUT WE'VE SEEN
AN UPTICK IN AN OUTCRY IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA OF THE LAST
COUPLE MONTHS AND THAT'S WHY.
I THINK THE THE BECAUSE THE
PROCESS IS IMPORTANT.
AND IT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING
THAT WAS TAKEN LIGHTLY AS FAR AS
INTRODUCING IT WAS NOT SOMETHING
THAT WAS NOT DONE WITH
CONSULTATION I THINK THE REASON
YOU SEE MULTIPLE STATE AGENCIES
HERE.
IS BECAUSE THE TIME IS RIGHT
RIGHT NOW I'M TO MOVE THIS
FORWARD.
I KNOW THAT BUT TO WHAT'S WHAT'S
THE DAMAGE BEGIN AMONG PLEASE
DON'T INTERPRET THEM JUST.
YOU KNOW WHAT TO THE TABLE OF MY
DAD DE ARGUING BACK AND FORTH
WHAT WE DO BECAUSE THEY CAN.
WELL.
WHAT'S THE GOAL FINISH HERE
WHAT'S THE DAMAGE IF THIS
DOESN'T HAPPEN TILL NEXT YEAR
WHAT WHAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT
WE'RE SEEKING TO AVOID BY THIS
URGENCY.
IMPORTANT IT'S CLEAR NO QUESTION
WE ALWAYS OF THE TENSION BUT
KNOWING PEOPLE IN A WHO THINK
THEY OWN THE BEACH AND THEY
DON'T TO HAVE.
IT THEN I THOUGHT AND AND AND
HOP THAT WE SOUGHT WITH SENATOR
HILL WE SOUGHT.
MALIBU SCENE ALL OVER THE STATE
NO QUESTIONS ISSUE.
BUT WHAT'S THE PROBLEM IF
THERE'S A DELAY.
IF THERE'S A DELAY IT WILL ADD
ON TO THE THIRTY SIX YEARS AND
WE DON'T EFFECTIVELY WILL BE A
YEAR WE DON'T HAVE THAT DELAY
WILL BE ANOTHER THIRTY SIX YEARS
THE TIME IS NOW WERE CAPTURING
THE MOMENT FOR CAPTURINGPUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT.
WE HAVE STATE AGENCIES HERE. FOR
LEGISLATORS ALSO INCLUDES THAT
POLICY IS CONTEXTUAL AND THE
CONTEXT IS SET UP FOR THIS BILL
RIGHT NOW.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU [inaudible]
MISTER CHAIR.
I WAS HERE FOR TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE BUT THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL ALSO HAS A STRONG
SUPPORT POSITION ON THIS BILL
DOOM AWARE THAT I WNT YOU TO
STAY HERE BECAUSE I WANT ONE THE
OTHER SIDE COMES UP I WANT YOU
TO MAKE YOUR POINTS ONLY HEAR.
THE INDEPENDENT ARBITER HERE AS
A WHAT THE LAW IS YEAH.
GUY GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIRMAN
OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOR A LOT OF
THEM ARE HERE ON BEHALF NOTHING
ON DOORS WHEN THE PRIMARY SCHOOL
SPONSORS THE MEASURE.
THAT WANT TO MAKE ONE BRIEF
COMMENT IF PATROL INDULGE.
SO IT'S REGARDING THE
OPPOSITION'S LETTER --
WITH THE TALK ABOUT AND BE OUT
THERE EQUITY GRANTS PROGRAM IS
BEING A SHALLOW THAT IS AND YOU
KNOW A PART OF THIS PLOY TO TO
MOVE THIS NOW
IT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT SHALL BE A
DIRECT EQUITY GRANTS PROGRAM
STILL INST IN THIS BILL AND WILL
MOVE FORWARD AND IS A CORE
COMPONENT OF WORK TO ENSURE THAT
WE HAVE.
EQUITABLE ACCESS --
FOR ALL RESIDENTS IN CALIFORNIA
OR OUTDOORS THANK YOU VERY MUCH
AND THANK YOU SIR THANK YOU SO
MUCH.
RESEARCHER MEMBERS DEBATE WITH
THEIR AND WEAKNESSES HITS WE'VE
TO CLIENTS.
CONSTRAINED SUPPORTS THE BILL
THAT WAS ORIGINALLY MOVING
FORWARD ON THE OUTDOOR EDUCATION
AND RESOURCES LEGACY FUND
SUPPORTS THE PUBLIC ACCESS PIECE
OF IT IN SUPPORT.
THEN YOU.
GOOD GOOD MORNING MY NOSE WAS
HELLO GET AS KNOWLEDGE OF THE
SOUL IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THANK
YOU.
JACK AINSWORTH EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE COASTAL
COMMISSION [inaudible]
HERE.
TO PLEASE WRITE ASK YOUR SUPPORT
FOR THIS BILL.
THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT
BILL IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S
PROVIDING.
GRANTS FOR UNDERSERVED
COMMUNITIES WHICH IS A FOCUS OF
OUR COMMISSION AND ALSO THE
OPPORTUNITY AND TO OPEN UP
ACCESS INTO HOLLISTER RANCH
AFTER THIRTY SIX YEARS.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS MISTER CHAIRMAN THANK
YOU VERY MUCH THANKS FOR COMING.
GOOD MORNING VANESSA GONZALEZ ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
PARKS FOUNDATION AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU THE MORNING CAO
JUSTICE CIRCLE CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR RICO
MUSTERED ANOTHER WITH THE TRUST
FOR PUBLIC LAND AND SUPPORT AND
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
THIS BILL THANK YOU. ONE OF THE
MADONNA WITH ITEM ON CALIFORNIAN
STRONG SUPPORT THAT YOU.
IN MORNING MONEY WAS
GRACEFULNESS NEED ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA COUNCIL INTEREST AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU SO MUCH.
TENTATIVE ABBOTT ON FOOD ON
BEHALF OF SURFRIDER FOUNDATION
ZERO WASTE USA SEVENTH
GENERATION ADVISORS CENTER FOR
OCEANIC AWARENESS RESEARCH AND
EDUCATION AND WISH TOYO TOO MUCH
FOUNDATION INC THE THE HOUSE
GETTING THAT [inaudible]
BUT YEAH.
THE MINING THREE SEPARATE IMAGE
ON BEHALF OF HUMAN BAY PLASTIC
POLLUTION COALITION THE FIVE
DRYERS INSTITUTE UPSTREAM AND
WHILE COAST IN SUPPORT.
BUT A GOOD MORNING JUST ALONG
FOR THE NATURAL RESOURCES
DEFENSE COUNCIL IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MORNING MR CHAIRMAN SENATOR EVAN
GOLDBERG WAS STATE CONTROLLER
BUDDY IN SUPPORT [inaudible]
THE FAMOUS.
BUT KNOWS YOU GUYS YEAH HE'S
IMPORTANT GUY IT HAS.
GOES AROUND FOR A LONG TIME
[inaudible]
OKAY OPPOSITION.
YOU GUYS GOTTA GO BUT HE STAND.
PRETTY LITTLE HERE'S TO APPEAR
PEERS THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE.
MY NAME IS STEVE AMERICANA
PARTNER AT THE BROWN STEEN HYATT
LAW FIRM I HAVE REPRESENTED
HOLLISTER RANCH.
FOR AT LEAST THREE DECADES.
AND I'M DEEPLY INVOLVED IN THE
PENDING LITIGATION BETWEEN
HOLLISTER RANCH AND THE COASTAL
COMMISSION IN THE COASTAL
CONSERVANCY.
WE DELIVERED A LETTER TO YOU
YESTERDAY.
EXPLAINING THE REASONS THAT
HOLLISTER RANCH OPPOSES THIS
LEGISLATION IN ITS PRESENT FORM.
AND I SAY OPPOSE.
WITH A PANG OF REGRET.
BECAUSE IN THE ABSENCE OF THE
RECENT CHANGES FROM LAST FRIDAY
NIGHT AND SATURDAY.
AB TWO TWENTY FIVE THIRTY FOUR
WAS A BILL WE WOULD HAVE GLADLY
SUPPORTED.
ASSEMBLY WOMAN AMONG DESERVES
PARTLY KUDOS.
THE LEGISLATION IN ITS PRE
AMENDMENT.
FOR OUR LETTER RAISED ONE KEY
QUESTION WHICH THE CHAIRMAN HAS
ALSO ASKED.
WHAT'S THE RUSH WHAT'S.
THE RUSH BECAUSE I COULD TO THE
CHASE AND NOT SURE OKAY THE HARD
QUESTION IS OKAY IF YOU
SUPPORTED THE REST OF THE
LANGUAGE.
WHAT THE CHANGE IN CREATING THE
SUB ACCOUNTS THESE THESE
ACCOUNTS THAT ARE BEING MADE AT
THE LAST MINUTE?
WHY IS THAT?
WHY DOES THAT CHANGE YOUR
POSITION TO PAY EVERY CAN ARGUE
IT'S LAST MINUTE I HAVE A
DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW BECAUSE
I MY JOB IS TO PROTECT THE
PROCESS?
YOU'RE JUDGED ADVOCATE FOR YOUR
CLIENT BUT SUBSTANTIVELY Y. IS
UP WHO WHO CARES BIG DEAL
DIMINISHED ON Q. AFFLECK'S.
OKAY ANAKIN WHO COULD READ TO
THE ANSWER.
SECRETARY BROWN ADMITTED LATIN A
LOT YEAH.
AND THE ANSWER IS THAT DOESN'T
DON'T SPEAK WITH LATIN.
COME ON I HIT MY WILL YOU DO
YEARS AWAY GO AHEAD.
OKAY.
AND IN THE ANSWER TO
YOUR-QUESTION IS THAT THE BILL.
DOES NOT ONLY CREATE SUB
ACCOUNTS TO WHICH WE HAVE NO
OBJECTION.
IT ALSO CHANGES THE LANGUAGE OF
THE LEGISLATION THAT SUSAN
JORDAN REFER TO THAT WAS ADOPTED
BACK IN THE EARLY EIGHTIES.
LANGUAGE IN THE COASTAL ACT.
WHICH REQUIRED THAT THE OWNERS
OF HOLLISTER RANCH PAY IN IN THE
MOVIE.
THAT IN LIEU FEE HAS BEEN PAID
BY THE OWNERS OF HOLLISTER RANCH
OF BILL THE PROPERTIES IT PAID
FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.
PER PARCEL.
THAT MONEY'S BEEN COLLECTED.
AND PUT INTO A FUND [inaudible]
THE NOW IF I COULD JUST BACK UP
A LITTLE BIT THE LITIGATION.
THAT WE BELIEVE THIS LITTLE
LEGISLATION IS DESIGNED TO
AFFECT.
IS BETWEEN HOLLISTER RANCH IN
THE COASTAL COMMISSION.
THE COASTAL COMMISSION FOR
THIRTY TWO YEARS HAS ASSERTED.
THAT IT OWNS A PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT OVER HOLLISTER RANCH.
WE HAVE BELIEVE FOR THIRTY TWO
YEARS THAT THEY ARE LEGALLY
INCORRECT.
AND WHEN THE COASTAL COMMISSION
CONSERVANCY UNDERTOOK TO TAKE
THAT EASEMENT. FIVE YEARS AGO WE
STARTED A LAWSUIT TO HAVE THE
COURT DECLARE WHETHER OR NOT
THEY HAD THE LEGAL RIGHT TO DO
IT.
THAT LAWSUIT WAS HARD FOUGHT
ENHANCEMENT HARD FOUGHT FOR FIVE
YEARS.
AND AFTER THAT PERIOD OF TIME WE
AND THE COASTAL COMMISSION CAME
TO A SETTLEMENT.
A VERY PROF NEGOTIATED
SETTLEMENT.
UNDER WHICH THE COASTAL
COMMISSION WOULD GIVE UP ITS
CLAIM.
THEY HAVE AN EASEMENT WHICH WE
THOUGHT NEVER HAD ANY VALID
VALIDITY IN THE FIRST PLACE.
AND HOLLISTER RANCH VOLUNTARILY
AGREED TO ALLOW MANAGED PUBLIC
ACCESS TO THIS VERY SENSITIVE
AREA.
THAT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WAS
SIGNED LAST DECEMBER.
AND HIS NOW UNDER ATTACK AND
THIS LEGISLATION IS DESIGNED TO
A AFFECT THAT SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT IT IS UNDER ATTACK.
BY A GROUP OF TRAIL ADVOCATES
AND ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES WHO
BELIEVE THE COASTAL COMMISSION
IN THE COASTAL CONSERVANCY MADE
A TERRIBLE MISTAKE.
BY AGREEING TO SETTLE THE
LITIGATION.
AND THEY'RE TRYING TO UNDO THE
SETTLEMENT.
AND THIS LEGISLATION WE BELIEVE
IS PART OF THE STRATEGY TO PUT A
TORPEDO INTO THAT BOAT.
AND THE WAY THEY DO IT AT AND
THAT I CASE IF YOU BECAUSE WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME IT IN THE
SHORT.
YOUR THE COASTAL COMMISSION
EXECUTRIX YOU JUST USES SUPPORTS
LEGISLATION AND IF HE SUPPORTS
THE THE THE THE LEGISLATION WHY
IS THAT A BIG DEAL IF HE'S IN
THE IF HE'S ALSO PART OF THE
SETTLERS OCTOPI IN HIS OWN
SETTLEMENT [inaudible]
WELL.
THE COASTAL COMMISSION SINCE THE
SETTLEMENT WAS ANNOUNCED HAS
COME UNDER INTENSE POLITICAL
PRESSURE FROM TRAIL ADVOCATES
AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVOCATES.
THEY'RE MEMBERS OF THE COASTAL
COMMISSION WHO WE THINK MAY HAVE
HAD SECOND THOUGHTS ABOUT THE
SETTLEMENT WE DON'T KNOW.
WE DO KNOW THAT THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE TRYING TO UNDO THE
SETTLEMENT ARE NOWIN THE
LAWSUIT AS OF YESTERDAY.
THEIR MOTION TO INTERVENE IN THE
LAWSUIT.
WAS GRANTED.
THEY ARE NOW IN A POSITION TO
DIRECTLY AFFECT THE SETTLEMENT
BY PARTICIPATING IN THE LAWSUIT
[inaudible]
THIS LEGISLATION WOULD
STRENGTHEN THEIR HAND WE BELIEVE
THAT THIS LEGISLATION IF IT'S
ENACTED WILL BE USED BY THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE NOW IN THE
LAWSUIT THE TRAIL ADVOCATES.
IN COURT PARENT TO STRENGTHEN
THEIR ARGUMENT WE THINK THAT
YOU'RE ACTUALLY HANDING THEM
SOME BETTER ARGUMENTS AND THEY
HAVE AT THE MOMENT ANYBODY ELSE
IN OPPOSITION.
ANY OTHER OPPOSITION TO THIS
MEASURE.
QUESTION FROM THE MEMBERS MISTER
HUESO.
A COMMENT --
MISTER CHAIRMAN BECAUSE YEAH I'M
A FORMER COMMISSIONERS WELL ON
THE COAST COMMISSION A KIND OF
FEEL LIKE IT'S A ANOTHER I'M
HERE AT A BETTER.
COAST COMMISSION FROM THE PAST
AND AND I APPRECIATE IT.
YOUR YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHAT'S
THE RUSH.
BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE HAVING
BEEN A PARTY TO THIS PROJECT
YEARS AGO.
AND SEEN THE CURRENT SITUATION
UNCHANGED.
MAKES ME I ASK TO THE OPPONENTS
OF THIS MEASURE WHAT'S THE
DELAY.
THE COAST SELECT IS WHAT IT IS
THE COAST SELECT DISPOSED TO
GUARANTEE EVERYBODY IN THE
STATE.
ACCESS TO THE COAST IT WAS
WRITTEN TO PROVIDE THAT.
IT WAS WRITTENTOOK NOT ONLY
PROTECT THE CLOSE.
BUT ALSO TO GUARANTEE ACCESS TO
EVERYBODY ON THE STATE.
SO WHEN YOU WHEN YOU MAKE AN
ARGUMENT AND SAY WE'RE THE ONLY
ONES THAT CAN PROTECT THE COAST
AS THE THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
I APPRECIATE THAT MY HOPE THAT
YOU DO.
BUT EVERY WHERE ELSE THAT THE
COASTAL A ACT PROVIDES ACCESS TO
PEOPLE OF TO THE COAST.
WE CAN ALSO PROVIDE PROTECTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENT RESOURCES.
SO YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT
CAN PROVIDE THAT FUNCTION THE
STATE AND ITS LAWS AND ITS
PROGRAMS AND THE PEOPLE WHO.
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT AND
MITIGATE FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT
ARE ALSO DOING THAT.
IN THAT REGARD AND SO I SEE THIS
AND THIS IS JUST A STALL TACTIC
THIS IS A VERY.
SOPHISTICATED WAY AROUND LAWS
YOU MAKE WE MAKE LAWS HERE TO
GET PEOPLE.
TO GET TO THE NEXT STEP AND THEY
FIND WAYS TO OPPOSE THAT BECAUSE
OF A VERY.
EXTREMELY NARROW INTEREST.
SO I THINK THE TIME IS NOW IN
FOR ME IT I'M A LITTLE BIT
FRUSTRATED TO BE HERE AND AND
HAVE TO READ ABOUT THIS.
YEARS AFTER WE WE WE SET OUT TO
CREATE A COASTAL TRAIL.
WOULD MEAN.
THERE THERE ARE I MEAN.
WE HAVE BEEN INVESTING IN.
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
TO PUT TOGETHER COASTAL TRAIL
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE
VERY INFLUENTIAL THAT ARE VERY
RICH THAT CONTROL ENORMOUS
SWATHS OF OF LAND THAT ARE
PREVENTING THAT.
AND THEY'RE IN THE WAY OF THE
GREATER GOOD.
AND I I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT
TIME TO ACT AND I HOPE THAT WE
WOULD AND ONE OF THE MOST
COMPELLING REASONS WHY WE SHOULD
ACTORS BECAUSE WE'RE HERE.
AND WE CAN DO THERE'S THAT.
AND THAT'S OUR MOTION IN THERE
ARE NO MORE COMMENTS --
TO TO MOVE THIS BILL AND LOWERED
THE ITEMS IF --
I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO MOTIONS
ARE AT THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE
OPPOSITION YEAH THAT'S
PROPOSITION THIS IS IN
OPPOSITION TO THE OPPOSITE WAS
OKAY.
SO -- I I
STILL AYE AYE STONE TO GET TO
THE BOTTOM OF THE LINE OF
QUESTIONING THAT.
MISTER CHAIRMAN YOU REYES JUST
TRYING TO GET TO THE SUBSTANCE
OF THIS AS OPPOSED TO THE
HISTORY IN.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIVISION AND
ANIMOSITY OVER THE YEARS AND I
KNOW THERE'S A THE PUBLIC OUTCRY
IS VERY REAL --
I DON'T PARTICULARLY LIKE SEEING
--
THIS I SEND THEM.
ATTITUDE THOUGH A I DON'T THINK
IT'S HEALTHY AND I DON'T THINK.
MAKING THE COAST SOME PLACE TO
HAVE CLASS WARFARE IS A GOOD
THING FOR ANYBODY --
I I WILL SAY THAT --
I I GET WERE VOTING ON A BILL
TODAY ABOUT ACCOUNTS RIGHT THE
BILL'S ABOUT ACCOUNTS.
YOU SAID IN HER INTERFERES THE
SETTLEMENT POINT COMEY FURTHER.
CAN YOU CAN YOU PULL THAT THREAD
A LITTLE BIT AND THEN SO THAT'S
ONE LEGAL QUESTION FOR YOU.
YOU DON'T THE OTHER ONE IS MORE
FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE --
BIGGER PENDING LITIGATION GOING
ALL THE WAY UP TO THE
SUPREME-COURT RIGHT NOW --
SEARCH I BELIEVE WAS GRANTED ON
THE MARTIN SPEECH CASE
[inaudible]
SO.
JUST I KNOW A LOT OF THIS IS
SORT OF A TWO STEP HERE OF WHAT
COMES NEXT RIGHT AND SO WE
PASSED THIS BILL HERE TODAY.
THEN NEXT YEAR IT'S SUBJECT TO
APPROPRIATION OR WHATEVER AND
THEN THERE'S ALL THIS PENDING
RISKS ARE JUST.
I KNOW IT'S A BIT OF A
HYPOTHETICAL BUT I SORT OF WANT.
TO GET A SENSE OF HOW HOW THIS
COULD ACTUALLY PLAY ITSELF OUT
BEFORE YOU YOU GO CAN YOU JUST
ARTICULATE LIKE WITH WHAT.
HOW DOES THIS SICK THE ACCOUNT
[inaudible]
QUESTION.
PUTTING MONEY IF THE PUP IF IF
WE WERE TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS
THIS WOULD SORT OF WHAT THOSE
FUNDS WOULD DO WOULD CONTRAVENE
THE SETTLEMENT I I DON'T AND I
DON'T KNOW.
LET YOU AT YOUR OWN MY OWN
QUESTION BUT WHAT SENATOR STERN
I CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION
[inaudible]
THE PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE THE
SETTLEMENT THAT I TALKED ABOUT.
SAY THAT THE SETTLEMENT VIOLATED
TO SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE
COASTAL ACT DEALING WITH IN LIEU
FUNDS THAT'S THEISTS.
THAT'S ONE OF THEIR ESSENTIAL
CLAIMS THEY'RE NOW WHEN THE
LAWSUIT AND THEY'RE GONNA PRESS
THAT CLAIMED TRIED HAVE THE
JUDGE THROW THE SETTLEMENT OUT.
THE LET LEGIT LIVING APPS ARE
THE LEGISLATION.
ON THE TABLE HERE TODAY.
AMENDS THE LANGUAGE OF THOSE
SAME TO STATUTES. FOR HOW
PIERCING THEY'D HAVE TO TAKE
JUDICIAL NOTICE THAT OF THAT
STATUTORY CHANGE AND THEN RE
LITIGATE THE ENTIRE CASE THAT
NO.
I WHO WHO WE BELIEVE THAT THE
CHANGE BEING PROPOSED IN THE
LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU.
WILL BE USED BY THE OPPONENTS OF
THE SETTLEMENT.
THE BOLSTER THEIR CASE
[inaudible]
AT THAT.
BECAUSE THE OPPONENTS CLAIM THAT
THE IN LIEU FEE IN LIEU FEES
THAT HAVE BEEN COLLECTED OVER
THE YEARS CANNOT BE USED.
IN FURTHERANCE OF THE SETTLEMENT
THEY SAY THAT MAKES THE
SETTLEMENT UNLAWFUL.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE BILL BEFORE
YOU TODAY [inaudible]
WE BELIEVE.
IS SUSCEPTIBLE OF BEING USED BY
THEM IN COURT. TO BOLSTER THAT
ARGUMENT WHICH IS WHY THE I
THINK THE LEGISLATURE FOR YEARS
HAS SAID WE'RE NOT GOING TO
CONSIDER LAWS [inaudible]
THAT AFFECT PENDING LITIGATION
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT AN
APPROPRIATE THING FOR THE
LEGISLATURE TO DO.
THAT'S WHAT THIS [inaudible]
THAT WELL.
YEAH I THINK I THINK THAT I MAY
BE A NAIVE. TO SHOW YEAH OKAY.
OKAY ASSIGNED STRONG.
I I THOUGHT PERHAPS I WAS BEING
NAIVE THERE BUT OBJECTIVES GOOD
ITEMS RIGHT YEAH.
BUT THIS BILL WE THINK IS
INTENDED TO WE DO EXACTLY THAT
IT'S INTENDED TO HELP.
THE TRAIL ADVOCATES WHO HAVE NOW
ENTERED THE LITIGATION IN THEIR
ARGUMENT THAT THE SETTLEMENT
SHOULD BE THROWN OUT.
AND AND THEY'RE GOING TO USE IT
IN COURT AND THAT HEARING AS
SOON AS ACCURATELY AS YOU SAID
IN COURT I STILL UNDERSTAND WHY
BECAUSE YOU'RE CITY BECAUSE
GENERATIONAL NOTICE OF SINCE
THIS ISN'T JUST YET YUP.
THAT'S EXACTLY WE HAVEN'T WE
WOULDN'T BE APPROPRIATING FUNDS
IT DOESN'T MATTER OKAY BECAUSE
IT HAS TO DO WITH THE AUTHORIZED
USE OF THE IN LIEU FUNDS.
THE AYE THE IN MOVING
AUTHORIZATION OF THE IN LIEU
FUNDS YOU'RE SAYING IS AN
IMPLICIT IN HIS HER PRECLUSION
ATTORNEY GENERAL ON THEIR PLATE
AT YOUR QUESTION THAT'S WHAT
RECOVERING OUR BECAUSE I DO
THERE IS COMING UP AND WE WANT
TO HEAR WHAT HE HAS GOT TO SAY.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN
SENATOR JUST A PROVIDE CONTENT
IS GOING TO THE CASES INVOLVING
BAY A PARCEL THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY
OWNED BY THE YMCA.
ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF
HOLLISTER RAMP WHERE THERE WAS
AN OFFER TO DEDICATE FOR PUBLIC
ACCESS.
AS THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
MENTION ROPE PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT ON A SMALLER PARCEL.
THAT WASN'T ORIGINALLY PART OF
HOLLISTER RANCH.
THE BIGGER PUBLIC HOT POLICY
ISSUE IS THE EIGHT AND HALF
MILES OF COASTLINE AT HOLLISTER
RANCH FRAZIER OFFICE INVOLVED IN
THIS CASE IT WE ARE REPRESENTING
THE COASTAL COMMISSION AND THE
COUNCIL CONSERVANCY.
AND WE SIGNED OFF ON THE
SETTLEMENT AND ONE THING I WANT
TO POINT OUT WITH REGARD TO THE
SETTLEMENT WHICH I HAVE RIGHT
HERE.
IS THAT IT'S SPECIFICALLY
CONTEMPLATES --
THE THE STATE AGENCIES TAKING
SEPARATE ACTION TO PROVIDE
PUBLIC ACCESS AT HOLLISTER RANCH
BUT THE MONEY SHOT WITH.
OKAY SO.
ENCOURAGING YOU MIND JUST GOING
TO ACTUALLY DOES THIS UP SO --
I GET IT I GET THE URGENCY FROM
THE PUBLIC'S PERSPECTIVE BUT I
AM.
I'M I'M A LITTLE HESITANT ABOUT
THE THERE.
NOT NEW INTERVENOR IN THE
LITIGATION --
PENDING LITIGATION.
YOU DON'T FEEL IT'S GONNA RIO
REOPEN THE LITIGATION.
THE THE ACTUAL UNDERLYING CASE
AND YOU DO FEEL LIKE ELECTION
[inaudible]
LIKE.
THAT THIS WILL ACTUALLY.
YOU HAVE.
TO THAT NOT JUST RENEGOTIATE A
SETTLEMENT AT THE THAT THE
UNDERLYING CASE ITSELF NO IT'S A
SETTLEMENT THE SETTLEMENT HAS
SETTLED THE CASE RIGHT
INTERVENOR CLAIMING THE
SETTLEMENT IS ILLEGAL.
WE BELIEVE JUST LEGISLATION IS
INTENDED TO HELP THE INTERVENOR
IS.
MAKE THEIR ATTACK ON THE
SETTLEMENT.
THAT'S WE THINK THAT IS WHAT WE
BELIEVE THAT'S WAITING TO USE
EVERYONE TIME.
TO WORK I MEAN HOW MUCH TIME
BETWEEN NOW AND SO THE CLEAR THE
NATION.
STEER THE HEARING ON THIS ISSUE
THIS LEGAL ISSUE.
THIS NOVEMBER NINETEENTH.
THE REASON FOR THE RUSH. TO
ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT I ASKED
EARLIER THE REASON FOR THE RUSH
WE BELIEVE IS TO ENACTTHIS BILL.
BEFORE NOVEMBER NINETEENTH
BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN THE
LITIGATION IS GOING TO CONSIDER
THIS QUESTION OF WHAT DOES THE
COAST LACK MEAN.
IN THIS CONTEXT.
THIS BILL AMENDS THE COASTAL
ACT.
IT CHANGES TO SPECIFIC
PROVISIONS OF THE COAST LIFE
HAVING TO DO WITH HOLLISTER
RANCH.
AND WE BELIEVE THAT THAT
AMENDMENT IF IT'S ADOPTED BY THE
AND SIGNED IT'S GOING TO BE USED
IN COURT.
I WOULD JUST SAY AND A AND ALL I
KNOW PIPE DOWN AFTER ATER THIS
BUT IF I'M VOTING AYE ON THIS
LEGISLATION TODAY I DON'T
CONSIDER THAT A VOTE --
TO UNDO THIS SETTLEMENT OR TAKE
ANY INTERVENING ACTION IN THIS
PENDING LITIGATION I CONSIDER
THIS VOTE.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL TO
BE THE MAYOR ESTABLISHMENT OF
SEVEN COUNTS SO TO THE EXTENT OF
THE COURTS EVEN WAY WHATEVER
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY THERE IS IN
THIS PROCESS.
I DON'T CONSIDER THIS TO BE --
SOME CONTRAVENTION OF THE OR A
REINTERPRETATION OF THE COASTAL
ACTING AS IT MAY I SUGGEST THEN
THAT THE LANGUAGE OF IMAGINATIVE
SECTIONS OF THE REPORT THAT THE
PLEADINGS GO AHEAD EXECUTIVE
JACKSON'S THING RIGHT NOW IS
THAT WE DON'T LOOK AT IT COULD
AYE SUCH AS NO.
YOU DON'T LATIMES THIS TIME I
WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR IN THIS.
THE OPPONENTS OF THE BILL ARE
CLAIMINGTHAT THE BILL IS ATTACK
ON THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS
THIS IS FOR THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL.
AND DIRECTLY INTERFERES WITH THE
PENDING LITIGATION OKAY SO THE
QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU IS WHAT
IS.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S LEGAL
OPINION AS TO THIS CLAIM THAT
THE BILL IS AN ATTACK ON THE
SETTLEMENT AND INTERFERES WITH
THE LAWSUIT BETWEEN THE COASTAL
COMMISSION IN THE HOMEOWNERS.
SO GET THE THE THE CASES
INVOLVING A SMALLER PARCEL.
EN AND THE BILL IS DEALING WITH
THE EIGHT HALF MILE COASTLINE.
SO IS THAT YOU BELIEVE IT
INTERFERES SUPPORT DOESN'T
INTERFERE WITH THE THE THE BILL
DOES NOT INTERFERE IT'S
CONSISTENT WITH THE SETTLEMENT
TO SETTLEMENT CONTEMPLATES.
THE STATE TAKING SUBSEQUENT
ACTION POTENTIALLY TO PROVIDE
PRODUCT PUBLIC ACCESS THAT
HOLLISTER RANCH AND HAS
PROVISIONS RELATED TO THAT
ACTION.
MISTER CHAIR FECKLESS TO THAT
POINT [inaudible]
CAN.
THE COASTAL COMMISSION ENTER
INTO A SETTLEMENT.
WHEN ANY PARTICULAR PARTY IN AND
THE COASTLINE THAT DOESN'T DENY?
THAT RESULTS IN DENYING ACCESS
TO THE PUBLIC OF THE COAST
[inaudible]
SO WE WE AS A AS A STATE AGENCY
THE LEGISLATURE --
WE HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL
OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE PUBLIC
ACCESS TO THE COAST.
NOW WE HAVE TO TAKE CASES ON ICQ
OBVIOUSLY CASE BY CASE BASIS AND
AND SOME CASES HAVE STRONG LEGAL
AUTHORITY --
LEGAL BACKING AND SOME DON'T --
IN THIS CASE WE NEGOTIATED OR
THAT OUR CLIENTS NEGOTIATED
AGREEMENT WHICH WE THOUGHT --
BASED ON THE THE SITUATION AND
THE FACTS THE LEGAL THEORY WAS
THAT THE MOST VIABLE WAY FORWARD
--
BUT WE STRONGLY BELIEVE IN THE
CONSTITUTION AND THAT ALL
CALIFORNIANS DESERVE OUR PUBLIC
ACCESS TO THE COASTLINE SO BY
ITS VERY STRUCTURE THE
CONSTITUTION PROTECTS ACCESS TO
THE COAST SO NOTHING THAT WE CAN
DO TODAY.
COULD OVERRIDE THAT OR SH EVEN.
MAKE IT SO THAT THIS --
WHETHER WE THINK [inaudible]
THIS SETTLEMENT [inaudible]
IS WRONG.
OR ILL CONCEIVED.
I MEAN ONE WHERE ANOTHER THAT'LL
BE DECIDED BY THE COURTS BUT
UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF THE
PRINCIPLES OF THE CONSTITUTION
THAT CORRECT [inaudible]
CORRECT [inaudible]
THANK YOU [inaudible]
I DON'T.
I THINK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND I I
CERTAINLY ARE.
SPEC MY COLLEAGUES EXPERIENCE ON
THE COASTAL COMMISSION AND YA
HAVE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE
SOMEBODY HERE FROM THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL THE REPRESENTS THE
COASTAL COMMISSION SO I'M NOT
SURE WE'RE GOING TO GET AN
OBJECTIVE ANSWER HE'S TALKING TO
SAY SOMETHING CONTRARY TO THE
BEST INTERESTS.
THE CLIENT I DON'T I'M NOT A
LAWYER BUT I KNOW ENOUGH BY LAW.
TO BE DANGEROUS --
GUY HE WAS ASK WHETHER NOT THIS
WOULD HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE OF
THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT
WAS --
ENTERTAIN AND SO --
YEAH THAT WHAT WE BUT I BELIEVE
ACCORDING TO THE PROPONENT THAT
IT WILL HAVE AN EFFECT HAS
RETAINS THE GOAL POSTS.
AND GIVING THEM STANDING --
WITHOUT WHICH I THINK THAT THE
OPPONENTS OF THE BILL ON MAKE A
VERY GOOD ARGUMENT THAT THEY
SHOULD BE HEARD AFTER NOVEMBER
AFTER THE COURT HAS HAD ITS --
INTRODUCTION AND AND COME UP
WITH THE DECISION I DON'T THINK
IT SHOULD BE THE LEGISLATURE
THAT --
MANIPULATES A LOSS IN THE BEST
INTERESTS OF PLAINTIFFS --
OR OPPONENTS --
IN IN IN LAWSUITS --
I SEE NO REASON WHY THIS MOVE
FORWARD UNTIL NEXT YEAR TO WE
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE OF THE CORE
PROCESSES WE SHOULD CHANGE THE
THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT UNTIL
THEY THE COURT HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY --
TO MAKERS VISION SO FOR THOSE
REASONS I'M NOT GOING TO BE
SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
TO OKAY.
UNDER YES SIR BRIEFLY ISRAELI AT
THE FLOOR WELL THERE'S A LADDER
OF LAYERS TO THIS DISCUSSION AND
I'M IT'S FASCINATING I JUST WANT
TO I WANT TO ASSOCIATE MYSELF
WITH THE REMARKS OF MY CENTER
STERN --
BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS
IS THIS IS COMPLICATED AND YOU
CAN BE INDEPENDENT AND THE SONG
GOING TO BE UTILIZED MEDICATION
BUT I I THINK THAT --
HOW I'LL BE VOTING FOR THIS FOR
THE SAME REASONS AND THAT CENTER
STERN MENTION AND I ALSO WOULD
WOULD WANT? TO TO SAY THAT THAT
--
YEAH I I I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
THAT THE HON.
HI.
THAT DID IS NOT BE
MISINTERPRETED AND I THINK THAT
CENTER STERN.
PARTICULARLY THOSE REASONS.
A BEFORE HE CLOSES ALSO WANT TO
MAKE A QUICK STATEMENT I WAS IS
AS YOU KNOW FROM TALKING TO
STAFF TO STAFF THE IDEA OF DOING
A DELAYED --
DATE FOR PURPOSES ASKING YOU TO
COMMIT BECAUSE WE CAN AMEND THE
BILL BUT I DON'T THINK I'M GONNA
DO THAT.
I THINK WE MADE A PRETTY GOOD
RECORD HERE TODAY LOOK THERE IS
NO QUESTION.
ACCESS TO THAT BIT TO THE
BEACHES WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS
FOR EVER IT'S IN OUR
CONSTITUTION IT IS IN OUR CORE
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THERE'S
BEEN TENSION BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO
HAVE ACCESS.
YOU KNOW WE SAW IT IN MAY IN IN
IN MISTER STARR'S DISTRICT.
YEARS AGO WE'VE SEEN ALL OVER
THE STATE IT IS A JIM HUGE
PROBLEM.
AS I SAY I JUST STOOD ON THE
FLOOR THE OTHER DAY --
FOR A LIMITED GONZALEZ FLETCHER
MEASURE IN MADE PRECISELY THE
SAME ARGUMENT FOR TO GRANT
PROGRAM THAT EXACTLY APPLIES TO
WHAT YOU'RE DOING NOT AS NARROW.
EVERY YEAR I'VE BEEN HERE THERE
HAS BEEN ARGUE IN BOTH HOUSES ON
EXACTLY THE SAME ISSUE FIGHTING
FOR THIS THIS DOCUMENT DATED
AUGUST EIGHTEENTH NINETEEN
EIGHTY ONE FOR SOME REASON
WASN'T IMPLEMENTED.
PARTLY BECAUSE OF THAT TENSION.
SO I'M NOT GONNA ASK THE DELAY
BECAUSE I THINK THAT I'M GONNA
ASSOCIATE MYSELF WITH SENATOR
STERN AND SENATOR --
ALLEN'S COMMENTS WITH RESPECT TO
THIS ISSUE SO DON'T THINK THERE
IS A NEED BECAUSE I THINK WHAT'S
GONNA HAPPEN IS THAT GONNA TAKE
A TRANSCRIPT OF THIS AND IF THEY
TRY TO USE THIS IN THE
PROCEEDING WILL BE CLEAR.
THE CONDITIONS UPON WHICH WE DID
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.
THAT THAT THE BEACHES ARE
PROTECTED BEEN FOR THE PUBLIC
BUT AT THE SAME TIME.
CAUGHT ON YET I'M JUST CONCERNED
ABOUT THE PROCESS IT IS THAT WE
GO FORWARD SO THAT WE HAVE A
MOTION SENATOR SENATOR AS OTHER
PRINCIPLE COAUTHOR AND IS
SOMEONE IN WHOSE DISTRICTTHIS
IS LOCATED LIKE TO ALSO BE
CLEAR.
AYE OF UNLIKE MY GOOD COLLEAGUE
THE PHARMACIST IS AN ATTORNEY
I'M GOING TO TRUST THAT HE WAS
AN ATTORNEY.
MAKING A REPRESENTATION AT LEAST
AS FAR AS YOU UNDERSTAND AND
READ THE LAW THAT THIS WILL NOT
INTERFERE WITH THE SETTLEMENT
BECAUSE THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
DOES MAKE REFERENCE TO THESE
ADDITIONAL.
ARE ACCESS ISSUES --
I'LL AYE AYE YOU KNOW FOR MAKING
A RECORD THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS NOT
GOING TO IMPACT THAT AND WITH
THAT.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO MOVE THE
BILL REGULATORY MOVE WASN'T
ALREADY MOVED BY A AYE.
CENTER HUESO.
START REMOVED ANYTHING FURTHER I
JUST WANT TO ADD I THINK AT I
WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I
BELIEVE IT IS THE ROLE OF THE
LEGISLATURE TO MOVE FORWARD LAWS
THAT IMPACT CALIFORNIANS IN THE
BEST WAY POSSIBLE AND THIS IS
CONSISTENT WITH THAT.
I THINK YOU'VE HEARD AND THE
DEBATE WHICH IS A THINK
MEANINGFUL BUT THE BILL DOES NOT
UNDER NINE NEGATIVELY UNDERMINE
THAT PENDING SETTLEMENT AND
INSTEAD ADVANCES THE
LEGISLATURE'S LONG STANDING
INTENT.
UP TO PROVIDE A MEANINGFUL PLAN
TO PUBLIC ACCESS ON AT HOLLISTER
RANCH I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT OTHER CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN
THE HOLLISTER RANCH ASSOCIATION
--
AND MYSELF EXIST WE WERE ON THE
PHONE YESTERDAY MORNING
DISCUSSING THIS SO IN NO WAY
DOES THIS LEGISLATION MOVING
FORWARD MEAN THAT WE ARE NOT
GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK
TOGETHER. THREE OKAY THE MOTION
IS TO A RETURN THE MEASURE TO
THE SENATE FLOOR FOR
CONSIDERATION SECTOR OF MORAL
CENTERS HERTZBERG BY HERTZBERG
AYE STONE STONE NO ALLEN.
ALLEN AYE HUESO HUESO AYE
JACKSON JACKSON AYE MCGUIRE.
MCGUIRE AYE MONEY MONNING AYE
STERN STERN AYE VITA.
BIDAK NO. TWO SEVENTY TWO MUNICH
GERMANY VERY MUCH WITH NO WAS
STOLEN ALONG CALMLY SAID ABOUT
COLLEGE SCREWS ME LOSING A BILL
ON CALL I APOLOGIZE.
IS FILE ITEM NUMBER.
ONE A. B. SEVEN FORTY SEVEN SIX
JOB THE ROLE STARTED GOING AGAIN
SENATE CENTER STONE [inaudible]
SENATE STONE.
JACKSON A JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE MCGUIRE MCGUIRE I
FIND OUT.
BY THAT I WAS SO SUPPORTIVE OF
US AND THAT'S ALLOCATE ZERO
THAT'S OUT AGES AGO MEETING ANY
FURTHER MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
KEVIN BABY [inaudible]
RIGHT