Ambrose Masto, M.D., President, Capistrano Beach
Three weeks ago I wrote a letter to the DP Times, which outlined my reasons for opposing the position of many environmental groups and the Coastal Commission concerning protection of our eroding Coastal shores. That article outlined the basic differences between the CCC which favors the concept of “managed retreat,” essentially a doctrine, which promotes the idea of doing little or nothing concerning the rising tides that are threatening homes and structures near the shore, and the Constitutional right that a homeowner has to protect one’s property from destruction and illegal seizure by the government. If you think that I overstated that position, I refer you to AB 1129. This bill will go to the Assembly Conference in the next two weeks. It’s hard to believe that in America the government is attempting to promote this bill to take away a basic right to protect one’s property and unilaterally to impose illegal, burdensome and confiscatory fines if one defends that right to do so.
Beautiful Dana Point, where we all live, has a tremendous amount of coastal property. Not only do the property taxes of these coastal residents as well as your property taxes help to finance the multiple and expensive city development measures, but summer beach rentals supply needed tax revenue and much influx of tourism which is necessary for this city’s fiscal survival. Over the years, we have all noted a diminution of our private rights that are constitutionally guaranteed. Often, some people are demonized as though they are the enemy of the public good. This is extremely evident in AB 1129. Coastal owners pay for their storm protection so that everybody can continue to enjoy our beautiful coast. We all will lose if this bill is enacted, especially Dana Point.
Rhetoric that seeks to destroy a private individual’s inalienable right to protect his property is unjust and wrong.
To submit a letter to the editor, email email@example.com.