Survey reveals mixed opinion of commission

Paul Clinton

The city’s planning director said she sides with a research

institute study’s conclusion that nearly half of city planners have a

“negative” perception of the California Coastal Commission.

Patricia Temple, who also partook in the survey, said she agreed

with the contention in the survey, completed in April, that the

statewide coastal regulator is often heavy-handed and understaffed in

dealings with the city.

“There’s very little sensitivity to the needs of local

[planners],” Temple said. “They tend to view local staffs with a

great level of suspicion. [They] don’t trust us.”

The city is now completing a local coastal program, which must be

submitted to the commission by mid-2003. The plan would create

unified coastal development standards along the city’s oceanfront

that are in place along much of the state’s coastline. Newport Beach

and Malibu are two of only a handful of coastal cities without a

plan.

The report, which was completed by Malibu-based Insite Research,

was discounted by a coastal commission spokeswoman as slanted.

“The poll is what is known in political campaigns as a push poll,

designed to elicit a negative response,” said Sarah Christie, the

commission’s legislative director. “Therefore, we don’t give the poll

a high degree of credibility.”

During a series of telephone interviews, 37 city planners were

asked their opinion of the commission. About 24% responded that it

was “strong negative” and 18% said it was “light negative.” On the

other side of the coin, 19% said they were “strong positive” about

the agency and 24% said they were “light positive.” About 14% said

they were neutral.

Christie pointed out that the majority of the respondents said

their interaction with the commission was positive, at 43% compared

with 42% falling on the negative side.

The margin for error on the survey was 11%, which is about three

times higher than most polls.

Among the claims in the report were that planners said the agency

interprets the Coastal Act of 1972 inconsistently and is often “going

beyond the authority granted them.”

Proposition 20, passed by voters in 1972, created the commission.

Christie said she disagreed with that contention and challenged

Newport Beach planners to take matters into their own hands by

crafting the coastal plan.

Rodolphe Streichenberger, whose battles with the agency culminated

in a state judge agreeing with his claim that the commission is

unconstitutional, said he was not surprised by the findings.

“They want to govern the cities,” Streichenberger said. “They

don’t recognize the self-governance of cities.”

Commissioners ordered Streichenberger to remove a man-made reef --

made up of tires, plastic bottles and other man-made items -- he

installed in the waters near the Balboa Pier.

Streichenberger’s victory with the state judge, in April 2001,

came four years after he first installed the reef.

Environmentalist Susan Jordan, who founded the League for Coastal

Protection, said the Coastal Act was created to prevent

Streichenberger and others like him from putting man-made items in

ocean waters.

“He’s the poster child for why we need the coastal commission,”

Jordan said. “He has created a garbage dump on the ocean floor.”