PLF comments on Coastal Commission's sea-level rise scheme
For the last several years, the California Coastal Commission has been preparing a document called the Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance. This document is intended to compel local governments and the CCC itself to take into account computer projections on potential sea level rise when making decisions about coastal property in California. It encourages land use permitting agencies to adopt certain sea level rise “adaptation” strategies, such as limiting seawalls, imposing extensive conditions on any such protective devices, requiring deep building “set backs,” and removing structures away from the coast.
This last Wednesday, June 8, 2015, the CCC considered the latest draft of this policy document. PLF’s Coastal Land Rights Project was there to give the agency some feedback – from a property rights perspective. The message? There is no sea-level rise exception to the United States Constitution, or to the property rights which it protects. A video of PLF’s comments can be found here at about 2:35:50 into the recording.
What to read next
ReasonTV released a new video that showcases our client Peggy Fontenot and her case against the Attorney General of Oklahoma. If you’ll recall, last year, Oklahoma enacted a new law that limits who may market art as American Indian-made.
Justice Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court endured the partisan gauntlet of the Senate hearing on his nomination to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The hearing only confirmed what has been known for some time: Justice Willett will serve the federal judiciary with integrity, wit, and commitment.
Earlier this year, the City of Seattle shocked the people of Washington—indeed, many across the nation—when it decided to impose an income tax on so-called “high-earners” in direct defiance of the Washington State Supreme Court, which has repeatedly held that the state constitution’s uniformity clause prohibits targeted income taxes.
PLF and several allied organizations submitted a petition for rule-making to the federal agencies that administer the Endangered Species Act. The petition asks the agencies to define “species” and “subspecies,” terms which, although critical to the Act’s operation, are left undefined by statute and regulation.
Next Friday, I’ll be presenting oral argument in the Ninth Circuit in Cedar Point Nursery v. Gould. The case involves a challenge to the ALRB’s access regulation, which allows union organizers to use the private property of agricultural employers to solicit potential union members.