A couple of months ago (May 2002) CNPS filed a lawsuit with the Sierra Club and Wetlands Action Network against the California Coastal Commission, City of Oxnard, and North Shore at Mandalay over the Commission’s decision to approve Oxnard’s amendment to their Local Coastal Plan (LCP) to allow the North Shore development to be built.
We contend that the Commission violated policies under the Coastal Act designed
to protect coastal resources, including coastal dunes, wetlands, and sensitive
species habitats. The Commissioners were heavily lobbied by the City
politicians and North Shore developers and largely ignored Commission staff
and environmental organizations recommendations to protect coastal resources.
Staff recommended a 100-foot buffer between sensitive habitats and the development;
however, the Commissioners cut that in half after the developer complained.
Since CNPS believes that the Commission violated the Coastal Act by voting
to allow destruction of sensitive coastal habitats to allow a housing development,
we chose to challenge that decision, which could only be challenged through
the courts. We have had one settlement meeting with all the parties
to the suit; however, no agreements have been reached to date to facilitate
settlement of our concerns: violation of Coastal Act policies. - David
Magney
January 2003
CNPS’s lawsuit against the Coastal Commission’s vote to override it’s own resource protection policies to facilitate an exclusive housing development (in Oxnard – the North Shore development) will be heard in early January. The Sierra Club and Wetlands Action Network join CNPS in requesting the court to overturn the Commission’s decision. The housing development project will impact coastal wetlands, coastal dune scrub, and habitat of rare plant and wildlife species, including the endangered Ventura Marsh Milkvetch, Silvery Legless Lizard, San Diego Coast Horned Lizard, and other species.
June 2003
Ventura County Superior
Court Judge Kent M. Kellegrew made his decision on our complaint regarding
the Coastal Commission’s decision to ignore Coastal Act policies regarding
prohibition of permanent onsite destruction of Environmentally Sensitive
Habitats (ESHAs), such as wetlands, at the North Shore development site
in Oxnard. The judge decided in
favor of the Coastal Commission, explaining that conflicting California
laws allowed the Commission to “balance” competing/conflicting policies. While we agree that under certain circumstances
balancing between conflicting policies is allowed, we disagree with how
it was used in this case. One
of the biggest problems with the judge’s decision is that he bought hook
and sinker the City of Oxnard’s/North Shore’s claim that Oxnard’s drinking
water supply was at risk of contamination from the oil wastes that had
been dumped at the North Shore site.
This is simply false! There
is no risk to drinking water at all, period!
Nothing has migrated offsite, and the top two groundwater aquifers
are never used for domestic, or agricultural purposes anywhere near the
site. CNPS is now considering appealing this bad
judgment.