California set to seize 1,100 miles of coastline

[Swordsmyth]

The California Coastal Commission is set to empower local government to take thousands of properties through eminent domain along 1,100 miles of coastline to prepare for sea level rise.
Despite California being battered by 4-8 inches (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/01/15/california-mudslides-heavy-rains-threaten-areas-burned-wildfires/2578542002/) of torrential rain and flooding from an El Niño weather cycle, E&E News reported (http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060109045) that the State of California in late January will authorize eminent domain authority for local jurisdictions to implement a "managed retreat" policy that will allow taking and demolishing coastal homes and businesses.
The California Coastal Commission circulated an 87-page "Draft Residential Adaptation Guidance (https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/assets/climate/slr/vulnerability/residential/RevisedDraftResidentialAdaptationGuidance.pdf)" in March regarding how communities could proactively address sea level rise impacts through Local Coastal Programs (LCPs). Although the CCC draft did not adopt specific retreat guidance, the California Special Districts magazine expects that the CCC will predict a sea level rise of 2.5-5.5 feet (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13389/sea-level-rise-for-the-coasts-of-california-oregon-and-washington) and the elimination of 31-67 percent of Southern California beaches by the year 2100.
CCC retreat guidance is expected to also entail dismantling and relocating of dozens of wastewater treatment and power plants; 250 miles of highway; 1,500 miles of roads; and 110 miles of railways, according to the latest California Special Districts magazine (http://www.nossaman.com/jerskine).


The CCC does not have the direct power to condemn properties, but under the California Coastal Act (https://www.coastal.ca.gov/coastact.pdf), it can task the local cities and counties with coastal zone land use rules for maintaining minimum beach width. The CCC has enormous practical power, since directive language must be recorded in property deeds and disclosed to future buyers.
CCC proposed guidance for the first time would prioritize local entities condemning and taking private homes and businesses to protect shoreline wildlife from "coastal squeeze (https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/assets/climate/slr/vulnerability/residential/RevisedDraftResidentialAdaptationGuidance.pdf)" caused by retaining walls and other fixed development preventing "landward migration of the beach that would have otherwise occurred."
Nossaman's Eminent Domain and Valuation Group (http://www.nossaman.com/eminentdomain), which provides lawyers for valuation disputes between public agencies, landowners, and businesses, stated that California eminent domain "regulatory taking" requires paying owners fair compensation based on:

(1) the economic impact of the regulation on the claimant; (2) the extent to which the regulation has interfered with the claimant's reasonable, distinct investment-backed expectations; and (3) the character of the government action.
But Nossaman warned that CCC issuing retreat guidance has the potential to negatively impact coastal property values due to "precondemnation damages" associated with the risk that properties could be taken through eminent domain any time over the next 80 years.
Many coastal homeowners have scoffed at the idea that California's cities that suffer from huge indebtedness and underfunded pension liabilities will have the financial capability to pay the big bucks to take many coastal properties under eminent domain.
But Nossaman expects that the California Coastal Commission's guidance will allow local jurisdictions (http://www.californiaeminentdomainreport.com/) to fund the cost of using eminent domain to manage their retreat by "buying the homes and then renting them out until they're damaged."


More at: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/california_set_to_seize_1100_miles_of_coastline.ht ml

[Anti Federalist]

Good...hope they take it all.

[PAF]

More government, sustainable development, “for the greater good”.

Anti Federalist any word about when your town is next?

Last year they forced one of the members of our liberty group out who lived less than a mile from me. The stream in her back yard was 1 or 2 hundred feet from the house, she could no longer afford the legal battles so she and her husband said f%ck it.

[Itsback]

Donald Trump: In California, voter fraud is rampant


58,000 non-citizens voted in Texas, with 95,000 non-citizens registered to vote. These numbers are just the tip of the iceberg. All over the country, especially in California, voter fraud is rampant. Must be stopped. Strong voter ID!


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1089513936435716096)

[shakey1]

Weren't they supposed to be under water by now?

[Origanalist]

Many coastal homeowners have scoffed at the idea that California's cities that suffer from huge indebtedness and underfunded pension liabilities will have the financial capability to pay the big bucks to take many coastal properties under eminent domain.
But Nossaman expects that the California Coastal Commission's guidance will allow local jurisdictions to fund the cost of using eminent domain to manage their retreat by "buying the homes and then renting them out until they're damaged."

No, they will just get federal disaster relief and rebuild. Just like the private owners did.

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2018/06/Gavin-Newsom-smirk-Associated-Press.jpg

[dean.engelhardt]

buying the homes and then renting them out until they're damaged." :eek:

[Anti Globalist]

Calexit.

[dannno]

the California Special Districts magazine expects that the CCC will predict a sea level rise of 2.5-5.5 feet (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13389/sea-level-rise-for-the-coasts-of-california-oregon-and-washington)



The sea level has risen approximately 4-8 inches in the last 100 years...

At the current rate, it would rise about another foot in the next 100 years.

The whole idea we need to prepare for 3-6 feet sea level rise in the next 100 years is really not justified imo.. and I have even read locally that some 'experts' and governments expect it to rise that much in the next 30 years!!

[Anti Federalist]

More government, sustainable development, “for the greater good”.

Anti Federalist any word about when your town is next?

Last year they forced one of the members of our liberty group out who lived less than a mile from me. The stream in her back yard was 1 or 2 hundred feet from the house, she could no longer afford the legal battles so she and her husband said f%ck it.

My response was snark.

I've been fighting the eminent domain battle for over 20 years now.

I played a small part in having NH adopt a constitutional amendment banning takings for private use.

I was damn near arrested in New London protesting the Kelo decision.

Anybody who knows me, knows that is a smart ass remark, directed at the people of California.

You elected the Marxist Uni-Party with Super - Duper majorities at all levels of government: you welcomed socialist migrants by the millions, you gave them the ability to vote locally, you enabled agencies with supernumary powers of control and what's more, you foisted all this shit off on the rest of us in the states that have not yet lost their minds or succumbed to the migrant hordes.

Now I'm supposed to care that bunch of wealthy Marxists are going to lose their beach houses to government seizures in the name of "climate change".

Hahahahahahahahhahahah...no.

Fuck them.

Hope they end up living in shit and needles in a bum camp in San Fran.

To any liberty minded brothers stuck behind enemy lines in Occupied Kalifornia, my door is open, I will personally help you re-locate, before it's too late.

[Swordsmyth]

More government, sustainable development, “for the greater good”.

@Anti Federalist (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=3169) any word about when your town is next?

Last year they forced one of the members of our liberty group out who lived less than a mile from me. The stream in her back yard was 1 or 2 hundred feet from the house, she could no longer afford the legal battles so she and her husband said f%ck it.
Is that all you have to say about it?

Where is the passion you had about eminent domain when it was going to be used to secure the border?
Or is it the securing the border part that gets you so bent out of shape and the eminent domain is just an excuse to object?

[PAF]

My response was snark.

I've been fighting the eminent domain battle for over 20 years now.

I played a small part in having NH adopt a constitutional amendment banning takings for private use.

I was damn near arrested in New London protesting the Kelo decision.

Anybody who knows me, knows that is a smart ass remark, directed at the people of California.

You elected the Marxist Uni-Party with Super - Duper majorities at all levels of government: you welcomed socialist migrants by the millions, you gave them the ability to vote locally, you enabled agencies with supernumary powers of control and what's more, you foisted all this $#@! off on the rest of us in the states that have not yet lost their minds or succumbed to the migrant hordes.

Now I'm supposed to care that bunch of wealthy Marxists are going to lose their beach houses to government seizures in the name of "climate change".

Hahahahahahahahhahahah...no.

$#@! them.

Hope they end up living in $#@! and needles in a bum camp in San Fran.

To any liberty minded brothers stuck behind enemy lines in Occupied Kalifornia, my door is open, I will personally help you re-locate, before it's too late.


I’m at that point. One thing I teach my offspring: you sleep in the bed you make. What I take heart in is folks who understand and hold natural rights, work hard, actual producers, I’ll stand with my brethren.

Cali is another tough one. I lived in LA for a couple of years. Yeah there’s slums and deadbeats, but there’s a lot of hard workers too. The wealthy still need workers, when those start going belly-up it just means more in Section 8.

Catch 22. I’m just biding my time.

[PAF]

Is that all you have to say about it?

Where is the passion you had about eminent domain when it was going to be used to secure the border?
Or is it the securing the border part that gets you so bent out of shape and the eminent domain is just an excuse to object?


Shill, you haven’t got a clue about me, where I’ve been or what I do. I’m not saying we have, but chances are Anti Federalist and I have crossed paths on more than one occasion.

[Swordsmyth]

Shill, you haven’t got a clue about me, where I’ve been or what I do. I’m not saying we have, but chances are Anti Federalist and I have crossed paths on more than one occasion.
I still don't see the passion for opposing this abuse of eminent domain that you had for the border wall.....................................
How many different threads did you make about that anyway?

[PAF]

I still don't see the passion for opposing this abuse of eminent domain that you had for the border wall.....................................
How many different threads did you make about that anyway?

Don’t ask me to do your own work. Count them yourself ;-)

[Swordsmyth]

Don’t ask me to do your own work. Count them yourself ;-)
I don't really care, I'm just waiting to see if you make as many threads about this.

[Stratovarious]

Governments love taking private land, they will sit on it for a few years
then lease it to Casino Builders or something else to feed the State.

[PAF]

I don't really care, I'm just waiting to see if you make as many threads about this.


I’ll be in LA next week so you’ll get a “relief”.

[oyarde]

This is a good one . Taking shit for a reason that does not exist . Hopefully Danke will understand when I tell him he has to give me his shed because it will be infested with Star Bellied Sneeches in yr 2525.

[PAF]

Governments love taking private land, they will sit on it for a few years
then lease it to Casino Builders or something else to feed the State.


Once he leaves office and it’s the NAU, do you think he’ll use that border for something beside the wall, the real estate magnate that he is?

I’m just wondering why a billionaire would want to be president. Other than to say he was.

[Stratovarious]

Once he leaves office and it’s the NAU, do you think he’ll use that border for something beside the wall, the real estate magnate that he is?

I’m just wondering why a billionaire would want to be president. Other than to say he was.

I think Trump is a Patriot.
It is a known fact that Calif is toilet, we should pay or force Mexico to take it back.

[Zippyjuan]

Governments love taking private land, they will sit on it for a few years
then lease it to Casino Builders or something else to feed the State.

https://www.newsweek.com/roma-texas-trump-wall-mexico-border-town-seize-land-federal-government-1263607


DONALD TRUMP VOTER, TEXAS BORDER RESIDENT FEARS TRUMP GOVERNMENT WILL SEIZE LAND FOR WALL

A Texas resident who voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election expressed fear that his proposed border wall plan will seize her land.

Several residents and founding members of Roma, Texas told the Los Angeles Times how their fight against Trump's border wall and the U.S. federal government reminds them of how their ancestors fought against Spanish rule along the Rio Grande hundreds of years before. One resident, Maria Guadalupe “Lupita” Rios, 60, said she voted for Trump in 2016 in order to keep illegal immigrants out, but now she is worried her land will simply be seized to make way for the billion dollar project.

“They can’t leave us on the Mexican side,” said Rios, a Democrat who voted for Trump. "This is our land."

More at link.

https://theweek.com/articles/644892/donald-trumps-weird-love-affair-eminent-domain


Trump has a well-established history of affection for eminent domain use and abuse. Most famously, he hounded an elderly widow, Vera Coking, in Atlantic City to give up her house so he could build a limousine parking lot for the now-failed Trump Taj Mahal casino. Coking refused, and with the help of the nonprofit Institute for Justice (IJ), she won her case.

That was in 1998. Seven years later, another case went to court in which a developer once again sought to use eminent domain to confiscate privately-held land for private building purposes. IJ again worked to defend against what amounts to state-facilitated theft, but this time the bandits won. That case was Kelo v. New London, and in the good company of about eight in 10 Americans, conservatives and libertarians were pissed.

But Trump loved it. "I happen to agree with it 100 percent," he said of the Kelo majority in an interview on Fox. His illogic was simple: If the government wants the development to happen, it should happen.


"If you have a person living in an area that's not even necessarily a good area, and government, whether it's local or whatever, government wants to build a tremendous economic development, where a lot of people are going to be put to work and make [an] area that's not good into a good area, and move the person that's living there into a better place — now, I know it might not be their choice — but move the person to a better place and yet create thousands upon thousands of jobs and beautification and lots of other things, I think it happens to be good." [Trump, via RedState]

[Stratovarious]

https://www.newsweek.com/roma-texas-trump-wall-mexico-border-town-seize-land-federal-government-1263607



More at link.

Maxine Waters fears that heirs to James Brown are set to reposes
her wigs.
Barrack Obama Claims that Maxine is what his son would have looked
like had he had a son
-
More at link
NPANEWS.COM
Neverprintedanywherenews 24/7

[TheCount]

Are we anti eminent domain this week? I didn't get the memo.

[juleswin]

Govt taking private property? I bet you wouldn't be able to find toilet paper in California grocery stores :)

[dannno]

Are we anti eminent domain this week? I didn't get the memo.

This always struck me as a really dumb, petty argument about the wall.. most people who use the argument seem to be totally fine with eminent domain in any other case.. except when Trump wants to use it for a fence.

They aren't building a fence on the edge of their property, they are taking usable property - in some cases property that has infrastructure on it. Based on lies. At least with illegal immigrants, there is an honest, straightforward reason to keep them out based on facts and evidence.. And they aren't taking usable property, they are fencing off the property.

[Stratovarious]

Are we anti eminent domain this week? I didn't get the memo.
Are terrorists, and Felons swimming ashore?

[Stratovarious]

Are we anti eminent domain this week? I didn't get the memo.

Obama took over a million acres in one grab, you weren't whining then were ya'?

[Swordsmyth]

Are we anti eminent domain this week? I didn't get the memo.
I don't like eminent domain even for the wall and I have always said so but the wall is a legitimate national defense purpose, this is just theft.

[PAF]

Are we anti eminent domain this week? I didn't get the memo.

Come to my castle where I have invested my own money and labor. I fully support the 2A, we’ll discuss it over tea.

As for the rest of Liberty people on the board, I won’t speak for them. That would depend on how dear they hold Free Market principles and Property Rights to their hearts, and if it doesn’t personally affect fruits of their own labor.

Without ending incentives at the minimum, that wall is moot and anti-liberty, a “bandaid” solution for a government-created problem.

[Stratovarious]

Come to my castle where I have invested my own money and labor. I fully support the 2A, we’ll discuss it over tea.

As for the rest of Liberty people on the board, I won’t speak for them. That would depend on how dear they hold Free Market principles and Property Rights to their hearts, and if it doesn’t personally affect fruits of their own labor.

Without ending incentives at the minimum, that wall is moot and anti-liberty, a “bandaid” solution for a government-created problem.
The wall is nothing without killing ALL incentives, but killing all incentives is nothing without a wall,
the worst of the worst don't need 'classical incentives' to come here and commit atrocities on our communities.

[Swordsmyth]

The wall is nothing without killing ALL incentives, but killing all incentives is nothing without a wall,
the worst of the worst don't need 'classical incentives' to come here and commit atrocities on our communities.
And the leeches only need our superior wealth to draw them here.

[Stratovarious]

And the leeches only need our superior wealth to draw them here.
Which reminds me of he hordes of day laborers at home depot, when I used to contract in
orange co, that would never stop by 'cutting incentives' .
I was not for a wall initially, but after time I began to see points made by others and concluded
that we need a concerted pkg, there is not 'one' simple solution to the problem , it is complex.

[Swordsmyth]

Which reminds me of he hordes of day laborers at home depot, when I used to contract in
orange co, that would never stop by 'cutting incentives' .
I was not for a wall initially, but after time I began to see points made by others and concluded
that we need a concerted pkg, there is not 'one' simple solution to the problem , it is complex.
I prefer heavy patrols on the border to a wall but a wall is better than nothing.
Liberty creates wealth, wealth attract leeches and leeches destroy liberty.
We have run out of new places to create liberty so our only option is to keep out the leeches.

[Stratovarious]

I prefer heavy patrols on the border to a wall but a wall is better than nothing.
Liberty creates wealth, wealth attract leeches and leeches destroy liberty.
We have run out of new places to create liberty so our only option is to keep out the leeches.
Liberals are the primary breeders.

[Swordsmyth]

Liberals are the primary breeders.
Unfortunately it isn't as easy to get rid of the native leeches as it is to keep out the foreign leeches.

[Stratovarious]

Unfortunately it isn't as easy to get rid of the native leeches as it is to keep out the foreign leeches.

So true.

[Brian4Liberty]

Of course they completely ignore the fact that California is on the edge of a fault line, which means there is movement unrelated to any changes in the actual sea level. Many homes built on the ocean do have to be condemned because they fall into the ocean because they are on sedimentary rock bluffs that erode over time. Global warming isn’t really the issue when it comes to erosion.

[Pauls' Revere]

The sea level has risen approximately 4-8 inches in the last 100 years...

At the current rate, it would rise about another foot in the next 100 years.

The whole idea we need to prepare for 3-6 feet sea level rise in the next 100 years is really not justified imo.. and I have even read locally that some 'experts' and governments expect it to rise that much in the next 30 years!!

well, according to AOC the planet has only 12 years left.

[Zippyjuan]

Liberals are the primary breeders.

Make more babies.

[Anti Federalist]

I've said 100 times already - Pay the people who own the land to build barriers.

Then call out the Unorganized Militia to man it.

Problem solved.

[Swordsmyth]

Make more babies.

People could afford that if your precious Fed didn't rob us into the dirt.

The primary cause of the west's demographic problem is kleptocracy (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?520013-The-primary-cause-of-the-west-s-demographic-problem-is-kleptocracy)

[eleganz]

Wouldn't the ocean view millionaires do a better job at protecting their own homes? :toady:

[Zippyjuan]

People could afford that if your precious Fed didn't rob us into the dirt.

The primary cause of the west's demographic problem is kleptocracy (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?520013-The-primary-cause-of-the-west-s-demographic-problem-is-kleptocracy)

Is that why poor countries tend to have more babies than rich ones- because of the Federal Reserve?

Birth rates go down as societies mature. One reason is that you need fewer kids- first to replace the ones who fail to make it to adulthood (improved medicine means fewer replacements needed) and second less financial stress (more income) needing more kids to work and help support the family.

[Swordsmyth]

Is that why poor countries tend to have more babies than rich ones- because of the Federal Reserve?
Poor countries have lower standards of living and the economics of raising children is different, many of them also get food aid and the like that produces a welfare like effect where it is beneficial to the families to have as many children as possible.
The fed not only robs us directly but it also drives up the costs of living in ways that discourages people from having children.

[Stratovarious]

Is that why poor countries tend to have more babies than rich ones- because of the Federal Reserve?

Birth rates go down as societies mature. One reason is that you need fewer kids- first to replace the ones who fail to make it to adulthood (improved medicine means fewer replacements needed) and second less financial stress (more income) needing more kids to work and help support the family.
Poor countries like what zippie;
You are not advised to respond, clue: I'm setting you up (shhh, did I just say that out loud...).

[fedupinmo]

More government, sustainable development, “for the greater good”.

@Anti Federalist (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=3169) any word about when your town is next?

Last year they forced one of the members of our liberty group out who lived less than a mile from me. The stream in her back yard was 1 or 2 hundred feet from the house, she could no longer afford the legal battles so she and her husband said f%ck it.

They should have bought guns and ammo earlier. ;)

[Origanalist]

Of course they completely ignore the fact that California is on the edge of a fault line, which means there is movement unrelated to any changes in the actual sea level. Many homes built on the ocean do have to be condemned because they fall into the ocean because they are on sedimentary rock bluffs that erode over time. Global warming isn’t really the issue when it comes to erosion.

Anybody familiar with California knows this is true.

Plus in a lot of cities, Mill Valley etc., houses are built idiotically on hillsides that are obvious hazards but that is kind of a different issue.

[oyarde]

Anybody familiar with California knows this is true.

Plus in a lot of cities, Mill Valley etc., houses are built idiotically on hillsides that are obvious hazards but that is kind of a different issue.

Yeah , you see houses that you can nearly be certain will not be there in a decade. World Temps do not cause the erosion that has been going on in california the past few thousand years .

[PAF]

I hope that I'm not interpreting some of the responses to be in support of eminent domain/government control. I agree that there are structures built in questionable areas, but that is the business of the property owner. I am heading back out next week and plan to stay at one of those questionable houses that overlooks the ocean.

[Origanalist]

I hope that I'm not interpreting some of the responses to be in support of eminent domain/government control. I agree that there are structures built in questionable areas, but that is the business of the property owner. I am heading back out next week and plan to stay at one of those questionable houses that overlooks the ocean.

I'm absolutely not in favor of eminent domain, especially with such bullshit reasoning as this. However, my feelings are a bit tempered I must admit as this IS California and they actually voted this menace into the Governors mansion. Progressive-ism is rampant in those area's.

[Ender]

I'm absolutely not in favor of eminent domain, especially with such bull$#@! reasoning as this. However, my feelings are a bit tempered I must admit as this IS California and they actually voted this menace into the Governors mansion. Progressive-ism is rampant in those area's.

I'm from California & most of the people I know are pretty freedom oriented. Most of this shite comes from public school indoctrination as to what "freedom" really means. I also believe that Cali is being used as a testing ground for TPTB to push things as far as possible before it is spread to the entire country.

And the beach areas are already part of the wonderful Constitutional-free zones, so there ya go.

[PAF]

I'm from California & most of the people I know are pretty freedom oriented. Most of this $#@!e comes from public school indoctrination as to what "freedom" really means. I also believe that Cali is being used as a testing ground for TPTB to push things as far as possible before it is spread to the entire country.

And the beach areas are already part of the wonderful Constitutional-free zones, so there ya go.

Better watch out, Shill might see these 3 consecutive posts and call us the 3 Stooges :cool:

[Anti Federalist]

I'm from California & most of the people I know are pretty freedom oriented. Most of this shite comes from public school indoctrination as to what "freedom" really means. I also believe that Cali is being used as a testing ground for TPTB to push things as far as possible before it is spread to the entire country.

And the beach areas are already part of the wonderful Constitutional-free zones, so there ya go.

I think we end up in our echo chambers.

It's human nature after all.

But obviously, based and what they vote for in overwhelmingly majorities, most Californians are NOT "freedom oriented".

[Superfluous Man]

The stated purpose for this of a managed retreat from the coast in preparation for an expected sea level rise could be done in the free market by individual property owners making their own decisions based on their own cost-benefit analyses of how they use those properties in light of whatever risks of sea level rise there are. No central managing of the process by the government would be needed, even if the fear were well-founded.

That said, I'm glad to see a response to global warming fears that involves preparing to adjust to whatever climate change is expected, rather than trying to implement policies that are supposed to affect that change, as if governments could be or should be planetary thermostats.

I don't know if any of the global warming predictions will end up coming true. But if they are going to, there's nothing we can do to stop it.

[TheCount]

I don't like eminent domain even for the wall and I have always said so but the wall is a legitimate national defense purpose, this is just theft.

Oh sure, ignore the glaciers full of liquid invaders just waiting to pour over the nation's borders. Do you think that they're going to give up millions of years of wet culture as soon as they get here?

[Swordsmyth]

Oh sure, ignore the glaciers full of liquid invaders just waiting to pour over the nation's borders. Do you think that they're going to give up millions of years of wet culture as soon as they get here?
LOL

Is that all the better you can do?

[Occam's Banana]

[...] they actually voted this menace into the Governors mansion. Progressive-ism is rampant in those area's.

https://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-democracy-is-the-theory-that-the-common-people-know-what-they-want-and-deserve-to-get-it-good-and-h-l-mencken-125667.jpg

[kona]

I hope that I'm not interpreting some of the responses to be in support of eminent domain/government control. I agree that there are structures built in questionable areas, but that is the business of the property owner.
I'm 100% against eminent domain, but if anyone, from Cali or otherwise, is a potential FEMA beneficiary, then on some level, it is our/your business.

[Ender]

I think we end up in our echo chambers.

It's human nature after all.

But obviously, based and what they vote for in overwhelmingly majorities, most Californians are NOT "freedom oriented".

Most all of urban Cali is- the cities are the big left-leaners.