Week of: Thursday, January 17, 2008 |
| Front | News | Opinion | Obituaries | Calendar | Real Estate | Subscribe | Classifieds | Archives |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
by Jared Cohen
On April 1, 2005, Citizens for the Preservation of Coronado Beach (CPCB) filed the first of two suits against the city to stop construction of the lifeguard service project. The group was described in the petition as “An unincorporated association of property owners and residents in Coronado [Š] who live near and/or enjoy Coronado Beach for recreational purposes and who will be negatively impacted by the proposed development at the beach.” The suit succeeded, and a judge ordered the city to obtain a full environmental impact report (EIR) before proceeding with construction. The city had only obtained a mitigated negative declaration, not a full EIR. In April 2007, CPCB submitted approximately 2,500 signatures to the city clerk, more than the 15 percent of registered voters required when submitting signatures for a special election. The signatures were endorsements for a ballot initiative that asked wether the city council should require voter approval for construction of lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities or bike paths on the beach, as is required by the Coronado General Plan. The existing local coastal plan, a part of the city's general plan, is very strict on allowing only certain developments on the beach. Lifeguard facilities are one of the allowed projects, along with restrooms and bike paths. On May 15, the city council requested that city staff prepare a report in time for the June 5 meeting on the impact of the initiative. Council members asked city staff to deliver a staff report as allowed under Elections Code 92.12. At the June 5 council meeting, City Attorney Morgan Foley gave a staff report on the initiative measure, saying that it was an amendment to the local coastal program. Council members voted to place the initiative on the November 2008 general election ballot. CPCB sued the city on July 27, naming the city of Coronado, San Diego County Registrar of Voters Department Head Deborah Seiler and Coronado City Clerk Linda Hascup. The suit aimed to force the city to hold a special election in accordance with the intent of the petition instead of waiting for the November 2008 general election. “Citizens intended for the people of Coronado to vote in a special election on the initiative as quickly as possible before the construction of the service building project,” said Susan Heavilin, proponent of the initiative. Heavilin lives in the 1100 block of Isabella Avenue, adjacent to the proposed site of the building. On Oct. 19, San Diego Superior Court Judge Ronald Styn ruled in favor of CPCB, that in fact the intention of the group to collect signatures specifically for a special election was clear, and the city's argument was not valid. “By its express terms, [Elections Code 9214] requires only that the initiative petition contain the request for a special election. There is no language requiring that each section of the petition contain the request for a special election. In fact, unlike other sections of the elections code, there is no reference to a section of the petition in 9214.” In his ruling, Styn ordered the city not to begin construction on the 2,574-square-foot lifeguard service building, writing that “the express purpose of the initiative petition is to stop the service building project.” Several Isabella Avenue and Ocean Boulevard residents, among others, indicated their willingness to testify on behalf of CPCB in court documents. The council took several actions at the Nov. 6 meeting, including rescinding its earlier resolution calling for a consolidated general election and issuing notice of a special municipal election on Feb. 5 of this year, to be consolidated with the new early California primary. A second ballot measure was placed on the ballot by the city at the same meeting, which directly addressed the construction of a lifeguard support building as it related to the initiative placed on the ballot by the CPCB suit. Proposition A, the CPCB initiative placed on the ballot by the successful lawsuit, will read: “Shall the Land Use Plan of the city of Coronado Local Coastal Program be amended to require that prior to the construction or expansion of any permanent lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities, or bike paths on the Coronado beach the city council must first receive voter approval?” Proposition B, the city initiative, reads: “In the event that Proposition A shall be approved by a majority of the voters of the city of Coronado, shall the construction of the lifeguard public safety service building at Coronado beach be approved?” The vote will have no bearing on past and existing developments by the Hotel del Coronado because the hotel sits on a parcel of land that predates the California Coastal Commission and the city. The service building floor plan contains a lifeguard office, equipment storage room, locker rooms and showers for lifeguards.
|
|
Copyright © 2010, Eagle Newspapers. All rights reserved. |
