Reopen Scripps Coastal Reserve first, talk later
This letter was sent to California Coastal Commission enforcement staff counsel Andrew Willis, with a copy to the La Jolla Light.
Dear Mr. Willis,
I have faith that your California Coastal Commission will diligently scrutinize UC San Diego’s request to forgive its illegal closure of the Scripps Coastal Reserve knoll when your hearing on this matter eventually occurs.
But meanwhile, since the chancellor’s ostensible reason for closing the knoll in the first place (i.e., protecting students from airborne COVID by preventing them from visiting the best possible place to breathe fresh air, restricting them instead to their tiny dorm rooms) was dubious at best; since the knoll’s closure without a permit violated California’s coastal access law; because after the COVID excuse withered on the vine, his newer excuses for keeping the knoll closed (litter, sensitive chaparral, suddenly important native relics) seem like stock, post-hoc fabrications; and given that these machinations have dragged on for five frustrating years, during which time the public has been improperly deprived access to the most beautiful open space in La Jolla, wouldn’t it be more equitable to order that the knoll remain open until UCSD proves up its defense?
Doesn’t keeping the knoll closed reward the lawbreaker and unfairly allow him to develop increasingly tenuous after-the-fact arguments?
The chancellor’s attempt to seek your commission’s forgiveness years after deliberately avoiding your timely permission reads now like a cagey campaign to dodge his duties as steward of our knoll and subvert the relevant rule of law.
The burden of your inquiry into this wrongful closure should rest squarely on the wrongdoer’s shoulders, not on those of the innocent public trying to access their beloved knoll. An order opening the knoll would both halt a blatant violation of law and encourage the rulebreaker to promptly plead his case without further infuriating delays.
Immediately opening the knoll would also allow your commission to evaluate whether the chancellor’s newfound allegations (litter, plant trampling, relic molestation) have merit or whether they are — as I firmly believe, having visited the knoll during seven decades — spurious.
— Monte Frankel
La Jolla’s S.D. council representative doesn’t seem to represent La Jollans
Regarding “Next hurdle for La Jolla cityhood effort may be legal action by San Diego” (May 22, La Jolla Light): It is disturbing that our La Jolla representative to the San Diego City Council [Joe LaCava] voted in favor of authorizing the city attorney to proceed with litigation questioning the authenticity of the signatures gathered in the petition for La Jolla seeking to separate from San Diego.
This does not feel like he has our La Jolla community’s best interests in mind when so many La Jollans have signed that they want to be an entity separate from San Diego and he votes to challenge our request.
La Jolla should have a representative who truly, actively represents the citizenry.
— Keys Allan
Let the public, not legal maneuvering, decide fate of La Jolla cityhood
Mayor [Todd] Gloria feigns outrage over an independent agency’s verification of signatures from La Jolla residents seeking independence from the city of San Diego.
But I think “fearful” is a more accurate description of the mayor’s response.
He knows a referendum on La Jolla’s proposed independence will include a lively and very public debate about the failures of his istration and the benefits of secession for La Jolla.
Thousands of La Jollans think they can organize a local government that will do a better job providing basic city services and running a financially sound government than the mayor has done. Others want their community to remain part of the city.
That debate would be healthy and an excellent example of the democratic process.
Rather than stifling this discussion with a costly and pointless legal challenge, the mayor should let the debate continue and the votes be cast.
— Paul Krueger
What’s on YOUR mind?
Letters published in the La Jolla Light express views from readers about community matters. Submissions of related photos also are welcome. Letters reflect the writers’ opinions and not necessarily those of the newspaper staff or publisher. Letters are subject to editing. To share your thoughts in this public forum, email them with your first and last names and city or neighborhood of residence to [email protected]. The deadline is 5 p.m. Friday for publication in the following Thursday’s paper. Letters without the writer’s name cannot be published. Letters from the same person are limited to one in a 30-day period. ♦
