State high-court case opens today

Andrew Edwards

Oral arguments are scheduled to be held today in a case that could

lead to the powerful California Coastal Commission being declared

unconstitutional.

The seven justices of the state Supreme Court are slated to meet

today in Los Angeles. The roots of the case stretch to 2000, when

Rodolphe Streichenberger of the Newport Beach-based Marine Forests

Society filed suit against the commission after the body denied him a

permit to build an artificial reef.

The commission issued a cease-and-desist order against

Streichenberger after the project was built without permission.

The case reached the state Supreme Court after two lower courts

sided with Streichenberger and ruled that the Coastal Commission’s

composition violated the constitutional principal of separation of

powers. Eight of the commission’s 12 members are appointed by

legislators, but the body performs executive tasks by enforcing the

Coastal Act. The commission has power to approve or deny local

coastal plans and construction projects.

In 2003, the Legislature modified the commission by giving fixed

terms to legislative appointees. Previously, legislators could fire

coastal commissioners at will.

Under court procedures, attorneys from both sides will have about

30 minutes to argue their case. Streichenberger’s attorney, Ronald

Zumbrun said he plans to argue that the Legislature still has control

over the commission through its appointment powers and that there is

a lack of checks and balances to protect the executive branch.

“We’ll be arguing primarily the corrective legislation is not

corrective and going from there,” Zumbrun said.

The attorney representing the Coastal Commission, state deputy

attorney general Joe Barbieri, could not be reached for comment

Tuesday. Previously, Barbieri said the state’s position is that the

commission is constitutional and that the Legislature has always had

authority to appoint members to agencies that wield executive powers.

During oral arguments, justices could likely focus on whether the

commission’s structure is in line with other agencies with members

appointed by the Legislature, as well as whether giving commissioners

four-year terms resolved the constitutional problem found by lower

courts, said James Burling, an attorney with the Pacific Legal

Foundation.

Burling’s organization filed a friend-of-the-court brief taking

Streichenberger’s side. The group tends to view the commission as a

threat to property rights.

Unlike Burling, Orange County Coastkeeper executive director Garry

Brown views the Coastal Commission as a needed safeguard against

overdevelopment along the coast.

However, he agreed justices would likely take a careful look at

the agency’s structure, as the appellate court did in its 2002

opinion.

“I think it will be something like that -- a very technical ruling

on the legality of how the commission operates,” Brown said.

The court has up to 90 days to issue a written opinion.

* ANDREW EDWARDS covers business and the environment. He can be

reached at (714) 966-4624 or by e-mail at andrew.edwards

@latimes.com.