Fail: 3084 / 47.1% Yes votes ...... 3461 / 52.9% No votes

See Also: Index of all Propositions

This initiative would amend the Land Use Plan of the City's Local Coastal Program to clarify that the exceptions to the prohibition on new development to new or expanded permanent lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities, or bike paths, where certain findings can be made, are the sole exceptions to the prohibition of such development. This initiative would also require that before any exception is effective, it must first be approved by a vote of the registered voters of the City.

This initiative further provides that it shall not be effective until the California Coastal Commission certifies the amendments contained in the initiative. However it also provides that any amendments to the City's Local Coastal Program, or the City's General Plan, inconsistent with the measure, which are adopted after the measure was submitted to the City Attorney for preparation of a ballot title and summary, are null and void, notwithstanding the effective date of the initiative.

The power to approve any of these types of projects rests in both the Coronado City Council and the voters of the City of Coronado through their constitutional powers of initiative and referendum.

Proposition A proposes to remove such final approval power from the City Council and place it in the hands of the electorate, exclusively. If Proposition A is approved by the voters, it will require that after the City Council (1) determines that the construction of new or expanded permanent lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities, or bike paths, on a sandy beach area is necessary and appropriate, (2) designs and selects a location for the development, (3) conducts the appropriate environmental review, and (4) makes the appropriate findings required by the LCP, it must then seek approval of the registered voters of the City of Coronado prior to proceeding with the development.

The changes to the LCP proposed by Proposition A would likely have an adverse financial effect on the City of Coronado in any of the limited types of development allowed by the LCP on the sandy beach. This is due to the requirement that after planning, design, and environmental analysis of any proposed project, it still could not be constructed unless and until it receives voter approval. If the voters do not approve the project, the costs associated with all preparatory design work and environmental analysis - both necessary prior to conditional approval of the project - would be lost. If the voters do approve the project, the costs of placing the approval on the ballot in a City election must be added to the cost of the project. Construction costs could increase while awaiting voter approval.

If approved, Proposition A will not be effective until it is approved as an amendment to the LCP by the California Coastal Commission.

San Diego Union Tribune

• Proposed lifeguard facility has been contentious issue - 01/24/08
• U-T Editorial: In Coronado, No on Prop. A, Yes on Prop. B - 01/19/08
• LOCAL PERSPECTIVE: CITY EDITION We don't need Prop. A. We may well need Prop. B. - 01/19/08

2. Coronado's Local Coastal Plan already limits construction on city beaches to lifeguard stations, public restrooms and bike paths. Proposition A is unnecessary and offers no greater protection or access to the beach.

3. The proponents have spread incorrect information.

a. The City is NOT building a garage on the beach. Coronado had to replace the Central beach tower damaged by storms. Nearby neighbors requested the City remove the storage for beach safety equipment, lifesaving boats, and safety showers from the planned lifeguard tower to shrink the size of the tower to avoid BLOCKING OCEAN VIEWS. The safety vehicles and equipment had to be placed close enough for lifeguards to reach in an emergency and a lifeguard support building was designed to house them shielded from view by the rock revetment. Now the same neighbors that were successful in protecting their view by having the life saving equipment relocated are switching their story. They want to prevent the lifeguard support building and they are misleading the public. The lifeguard support building is necessary for public safety and will not impact ocean views.

b. The cottages at the Hotel Del would not have been stopped by this initiative. They are on private property and not on the sandy beach.

4. Proposition A would prevent the city from replacing the tower in a safe and timely manner if it becomes damaged in the future. Vote No on proposition A so that our lifeguards can have immediate access to the equipment they need to protect all beachgoers.

CARRIE DOWNEY

AL OVROM

PHIL MONROE

CASEY TANAKA

SECTION I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

The purpose of this measure is to protect the beaches of Coronado, and the people who use and enjoy them, from unnecessary and poorly planned development by requiring voter participation in certain decisions affecting existing sandy beaches.

SECTION II. FINDINGS

WHEREAS, the beaches in and around the City of Coronado are amongst the City's most precious natural resources; WHEREAS, the beaches are both actively and passively enjoyed year round by City residents and visitors from all over the world; WHEREAS, the beaches provide unique recreational opportunities and are an invaluable economic resource; WHEREAS, wildlife and native vegetation live in and around the beaches of Coronado, including the dunes, and are important both as scenic resources and as habitat; WHEREAS, during peak seasons the beaches attract large crowds which require public safety services; WHEREAS, both current and prospective public use levels and patterns must be carefully considered before new development occurs; WHEREAS, the ill-considered mixing of emergency vehicle routes with crowded public beaches may result in injuries or even death to beach users; and WHEREAS, the Superior Court of California, San Diego County, has recently determined the City of Coronado inadequately considered the impacts, including public safety concerns, of a proposed new structure on Coronado Beach; IT IS THEREBY RESOLVED that it is in the best interests of both current and future generations to 1) require a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado before any proposed new or expanded permanent lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities, or bike paths are constructed on existing sandy beach areas; 2) clarify existing language in Section IV, Subsection B, Paragraph 3 of the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan regarding an exception to an existing ban on new or expanded development on existing sandy beach areas; and 3) readopt and reaffirm, as amended, the same Section IV, Paragraph B, sub-paragraph 3 of the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan and thereby require that the language therein can only be amended or repealed by a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado.

SECTION III. LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT

Section IV (Adopted Action Program), Sub-section B (Recreation and Visitor Serving Facilities), Paragraph 3 of the City of Coronado Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan is amended as follows (amending language is underlined and bolded, language being removed is crossed-through):

That no new development shall be permitted on existing sandy beach areas. An The exclusive exception, which can only be approved by a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado, would be allowed for new or expanded permanent lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities, or bike paths if it can be determined that adverse impacts to public beaches are negligible or when public safety or health requires it, and provided that no less environmentally damaging alternatives exist. This paragraph can only be amended or repealed by a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado.

PROPOSED ORDINANCE (Continued)

SECTION IV. READOPTION AND REAFFIRMATION, AS AMENDED ABOVE, OF SECTION IV, SUB-SECTION B, PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE CITY OF CORONADO LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE PLAN

Section IV (Adopted Action Program), Sub-section B (Recreation and Visitor Serving Facilities), Paragraph 3 of the City of Coronado Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, as amended in Section III above, is hereby readopted and reaffirmed as follows and as amended above:

That no new development shall be permitted on existing sandy beach areas. The exclusive exception, which can only be approved by a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado, would be allowed for new or expanded permanent lifeguard facilities, restroom facilities, or bike paths if it can be determined that adverse impacts to public beaches are negligible or when public safety or health requires it, and provided that no less environmentally damaging alternatives exist. This paragraph can only be amended or repealed by a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado.

SECTION V. IMPLEMENTATION

1. This initiative measure will not be effective until certified by the California Coastal Commission. On the effective date of this initiative measure as further provided by California law (the "Effective Date"), the above amendments are inserted into and become part of the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. In the event there are limits which have been exhausted with respect to the number of amendments that can be submitted or made in the calendar year in which the vote is declared, the amendments in this initiative will be the first inserted in the next year.

2. No development shall occur, be permitted, or be approved which incorporates or is based upon any provision of the Coronado Municipal Code which is inconsistent with the provisions of this initiative measure after the Effective Date.

3. Any amendment to the Coronado Local Coastal Program or the Coronado General Plan adopted after the submission of this initiative measure for preparation of ballot title and summary that is inconsistent with this initiative measure is hereby repealed and declared null and void as of the Effective Date of this initiative measure.

4. Upon the Effective Date of this measure, all general plan amendments, rezonings, specific plans, tentative or final subdivision maps, parcel maps, major use permits, conditional use permits, building permits or other ministerial or discretionary entitlements for use shall not be approved or issued unless consistent with the policies and provisions of this initiative measure.

SECTION VI. CONSTRUCTION

1. Nothing contained in this initiative shall be construed to make illegal any lawful use presently being made of any property.

2. Nothing contained in this initiative shall be construed to require more than one simple majority vote for the adoption of this initiative or for the approval of any future measure required by this initiative.

3. In interpreting this initiative measure or resolving any ambiguity thereof, the City Council and all other City entities charged with implementing or enforcing this initiative measure or any part of it, as well as any reviewing court, shall interpret this initiative measure in the manner which most vigorously and effectively accomplishes its purposes and operative provisions.

SECTION VII. SEVERABILITY

If any portion of this initiative measure is hereafter determined to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, all remaining portions of this initiative measure shall remain in full force and effect. Each section, subsection, sentence, phrase, part, portion or word of this initiative measure would have been adopted and passed irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, phrases, parts, portions or words are declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION VIII. NO UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKING

1. This initiative measure is not intended, and shall not be applied or construed, to authorize the City to exercise its powers in a manner which will take private property for public use without the payment of just compensation, but shall be interpreted, applied and implemented so as to accomplish its purposes to the maximum constitutionally permissible extent without requiring payment of compensation.

2. If application of this initiative measure to a specific property of record as of the Effective Date would create a taking, then the City Council may, upon application by the landowner, allow additional uses on such property, upon findings that the level of additional development permitted is the minimum necessary to avoid a taking, and no lesser level of development would be sufficient to avoid a taking.

SECTION IX. COMPETING INITIATIVE MEASURES

In the event of a conflict between measures adopted in the same election, the provisions of both measures must take effect except to the extent that the provisions of one measure are in direct conflict with the other. As to such conflicting provisions, the provisions of the measure with the most votes will prevail.

SECTION X. AMENDMENT AND REPEAL

This initiative measure and all of its provisions may be amended or repealed only by a vote of the registered voters of the City of Coronado.