Western Railroad Discussion > California Coastal Commission To Seize 1,100 Miles Of Coastline

The CCC is set to seize 1,100 miles of coastline, including 1,500 miles of roads, 250 miles of highway, and 110 miles of railways.  Link is:

Link To Article

The link gives complete detail on how they are planning to do this.  It does make excessive use of Eminent Domain.

(I've changed the text to the article link.)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/19 18:47 by norm1153.

A serious overstatement of the proposal, which is intended to deal with the change in coastline as the sea level rises, if it does. Relocating homes, businesses power plants, sewage treatment plants, roads that may be damaged/destroyed if the coastline changes will be a problem everywhere, and this is an attempt to plan for this.
Several states are starting to discuss such contingency planning.

Sounds like a simple property grab. How much have sea levels risen over the last 50 years? What happens when the taken property years down the road is not inundated with floodwaters? Is it given back to the original owners or their heirs?

What about the railroad? Is there going to be a line relocation?

Lastly, who pays for all of this?

When these properties are damaged in a coastal storm or fire, does FEMA open up its taxpayer cash box to help them rebuild?

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When these properties are damaged in a coastal
> storm or fire, does FEMA open up its taxpayer cash
> box to help them rebuild?
>
> Posted from Android

Very true. However, this policy could be justified based on "climate change" for all US coastline, or other areas that suffer disasters. The people living in flood prone, fire prone areas assume the risk and should be be providing their own insurance for those risks. My issue with seizing property 1. taking private property for what "could happen" and 2. where do we relocate these people? Do we seize property further inland via eminent domain and give it to relocated people and for relocating highways and railroads? It can create problems for many people and transportation systems.

In NJ, the state and Feds got tired of repeatedly fixing homes that were flooded every few years.

So, you got one lap at the FEMA trough, then you're on your own. FEMA bought out and demolished homes of willing sellers.

Just fixing houses that are gonna fall into the sea sounds foolish to me..

Posted from Android

Localities would use imminent domain under the proposal-not the CCC. Imminent domain isn't all bad. We wouldn't have the Interstate highway system without this process.

There is no increase in the rate of sea level rise. None. Sea level has been rising at more or less the same rate since the end of the Little Ice Age in the late 1800's. 

In spite of three decades of climate alarmists' predicting an increase in the rate of rise, it has not occurred. Dr. James Hansen, who collaborated with Al Gore, forecast the West Side Highway in NYC would be perpetually underwater starting in 2008. It is more than a decade latter. Still waiting. 

Global warming is being used to grab land, increase insurance rates, re-insurance rates, electric rates (just today: https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article224627000.html ) and many other things that unjustifiably cost the little guy and increase government power. 

No way, the state can’t afford what we have now

Posted from iPhone

LOL at the original poster for believing this article. There are no plans to have any land seized, and there is no evidence to support the existence of such a crazy plan other than one crazy website linking to another crazy website. This is an alt-right extremist website that espouses crazy unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. Just take a look at the other articles they have posted to get an idea of their ideology.

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The web site connected to the link he posted is not exactly an unbiased source. And it is NOT going to the California Coastal Commission!
Of course finding an unbiased source these days is quite a trick. They all seem to have an angle they're pushing. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/19 15:22 by PHall.

• False.  Simple, correct and true information is available unlike any era in human history.  
• It's the readers who have a problem with understanding the material. 
• "Seizing land" and "eminent domain" are words meant to incite fear and cause alarm. 

I found the CCC to be supportive of our efforts to continue maintaining the old Santa Fe Surf Line.  I think the UP used the same regulations on the old SP Coast Line.
The locals objected to placing rip-rap and called in the CCC. 
The CCC rules not only permit, but require public utilities (RRs plus sewage plants, public piers, power plants, roads etc) to maintain their infrastructure in the coastal zone.
They politely asked, and we agreed, to avoid dumping rip-rap during some endangered species nesting period or during peak vacation use of the beach, but we were free to act at any time if surf threatened to wash out the tracks.
The people who fight the CCC are almost always trying to build mansions or other "developments" in the coastal zone.
However some CCC staff are really evil too, details upon request.

>
> Lastly, who pays for all of this?


If it's anything like down here in Australia,you ,the tax payer will have to pony up.
DK

Oh well the whakos that run CA are at it again wait until the new governor gets free health care and education. Throw this into the mix and the coast population and building along the coast will cause great problems with values and the resulting loss of taxes.

Amen!

Back in the old days you could believe what you read in the newspapers because the editorial staffs were Democrats and the publishers were Republicans, so they had an internal check and balance (that's kinda a joke, but had some truth to it).  Now any one who wants can post what he wants on the internet with no checks and balances.  It doesn't matter whether it is politics or a cure for cancer.  The amount of trash that has been made to look like reputable "news" is amazing.  But rather than look at this stuff soberly and try to figure out what is true or false, I'm finding people on both sides of any issue tend to believe what they want to believe.  And since it has been "published" on an important looking site on the internet it must be true.  But this certainly is convenient, since whatever you want to believe you can always find "facts" to support your opinion.  Interesting world we live in.

JBWX

when cities, states, and countries INCREASE the amount of people that DEPEND on government INSTEAD of increasing the amount of people that can fund a government (i.e., middle class taxpayers), it is not good.......

66

FEMA gets much of its money from annual insurance payments from property owners in flood prone areas, including me.
While I live in a desert, several years ago a sudden storm came within about 2 inches of entering my home and did damage to some local properties.
Much of these problems result from people being allowed in previous years to build in flood and fire prone
locations. Our house was built by the SP about 100 years ago long before standards to prevent flooding, primarily through elevation.
By the way, back in 1948 when we moved to Mojave we had snow storms every year. Over the years they have gone
away and now we have rain storms like the ones we had this week.
The Coastal Commssion was created by the voters to protect the coast.
 

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

There are sure a lot of critics of California on here, but we do get a lot of things right.  We do have the best intercity passenger rail service outside the NEC and the Coastal Commission is, as noted above, supportive of rail service.  The additional double track on the Surf line is a good example.  Inspite of strong opposition to many of the double track projects on this liine the coastal commission continues to approve them.