Is California’s Coastal Commission pro-housing now? New appointments signal changes – CalMatters

Report on the California Coastal Commission’s Strategic Shift Towards Sustainable Development

Introduction: Realigning Priorities for Housing and Environmental Goals

The California Coastal Commission, a state agency historically focused on environmental preservation, is undergoing a significant strategic realignment to address the state’s housing crisis. This shift aims to balance its foundational mandate with pressing socio-economic needs, directly engaging with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Commission’s recent actions reflect a complex effort to integrate SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) with its traditional focus on SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land). New pro-development appointments and policy adjustments signal an attempt to improve its reputation and contribute to equitable development along the California coast.

Policy Adjustments and Institutional Reform

Advancing SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

In a direct effort to support SDG 11.1, which calls for access to adequate, safe, and affordable housing, the Commission has implemented key changes. These reforms are designed to remove obstacles to housing development in coastal zones, which are among the most expensive and exclusive areas in the state.

• Regulatory Amendment: The Commission unanimously approved a rule change extending the validity of building permits for affordable housing projects from two to five years. This addresses financing challenges and facilitates the construction of affordable units.
• Support for Housing Legislation: The agency has aligned with broader state efforts by not opposing landmark housing reform laws that exempt certain developments from environmental review, and has worked to facilitate the construction of student housing.

Strengthening Governance for Sustainable Goals (SDG 16)

Recent appointments to the Commission’s 12-member board reflect a deliberate strategy by state leaders to foster a more development-friendly institutional environment, in line with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The new members are expected to champion housing initiatives while navigating the agency’s conservation duties.

1. Jaime Lee: Appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, Lee is a real estate developer with extensive experience in multifamily unit construction.
2. Chris Lopez: A Monterey County supervisor appointed by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Lopez has expressed strong support for affordable housing on the coast.
3. Jose Preciado: A Chula Vista councilmember also appointed by Rivas, Preciado aims to develop the coast to create jobs and housing for working-class families, contributing to SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

These appointments are intended to steer the Commission towards policies that address the housing shortage and promote inclusive growth.

Balancing Development with Environmental and Social Equity

The Challenge of Integrating Competing SDGs

The Commission was established in 1972 to protect California’s coastline, a mission directly aligned with SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land). Its historical mandate focused on conserving natural habitats and ensuring public access. However, this focus has been criticized for contributing to outcomes that conflict with SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

• Socio-Economic Disparity: Coastal zones exhibit significant demographic imbalances, with a resident population that is two-thirds white, double the state average. Exorbitant housing prices have created exclusive communities, limiting access for lower-income and diverse populations.
• Tension Between Conservation and Equity: Critics argue that the Commission’s stringent regulations have exacerbated the housing shortage, hindering efforts to create inclusive and equitable communities as envisioned by SDG 10 and SDG 11.

Stakeholder Perspectives and Future Outlook

The Commission’s strategic shift is being closely monitored by various stakeholders, each with a focus on different aspects of sustainable development.

• Pro-Housing Advocates: These groups are optimistic that the new appointments will advance a vision for more affordable housing, viewing the changes as a positive step toward achieving SDG 11.
• Environmental Organizations: Conservation groups are adopting a cautious, observational stance. They remain committed to upholding the Commission’s core mission of coastal protection (SDG 14 and SDG 15) and are waiting to evaluate the new commissioners’ voting records.
• Commission Leadership: Some commissioners maintain that their primary role is conservation and that legislative housing reforms are creating dysfunction. They emphasize that developing in the coastal zone presents unique environmental challenges that require careful consideration.

The future direction of the California Coastal Commission will depend on its ability to forge an integrated policy framework that successfully balances the urgent need for affordable and inclusive housing with its critical, long-standing mandate to protect the state’s invaluable coastal ecosystems.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses a complex interplay of housing development, environmental conservation, social equity, and governance, which connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary SDGs addressed are:

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  This goal is central to the article, which focuses on California’s “gripping housing crisis” and the efforts of the California Coastal Commission to facilitate the construction of “affordable housing” in coastal regions. The entire narrative revolves around balancing urban development with other priorities.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article explicitly points out social and racial disparities in coastal communities. It notes the “disproportionate number of white residents” and highlights that new commission appointees aim to ensure “underrepresented communities that live on the coast have more access,” directly addressing issues of inequality and inclusion.

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

  The fundamental purpose of the California Coastal Commission, as described in the article, is rooted in this goal. The commission was created to “protect California’s coveted shoreline” and the Coastal Act’s mandate is to “protect its natural habitats and keep beaches open to the public,” which aligns with the conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal ecosystems.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article details the functions, challenges, and political dynamics of the Coastal Commission, an “independent, quasi-judicial state agency.” It discusses the appointment process, the influence of political leaders like the governor, public scrutiny, and the commission’s efforts to reform its reputation and processes, all of which relate to developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services.

   This target is directly addressed through the article’s focus on the state’s “crippling housing crisis” and the Coastal Commission’s recent rule change to “make it easier to build affordable housing.” The appointment of “pro-development” officials is explicitly aimed at getting “more housing and other developments approved along the Pacific coast” to remedy the housing shortage.

2. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… race, ethnicity… or economic… status.

   This target is relevant to the discussion of demographic imbalances, where coastal areas have twice the proportion of white residents as the state overall. The stated goal of new commissioner Jose Preciado to develop the coast so that “underrepresented communities that live on the coast have more access” is a direct effort to promote social and economic inclusion.

3. Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts… and take action for their restoration.

   The article establishes that the Commission’s historical and primary mandate is to conserve “more than 800 miles of the California coast.” Its creation was a response to environmental disasters like the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill, and its ongoing purpose is to “protect its natural habitats and keep beaches open to the public,” which is the essence of this target.

4. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.

   The article describes a deliberate shift in the composition of the Coastal Commission. The appointment of three new “pro-development local officials” by the Governor and legislative leaders is a direct attempt to make the institution more responsive to the state’s housing needs and to ensure the commission’s decisions reflect a broader range of priorities beyond pure conservation.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicators for Target 11.1 (Affordable Housing):

  • Regulatory Timelines for Housing Projects: A direct indicator of policy change is the extension of the deadline for building affordable housing projects from “two to five years after permits are issued.” This change can be measured by tracking the number of projects that utilize this new timeframe.
  • Number of Housing Units Approved/Built: The article mentions that one new commissioner’s company “has built 6,600 multifamily units,” providing a tangible metric for housing supply. Progress can be measured by tracking the number of affordable housing permits approved by the commission annually.

• Indicators for Target 10.2 (Reduced Inequalities):

  • Demographic Composition of Coastal Residents: The article provides a baseline indicator: “Two-thirds of coastal residents are white, about twice as many as in the state as a whole.” Progress towards this target could be measured by tracking changes in the racial and economic demographics of these coastal zones over time.

• Indicators for Target 14.2 (Coastal Protection):

  • Public Access to Coastline: The article implies this is a key performance indicator by highlighting the commission’s mandate to “keep beaches open to the public” and citing the legal fight over “access to Martins Beach.” The number of public access points and legal challenges to access can serve as indicators.

• Indicators for Target 16.7 (Inclusive Decision-Making):

  • Composition of the Commission: The article details the appointment of new members with specific “pro-development” backgrounds. The professional backgrounds and stated priorities of the 12 voting members serve as a qualitative indicator of how representative the decision-making body is of different stakeholder interests (e.g., development, environment, social justice).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: calmatters.org