Recently California’s government has not had a good record concerning truthful communications with the public. Is it possible that the Coastal Commission is successfully misleading the Legislature on pending legislation relating to its purported interest in protecting the coast? Could it really be a disguised means to create a new source of funds for the Commission during these economic times at the expense of property owners in the coastal zone?

I love America for being the place where an upstart group of colonists, against all odds, battled the most powerful empire in the world—and won—all in the cause of liberty.

I love America for establishing a revolutionary new country in which a person’s life is his and his alone to live for his own sake, and government’s sole purpose is to protect that sacred right.

What if a private person were to trespass on your property to see if you might be violating coastal regulations? If evidence were obtained as a result of the trespass, would it be admissible by the California Coastal Commission in an enforcement action and later in court, or would it be a Fourth Amendment violation as an unreasonable search?

Ever since 2005 when the United States Supreme Court ruled in Kelo v. Town of New London, Connecticut, there has been heightened attention paid to the Constitution’s protection of private property rights. The Kelo Court held that the government’s power of eminent domain was so great that it could take one person’s private property for another’s private economic gain. The Court chose to rewrite our nation’s Constitution by substituting public “purpose” for public “use.” The purpose here was to improve the tax base.