At the micro level, developers are not inherently evil people. I have yet to be whipped by their tails or gouged by the tiny horns on their heads. And while I may have been made woozy by the hint of sulphur that trails behind them as they rush to grab a politician’s hand, for the most part a developer is relatively harmless.
But gather them together in a pack, the way jackals sometimes come together for a hunt, and things can get a little … concerning.
On Jan. 19 the California Coastal Commission issued a letter stating that in February they will consider the continued employment of its executive director Charles Lester.
The commission is in charge of safeguarding California’s second most valuable asset, the coastline (it’s first being, of course, its people because they’re the ones who pay taxes and help keep this giant machine running).
California is synonymous with coastal sunsets and paradise. Many a non-resident has travelled to the Golden State to visit one of its fabled beaches or drive along the historic Highway 101. The views from some of California’s ocean side venues, from Big Sur to Sunset Cliffs, is breathtaking and awe inspiring. They are the kinds of vistas that people would gladly pay millions of dollars for and yet the majority of us — the have-nots — can enjoy for free.
But according to published reports, including one Wednesday in the L.A. Times, the commission is in the midst of a tug of war over leadership. On the one hand are conservationists and environmentalists and on the other are developers.
One group of people wants to keep California’s coast pristine and open to the public as much as possible, the other … well they see beach sunsets, resorts, mansions and money. Caught in the middle is executive director Lester, a man who is characterized as friendlier to the conservation side than those who would build things that, in a lot of cases, would keep out most of us.
Denying that some development along the coast benefits communities is silly. Planned with an appropriate balance of environmentalism and commerce in mind, commercial settlements can add value to a community, as Chula Vista is hoping to discover when its bayfront goes on line.
But trusting developers or developer-friendly directors and commissioners to be the final arbiters of what is best for an entire community is like a group of injured lambs letting hungry wolves decide what’s for dinner. Sure, there may be a vegetarian among the bunch but chances are lamb chops will be on the menu.
Developers as people may be nice and warm and fuzzy. But get them together in a room and beware the pack mentality.
