Edhat Staff
A very green Hollister Ranch from 2017 (Photo: John Wiley)
By edhat staff
Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill on Wednesday that will produce public access to the exclusive Hollister Ranch beaches by 2022.
Assembly Bill 1680, introduced by Assemblymember Monique Limòn, amends the California Coastal Act of 1976 requiring a public access plan to be developed by April 1, 2021 with the beaches opening on April 1, 2022.
Hollister Ranch landowners have argued that public access to the 8.5 miles of beach should be banned or restricted and it’s already accessible by boat or watercraft. After the bill’s introduction, they’ve publicly called it unnecessary and a possible legal overreach.
“The state Legislature, the state Constitution and the Coastal Act have all reaffirmed the public’s right to the beach. With [AB1680] and after almost 40 years, the state of California has made a clear statement that no matter your zip code, all Californians deserve a chance to enjoy our public parks and beaches. Hollister Ranch is no exception,” wrote Assemblymember Limòn on Twitter.
Governor Newsom echoed this by stating beaches should be public. “As Californians, respect and reverence for our beaches is in our DNA, so much so that we enshrined public beach access into our state constitution… I’ve long fought to protect these public treasures for future generations and to ensure any person can experience their beauty. That won’t change now that I’m governor,” he said to the Los Angeles Times.
The law will also make it a crime with a fine of tens of thousands of dollars for any person or group who tries to prevent public beach access.
PAST ARTICLES
- March 28, 2019: Two Rulings Reject Latest Hollister Ranch Owners Efforts
- March 1, 2019:
- February 15, 2019:
- August 24, 2017:
Waste of time by Ms Limòn. The owners association knows they can fight this for years and then most likely win.
They recently discovered dozens and dozens of snowy plover nesting sites along that part of the coastline. Studies will have to be done, and sites must be protected.
Must people be everywhere? Give wildlife a break, and just stay away, please.
Don’t get past the mean high tide mark – the Hollister Ranch armed guards harass, threaten and steal.
If only it was about the wildlife! It is about the privileged wanting exclusivity where public domain is inherent. It’s no worse than the owners along Padero Lane in Carpinteria aggressively intimidating people walking on what they perceive as “their” beach.
Private beaches. Selfishness is all that can be said about the “entitled”. Padero Lane. Miramar Hotel.
Why is our government wasting time and money going through all of this. Within the next 12 years there won’t even be a beach along Hollister Ranch…it will all be under water. Even the most hardened critics would have to agree that within 50 years that part of the coast will be toast…gone forever.
Not exclusivity, but privacy on their own private property. No one up there is preventing people from enjoying the beach, which is public property. What this bill is trying to do is circumvent eminent domain (at least to portion that requires just compensation for the taking) and take private property (not the beach) in order to more easily access the public property (beach). This circumvention of just compensation and respect for private property rights is why, as MilliMesa said, this bill is a waste of time and won’t stand up in the courts.
I heard there is a new surf gang called ‘ the ranch locos’ Get ready for the surf wars!!! Now a bunch of entitled brats are going to show up from LA like they did to Rincon and make it a ZOO. It’s going to get ruined!!! Trash, crowds etc,,, it’s ruined thanks to our liberal-retard governor who is turning California into a homeless, drug infested nightmare!!!
Vote differently next election. You had choices last time. You will again. Elections have consequences. Vote with care; not just sound bites.
Is it their beach right down down to the mean high tide line – private property. The issue is how much “access” to the beach can the state demand. Plenty of public access to the Miramar Beach, but they do have the right to control the portion of the beach they actually own and pay property taxes on every year because of that private ownership.
Give wildlife a break? Did you know they can drive their vehicles on the beach at Hollister Ranch? Not sure now which part of the beach there, but I know it’s done.
For the edification of all: Snowy plovers nest on DRY SAND. If the tides come up to the cliffs, it’s sure bet there are no Snowy plovers nesting on those beaches.
This is a real shame
As someone who has been a guest on The Ranch many times, I can tell you that the guys who bought in on lots just so they can keep the surf all to themselves (and their buddies) are going to be sorely pissed about all of this. It’s shameful for a small group of landowners to shut people off from any beach in CA. That said, I don’t think opening up to the public is such a great thing. But . . . people keep having babies. People keep moving to CA. This is the future—–bumper to bumper humans.
If Limon did this as a mere Assemblywoman, just think of what she can do as state senator. Vote carefully. Nice to get some entirely new faces to represent our local interests. Why recycle failed leadership?
SAM THE DOG. Drive up to Hollister Ranch soon and report back how much luck you had getting access to the beaches there. Unless you walk in at low tide (hope you’re athletic) or boat in, you have ZERO access to the 14 surf breaks up there. Woe be to you if you try to set foot on the beach once you’ve boated into a cove. And, yes, people drive on the beach up there—–the property owners.
The coast won’t be “gone forever” — it’ll be inland of where it is now!
@ 4:12 PM You realize you provided 2 very feasible ways to access the beaches along Hollister Ranch then said “you have ZERO access” in the same sentence? I also didn’t know you needed to be “athletic” to walk and if you’re not athletic enough to walk you probably shouldn’t be surfing out in the ocean anyway. And no, people no longer drive on the beach up there, google prior articles. Phew! That was a lot of misinformation in just four sentences, do you work for CNN?
First off, the problem children at Rincon are not people from LA, they are the self appointed locals who think they deserve everything that comes through and just bad vibe all over the lineup. Second, it’s a treck to get out to the ranch–it’s not going to get that crowded. Third, the ranch owners at Hollister have been fouling their own nest for a long time, driving cars on the beach–which is total BS.
As if Ranch Owners haven’t been driving up and down the beach in their trucks for the past forty years? Come on.
Oh, really, so if I boat in and then decide to chill on the beach below the low tide line no one is going to hassle me? Dude, people get hassled IN THE WATER there, much less on the sand.
And by the way, don’t worry, I’ not planning on surfing there–I like less crowded spots and I know how to get to them.
My beach, my wave!
Yes elitist snobs enjoy breaking law.
A** holes will be A** holes no matter where the surf break is. Same at Rincon, the Shores, Wind n Sea, amoung many many others. I seriously doubt anyone who walked in is getting hassled just sitting on the beach.
SAM THE DOG. Read my comment again. I wrote “unless.” *Unless* you walk in or boat in. Or if you happen to know a property owner who signs you in (and your dog, too) and who wants to sit on the beach with you. You can’t even go to the beaches there unless the person who signed you in goes with you.
Which is why the HR owners probably shouldn’t get too bent–there are not going to be hordes of people showing up.
Hundreds of millions of dollars? You make that statement based on what? There is an existing easement that belongs to the State of California.
“the government trying to form division between the people” — LOL. The only ones doing that the folks demonizing this bill after already being signed and threatening baseless court battles.
I vote for whoever lieotum opposes.
Here’s the point: In CA the beaches are public property up to the mean high tide line. This “means” that the public must and should be allowed to access whichever beaches they please. Count me as one who has “set foot” on several stretches of beach from “Haskell’s to Gaviota.” As world population burgeons, I think it will be good for everyone if access is provided, if only for some of us to get away from other people for a while.
JQB- what is your stance on surf beach? vandenberg? If you had a fruit tree in the easement behind your house, would it be ok if your neighbors gained access to the tree by opening a gate and entering your backyard instead of walking around the block?
@ BUCKWHEAT——–I get where you’re coming from, but I also get what it’s like to be somewhere first and feel possessive of where one lives and the deep desire to want to protect it from those who won’t show love and respect. I was born and raised in Santa Barbara and keeping my hometown nice now pretty much feels like a lost cause. That said, I don’t think HR property owners own the beach. It’s time for them to appreciate that things are going to change for them. They will have to share. I just hope people are respectful and considerate of the gorgeous beaches they will now be allowed to visit.
Everytime someone rants about the ban on plastic straws, it is patently obvious that person is an ignoramus.
The Gaviota boat hoist has always been sabotaged by those who are trying to keep surfers and fishermen away from HR. Fix the hoist and next thing you know, it’s broken again. What’s the definition of insanity? “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.” (Albert Einstein)
DBD yard and property doesnt correctly describe public access to a beach. I’ve “set foot” on that beach and the northern SB county beaches for decades and am really f’ning tired of the @ssholes that live at the ranch, (aside of a few of my buddies that lease some land there), chasing people off, threatening them, all the while they continue to abuse and trash the beach and bluffs. So really…your opinion and those that just want to argue for the sake of arguing, can pi## off.
The lawyers are the real winners here this isn’t going anywhere. Those greedy landowners are easy to target another topic of the government trying to form division between the people. This will be in the courts for years. Meanwhile plastic straws and shampoo bottles are banned but real problems like homelessness and unsustainable budget liabilities are not tackled. The state cannot even maintain the roads or the campgrounds or repair the broken pier but they are going to spend hundreds of millions on a private property land grab to make a coastal trail? This is definitely going to the supreme court.
The boat hoist on the pier has long provide an easy way for non HR landowners to access hard to reach places of the Gaviota Coast. It’s been broken for what, a decade? All the money the State has spent in the courts could have gone towards getting the hoist working again and restored easy access to this stretch of coast. But that would require our political leaders to have some fiscal responsibility, instead they’re more concerned with padding their resumes for the next election.
“Unless” you ignore the 2 prior ways I provide to enter the ranch, as well as ignore the third I’m presenting now (know a friend), there are ZERO ways to access the Ranch….. seriously? Why does there have to be roads, parking, restrooms, and BBQ’s at every stretch of beach? And those facilities couldn’t be on public property, because they’d get destroyed by high tides so they’d have to be on someones private property. So let’s take that private land from the have’s and give it to you, the have not’s or choose not to’s so you can have a BBQ at an extremely remote beach. You know, the ocean and Channel Islands are a public resource, but I don’t have a boat, let’s enact legislation that would require every rich person who could afford a boat to leave 2 seats open on any voyage to the Channel Islands for members of the public.
345, you’re clearly a trump supporter lol…
Newsom is a very good governor. If you don’t feel that the people of California have a right to enjoy any beach, then perhaps this is the wrong region for you to reside in. There is no surf gang. I have friends who lease a huge portion of the ranch. They are surfers and skaters and they are some of the nicest people I know.
Rincon is a very special and well known surf spot and it’s not for locals only….lol there are no locals by rincon…this isn’t Hollywood beach or Pierpont in the 80s, or the Strand. Drug infested? Lol ok…whatever dude. Seems like you just like spouting off nonsense with nothing to back it up…it’s a beach. we all have a right to access it.
Bravo to Monique, Gavin, and Judge Stern for helping to make this happen! It’s been too long coming. As for the disgruntled HR residents, I suggest that they pool their money and buy an island somewhere where they won’t have to worry about intruders.
Who here has actually stepped foot on the beach between Haskells and Gaviota? They are hardly used as is, I just don’t see the point of spending millions of our tax dollars, and forcing people to give up parts of their property just to add a few more miles of similar coastline. Where are these people preaching for public access when it comes to the Plover and all the mess Lompoc has to deal with? Surf beach and Vandenberg are fine to keep off limits, but someones yard/property isnt’? I just don’t get it.
I grew up on Rincon since 1978. Used to be a tranquil place to surf and respect for our elders now every kook think thier a pro surfer and is entitled to every wave. Trump is god!!!!
Dude LA and Orange County looks bought into the ranch long ago. There’s this toad who kept his zodiac anchored at Augie’s so he could boat up to perkos, cojo , and govies; drop in on the locals on his longboard. Mysterious his boat ended up halfway to the islands on a strong offshore evening with the anchor and line coiled in the bow. Yes there are a bunch of a-holes up there including one prick of a realtor. But opening to the hordes? No I disagree wholeheartedly. The precedent this sets is amazing untenable. Now any oceanfront property must allow access to the beach over their private land. Next it will be all parcels abutting any public lands such as state parks, county parks, national forest, blm land. This was an incredibly uninformed decision meant only to pander to the electorate. It will harm the natural resources some of us value and choose to protect. Shame on Monique Limon for this anti-environment piece of legislation. PS No current affiliation with HR or owners. Never had any ownership interest. Know the place pretty damn well though.
YES! Vote the horrific climate denying foul crooked Republicans OUT! Return to a sense of respect for our environment and natural world. Vote to protect the Endangered Species Act and not open up our national parks to drilling, development and ranching!!!!!