Santa Cruz County homeowners hit with $4.7 million in fines, prop up fence amid beach access battles
APTOS — Amid litigation against Santa Cruz County and in defiance of more than $4.7 million in recent fines from a statewide regulatory agency, a group of beachfront Rio Del Mar homeowners erected new fencing this week, replacing older interim barriers that wall off a disputed stretch of land adjacent to Seacliff State Beach.
New chain link fences with plastic green panels were set up Monday and Tuesday on both ends of an almost quarter-mile-long paved area behind a row of homes at Beach Drive in Aptos, close to where it meets the roundabout and brick esplanade.
John Erskine, a partner at the law firm representing the Rio Del Mar Beach Island Homeowners Association, Nossaman LLP, said that new fencing is simply following through on a four-year lawsuit with Santa Cruz County that came out in favor of the homeowners in 2022 and their right to the private patio areas.
RELATED: Coastal Commission slams a group of Santa Cruz County homeowners with $4.7 million in penalties
The county tore down a previous iteration of the fencing in 2018, asserting that it was a public walkway and a vital resource for local beachgoers.
Erskine said filings in recent weeks that stem back to the court’s 2022 decision allowed “that original fencing to be put up and to remain until any final ruling by the court of appeal.”
“We believe that the temporary fencing is authorized by the superior court order and is simply replacing fences that were illegally demolished by a third party, namely by the county of Santa Cruz, and so are exempt from the requirement for any permit from the county,” said Erskine, referring to the new green fencing that replaced large plastic orange barriers established after storms last winter.
Supervisor Zach Friend, who represents Rio Del Mar and has long advocated for the area as a public access point, told the Sentinel Wednesday that, after checking with the county’s Community Development and Infrastructure department, no request or application for a permit with the county had been located.
“Whether it’s trashcans blocking the sidewalk in front of the Beach Drive homes or newly-erected fences blocking the coastal walkway it sure seems like a lot of time, effort and money is being spent to prevent any sort of safe, public access to the area,” wrote Friend in an email.
He said the court’s judgment hasn’t been finalized yet, preventing an option for appeal, but added that “the county will keep all of our options open” after the judgment is finalized.
Coastal Commission continued
The new fencing also comes in the wake of a unanimous decision by the California Coastal Commission to levy its highest fee in Santa Cruz County history against the homeowners in December.
Using enforcement powers of its own, the commission fined the homeowners more than $4.7 million based, in part, on a determination that they had been blocking public access to the coastal walkway with plastic barriers and a seawall. All this was done, it contended, despite issuance in the 1980s of an encroachment permit from the county and coastal development permit from the commission that were based on the preservation of public access to the walkway. The commission’s easements, the enforcement staff said, frequently require public access to both public and private properties, so who owns the walkway was irrelevant.
The Dec. 14 meeting last year also featured an extended rebuttal from the lawyers representing the homeowners association, who claimed that the commission’s staff was rewriting the original text of the development permit and misquoted findings in misleading ways. All this, the attorney said, in the face of a ruling from a superior court judge in their favor.
Despite the defense, all 12 voting members of the Coastal Commission, including 3rd District Santa Cruz County Supervisor Justin Cummings, voted in favor of the penalties with Cummings adding that he thought they were “a little light.”
Just days after, the association filed a lawsuit Dec. 20 against the commission, calling its meeting “hastily scheduled and pre-ordinated.”
The lawsuit stayed the commission’s order and penalties while the court proceedings, which the homeowners association expects will take 12 to 24 months, play out.
A representative from the Coastal Commission, as a matter of policy, declined to comment on the pending litigation but confirmed that the agency had not issued a coastal development permit for the new fence or previous structures.
This story will be updated.
View more on Silicon Valley