Critically think about what you’ve learned in class this week about California’s beaches through the historical lens as it relates to access equity and inclusion. Research you

Friends pose together on Lake Elsinore in 1946 | Courtesy the Walter L. Gordon Jr. Collection of William Beverly Jr.

A Look Back at California's Long-Lost African American Beaches and Vacation Spots In the new book 'Living the California Dream,' historian Alison Rose Jefferson looks back at leisure's place in

Black people's fight for civil rights

By Hadley Meares – May 4, 2020

It was the summer of 1925, and the Lake Shore Beach Club on Lake Elsinore in Riverside County was alive with the buzz of happy vacationers. “Everyone would hang out at the lake for picnics, swimming and some boating. It was like paradise to go out on the lake,” California native Milton Anderson recalled. At night guests would have supper at the dining pavilion and would dance to the sound of live bands. After a full day of summer fun, guests would sleep in wood frame tents or cabins before their journey back to Los Angeles in communal shuttles.

Once home, these black Californians were far from paradise, facing the daily injustices of life in Jim Crow-era America.

Historian Alison Rose Jefferson, author of the fascinating new book Living the California Dream: African American Leisure Sites During the Jim Crow Era, has a personal connection to the black resort communities that thrived on Lake Elsinore for decades. “My mother's family used to go there when she was growing up and I heard stories,” she says. “They would go there for a few weeks in the summer and they bought a couple of lots there, but they never built anything on it.”

Jefferson would go to Lake Elsinore only one time with her extended family, but this memorable trip, and the recollections of her elders, would set her on a years-long journey of research and discovery. In Living the California Dream, she documents the history of a long-overlooked network of African American leisure and recreation sites that flourished in SoCal from the 1910s to the 1950s. Along the way she uncovered stories of courage, community, and camaraderie in the California sun.

Boat races on Lake Elsinore in 1937

LAKE ELSINORE PUBLIC LIBRARY COLLECTION

For courage look no further than Willa Bruce, who in 1912 bought oceanfront property between 26th and 27th Streets in the small village of Manhattan Beach. There, she and her husband opened what came to be known as “Bruce's Beach,” a resort which would eventually include a snack stand, a bathhouse, and dance floor.

“Mrs. Bruce was amazing,” Jefferson says. “She bought that property down there in Manhattan Beach. And that was a long way then because you were still in the early days of the car. To get down there, you would have been initially going by public transportation- the streetcar, the train, or by horse and wagon. And she was determined to have this place. And she was harassed from day one after white people realized that she had bought the land. Within the first week of them opening, there was a story in the Los Angeles Times… about this little black resort in Manhattan Beach. And she said in the article that she knew her rights and that she was not going to be deterred from continuing to have her business.”

Mrs. Willa Bruce (left) with her daughter-in-law and sister on Bruce's Beach in the 1920s

CALIFORNIA AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSEUM

The Bruces' business flourished, and other black families built vacation homes in the area. However, harassment—which included mysterious fires, ticketing swimmers, and roping off the beach—intensified throughout the 1920s. In 1927, the city of Manhattan took control of the land to build a public playground, and Bruce's Beach was no more.

To Jefferson, this story perfectly illustrates that black Californians were fighting for more than the right to have a good time.

“African Americans were all over the place in terms of California…they were pursuing everything that everybody else was pursuing within the confines of the barrage of racial oppression that they sometimes would be experiencing because of the times,” Jefferson says. “They were developing various business practices around leisure just like everybody else was. They were trying to enjoy these experiences as well in these different picturesque areas and trying to have self-fulfillment and better opportunities for themselves. And these were also ways of fighting for freedom in terms of the struggle during this time period. Leisure was not an add-on in terms of civil rights—it was an essential component of civil rights and liberty.”

Pageant winners Florence LaRue and Bradley Polk at Val Verde Park in 1965

With the increasing enforcement of civil rights laws in the 1950s and '60s, black-owned leisure sites would virtually disappear, as African Americans had increasing number of options and black-owned businesses could not expand their base. “They couldn't get the broader business in terms of the full range of society,” Jefferson says. “So, there was this economic detour right as that occurred.”

One of these forgotten areas was in the neighborhood of Ocean Park in Santa Monica (particularly around the Civic Center), which featured a popular stretch of beach called “The Inkwell.” For Jefferson, this is the spot she wishes she could have visited in its heyday.

“Oh, the beach! I love going to the beach,” she laughs. “I'm a Californian!”

RELATED: Tucked Away Behind a Macy's Bed Display, a Lesson in Civil Rights History

Stay on top of the latest in L.A. food and culture. Follow us on Facebook.

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330912985

Coastal Access Equity and the Implementation of the California Coastal Act

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS

3 READS

82

5 authors, including:

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hawaii Resilience Project View project

Coastal Adaptation Center for Ocean Solutions View project

Lisa M. Wedding

University of Oxford

51 PUBLICATIONS   989 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Jesse Reiblich

College of William and Mary Law School

12 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jesse Reiblich on 06 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

89

Coastal Access Equity and the Implementation of the California Coastal

Act

Dan R. Reineman,A Lisa M. Wedding,B Eric H. Hartge,C Winn McEnery,D Jesse ReiblichE

The California Coastal Act, passed in 1976, protects public coastal access

for all Californians. In the forty years since the Act’s passage, the state’s population has nearly doubled with much of that growth occurring in the coastal zone, where the beaches and public trust shoreline are an important natural, open space resource. As such, they are beneficial to individual and community well-being. Inequities in access to nature (and other beneficial resources) are increasingly common. In this study, we evaluate and map the proximity of different demographic groups to public shoreline access points on California’s coast. In so doing, we identify disparities in the availability of coastal access opportunities to different groups and show that, in general, wealthy, white, senior residents of California live closer to coastal access than other groups, while populous minority groups are significantly underrepresented in terms of their proximity to coastal access points. We discuss these findings in light of environmental change (e.g., sea level rise) and responses to such changes (e.g., shoreline armoring), combined with social factors (e.g., continued population growth) and policy responses to such changes (e.g., climate adaptation planning). Our analyses set the stage for further place-based study of disparities in public coastal access, including their impacts on specific populations, as well as mechanisms intrinsic to the Coastal Act for increasing coastal access equity in California through the Act’s next forty years.

A Lecturer, School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences; Researcher, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Stanford University; [email protected], 202-556-0735.

B Research Associate in Spatial Ecology and Analysis, Center for Ocean Solutions. C Research Development Manager, Center for Ocean Solutions. D Formerly Geospatial Research Assistant, Center for Ocean Solutions. E Early Career Law & Policy Fellow, Center for Ocean Solutions.

90 STANFORD ENVIRONMENTAL LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 36:89

I. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………….. 90 II. BACKGROUND: COASTAL VALUE, PUBLIC COASTAL ACCESS, AND THE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE ………………………………………. 92 III. METHODS ………………………………………………………………………….. 95 IV. RESULTS ……………………………………………………………………………. 96 V. DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………………………….. 97 A. Addressing Public Access Disparities …………………………… 98 B. The Challenge of Sea Level Rise ………………………………. 100 C. Recommendations …………………………………………………… 102 D. Limitations & Next Steps …………………………………………. 103 VI. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………………. 104 APPENDIX ………………………………………………………………………………… 105

I. INTRODUCTION

One of the primary goals of California’s 1976 Coastal Act was to maximize public access to and along the coast for Californians.1 But like other ostensibly public goods, public access has traditionally been inequitably distributed between different groups—whether de jure or de facto.2 Access to resources, from clean air to food to open space, is a significant environmental justice issue and is inseparable from social and economic issues underlying sustainable environmental and resource management.3 Inequities between different groups of people have been documented in both their exposure to problematic environmental stressors, such as climate change,4 and also their access to critical resources, including food and medical care.5 With increasing frequency, however, inequities

1. CAL. PUB. RES. CODE § 30001.5 (West 2016) (stating that one of the goals of the Coastal Act is to “[m]aximize public access to and along the coast . . . .”).

2. See generally Annika Dahlberg, Rick Rohde, & Klas Sandell, National Parks and Environmental Justice: Comparing Access Rights and Ideological Legacies in Three Countries, 8 CONSERVATION AND SOCIETY 209 (2010); Robert García & Erica Flores Baltodano, Free the Beach! Public Access, Equal Justice, and the California Coast, 2 STAN. J.C.R.& C.L. 143 (2005); Hugh Millward, Public Recreational Access in the Countryside: Concepts and Measures of Physical Rigour, 7 JOURNAL OF RURAL STUDIES 241 (1991).

3. United Nations Environment Programme, Advancing Justice, Governance and Law for Environmental Sustainability, (June 22, 2012), http://www.unep.org/delc/Portals/119/ publications/Advancing_Justice_Governance_Law.pdf.

4. David S.G. Thomas & Chasca Twyman, Equity and Justice in Climate Change Adaptation Amongst Natural-Resource-Dependent Societies, 15 GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 115 (2005).

5. Maria Goddard & Peter Smith, Equity of Access to Health Care Services: Theory and

2016] COASTAL ACCESS EQUITY IN CALIFORNIA 91

are being documented in access to nature and open space.6 Lack of access to “recreational” resources is of growing concern as the physiological and psychological benefits of exposure to nature are better understood.7 Thus, inequitable access to these resources may have very real implications for health, happiness, and productivity.

The coastal zone is a common pool natural resource. Space in coastal areas will become increasingly limited due to rising seas, likely adding to the complexity and intensity of conflict and exacerbating potential for inequities in coastal access, unless preempted by thoughtful coastal planning. A changing climate and its associated impacts (e.g., rising seas, increased storm events) will serve as a risk multiplier, leaving the coasts both ecologically and socially vulnerable. In California, communities are responding to the threats of rising sea levels, growing coastal populations, and increasingly damaging storms by building armoring structures that may threaten or undermine coastal access by reducing the size of beaches, coastal access points, or both.8

Local governments have a role to play in ensuring that their local coastal programs conform to the strictures of the Coastal Act— California’s coastal zone management (CZM) law.9 Accordingly, these governments can take proactive steps to ensure that their coastlines continue to provide public access to all, especially in the

Evidence from the UK, 53 SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE 1149 (2001); H. Charles J. Godfray et al., Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People, 327 SCIENCE 812, 815 (2010).

6. Christopher G. Boone , Geoffrey L. Buckley , J. Morgan Grove & Chona Sister, Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland, 99 ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS 767, 769 (2009); Bethany B. Cutts, Kate J. Darby, Christopher G. Boone & Alexandra Brewis, City Structure, Obesity, and Environmental Justice: An Integrated Analysis of Physical and Social Barriers to Walkable Streets and Park Access, 69 SOCIAL SCIENCE AND MEDICINE 1314, 1315 (2009); Chona Sister, Jennifer Wolch & John Wilson, Got Green? Addressing Environmental Justice in Park Provision, 75 GEOJOURNAL 229, 243 (2009); Jennifer R. Wolcha, Jason Byrne & Joshua P. Newell, Urban Green Space, Public Health, and Environmental Justice: The Challenge of Making Cities “Just Green Enough”, 125 LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING 234, 235 (2014).

7. See generally Gregory N. Bratman, J. Paul Hamilton, & Gretchen C. Daily, The Impacts of Nature Experience on Human Cognitive Function and Mental Health, 1249 ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 118 (2012) (categorizing how humans interact with nature to lay a foundation for further exploration of the psychological benfits nature provides); Roly Russell et al., Humans and Nature: How Knowing and Experiencing Nature Affect Well-Being. 38 ANNUAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES 473 (2013) (creating a framework that links aspects of well-being to nature experience).

8. MOLLY LOUGHNEY MELIUS & MARGARET R. CALDWELL, ENV’T AND NAT. RES. LAW & POLICY PROGRAM, California Coastal Armoring Report: Managing Coastal Armoring and Climate Change Adaptation in the 21st Century (2015).

9. CAL. PUB. RES. CODE § 30005 (West 2016).

92 STANFORD ENVIRONMENTAL LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 36:89

face of rising seas. Particularly, local governments can engage in climate change adaptation planning to minimize inequitable economic and social losses in coastal access associated with climate change and to inform a more equitable implementation of the public access policies of the California Coastal Act. This paper examines the spatial distribution of public access to the coastline in California relative to the distribution of the state’s diverse residents and asks whether access to this important resource is equitably shared among all residents of California. We discuss results of these analyses in the context of decisionmaking regarding the management of California’s coastline and of access to it.

II. BACKGROUND: COASTAL VALUE, PUBLIC COASTAL ACCESS, AND THE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE

Coastal regions are epicenters of population and economic activity. In the United States, coastal counties constitute just 18% of the United States’ land area, but 37% of its population and 42% of its economic output.10 In California, shoreline counties are even more significant. In 2007, they comprised just 21% of the state’s land area, but 69% of its population, 66% of its jobs, and 69% of its GDP.11 With continued population growth, development pressures on the coast will continue to increase, driven in part by the productivity of the coastal economy, but also increasingly by the “quality of life” it offers.12 Beach recreation, which according to a 2005 estimate contributes $2.25–$7.5 billion annually to the state’s economy, is an important component of this coastal quality of life.13 The public’s ability to recreate on the state’s beaches is predicated on its ability to access them.14

The importance of equitable access to coastal resources and in particular to the shoreline has long been recognized and is enshrined within the common law public trust doctrine (PTD).15 In

10. JUDITH T. KILDOW ET AL., CENTER FOR THE BLUE ECONOMY, State of the U.S. Ocean and Coastal Economies 2009, https://www.miis.edu/media/view/8901/original /NOEP_Book_FINAL.pdf.

11. Id. 12. Jordan Rappaport & Jeffrey D. Sachs, The United States as a Coastal Nation, 8 J. OF

ECON. GROWTH 5 (2003). 13. Linwood Pendleton & Judith Kildow, The Non-Market Value of Beach Recreation in

California, 74 SHORE & BEACH, 34 (2006). 14. See, e.g., Jesse Reiblich, Greening the Tube: Paddling Toward Comprehensive Surf Break

Protection, ENVTL. L. & POL’Y J. 45, 52 (2013). 15. The PTD was first codified by the Roman emperor Justinian in the 6th century CE,

2016] COASTAL ACCESS EQUITY IN CALIFORNIA 93

the United States, public coastal access is a priority of the national Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, which calls on the states to separately prepare CZM programs to implement the priorities of the act, including the provision of “public access to the coasts for recreation purposes.”16 In a large scale review of CZM programs conducted in the late nineties, California placed high value on implementing public access measures and was relying on more tools than other states.17

In California, the PTD and public access to the coast are reflected in Article X. Section 4 of the state’s constitution, which declares that no entity “shall be permitted to exclude the right of way to [coastal and other] such water . . . [so that] access to the navigable waters of this State shall be always attainable for the people thereof.”18 Subsequently, this protection is codified in the California Coastal Act of 1976 (the State’s Coastal Zone Management implementing legislation), which states that “maximum access . . . shall be provided for all the people . . . . “19 In light of rapid coastal development, increasing property values, the growing income gap between rich and poor, and prominent instances of private property owners asserting their exclusive right to shoreline access,20 there is some question as to whether access to the California shoreline is equitably available for all Californians.21

This study addresses the fundamental question: to whom is shoreline access most readily available in California? This question is explored through spatial analysis of population, income, age, and race of Californians in relationship to their physical proximity to shoreline access points (derived from a database assembled and curated by the California Coastal Commission).22 We test the

who held that “[b]y the law of nature these things are common to mankind: the air, running water, the sea, and consequently the shores of the sea . . . No one, therefore, is forbidden to approach the seashore, provided that he respects habitations, monuments, and buildings which are not, like the sea, subject only to the law of nations.” Institutes of Justinian § II(I)(1).

16. 16 U.S.C. § 1452 (2) (E) (2016). 17. Pamela Pogue & Virginia Lee, Providing Public Access to the Shore: The Role of Coastal

Zone Management Programs, 27 COASTAL MANAGEMENT 219 (1999). 18. CAL. CONST. Art. X, § 4. 19. CAL. PUB. RES. CODE § 30210 (West 2016) (emphasis added). 20. See, e.g., Friends of Martin’s Beach v. Martin’s Beach 1 LLC, 246 Cal. App. 4th 1312

(1st D. 2016). 21. García & Baltodano, supra note 2, at 143. 22. A shoreline acce