David Lebowitz’s statement in “UCSD withdraws, then resubmits, application to continue Scripps Coastal Reserve closure” (May 8, La Jolla Light) perfectly captures my own frustration regarding UC San Diego’s continued closure of Scripps Coastal Reserve.
In what world does the university think it is acceptable to indefinitely restrict public access while dragging out the permitting process?
For years, UCSD has operated as if it is above the law, maintaining an illegal closure without first securing the required coastal development permit under the California Coastal Act. This is not just a bureaucratic delay, it is a brazen disregard for public rights.
The [California] Coastal Commission must enforce its mandate and UCSD must reopen the reserve immediately. Our coastline belongs to the people, not to institutions that believe they can rewrite the rules to suit their misguided interests.
At the core, this is about much more than coastal access. UCSD’s conduct raises a fundamental question: Does the university respect the rule of law or does it believe its power exempts it from ability?
Until UCSD stops treating adherence to the law as an afterthought, I urge my fellow La Jollans to me in withholding all donations to the university.
Ghalia Mohder
— — —
Enough is enough!
The Scripps Coastal Reserve is a public treasure meant to be shared, studied and stewarded with the community, not cordoned off behind indefinite closures and restricted access.
While UCSD’s desire to protect sensitive habitats is commendable, the continued limitation of public entry, under the guise of conservation, raises legitimate concerns about transparency, ability and long-term intent.
The reserve was closed in response to COVID-19, a reasonable measure at the time, but five years later, the public still awaits full reinstatement of access. UCSD’s application for retroactive permission to maintain locked gates, rather than pursue open access with reasonable safeguards, suggests a preference for managing the reserve in isolation. This is not what the California Coastal Act envisions.
Public lands belong to the people. Managed access, enhanced education programs and seasonal protections for wildlife are all viable alternatives that promote environmental stewardship and public inclusion. Instead, UCSD’s approach appears to sidestep permitting requirements while gradually normalizing restricted entry.
The community is not asking for unchecked access, only a fair balance that respects both ecological preservation and the public’s right to responsibly enjoy coastal spaces. Prolonging closure without a transparent long-term plan only deepens public mistrust and undermines the university’s role as a steward of public land.
It is time to reopen the reserve with clear boundaries, enforceable protections and collaborative oversight that includes community voices. Conservation should not come at the cost of public exclusion.
Steven-Paul Lapid
What’s on YOUR mind?
Letters published in the La Jolla Light express views from readers about community matters. Submissions of related photos also are welcome. Letters reflect the writers’ opinions and not necessarily those of the newspaper staff or publisher. Letters are subject to editing. To share your thoughts in this public forum, email them with your first and last names and city or neighborhood of residence to [email protected]. The deadline is 5 p.m. Friday for publication in the following Thursday’s paper. Letters without the writer’s name cannot be published. Letters from the same person are limited to one in a 30-day period. ♦
