Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3930 - SB 940 or HR 4484RESOLUTION N0. 3930 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORAIA, PETITIONING 2 THE CONOR ^SS OF THE UITED STATES TO ACT FA- VORABLY UPON AND ADOPT SILL S. 940 OR H.R. 4484 • 3 PENDING IN THE 82nd CONGRESS. 4 i 5 WHEREAS, the several states, their grantees, and others acting pursuant 6 to the authority granted by said states since July 4, 1776, or since the for - 7 maticn of said states and their admission to the Union. have exercised full 8 powers of ownership of all lands beneath navigable waters within their respec- 9 tive boundaries and all natural resources, including fish and marine life Within 10 state lands and waters, and full coatrol'of said natural resources with the full 11 acquiescence and approval of the United States, and in accordance with many pro - 12 InOuncsmsnts of the Supreme Court of the United States and decisions of the execu- 13 tive departments of the Federal,Government that such lands and resources were 14 I vested in the respective,states as an incident to state sovereignty, and the 15 exercise of such powers of ownership and control has not in the past impaired or 16 interfered with, and will not - impair or interfere With, the exercise by the Fed - 17 eral Government of its constitutional powers in relation to said lands and navi- 18 gable waters and to the control and regulation of commerce, navigation, national 19 defense and international relationst and 20 WHEREAS, the several states, their grantees and persons acting pursuant 21 to said authority granted by said authority granted by said states, including 22 many municipalities and public port authorities, have expended enormous sums of 23 money on improving and reclaiming said lands and developing the natural resources 24 in said lands and waters in full reliance upoln the validity of their titles= and 25 WREREAS, in the cases of the United States vs. California, United States 26 vs. Texas and United States vs. Louisiana, the Supreme Court of the United States 27 held that the Federal Government is possessed of paramount rights in and full do- 28 minion and power over lands, minerals and other things underlying the so- called 29 marginal sea, and thereby made a distinction between said so- called marginal sea 30 on the one hand and bays, ports, harbors and Other inland navigable waters on the 31 other, and has refused to apply the marginal sea rules of ownership which it has 32 erstofore applied to bays, ports, harbors and other inland waters, and held that -1- S —2— 1 '4he coastal states have no rights of ownership in the so- called marginal sea • 2 belt within their resnective boundaries or the lands beneath it or reclaimed • 3 therefrom or the natural resuurdes in said waters and lands; and 4 WHEREAS, prior to said decisions it was judicially recognized that the 5 several states not only owned the tidelands and lands beneath the bays, ports, 6 harbors and other inland navigable waters within their res_ectiira boundaries but also owned the lands beneath all navigable waters, including the so- called 8 marginal sea belt within their respective boundaries, whether inland or not. and 9 that such state boundaries extended, at least, three miles seaward; and 10 WEREAS, in the government brief in the case of United States vs. Cali - 11 fornia, the theory of state ownership of lands beneath inland navigable waters 12 is attacked as "erroneous ", punsound ", "wrong", and a "legal fiction," and it is I 13 believed that the theory announced by the majority opinion of the Supreme Court 14 I in said case, as a basis for the decision reddered therein, can be equally ap- 15 plied to all lands underlying inland navigable waters located in inland states 16 as well as coastal states; and 17 WEM MS, in said California case Mr. Justice Reed, in dissenting, saidt 18 "This ownership in California would not interfere in any way with the 19 needs or rights of the.United States in war or peace. The power of the United 20 States is plenary over these undersea lands precisely as it is over every river, 21 farm, mine and factory of the nation ;" and 22 WHEREAS, in said Texas case Mr. Justice Reed and Mr. Justice Minton, in 23 dissenting, stated$ 24 "The necessity for the United States to defend the land and to handle 25 international affairs is not enough to transfer property rights is the marginal 26 sea from Texas to the United States. Federal sovereignty Is paramount within 27 national boundaries, but federal ownership depends on taking possession, as the 28 California case holds; on consent, as is the case of places for federal use; or 29 oa purchase, as is the case of Alaska or the Territory of Louisiana. The needs 30 of defense and foreign affairs alone cannot transfer ownership of an ocean bed 31 from a state to the Federal Government any more than they could transfer iron 32 ore under uplands from state to federal ownership. National responsibility is t —2— 1 greater in respect to the marginal sea than it is toward every other particle • 2 American territory;" • 3 and 4 WHEREAS, the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States ren- 5 dered in United States vs. California, United Stites va. Texas and United Sta 6 vs. Louisiana, together with subsequent pending proceedings in said California q case, place in jeopardy the ownership, use, development and control of said tid 8 lands and submerged lands, together with the vast improvements constructed ther 9 on; and the theory of "paramount powers" announced by said court as a basis for I 10 the decisions in said cases constitutes a most serious precedent that may be us 11 by the Federal Government in the seizure of property rights without just coupon 12 cation guaranteed by the provision of the Fifth Amendment to the Federal Con - 13 stitution; and 14 WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of the United States, in its decision of 15 United States vs. California, recognised that the question of ownership and 16 trol of said submerged lands and natural resources therein is a legislative 17 ter in that the court stateds 18 "We have said that the constitutional power of Congress in this respect 19 is without limitation . . . Thus neither the Courts nor the executive agencies, 20 could proceed contrary to an Act of Congress in this congressional area of na- 21 tional power," 22 23 and the >t Congress will not execute its powers "in such a way as to bring about 24 injusticse to states; their subdivisions or persons acting pursuant to their 25 permission;" and 26 WEEMS, in said decisions, the United States Supreme Court, although 27 holding that the Federal Government has paramount rights in and power over the 28 "marginal sea belt," however, it did not hold that the Federal Government is the 29 owner thereof, and it is desirable and in the public interests that Congress of 30 the United States shall exercise its constitutional powers in accordance with 31 and not adversely to the heretofore recognized state ownership of such waters 32 I and the lands beneath them; and -3- .qry 1 2 • 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 WUREAS, there is pending in the 82nd Ccngress of the Unite. States 5.940, entitled, 8 A BILL To co11lirm and establish the title of the States to lands beneath navigable waters within State boundaries and natural resources within such lands and resouroes,s and H. R. 4484, entitled, o A BILL To ^onfirm and establish the titles of the States to land: beneath navigable waters within State boundaries and to the natural resources within such lands and waters, to provide for the use and control of said lands -and resources, and to provide for the nee, control, explorvtion, development, and conservation of certain resource of the Continental shelf lying, outside of State boundaries, d and under the pro- visions of each of said billet the United States would recognize, confirm, es- tablish and vest in the respective Ststess their grantees and successors in in- terest, title, ownership and control of all lands beneath navigable waters withl the boundaries of such states and in and to all natural resources within such lands and waters; and to approve and confirm the boundaries of the several coastal states as extending, at least, three geographical miles seaward of the coast lips and outside island waters, and the boundaries of the several states on the Great Lakes to extend to the international boundaries of the United State and WHESAS, a nefarious campaign to disseminate false and misleading pro- paganda relating to the issues, facts, rights, esuitiez and justice supporting the basis and reasons for the enactment of the above referred to legislation i; law, has been and is now underway for the avowed purpose of Influencing public opinion and members of Congress in such a manner as to bring about the defeat i the enactment of said legislation, HOW, THRREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REWi'ORT BEACH RESOLVES AS FOLLOWSt Section 1. The City of New -port 13each, by and through its City Council, does hereby petition the Congress of the United States to act favorably upon adopt S. 940 or H. R. 4484, pending in the Eighty- Second Congress, or similar legislation, designed to accomplish the objects and purposes aforesaid. Section 2. That the Congress of the United States is urged to reject and defeat any legislation which by its provisions will authorise any Federal -4- I 1 depar%ent or agency to grant leases on or exercica y p ro riet � y rie t in or • 2 to the aforesaid lands lying beneath navigable waters within the boundaries of • 3 tha states, or in and to the natural resources within such lands and waters. 4 Section 9. That the City Attorney be, and he is horsby` authorizod 'to 5 present to the members of Congress and the appropriate committoec thereof all 6 I matters pertinent to favourable action upon and adoption by Congress of S. 940 7 I or H. R. 4484, and /or similar legislation, and in-opposition to W legislation 8 authorising say Federal department or agency to grant leases on or exercise any 9 proprietary right in or to lands beneath navigable waters within the boundaries 10 of the states or in and to the natural resources within such lands and waters. 11 Section 4. That each legislative body of the various states, county 12 governments and municipalities, and tho officials of each thereof, public port 13 authorities, boards of education, chambers of commerce, and civic bodies and 14 " organizations interested in the preservation of our constitutional form of gover: 15 ment, are hereby requested to actively support favorable action u:on said lsGis- 16 lotion and take all appropriate and proper measures as shall assure the adoption 17 of said legislation by the Congress of the United States. 18 Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of t5le Resolu- 19 tion by the City Council of the City or Newport Beech. 20 The above and foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a re- 21 Baler meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 14th 22 day of January, 1952, by the following vote, to -wits 23 AYES, COUNCILIM: Fiuoh, Ramsay, Rlue, Ureelor. Isbell 24 ROSS, COUNCILMM: Note 25 ABSENT COUNCIUMNi Zone 26 27 �'-- Mayor 28 ATTEST: 29 30 City Clerk 31 I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by 32 the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, at its regular meeting of January 14th, 1952. A/ 0— C. °!t s eS i _ City Clerk 4b 0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ) I, MARGERY SCHROUDER, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that according to the records of the City of Newport Beach filed and maintained in my office, the foregoing Resolution No. 3930 was duly and regularly adopted, passed, and approved by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held at the regular meeting place thereof, on the 14th day of January 19 52 by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCILMEN: Finch, Ramsey, Blue, Greeley, Isbell NOES, COUNCILMEN: ABSENT, COUNCILMEN: Dated this None None 27th day of December 3 1957. ty Clerk anp Ex-Officio Clerk of the City Council, City of Newport Beach, State of California. K