• The Publisher’s Notebook •

An Adoptive Attitude toward Pacific Coast Highway

BY ANNE SOBLE

As laudable as it is that civic-minded volunteers gathered to pick up litter at Zuma Beach on Monday, that they had to do this at all points out the shortcomings in the state’s Adopt-a-Highway program. When the state Department of Transportation, better known by the contraction Caltrans, began the AAH program in 1989, some environmental activists involved in the fight to curb billboards and large signage in scenic areas were concerned that it was an end run around the new ban. But if the plan works as it is supposed to, the fact that the visitor’s view of the ocean is marred by a blue AAH sign might be a fair trade-off for a clean stretch of roadway. When an adopter commits to a location, especially a choice location passed by thousands of local residents in their many daily sojourns, it agrees to keep that stretch clean. If the adopter (a family, a company, a civic group) wants to do the work, Caltrans provides the safety gear, litter bags, etc. If an adopter doesn’t, they are expected to contract with a service, of which there are many, to do the work. In short, in return for public recognition 365 days a year for five years, they are expected to honor the bargain.

That there are stretches of Pacific Coast Highway that are adopted but not kept clean indicates some bargains may be in need of review. Caltrans acknowledges that it cannot monitor the AAH program closely and counts on citizens to inform it when there are problems at 213.897.4273, or www.adopt-a-highway.dot.ca.gov, so it can review an adoption’s renewal. We think renewals should be yearly and based on actual inspections. If an adopter does not have the resources to maintain the stretch it has selected, the location should be relinquished to one who can. That’s fair to the visitors to an area and the residents who live along that stretch of highway. If an area requires daily cleanup during the summer, perhaps it should not be eligible for adoption at all. Unspoiled viewline would be an extra benefit of the additional public expense that would be involved. Besides, wouldn’t it be ironic if people see the litter, then look at the sign and get a poor impression of the adopter? In addition, telling people that someone else is responsible for cleanup of an area may absolve them of any sense of responsibility for their own trash.