Court Opinion

ID: 9580725
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:08:03.010957+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:36:28.623132
License: Public Domain

ADAMS, Judge,
concurring specially.
Although I concur in full with the majority opinion, the result in these cases raises concerns regarding the efficacy of the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act, OCGA § 12-5-280 et seq. We have concluded the Coastland Marshlands Protection Committee has no authority to address the effect that upland development will have on the marshland, even where, as here, the upland development and the marshland development are interconnected. Although other federal and state laws exist to address problems with wastewater and runoff, the existing patchwork of regulations may not successfully preserve this delicate and irreplaceable ecosystem. I write separately to urge *535the legislature to consider whether broadening the scope of the CMPA to address such issues would better serve the marshland the CMPA is designed to protect.
Decided July 11, 2007
Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Isaac Byrd, Deputy Attorney General, John E. Hennelly, Senior Assistant Attorney General, James D. Coots, Assistant Attorney General, James A. Chamberlin, Jr., for Coastal Marshlands Protection Committee.
Smith & Floyd, Charles C. Smith, Jr., Smith, Gambrell & Russell, Stephen E. O’Day, Alston & Bird, Beverlee E. Silva, Christopher K. DeScherer, Mary Maclean Doolan Asbill, for Center for a Sustainable Coast et al.
King & Spalding, Patricia T. Barmeyer, for Point Peter, LLLP
McKenna, Long & Aldridge, R. Todd Silliman, Karsman, Brooks & Callaway, Dana F. Braun, Hunter, Maclean, Exley & Dunn, Frank J. Perch, Andrew H. Ernst, Julie V. Mayfield, amici curiae.