This land was a valuable public resource, ceded for no financial consideration.<\/p>\n
![\"Waves](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/2017-near-point-arena-california-133551032.jpg\")
California has given away 136 acres of coastal land in Mendocino County to a group of three Indian tribes. Getty Images<\/p>\n
The key questions are obvious:<\/p>\n
What is the land\u2019s market value? Why give it away for essentially nothing? And what does the public really gain from this apparent handout?<\/p>\n
While politicians like to virtue-signal about \u201creturning\u201d native land \u2014 a policy that never extends to their own real estate, of course \u2014 it\u2019s unclear how overtaxed Californians benefit from giving public assets away.<\/p>\n
Even so: This was enough of a priority for state officials that they spent years ensuring that it happened.<\/p>\n
In 2021, legislators passed and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill authorizing the giveaway to Kai Poma \u2014 a nonprofit controlled by three tribes with ties to the region: the Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians, Round Valley Indian Tribes and Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians.<\/p>\n
The land was officially ceded in June.<\/p>\n
![\"California](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/california-gov-gavin-newsom-arrives-131424537_e0eea2.jpg\")
In 2021, legislators passed and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill authorizing the giveaway to Kai Poma. AP Photo\/Jon Cherry<\/p>\n
Question: Why did the legislation authorizing this giveaway specify the transfer to occur \u201cat no cost,\u201d yet fail to include an appraisal of the land?<\/p>\n
Shouldn\u2019t the public know what an asset is worth before the state hands it to a private group? Seems basic.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s also fair for state residents to wonder: Why, with taxes so high and the state constantly spending more than it collects from residents, should California hand over a vast tract of land for no financial consideration?\u00a0<\/p>\n
Such \u201ctransfers\u201d also raise questions going forward.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The acreage had been acquired by the state\u2019s transportation department, now Caltrans, in the 1960s to support the State Route 1 corridor.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSign up for the California Morning Report newsletter\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tCalifornia’s top news, sports and entertainment delivered to your inbox every day.\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\tThanks for signing up!\n\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
The current giveaway, on the premise that Caltrans no longer needs the property and does a poor job maintaining it, sets a troubling precedent.<\/p>\n
Which public resources might the agency seek to hand out next, and at what cost to taxpayers?<\/p>\n
From a legal standpoint, the transfer is not a gift of public funds because it was specifically authorized by legislators, and because nonfinancial consideration was ostensibly received by the state.<\/p>\n
The latter claim is dubious, at least in practical terms.<\/p>\n
The legislation requires the tribes to conserve the land and allow at least some public access, for instance.\u00a0<\/p>\n
But the land already had been conserved and the public already had access to the land.\u00a0<\/p>\n
So what would Californians gain, exactly?<\/p>\n
Perhaps the tribes will more effectively manage the land than Caltrans did, as the state has claimed.<\/p>\n
But if that\u2019s the advocates\u2019 key argument, is there a written plan to better steward the property? And if no such plan exists, how could state officials know this was a good idea?<\/p>\n
It\u2019s also fair to wonder if \u2014 down the road \u2014 the \u201cdeal\u201d will evolve into something even more beneficial to the tribes, with fewer public protections.<\/p>\n
The entire process appears, from Californians\u2019 perspective, less than rigorous and not particularly transparent.<\/p>\n
Legislators and the governor should treat public assets as belonging to the public, and not as baubles for politicians to give away as they wish.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"From the \u201cIt looks bad, even if it\u2019s legal\u201d files: California has given away 136 acres of coastal…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":388864,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[7,9,8,8151,457,156718,5551,975,121,1967],"class_list":["post-388863","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-california","tag-california","tag-california-headlines","tag-california-news","tag-department-of-transportation","tag-gavin-newsom","tag-indians","tag-legislature","tag-opinion","tag-sacramento","tag-transportation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/388863","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=388863"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/388863\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/388864"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=388863"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=388863"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=388863"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}