The city is no longer obligated to shoo the seals from Children’s Pool since a Superior Court judge dissolved the 2008 injunction on Nov. 13. Superior Court Judge Timothy Taylor indicated he agreed with the previous judge’s rulings, but that new legislature has altered the case. Namely, State Senator Christine Kehoe introduced State Bill 428 to permit Children’s Pool to also be used as “a marine mammal park for the enjoyment and educational benefit of children.” The bill will take effect Jan. 1, 2010.     “It is the court’s view that nothing would be gained by insisting on compliance with the earlier orders for the next 48 days,” wrote Taylor in his decision. The decision about what to do with Children’s Pool now lies in the hands of City Council. Paul Kennerson, the attorney from La Jolla who first sued the city to return the beach to its 1941 configuration as a pool for children, has not yet decided whether he will appeal. “I’m not the only vote in the game,” Kennerson said. “It’s really a community issue. I pay a lot of attention to what the community says. It’s not my beach or Valerie O’Sullivan’s beach.”  Kennerson represented swimmer and former La Jollan Valerie O’Sullivan who was charged by the city for harassing the seals after swimming in the cove. Kennerson opposed Kehoe’s amendment to include a “marine mammal park” in the trust, calling it “unconstitutional.”  “[The judge] gave every benefit of the doubt to the validity of the statute,” Kennerson said. “I don’t believe it’s the right thing to do.” District 1 Councilwoman Sherri Lightner did not comment on the future of the beach, but spokeswoman Erin Demorest said Lightner is committed to upholding the law and court decisions. “If that’s the new law, then we’ll have to figure how the city can work within the confines of the new law,” Demorest said. Seal activist Bryan Pease, an attorney for the Animal Protection and Rescue League, applauded the ruling as “a victory for seals, a victory for children and a victory for people who like to come to watch the seals.” The City Attorney’s Office also issued an e-mail to applaud the ruling. “In February, our office recommended that the City of San Diego sponsor legislation to change the terms of the trust to give the City discretion on use of the beach,” wrote City Attorney Jan Goldsmith. “Today’s decision means that the issue can now be decided by the City Council and Mayor, the way public policy issues are supposed to be decided.”   City attorney sets it straight Goldsmith issued a memo this past June to clarify misconceptions surrounding the Children’s Pool.   The land: The State of California owns the beach and owns all property rights involved. The city entered a trust with the state – not with Ellen Browning Scripps. “As opined by the attorney general, if the state wants to change the terms of this trust, it can do so as the property owner,” Goldsmith stated in the memo. The seals: “With limited exceptions, federal law prohibits removal of the seals,” Goldsmith wrote. “Whether those exceptions apply is subject to litigation. If they do apply, federal law dictates the method of removal – and it is quite involved. Hence, the $700,000 cost. The federal government has instructed us in writing that allowing dogs to harass the seals is a federal crime and they will enforce the law.” The endgame: “Removal of the seals does not end the matter,” Goldsmith wrote. “The state court order would also require that the beach sand be dredged, contaminants removed and the beach be reconfigured to its 1941 geography. The estimate on this is an additional $1 million for the dredging plus the environmental impact report and a lot of years seeking approval from the Coastal Commission and other agencies and defending environmental lawsuits.”