The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTC Digest 2016-02-12TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST February 8-12, 2016 TIBURON Correspondence, Notices and other Information 1. Email - Feb. 8 - Helping the Homeless Town of Tiburon Commissions, Boards & Committees 1. Acceptance: Mike Tollini - DRB 2. Acceptance: Bryan Chong - DRB 3. Acceptance: Philip Feldman - POST 4. Acceptance: Michael McMullen - POST 5. Acceptance: Daniel Amir - H&A 6. Acceptance: Kenna Norris - H&A Agenda, Minutes 1. Agenda - Feb. 18 - Tiburon Design Review Board 2. Agenda - Feb. 23 - Heritage & Arts REGIONAL, NOTICES AND AGENDA Correspondence, Notices and other Information 1. Meeting - Feb. 24 - MCCMC 2. Meeting - Feb. 25 - Center for Creative Land Recycling 3. Newsletter - The Rotide - Feb. 3 4. Newsletter - Bay Area Monitor - Feb/Mar Agenda, Minutes 1. Agenda - Feb. 11- Richardson Bay Region Bay Agency 2. Agenda - Feb. 11- Marin LAFCO 3. Agenda - Feb. 17 - Marin LAFCO Gel DIGEST From: Hugo & Cynthia Landecker [mailto:ciandeckerC0.saber.net] Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 10:31 PM To: Greg Chanis Subject: Helping the homeless Town Council, I head up San Rafael Group that has now grown to 500 and is growing rapidly. I send out daily emails on the subject of homelessness to all in the group. These emails go to'all parts of Marin County, including some Tiburon residents. You are welcome to join the group too. I thought this email that I sent out yesterday to the group would be of particular interest to you. Good morning, Another perspective This letter to the editor appeared in the Marin IJ yesterday. I know lots of you will comment on this! The letter refers to a Dick Spotswood column 'that I had sent to San Rafael Group previously. I only wish the SMART right of way was extended to Tiburon. What has happened on the right of way is not acceptable for any community and I am sure that if this happened in Tiburon, the letter would be much different. What San Rafael faces on a daily basis would never never be tolerated in Tiburon either. Her perspective of homeless is so distorted that she is blind to the problems on the streets. Don't forget that most homeless prefer to not take advantage of REST. The men's REST has a capacity of 40 and operates at capacity only during periods of the most severe weather. Many homeless men are not allowed in the program due to the inability to conform to their requirements. She is seeing only the "elite" of the homeless community. To further enhance her perspective is the fact that those she has contact with are only seen in Tiburon for only a few moments. They are whisked away early in the morning to St Vincents in San Rafael for breakfast. They then roam the streets of San Rafael all day, with their possessions, often in inclement weather, to await the next departing REST bus that leaves about 6 PM. This is called compassion and empathy. I call it inhumane.. Sally just doesn't see it that way. Maybe she should come to San Rafael for the day and see "her" homeless that she is so familiar with roaming the streets. BTW, maybe someone can forward this email to Sally. I would like to hear from her and maybe she would join San Rafael Group! 1 The letter: Homeless people don't need false stereotypes In response to Dick Spotswood's column on Feb. 1 regarding the SMART train, I was saddened to read the perpetuation of false stereotypes of homeless people. Many homeless people are not psychologically impaired, except perhaps what would result from living in all weather, in fear of their few personal items being stolen, little food and no shelter. Why would you assume that their bicycles are "stolen?" Where exactly do you think local agencies should place these people other than out of sight of SMART train riders? I invite you to join the Community Congregational Church in Tiburon on Thursday nights, when we host homeless men through REST and sit down and just talk to several of our guests. I think you would be surprised to hear their stories and how close you and I could come to being in their shoes. A downward spiral is very easy in our present society. They are human beings who, I believe, deserve to be treated as such and helped to live a life without fear, scarcity and the attitude that they "sully" the grounds. I look forward to seeing you at REST on Thursday nights. — Sally Doyle, Tiburon Albert Park I got this email yesterday from a female dog walker and downtown employee. I just was taking shop dog for walk and witnessed this guy masturbating on grounds of Albert Park...I ran back to shop, grabbed camera, and took his picture. I was afraid to eget any closer , sorry that pic is not very good. Obviously he was done so to speak but this is second one I witnessed in public view near Safeway/ Albert Park. Sadly. 1 no longer see children playing in the park, they have been run out by homeless/ dniggies, etc. I don't bother to call police anymore as there is no point. However , felt you should be aware this is happening in a public park ....and near business' and as you know , not the first time. Hugo comment: Clearly, what this guy is doing is against our Municipal Code on at least several fronts. We all realize that police cannot be everywhere all the time. A call to the Police Department would have been appropriate. 2 3 Diane Crane Iacopi To: Subject: Diane Crane Iacopi FW: DRB From: Mike Tollini[mailto:mike.tollini(agmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 9:41 AM To: Diane Crane Iacopi Subject: Re: DRB Hi Diane - I'm still in, too. Mike On Tuesday, February 9, 2016, Diane Crane Iacopi <Dcrane@townoftiburon.org> wrote: Hi, Mike, I have not heard from you yet. Are you in? - I'll need to know by around Feb. 22 in order to start preparing my staff report for the Council. No hurry --just wanted to let you know. Thanks! Diane Crane Iacopi Tiburon Town Clerk 1 7.zb DIGEST Diane Crane lacopi From: Bryan Chong <bryan@chonger.com> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 2:32 PM To: Diane Crane lacopi Cc: (Tiburon Design Review Board) Mike Tollini Subject: DRB Hi Diane, EE11'6 ��?I - 201 L TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON Thanks for the letter. I would be interested in seeking an additional term on the DRB. Regards, Bryan Chong brvanZchonger.com 415-789-9009 Office 415-377-3867 Mobile 1 Diane Crane lacopi Tel 7-2 LI iii l From: Feldman, Philip <pfeldman@coblentzlaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 9:20 PM To: Diane Crane lacopi Subject: POST Dear Diane, thank you for your letter regarding my expiring term as a POST Commissioner. I have enjoyed serving as a Commissioner, and I would be glad to renew my commitment for another term. However, I am also aware that others may wish to serve the community in this way. If there are other qualified applicants who wish to serve, I would not want to prevent that opportunity. So please except my willingness and desire to continue serving as long as it is not standing in the way of another applicant that the Council feels would be well- qualified. Thank you very much! Phil Philip B. Feldman Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass, LLP (415) 772-5720 (Dictated to Siri - please forgive her typos!) 1 10'[ ED:GEST Diane Crane Iacopi From: Michael McMullen <mike@rocfin.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 9:36 AM To: Diane Crane Iacopi Subject: POST expiring term Hi Diane, In response to your letter regarding expiration of my POST commission appointment, I am interested in seeking appointment to another term. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks, Mike Michael McMullen 415.652.8061 mike@rocfin.com 1 75ThIGEST Diane Crane Iacopi From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: daniel amir <daniel_amir@yahoo.com> Monday, February 08, 2016 10:32 AM Diane Crane Iacopi Patti Pickett H&A Commissioner renewal Diane, I hope this email finds you well. I wanted to let you know that I am interested in renewing my term for another four years on the commission. Let me know if you need anything else from me. All the best, Daniel IE��L,� �j.0 !" 2.16 Li FLiJ L�IJ TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON 1 To- & DIGEST Diane Crane Iacopi Subject: FW: Your term with Heritage and Arts From: Kenna Norris [mailto: kennaknorris@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 1:56 PM To: Patti Pickett Cc: Diane Crane Iacopi Subject: Re: Your term with Heritage and Arts Hi Diane, I would like to continue my appointment to the Tiburon Heritage & Arts Commission. Please let me know if you need more information from me. Thank you, Kenna 415.699.7907 From: Kenna Norris [mailto:kennaknorris@amail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 10:32 AM To: Patti Pickett Subject: Re: Your term with Heritage and Arts Hi Patti, Yes, I did receive the letter and plan to renew my term. Is it ok to send Diane an email with my intent? Thanks, Kenna 1 TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Ai ce. I Regular Meeting Design Review Board February 18, 2016 7:00 P.M. AGENDA TIBURON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Tollini, Vice Chair Kricensky, Boardmembers Chong, Cousins and Emberson ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Design Review Board on any subject not on the agenda may do so under this portion of the agenda. Please note that the Design Review Board is not able to undertake extended discussion, or take action on, items that do not appear on this agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to Town Staff for consideration and/or placed on a future Design Review Board agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3) minutes. Any communications regarding an item not on the agenda will not be considered part of the administrative record for that item. STAFF BRIEFING (if any) NEW BUSINESS 1. 2225 VISTAZO EAST STREET: File No. VAR2015022/DR2015145; Shor Capital, LLC, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with a Variance for excess lot coverage. The applicant proposes to construct a new 5,830 square foot house. The lot coverage of the house would be 6,795 square feet (16.3%), which is greater than the 15.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the RO-2 zone. Assessor's Parcel No. 059-091-55. [DW] 2. 4030 PARADISE DRIVE: File No. FAE2015014/DR2015142; Taylor Lembi, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single- family dwelling, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicant proposes to add 1,601 square feet of basement and a 214 square foot ground level addition to the existing house. The project would result in 5,283 square feet of floor area, which is greater than the 4,800 square foot floor area ratio for a lot of this size. Assessor's Parcel No. 039-091-11. [KO] 3. 681 HAWTHORNE DRIVE: File No. VAR2015024/DR2015151; Bahram Seyedin- Noor and MaysaNamakian, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with a Variance for excess lot coverage. The applicant proposes to construct a new 2,960 square foot house. The lot coverage of the house would be 3,016 square feet (31.4%), which is greater than the 30.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the R-1 zone. Assessor's Parcel No. 059-091-55. [KO] CONTINUED TO MARCH 3, 2016 Design Review Board Agenda February 18, 2016 Page 1 MINUTES 4. Regular Meeting of February 4, 2016 ADJOURNMENT Design Review Board Agenda February 18, 2016 Page 2 T I B U R O N HERITAGE & A R T S COMMISSION A 2- DIGEST Town of Tiburon Heritage & Arts Commission 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, CA 94920 415-435-7373 AGENDA - FINAL HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION February 23 - Town Hall Conference Room - 6:30 p.m. I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Oral Communications Persons wishing to address the Heritage & Arts Commission on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however, that the Heritage & Arts Commission is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission, Board, committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future Heritage & Arts agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. IV. Minutes — February 2, 2015 V. Treasurer's Report VI. Artist Recruitment - New Artists for Exhibition (At each meeting, any Commissioner may present art tivork for consideration for future exhibits. Once approved by the group, the individual's samples will be turned over to one of the .Artist Recruiters for scheduling and processing.) a. Artist Exhibits: March/April — Watercolor Society b. Commissioner Exhibit: Aug/Sept — 2016 — **Artist Laureate, Jaleh Etemad requests to join Commissioners in show VH. Commission Seat Status and Confirmation — 2016 a. Vice Chair Hall moves into Chair Commission (C. Merrill steps down) b. Confirmation of renewal or resignations for current commission terms coming up for vacancy VIII. Old Business a. Development of outline for written proposal to Town Council on future direction of H&A and appointment of commissioner(s) to prepare it. b. Art Walk collaboration — Outline: C. Mujica-Beavers, C.Cohan, C. deQuattro c. Art Festival — Outline: C. Fong and C. Norris d. Website — Staff Report from Suzanne Creekmore (presented by P.Pickett) IX. New Business a. Landmarks — Joan Bergsund invited to attend for collaboration with H&A on possible events in 2016 and beyond. X. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting — March 22, 2016 THE CITY OF NOVATO is pleased to host The Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers Wednesday, February 24, 2016 Historic City Hall/City Administrative Offices 922 Machin Avenue, Downtown Novato 5:00 pm — Pre -meeting to provide input on ABAG/MTC Merger Study 6:00 pm — Social Hour 1 7:00 pm — Dinner 1 7:30 pm — Presentation Presentation: Vivien Straus, Straus Home Ranch "My Life with Cows: a Marin Co. Farm Girl's views on the importance of agriculture to our community & local economy" Vivien Straus grew up on her family's dairy in Marshall, served as VP of Marketing for Straus Family Creamery, as Public Relations Coordinator at Cowgirl Creamery and currently manages the Straus Home Ranch. She created and manages the Sonoma Marin Cheese Trail project and California's CheeseTrail.org, which helps to promote cheesemakers, and small farmers. Vivien also sits on the Board of the Marin Economic Forum. DINNER MENU Appetizers Wild Mushroom Strudel & Cucumber Cup with Hummus Buffet Baby Greens, Pears, Manchego Cheese & Toasted Walnuts with Pear Vinaigrette Beef Brisket Braised in Wine with Carrots, Onions, Garlic & Tomatoes Creamiest Mashed Potatoes Lemon Thyme Chicken with Fresh Citrus, Caramelized Onions & Capers • Oven Roasted Vegetables Dessert John and Jill's Cheesecake, Coffee & Tea $55 PER PERSON RSVP to Vickie Gerber, 899-8905 or vgerber@novato.org By Wednesday, February 17, 2016. Checks payable to: City of Novato, 922 Machin Avenue, Novato, CA 94945 Missed Us Last Time? Join CCLR and H&K for an Encore Lunch Discussion on CEQA Page 1 of 2 Email not displaying correctly? Click here to view it online. DIGEST itc•A# "In the Name of the Environment" Lunch Discussion (Encore!) Due to the incredible amount of interest shown in our first event in December, we are pleased to share another opportunity for you to join Holland & Knight and the Center for Creative Land Recycling for a discussion of H&K's newly published report, "In the Name of the Environment"—a comprehensive study of recent lawsuits filed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and recommended reforms. Holland & Knight Nabj C[NTI.It Fog. RcAT1V 1 A \ [) RECYCLING This Holland & Knight report is the first comprehensive study of lawsuits filed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Analyzing all CEQA lawsuits filed in California over the three- year period of 2010-2012, the report systematically documents widespread abuse of CEQA litigation that undermines the state's environmental, social equity and economic priorities. Please join us to hear from Jennifer Hernandez and Evan Reeves for a lively discussion about the report's findings and recommendations, with plenty of time to ask questions or share your own CEQA stories and experiences. Download a free copy of the report HERE. Cost: Free 1 Lunch generously provided by Holland and Knight. Date and Time: http://ymlp.com/zPeM1c 2/9/2016 Missed Us Last Time? Join CCLR and H&K for an Encore Lunch Discussion on CEQA Page 2 of 2 Thursday, February 25, 2015 1 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm Location: The Offices of Holland & Knight, 50 California St., #2800, San Francisco, CA 94111 More About the Report: Among the study's key findings: • CEQA litigation is not a battle between "business" and "enviros" — 49 percent of all CEQA lawsuits target taxpayer -funded projects with no business or other private sector sponsors. • Projects designed to advance California's environmental policy objectives are the most frequent targets of CEQA lawsuits: transit is the most frequently challenged type of infrastructure project, renewable energy is the most frequently challenged type of industrial/utility project, and housing (especially higher density housing) is the most frequently challenged type of private sector project. • Debunking claims by special interests that CEQA combats sprawl, the study shows that infill projects are the overwhelming target of CEQA lawsuits. For infill/greenfield projects, 80 percent are in infill locations, and only 20 percent are in greenfield locations. • CEQA litigation is overwhelmingly used in cities, targeting core urban services such as parks, schools, libraries and even senior housing. • Sixty-four percent of those filing CEQA lawsuits are individuals or local "associations," the vast majority of which have no prior track record of environmental advocacy. CEQA litigation abuse is primarily the domain of Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) opponents and special interests such as competitors and labor unions seeking non -environmental outcomes. And don't forget to LIKE us on Facebook and READ our Blog to stay current and connected! The Center for Creative Land Recycling (CCLR or "see clear") is a nonprofit founded on the belief that intelligent, innovative land use is the key to ensuring a healthy future for both our communities and our environment. Photo courtesy of Diana Robinson. Follow CCLR at: r TA F77 ri Forward this email to a friend: ! `_ Center for Creative Land Recycling 200 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 5th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612 1 415.398.1080 1 infoOccIr.org Unsubscribe from Mailing List / Update Email Address Powered by YMLP.corn http://ymlp.com/zPeM1c 2/9/2016 The ROTIDE bIG.EST ' ' ;4 .CLI•' ?"T�- �^yN L' - Newsletter of the Rotary CIub of Tiburon -Belvedere Wednesday, February 3, 2016 Treasurer Drawing Pledge KUDOS TO THE CREW Charlie Oewel Bob Zimmerman Joe Ernst THOUGHT FOR THE DAY Joe Ernst asked us to think about one of Mark Twain's pieces of wisdom: "The best way to cheer yourself up is to cheer someone else up." ANNOUNCEMENTS Carnaval. Linda Emberson reminded us that Carnaval is almost here, and "It's going to be so much fun." She also reported that lunch with the police chiefs and a ride in a police car, hotel stays and an all-inclusive day at Champagne Salon & Day Spa with dinner at Milano to follow are among the live auction items. "I just want to recognize Linda," said Joe Ernst, crediting her with doing an incrediblejob."People need to step up and help," he added. "We have a fabulous auctioneer who is a Rotarian in Novato," President Marianne Strotz reported. Mike Fish is a member of the Rotary Club of Ignacio who has a reputation for his great performance at Marin Evening's fundraiser. "Are we doing the pajamas?"asked Jim Deitz, referring to last year's pajama fashion show? "No, some members over 55 wanted negligees," said President Marianne, but it didn't work out. GUESTS FROM THE LIBRARY Debbie Mazzolini, Director of the Belvedere Tiburon Library, and Donna Bero, Executive Director of the Belvedere -Tiburon Library Foundation were guests. Debbie's favorite event, the Gently -Use Art Auction is coming up, March 17 to 20. People in the community donate art that is no longer on their walls, and a silent auction featuring the art lasts for four days. You can get a great deal on some good art, and the library also benefits. "We use the money to buy art books and museum passes,"she said, explaining that people can borrow the passes and visit the museums for free. A big reception takes place on the Wednesday night, and if you make a donation to the library's annual appeal you can attend. "I have been to that auction, and it's fabulous,"said Linda Emberson. "I would like to welcome the library," said President Marianne Strotz, who invited Debbie and Donna (right) to become members. "It's the best -run business in town," said Jim Deitz. "Thank you so much for inviting us today," said Donna. She explained that the library is the public entity, and the foundation is the organization that raises money to support the library and also fund its capital needs. People can support the library in a variety of ways, including making a donation to the foundation. Saturday, February 6, is the annual Teddy Bear Tea, and "It's fun to see all the little kids in town dressed up to the nines," said Donna, who invited us to stop by to see the children having tea with their teddy bears. ANNOUNCEMENT President Marianne reported that we have been invited to participate in the Second Annual Marin County Rotary Club President's Council Community Project Work Day. Please look for details in the Tuesday Tattler. Charles Arnold recently spent time in Sun Valley, Idaho, and he reported that they've totally remodeled the lodge, and it has 1 -inch cement walls, like a castle. "It was really beautiful," he said. He had the biggest hotel room he's ever had, although it didn't have a fireplace, and he found it interesting to see people over 70 from all over the world skiing aggressively. He knows of a timeshare, and anyone who's interested should contact him.... Klaus Meinberg and his wife Linda visited Missoula, Montana, where their children live. He said the hotel was beautiful, but the weather was bitterly cold and not good for skiing. Alaska Airlines flies prop aircraft into Missoula, and on the return trip, after they'd boarded, they had to wait for the plane to be de- iced.... Marshall Gross was walking into the Bank of America in Corte Madera, when he saw police officers. An officer with a gun drawn called him over, and they saw a woman walk out, whom Marshall identified as the manager. Joe Ernst said it was probably a false alarm. He set off his branch's alarm by mistake, and the police weren't happy. He also recalled that someone walked into a bank in San Rafael naked, and everyone acted like it was normal.... Charles Arnold was in a bar in Sun Valley and saw two guys with baseball hats and tattoos who looked like truckers. He talked to one of them who turned out to be a lawyer, and they spent time the evening talking and closed the bar.... Hank Bruce and his wife celebrated their anniversary, and he GOOD TIMES, BAD TIMES thought it was their 25th and special, but it turned out to be their 24th, so now he has a year to plan. ... Marshall Gross and his wife Shelby will celebrate their 50th soon.... Joe Ernst has been fighting a case of gout in his foot,"which is pure agony." He believes it's because he hasn't been cycling all winter, which has also caused him to gain about 10 pounds. He played golf in a tournament in the fall with Jon Rankin, Jim Deitz and Justin Kreibich, and said,"Jon has the absolute worst swing I've ever seen.The Marin Humane Society is still looking for the bird." He confessed that he was kidding and added, "Jon's actually a very good player." DRAWING "I got it, I got it. Joe's [Lavigne] not here, who do you think is going to get it?"asked Jon Rankin. However, luck didn't hold, and he plucked a clear marble from the bag. "Give it to Deitz;" he said, referring to his $10 consolation prize, and Jim directed it to Rotaplast International, because Angelo Capozzi is away doing good work in Ethiopia. ROTARY CLUB OF TIBURON-BELVEDERE Chartered June 27, 1977 The Four -Way Test of things we think, say and do Is it the truth? Is it fair to all concerned? Will it build good will and better friendships? Will it be beneficial to all concerned? NEWS & INFORMATION ONLINE Website: www.tiburonrotarv.orq News & Updates: www.telli.com/rotary Activities: www.facebook.com/tbrotary February 10 February 17 February 24 March 2 March 9 LOOKING FORWARD Steve Stein, Abraham Lincoln John Andrews, Water Resources Habitat for Humanity Social Lunch Bill Painter, Californians for Western Wild Wilderness February 6 February 7 February 10 February 11 February 12 February 12 CELEBRATIONS Michael Heckmann Marshall Gross Karen Glader Craig Hughes Heinz Koop Bill Lindqvist Spouse Birthday Birthday Birthday Birthday Birthday Spouse Birthday MAKE UP A MEETING Monday 12:15 p.m. San Rafael: Fenix Supper Club, 919 Fourth Street, San Rafael 12:15 p.m. Central Marin: Left Bank Restaurant, 507 Magnolia Avenue, Larkspur Tuesday 7 a.m. Novato Sunrise: Moylan's Brewery, Vintage Oaks, Novato 8 a.m. 12:15 p.m. 12:15 p.m. 6:30 p.m. 7:15 a.m. 8 a.m. 12:15 p.m. 12 noon 12:15 p.m. 12:15 p.m. 6:30 p.m. 7 p.m. 12:15 p.m. San Rafael Harbor: Jackson Cafe, Whistlestop, 930 Tamalpais, San Rafael Mill Valley: Golf Course Clubhouse, 280 Buena Vista Avenue, Mill Valley Terra Linda: Embassy Suites, San Rafael Marin Evening:The Club, McInnis Park, 300 Smith Ranch Road, San Rafael Wednesday Marin Sunrise: Corte Madera Inn West Marin: U.S. Marine Coast Guard Station, Commodore Webster Drive, Point Reyes Station Ross Valley, Cafe Arrivederci, 11 G Street, San Rafael Thursday Ignacio: Inn Marin, 250 Entrada Drive, Ignacio Mission San Rafael: San Rafael Joe's, 931 4th Street, San Rafael Sausalito: Sausalito Yacht Club, Foot of El Portal, Sausalito Tiburon Sunset: San Francisco Yacht Club, 98 Beach Road, Belvedere Rafael Evening: second and fourth weeks, George's, 842 4th St. San Rafael Friday Novato: M. Todd Senior Center, 1560 Hill Road, Novato President Vice -President President -Elect Secretary Treasurer Assistant Treasurer Membership Club Services Programs Programs Assistant Fellowship Events Community Events Vocation/Education Youth Education: Interact Community Services International Service Rotary Foundation PR/Rotide/Telli Page Club Foundation Photographer Sunshine Webmaster Facebook OFFICERS & Marianne Strotz Dave Hutton Jim Deitz Justin Kreibich Bill Lindqvist Charlie Oewel Joe Lavigne Bob Zimmerman Marshall Gross Jim Deitz Linda Emberson Angelo Capozzi Jon Rankin Lata Setty Elizabeth Ury Joe Ernst Judy Wilson Annette Gibbs Judy Wilson Michael Heckmann DIRECTORS — BOARD 415-435-3800 415-789-2828 415-435-3717 415-328-2207 415-789-0703 415-377-7262 415-435-5245 415-889-5098 415-789-9106 415-435-3717 831-212-2121 415-435-8144 415-435-5822 415-342-7256 415-435-9227 415-435-9794 415-747-5828 415-847-1449 415-747-5828 415-789-0703 IMPORTANT POSITIONS Marshall Gross 415-789-9106 Pamela Schuyler Cowens 415-722-4003 Justin Kreibich 415-328-2207 Laurie Nilsen 415-435-7386 properties@pacbell.net dhutton@ci.tiburon.ca.us jd@jdeitz.com justin.kreibich@gmail.com william _lindqvist@yahoo.com coewel@gmail.com jblavigne@msn.com bobzim@mac.com marshall@thejewelcase.com jd@jdeitz.com wildthing@95060@yahoo.com angelocapozzimd@gmail.com Jon@jonprankinattorney.net lata.setty@unitedlex.com elizabethury@mac.com joseph.a.ernst@bankofamerica.com judith@telli.com nettie2@msn.com judith@telli.com heckmannarchitects@earthlink.net marshall@thejewelcaseinc.com yogal oml @icloud.com justin.kreibich@gmail.com Inilsen@tiburonpd.org n r League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund °Di FjtUtaa BAY AREA MONITOR February/March 2016 Volume 41, Number 4 Energized by Renewables By Leslie Stewart The Bay Area may currently be witnessing a classic example of a tipping point. In 2002, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 117 (Migden), allowing California communities to purchase and re -sell clean energy to residents and local businesses, a practice known as community choice aggregation. However, until recently only one such program existed in the Bay Area: Marin Clean Energy, which launched in 2010. Now, in the short time since the Bay Area Monitor last covered this issue in 2013, Sonoma Clean Power is up and running, CleanPowerSF in San Francisco announced a start date in May, and four additional counties — San Mateo (Peninsula Clean Energy), Santa Clara (Silicon Valley CCE Partnership), Alameda, and Contra Costa — are exploring the option. For most consumers in California, clean energy use is limited to what is available through their utility, and perhaps what they generate through a rooftop solar system. If they depend solely on a utility like Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), the utility decides how much solar, wind, nuclear, or hydroelectric power goes into their wires. Community Choice Energy (CCE) programs are designed to give customers an alternative with more renewable energy, usually for a lower price, with an option to pay slightly more and get 100 percent renewable energy. State regulations require all utilities, including CCEs, to provide 20 percent renewable energy now, and 33 percent by DIGENiT Workers from RichmondBUILD install panels at Solar One, a 10.5 megawatt solar farm in Richmond. When completed this November, the project will contribute electricity to Marin Clean Energy, the region's first community choice energy program. Photo,o�rten ofM,en clean,„ Contents Wetlands Restoration and Sea Level Rise Photographic Technology and Open Space Water Transit Ridership and Ferry Upgrades Page 3 Page 5 Page 6 the year 2020. PG&E currently provides roughly 28 percent renewable energy to its customers. However, San Mateo County Sustainability Fellow Kirsten Pringle, who has been helping coordinate the formation of Peninsula Clean Energy, noted that some of PG&E's renewables portfolio comes from nuclear power. "Peninsula Clean Energy is not going to have any nuclear, she said. Peninsula Clean Energy and other proposed CCEs are modeled on the successful programs in Marin and Sonoma. Program startup usually takes about two years, beginning with an exploratory group of jurisdictions — several cities plus the county to cover unincorporated areas — and a technical feasibility report. San Mateo is partway through the process; it began outreach in the fall of 2014 and completed its report in July 2015. Based on this report, participating jurisdictions will vote on creating a new Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that will be continued on page 2 2 - Bay Area Monitor February/March 2016 Energized by Renewables (from page 1) responsible for administering the program by purchasing the energy from traditional and renewable sources to serve its customers. In December, Atherton voted to join the San Mateo County JPA, followed by the City of San Mateo. Pringle expects that between 11 and 15 cities will join, explaining that "most cities have Climate Action plans and for a lot of cities that's the reason to join, because this will decrease greenhouse gases." Another reason is to encourage "green jobs" generated by industries such as solar installation, particularly if the CCE makes a commitment to buy locally. Once formed, the JPA submits a plan to the California Public Utilities Commission, starts purchasing power, and then sells that power to customers. Like any other utility, professionals experienced in the energy field actually run the program. Charles Sheehan, spokesperson for CleanPowerSF, noted that the program's administrator, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, has already been operating as an energy utility "for almost 100 years." Barbara Hale, an assistant general manager at SFPUC, added, "We have more expertise than other CCEs." The infrastructure — wires, poles, meters — remains with PG&E, but the consumer has the assurance that the energy going into the grid for their use comes from the mix of clean power sources they've been promised. PG&E charges CCE customers a delivery fee for the use of its infrastructure. The customer sees one bill covering charges from both PG&E and the CCE program. By law, all CCEs are "opt -out" — when one is formed, all customers in the participating jurisdictions become CCE customers, unless they choose to opt -out at the beginning (or later, for a fee). In San Mateo, Pringle said, "We think the opt - out rate will be lower than 15 percent based on experience in Marin and Sonoma." Even with recently increased grid - usage fees from PG&E, Pringle expects that Peninsula Clean Energy fees will be lower than PG&E, "at least for launch." The same is true in San Francisco, which postponed its start date from October 2013 to May 2016. In the meantime, according to Hale, "changes in the electric market have been favorable to the program." San Francisco's basic "Green" account is 35 percent renewable California -sourced power and will cost slightly less than PG&E's rates. The 100 percent renewable "SuperGreen" level will cost up to two cents more per kilowatt than PG&E's rates. Hale thinks it will compete well against Solar Choice, PG&E's clean energy plan, promising, "It's a better product and, for now, it's cheaper!" Unlike most CCEs, not all San Francisco customers will join CleanPowerSF at once; energy purchases will be made in stages, with some customers added in May and more in August. The first customers will be those who have already indicated they will waive their right to opt -out. "We are enrolling everyone who raises their hand;' said Hale, "but the typical San Francisco resident doesn't know anything about this program." CCEs can also include current customers doing net -metering — selling back surplus power to PG&E — but Hale said, "We will be more purposeful and strategic in enrolling those customers" to ensure that switching the contracts won't cost them extra PG&E fees. With interest in CCEs on the rise, Marin Clean Energy has already added some non -Marin jurisdictions to its JPA, including Richmond, Pinole, San Pablo, and El Cerrito (all in Contra Costa County), Benicia (Solano County), and the County of Napa. The City of Lafayette sent a letter of interest to Marin Clean Energy in August, even though Contra Costa County recently asked for participants in a study. "Our Environmental Task Force looked at CCEs for over a year. They prefer Marin Clean Energy because it's already established. There would be no upfront cost, and About the Bay Area Monitor Launched in 1975, the Bay Area Monitor is published six times a year by the League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund, and covers transportation, air quality, water, open space, and land use issues in the nine -county San Francisco Bay Area. The publication is distributed to League members, elected and appointed officials, government employees, libraries, media outlets, nonprofit organizations, business leaders, and engaged residents. Every edition is also posted online at www.bayareamonitor.org. Subscriptions to the Monitor are free, but reader donations are encouraged and help to sustain the publication. Donations are tax-deductible, as the League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund is a nonprofit 501(c)3 organization. The Monitor is also supported by the Alameda -Contra Costa Transit District, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the East Bay Municipal Utility District, the East Bay Regional Park District, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Midpenincnla Reo opal Open Space District, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board and the San Mateo County Transit District, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid TYansit District, the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority, the S anta Clara ValleyOpen Space Authority, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the Sonoma County Water Agency. The Monitor retains editorial autonomy from its supporters. Contact us at (510) 839-1608 or editor@bayareamonitor.org. Alec MacDonald, Editor • Linda Craig, LWVBA President February/March 2016 Bay Area Monitor - 3 there are known factors;' said Megan Canales, an assistant planner with Lafayette. "If we go with Contra Costa, we don't know how long it will take." On January 25, the city council voted to partner with Marin Clean Energy. Canales mentioned that although it is unlikely, MCE could choose not to accept an application from her city "if Lafayette joining would raise rates for MCE's existing customers, or strain the supply of renewables so that the mix of renewables versus nonrenewables is affected" It might seem that straining the supply of renewable energy could be a real concern. However, Pringle noted, "There is a lot of renewable energy on the market because of the huge demand, from utilities because the state raised the requirements, as well as CCEs." San Francisco has seen the same growth in renewables. "There is definitely a lot being constructed, and part of what motivates a lot of people to participate is the emphasis on renewable electricity;' Hale reported. "When we went out to bid, we got 52 bids — quite robust. Some were from projects that said, `If you take our bid, this is what we will build for you"' If technical studies continue to confirm that supplies of renewable power will be available at or below current rates, it is possible that by the end of 2017 the majority of electricity customers in the Bay Area will be served by a CCE. One benefit will be to the environment. Replacing other 11 ® Visit Us Online www.bayareamonitor.org facebook.com/bayareamonitor forms of energy use with greenhouse -gas -free electricity will likely improve Bay Area air quality (although no studies appear to have been done to confirm this, due to the difficulty in projecting amounts of locally -sourced clean power). Air quality regulators have taken notice of this upside. In fact, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District helped Marin Clean Energy get off the ground with an allocation of $75,000 from its climate protection grant program back in 2008. Perhaps the major selling point, however, is embodied in the word "choice" Pringle pointed out, "This program provides access to renewable energy for people who can't afford solar, or are in multi -family housing where the owner can't or won't add it." "From the customer perspective, who's making the decisions about your power supply?" Hale asked. "It's your locally elected officials. The money you spend with us is money that will be reinvested in San Francisco — you're `shopping locally' for your electricity:' gif Leslie Stewart covers air quality and energy for the Monitor. How Restoring Wetlands Will Prepare Us for Sea Level Rise By Robin Meadows After California's worst drought in 500 years, we're finally enjoying a rainy winter thanks to one of the strongest El Ninos on record. Droughts interspersed with drenchings are nothing new for us — these extremes are part of our normal weather cycle — and periodic wet years are nothing we can't handle. But that's about to change. In coming decades, sea level rise will amplify the storm surges and ultra-high "king" tides that send waves crashing over levees. Making matters worse, sea level rise will also weaken the Bay Area's resilience to floods. Tidal marshes edging the bay take the oomph out of waves and soak up water like sponges. However, according to a 2015 State Coastal Conservancy -led report, we stand to lose most of this natural flood protection to rising seas. The cost of an extreme storm to the Bay Area is estimated at $10 billion. "Many of our salt marshes will be drowning," said San Francisco Estuary Institute scientist Jeremy Lowe. "When they're under water too long, the plants will start dying off and then we'll have mudflats." And while mudflats also help control floods, they are not nearly as effective. Marshes won't be the only things drowning. We've built cities and roads all the way down to the bay, and as it goes up, they will start to go under. "We need to start thinking about how to live with the bay as it moves," Lowe said. Sea level rise is projected at roughly one to five feet by the year 2100, and our cities and roads can't be easily reengineered to keep up with it. But our marshes can. Tidal Marshes Then and Now We have time, but we must start now — it takes decades to restore a tidal marsh. Fortunately, we've been restoring marshes here for about 40 years, so we're good at it. Altogether, the bay needs 100,000 acres of tidal marshes to do the job. continued on page 4 4 - Bay Area Monitor February/March 2016 Restoring Wetlands (from page 3) This is just over half their historical area circa 1800, before we started diking and draining them for agriculture, salt ponds, and other uses. Marshes around the bay were down to 40,000 acres in 1998, and since then about that many more have been restored or are in the works, leaving about 20,000 to go. Other reasons to restore these wetlands include that they help purify water, and provide habitat for at -risk species such as the California clapper rail and the salt marsh harvest mouse. Most of the original marsh was in low-lying lands fringing the North, Suisun, and South bays, and that's where most of the restoration is too. Of course the Central Bay also had wetlands, but they were smaller due to steep, rocky shorelines. Even so, the East Bay can still be a key player in adapting to sea level rise. Giving Wetlands Room to Move As the water creeps higher, marshes will need to shift inland. In the East Bay, a $2 million experimental levee — part of a $9 million project at the Oro Lorna wastewater treatment plant in San Lorenzo — is testing a new way of giving wetlands room to move. The site used to have a wall-like levee right along the bay, which would have blocked wetlands from moving inland. Now, the levee is a gently sloping wedge that stretches up from the bay; this will let marshes migrate up the slope as sea level rises. "We hope to expand this upland restoration to the whole shoreline of the East Bay;" said Lowe, who directed the project. The sloping levee mimics the gradual transition fromwetlands to uplands and should, like natural marshes, slow waves from storms and king tides. "It's a cool idea," said UC Berkeley environmental engineer David Sedlak. Grasses, sedges, and other native plants will stabilize the levee, keeping the soil in place and building it up. To give the plants a head start in their manmade wetland, they will be irrigated with effluent from the wastewater treatment plant. Native plants could also purify the effluent of nitrate, a nutrient that can cause harmful algae blooms. Most of the nitrate in the bay is from urine. "It comes from us," Sedlak said, adding that our wastewater treatment plants do not remove nutrients, and that retrofitting them to do so could cost more than a billion dollars. The Latest in Marsh Restoration More traditional marsh restoration also needs to prepare for sea level rise, and a new project in Sonoma County's Sears Point incorporates a sloping levee as well as what we've learned from previous restorations. The Sonoma Land Trust is restoring nearly 1,000 acres of diked agricultural land on the bay side of Highway 37. In addition to keeping water off the highway, the new sloping levee's uplands will give wildlife a place to go during king tides. Sears Point was diked and pumped dry 140 years ago, and exposure to air made the soil decompose and subside. It will be rebuilt naturally over the next 20 to 30 years, as tides bring in sediment. "We're relying entirely on the bay and tides to bring in six feet of soil, said project manager Julian Meisler. Sediment won't settle out when water is choppy, though. "The site is nearly three miles long and that's enough for the wind to make waves," he said. "We need calm conditions." The old way to breakup waves was finger-like peninsulas extending from the shore into the restored marsh, but these also let predators like coyotes trot in. Instead, the Sears Point project is dotted with more than 500 island - like mounds to break up the waves. r?ir H" Letting the tide Last October, an excavator breached an old levee at Sears Point to initiate restoration of farmland back to tidal marsh. photo courtesy of Sonoma Land Trust/Corby Hines rebuild the marsh will cut costs but, at nearly $18 million to buy and reengineer the land, the project is still expensive. The same holds elsewhere around the bay. To help raise funds for the remaining wetland restoration we need, the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority has placed a region -wide, $12 parcel tax on the June 7, 2016 ballot. The tax would raise $500 million over 20 years, enough to build 20 miles of new levees and restore an estimated 15,000 acres of wetlands. it Robin Meadows covers water for the Monitor. February/March 2016 Bay Area Monitor - 5 To Protect Open Space, Stewards Focus on Photographic Technology By Elizabeth Devitt For more than a century, photographs have helped protect open space in California, inspiring conservation by capturing the grandeur of nature. In the late 1800s, Carleton Watkins' mammoth plate images of Yosemite influenced President Lincoln to preserve that wilderness area. Years later, Ansel Adams' landscape portraits of the southern Sierra Nevada were credited with getting national park status for Kings Canyon. These days, photos are still boosting land stewardship in the Bay Area — although perhaps not in ways those photographic pioneers could have envisioned. Motion -triggered cameras, smartphones, and social media now make it possible to continuously monitor animals, plants, and environmental changes. The pictures generated by these new technologies provide data that can guide land management for the benefit of wildlife and people. Sometimes, they manage to be breathtaking, too. "Cameras can show us the secret life of places," said Monica Stafford, the community ambassador program director for One Tam, an initiative created to bolster protection of Marin County's Mount Tamalpais. Since 2014, more than 100 cameras have been placed around Mount Tam to gather information about the diversity of wildlife in that area. Instead of tracking animals one by one, these electronic eyes catch the bobcats, coyotes, bears, and other hard -to -follow critters (like the occasional river otter) whenever they wander by. The project has already collected a million -plus photos. A combination of researchers and trained volunteers sift through the pictures, amassing data that helps assess biodiversity across the landscape. One Tam partners — Marin County Parks, the Marin Municipal Water District, California State Parks, the National Park Service, and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy — hope the gathered knowledge can improve management of the lands. The Mount Tam cameras are one of seven Bay Area projects, in place or in the works, using the Wildlife Picture Index. This method of taking photos with a grid -based pattern of cameras was first developed in the tropics to better account for biodiversity. In the Bay Area, this data -collecting technique was first launched by scientists at the Pepperwood Preserve, just north of Santa Rosa. "It's like having 21 biologists sitting there watching all the time;' said Pepperwood Foundation President Lisa Micheli about the 21 -camera array sited on the 3,200 acre property. Photos from the cameras help fill in critical gaps about the state of wildlife on the large landscape. "We do all this work to restore critical habitats for wildlife, but we don't have a lot of data about how the wildlife is doing;' said Micheli. "It's hard to count animals when there are no fences on these lands," she noted. Who shows up in these pictures? Mule deer, bobcats, coyotes, raccoons, and opossums make the expected cameos, according to Micheli, who added that people are surprised by how often black bears and pumas enter the frame. A few rare sightings include a badger (thought to be long gone from the area), a porcupine, and spotted skunks. Eventually, Micheli hopes to create one large dataset from all the Bay Area camera grids. "That could help resolve regional questions about the important places we need to protect, such as the critical corridors that need to be kept open between fragments of open space;' she said. Many of these open spaces are also prime spots for human recreation. To learn about how non -motorized human activities might affect wildlife, Michelle Reilly, a conservation biologist at Northern Arizona University, set up camera traps around eight Bay Area counties. For three years, Reilly collected photos from 150 motion - activated cameras set at selected spots in 87 protected areas. She used these images to analyze how 10 species changed continued on page 6 48F8C 05-27-2015 08: 16:35 This photo of a coyote pup was captured by one of the motion -triggered cameras placed around Mount Tam. photo courtesy of Marin Municipal Water District 6 - Bay Area Monitor February/March 2016 Photographic Technology (from page 5) their land -use patterns when people were hiking, mountain biking, horseback riding, or walking with dogs in the same territory. The cameras showed that most animals in the study were affected, to some degree, by human activities. In varying ways, wildlife either shifted the times they used people -populated areas, or avoided these places altogether. In some cases, those findings could be considered good news. For instance, Reilly found that mountain lions were most likely to avoid areas where hikers were present, and that striped skunks tended to avoid people with dogs. But this can also be bad news. When animals make lifestyle adjustments to avoid people, it can interfere with their ability to find food, a place to rest, or mates. "In no way does this mean people shouldn't be recreating out there;' Reilly emphasized. She hopes images can help land managers make better usage plans for the properties they oversee. For instance, if a space needs to accommodate both mountain lions and hikers, then land managers should try to set aside core areas that don't have trails for people, leaving room for mountain lions to retreat. A camera in hand can also provide a lot of information. That's one lesson students learn during the TeenNat Summer Internship at Pepperwood Preserve. A free point -and -shoot camera helps introduce the 13- to 17 -year-old interns to the power of pictures in science and conservation. In one project, the students make research plots and photograph the biodiversity they find. They learn how to upload scientific -grade images to iNaturalist.org, the online social network that shares photos among nature -lovers and scientists around the world. "The students see the connections right away. When they put up data [onto iNaturalist.org] they're interacting with the scientific community from Sonoma County all the way to the head of Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the largest repository of biodiversity information in the world;' said Sandi Funke, the education director at Pepperwood. Digital photography and social media networks have also helped turn hikers on Mount Diablo into citizen scientists. After the Mount Diablo Morgan Fire in 2013, the grassroots organization Nerds for Nature, in collaboration with Mount Diablo State Park and the Wildlife Society, installed a change bracket system to monitor the landscape's recovery. At several sites along the mountain's trails, hikers could place their smartphone or camera in an angle bracket, take a picture, and post it to Twitter, Instagrain, or Flickr. Nerds for Nature harvested the pictures and posted them on the Web, creating a time-lapse slideshow of Mount Diablo's blackened earth becoming green again. This "monitoring change" project was based on the idea of U.S. Geological Survey scientist Sam Droege, who saw angle brackets as a way to capture images of the same height, angle, and direction in one spot over time. "I really like using existing social networks for these projects, because someone can post a photo that 100, 200, or 1,000s of followers can see. So you get this amplifying network of awareness," said Dan Rademacher, a Nerds for Nature cofounder. "You can't do anything with an image locked away in a camera" Elizabeth Devitt covers open space for the Monitor. Ferries Plan Upgrades as Ridership Swells By Cecily O'Connor The number of Bay Area residents taking a ferry is rising, an increase that's likely to continue as operators add new boats and routes, and upgrade infrastructure to ensure smooth sailing. Ferry ridership jumped during 2015 as commuters sought relief from roadway congestion and packed BART trains, based on figures from two regional operators. San Francisco Bay Ferry — which runs between Vallejo, Oakland, Alameda, San Francisco, and South San Francisco — shuttled 973,572 total passengers from July through October last year, a 20 percent increase over the same period the previous year. Golden Gate Ferry — whose vessels sail out of Larkspur, Sausalito, and San Francisco — logged 2.54 million total riders for its fiscal year ended June 30, up nearly 3 percent from the previous fiscal year. Larkspur alone experienced 11 straight months of ridership growth as of December 31. "Demand is high;' said Jim Swindler, head of Golden Gate Ferry. "If it gets much higher we'd have to look quickly at what to do to accommodate it. Right now, we're keeping up with The increase is driven by the need for fast, reliable, and convenient commute options as the Bay Area economy thrives and sends more people to work. Another driver is commute February/March 2016 Bay Area Monitor - 7 pattern shifts, as parts of the East Bay and Silicon Valley join San Francisco as the region's primary employment centers. Waterfront development in San Francisco also is making ferry access attractive to mitigate regional transportation constraints. "I expect ridership will continue to grow, and people might be more outspoken [in] calling for ferry service around the bay as more waterfront developments are completed;' said Emily Loper, policy manager at the Bay Area Council, where she conducts research and analysis for the water transit committee. To keep pace with demand, ferry operators and transportation planners will need to consider first- and last -mile terminal connections to ensure water commutes are competitive with other transit modes, Loper added. Facilitating those connections includes accommodating bicycling and walking as alternate ways to reach terminals, which also aids in regional pollution reduction. Some residents first turned to the open water when BART closed the Transbay Tube for repairs last summer, said Ernest Sanchez, spokesperson for the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA), which runs San Francisco Bay Ferry. Bay Bridge delays also compel riders needing a backup. "Ferries have been quick to respond and serve their role as part of the public transit mix," Sanchez said. "That has put us in the public eye:' The result is often crammed terminal parking lots, overcrowded vessels, and more time to board or disembark. In response, WETA stepped up its operating budget for fiscal year 2015-2016 to ease overcrowding and extend some added ferry service for part of last summer and fall. Golden Gate Ferry raised its 2015-2016 budget as part of ongoing investments in its fleet and service. Operators have looked to fare hikes to help cover these mounting expenses. Golden Gate Ferry officials recently proposed a 4 percent increase beginning July 1 to combat a $34.6 million, five-year projected deficit. Meanwhile, San Francisco Bay Ferry increased ticket prices last July as part of a five-year program to offset expected rises in operating costs. Even prior to these increases, ferry fares have generally been higher than other transit modes. One tradeoff for the additional expense is that water transit offers a lot of enjoyment, with comfortable, high-speed boats that sell coffee in the morning and cocktails at night, among other perks. The weather, too, is fairly calm year-round, which makes service reliable and ideal for taking in local scenery before and after a hard day of work. "The ferry is arguably one of the more beautiful ways to get across the bay" said Priya Clemens, Golden Gate Ferry spokesperson. San Francisco Bay Ferry's fleet will rise to 14 vessels from the current lineup of 12 by 2018, the result of five new boat additions that will replace three retiring ones. Two of the vessels now under construction, at a total cost of $33.5 million, will each hold 400 passengers, accommodate 50 bikes, and travel at a speed of 27 knots (31 miles per hour). New vessels meet or exceed federal, state, and regional emissions standards. The operator is planning a $45 million Richmond -to -San Francisco project in 2018, serving about 100,000 Contra Costa County residents the first year. A San Francisco - Treasure Island route will eventually follow. To accommodate current and future ferry service, the San Francisco Ferry Building will expand to include up to two new berths, a $65 million project. Other projects include a $31 million North Baymaintenance facility at Mare Island in Vallejo and a $35 million Central Bay maintenance facility at the former Alameda Naval Air Station. At Golden Gate Ferry, marketing is a priority to promote Marin County outings and fill empty reverse commute seats, Swindler said. Later this year, the operator might take over continued on page 8 A San Francisco Bay Ferryvessel departs from the Alameda Main Street Terminal in the Oakland Inner Harbor. photo by Alec MacDonald 8 - Bay Area Monitor February/March 2016 ►`" ' '� oia i o ers of the I3ay Area Education Fund- 14th Street #1213, Oakland, CA 94612 xM .a+ _ r _ one Thank You for Your Support The Monitor would like to acknowledge recent donations from Sue Beittel, Mary Ann Benson, Abigail Bok, Roberta Borgonovo, Elizabeth Brown, David Calkins, Linda Craig, Sue Graham, Nancy Ianni, Paul McCauley, Judy Merrill, Robert Piper, and Marion Taylor. Such generous financial contributions are greatly appreciated, and help this publication continue to fulfill its mission. Donations to the League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund, a 501(c)3 organization, are tax-deductible. NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION U.S. POSTAGE PAID OAKLAND, C, PERMIT NO. 25 "Id'HIT11111+1111h1IlT11111111111F1P111"111111111111 T9'B7* ***5 -DIGIT 94920 TOWN MANAGER TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 TIBURON BLVD TIBURON CA 94920-2530 Ferries Plan Upgrades as Ridership Swells (from page 7) Tiburon service from Blue and Gold Fleet, which sells 216,000 Tiburon commute tickets annually. Golden Gate Ferry is currently studying the idea, and held a related open house and public comment hearing in late January. Comments from the events were "positive;' Clemens said, adding, "The only concern was if there would be a gap in service, and the answer is no:' In the meantime, Golden Gate Ferry is working on American Disability Act access improvements at terminals in Sausalito and San Francisco, and is in early planning stages for similar enhancements at the Larkspur Terminal in addition to parking lot upgrades. Golden Gate Ferry's seven - vessel fleet includes two recently refurbished high-speed boats, for about $22 million total, now in operation. In ferries' wake is Tideline, a water taxi service. It's also filling seats and in discussions about partnership opportunities with Bay Area municipalities and housing developers who are building adjacent to the shoreline. The goal is to accommodate and move more residents, especially in areas unserved by transportation options, said Nathan Nayman, president of Tideline Marine Group, which operates the taxi. Tideline has completed 1,000 trips since inception in 2012, serving more than 4,000 passengers in and around the North Bay, East Bay, and San Francisco, according to Nayman. "We're another safety valve that's helping relieve some of that pressure for people moving in and around the bay," he said. Cecily O'Connor covers transportation for the Monitor. Nominations Still Open for MTC "Excellence in Motion" Transportation Awards Every two years, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission solicits nominations for exceptional contributions to Bay Area transportation. The "Excellence in Motion" awards recognize positive impacts on mobility in the region. Nominations for the 2016 awards are due April 4. Winners will be selected by a jury representing MTC and the community. Awards will be presented in the fall of 2016. Nominations can be for an individual, organization, jurisdiction, agency, firm, program, or project. All eligible nominees must have been active or under way during the two-year time frame from April 2014 to March 2016. To learn more information about the awards and to submit a nomination, visit mtc.ca.gov/awards or contact Terry Lee at tlee@mtc.ca.gov or (510) 817-5952. DIGEST RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY `� � -1 Thursday, February 11, 2016 5:30 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. Sausalito City Council Chambers 420 Litho Street Sausalito, CA PUBLIC COMMENT IS INVITED CONCERNING EACH AGENDIZED ITEM PURSUANT TO THE BROWN ACT. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE (3) MINUTES. AGENDA 5:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL 1. Closed session : Conference with legal counsel — Anticipated Litigation. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to CA Government Code § 54956.9 (d)(2) (one potential case). Public meeting should reconvene at approximately 6 pm. 2. Minutes of December 10, 2015 Meeting 3. Review report of Harbor Administrator 4. Approval of prior expenditures for December 2015 — February 4, 201 5. Anchorage update 6. Agency future discussion 7. Presentation by anchorouts (20 minutes) 8. Public comments invited concerning items NOT on this Agenda (3 -minute limit) 9. Staff comments 10. Board member matters NEXT MEETING: Tentatively planned for April 14, 2016. Board members please review your calendars and advise Staff as to your availability. A COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING ON THE RBRA WEBSITE http://rbra. ca.'ov , AND AT THE SA USALITO CITY LIBRARY. TO RECEIVE AN ELECTRONIC MEETING NOTICE, PLEASE EMAIL REQUEST TODON ALLEEAT dallee(ainarincounty.org Marin County Community Development Agency, 3501 Civic Center Dr. Room 308, San Rafael, CA 94903 Cell 415/971-3919 bprice@marincounty.org ; .11V tc;I% RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY MEMORANDUM February 5, 2016 TO: RBRA Board FROM: Ben Berto, RBRA Clerk SUBJECT: February meeting Board members: As noted in the attached anchorage update and discussion of future challenges facing the RBRA, our agency is at an interesting crossroads. A key question is what are member jurisdictions, Sausalito in particular, willing to support in terms of an anchorage program? From Sausalito's recent meeting, they appear to heading in an enforcement direction. Staff has not made formal recommendations to the Board about next fiscal year' s (FY '16-17) work program and budget, due to the late -breaking and still developing nature of Sausalito's actions, described in detail in this agenda package. Your Board is requested to provide staff with preliminary direction to staff on the role of enforcement in the upcoming year. If the Board so directs, Staff will return at the next (April 14) RBRA meeting with a budget reflecting enforcement -oriented options. An anchor -out group will be making a presentation to your Board at the end of the meeting. They have provided no written material aside from a conceptual overview of the type of approach this groups desires (see material attached to anchorage update), but are likely to propose another direction to consider. Mill Valley has appointed a new representative — Jim Wickham. Unfortunately he has other conunitments precluding him from attending next week's meeting, but looks forward to attending in April and subsequent meetings. Welcome on board Jim. See you next Thursday. Clerk 020516 mem fnl.doc RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL , AGENCY MINUTES OF OCTOBER 1, 2015 HELD AT SAUSALITO CITY HALL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Herb Weiner (Sausalito); Erin Tollini (Tiburon); Kathrin Sears (Marin County); Marty Winter (Belvedere) ABSENT: No representative from Mill Valley has been named STAFF: Bill Price (Harbor Administrator); Ben Berto (RBRA Clerk) ADDITIONAL: Leslie Alden (Aide to Supervisor Sears) Meeting called to order at 5:35 PM. Ken Wachtel was presented with an award for his years of service to the RBRA. Minutes of October 1, 2015 Meeting Minutes were approved unanimously Harbor Administrator's Report Mr. Price explained the recent additional funds that were secured with the help of Port San Luis Harbor District. He also reported a trend in the theft of impounded boats from previously secure storage docks in Sausalito. He updated the Board on the new laws regarding Marine Debris that were coming into effect on January 1, 2016 that would affect the anchorage greatly. Chad Carvey thanked the Board for the Spinnaker meeting and noted that the anchor out community had brought in a sunken barge as a community effort to reduce the costs associated with boat disposal. Keven Killer felt that the room layout at the Spinnaker meeting constituted a jurisdictional issue. Prior expenditures: October — December 2015 Member Sears pointed out that there were no visible expenses shown for December and asked Staff to be sure that the report accurately reflect the report's time period. Doug Storms asked why the report didn't show who was responsible for the disposed vessels and asked why the taxpayers had to fund the activities. Orlie Lindgren wanted to re-establish a rescue boat program and he wanted more preventative action on the anchorage. Mr. Carvey stated that he had a zero dragging anchor plan that would cost @ $60K to fund. The expenditure report was accepted unanimously Status Report on the Anchorage Management Program 1 Mr. Berto summarized the Community Meeting held at the Spinnaker Restaurant on November 12, 2015 which was attended by over 250 people, and said that we had met the goals for Sausalito's request for more public outreach. When City Manager Adam Politzer was asked if the council would support the requested increase for further studies, Rapid Response and staff time, there was a cautious response which put the planned increase in a holding pattern until after the council meets in January. Member Sears asked if there was enough funding for baseline functions and Berto responded in the affirmative. Member Weiner stated that the item was agendized on January 12th meeting. Mr. Lindgren said that this was obfuscation and confusing language and that it would take two years before coming to fruition; too long a process, and we should work together. Jeff Jacob read from the Torah. Mr. Kiffer questioned the funding for the presenter at the meeting and Member Sears responded that it came out of County of Marin funds. Alden Bevington stated that the budget didn't address issues; he wanted more community-based action and volunteerism and asked to have time on the agenda. Peter Moorhead said that he had watched the film of the meeting and agreed with Barbara Salzman's assessment of the public trust issues. He believed the boaters and the public were not represented and the majority of comments were from anchor- outs, and he asked that the Board represent the public fiduciary responsibility. Scott Diamond felt that public trust was not well defined and that certain families had colluded with government and robbed the public of space. Mr. Storms said that the presentation lacked facts and that it had brought the community together in opposition. He believed an accurate demographic survey was imperative and said he would be conducting one prior to the next meeting. Bob Lorenzi said he felt ignored and that the Board had already made up their minds regarding possible solutions. Member Winter liked the idea of volunteerism, but he did state that there was a difference between volunteerism and professionalism when it came to boat disposal. Member Wiener gave a brief synopsis of the Spinnaker presentation, explaining that he had spoken to hundreds of Sausalito residents and most of them don't want anchor outs mainly because they haven't been around long enough to know Sausalito's history. He said it would be an uphill battle now, but he wanted to protect anchor-outs and educate the local residents. Member Sears voiced her frustration at the process, that after conducting 2 large public workshops and trying to keep the outreach open with a broader public conversation costs, Sausalito was still not offering support. She requested that Staff take baby steps and put other presentations from the public on the agenda for next meeting to keep the conversation moving forward. Chair Tollini expressed support for the idea and encouraged the presenters to contact Mr. Berto. Mr. Lorenzi asked that the Board carefully consider the options offered at the presentations. Mr. Carvey said he wanted the Board to call his bluff and stated he wanted to help with ideas and solutions. Mr. Diamond said there was no government through sound bites, and he didn't need expensive facilitators to focus on real enforcement and limit the discussion to rational contributors. Mr. Jacob said that problems will lessen when folks have a claim, and felt the budget money should be divided equally. Craig Wilson wanted a clear directive so he could get a permit though the State Lands Commission and come up to standards. Bobby Bright aka Jesus said that all life is God and he asked for help in securing the boats. Andre Scott reported a large spill on the anchorage and wanted to know what had happened and 2 who to report to. Mr. Price advised him that a large vessel had sunk in the Richardson Bay Marina and that could have been the source. Price also advised him to call the US Coast Guard and the Marin County dispatch for a quick response. Nick Vance said he was not one who wants anchor -outs gone and felt they should be preserved. Mr. Kiffer felt that demographics were in flux and he asked for accurate numbers at the meetings. He felt things were developed before public discussion and he wanted more transparency. David McGuire said that Richardson's Bay was important and getting healthier. He believed in the maritime heritage and wanted to find a mooring compromise that wouldn't lose the bohemians. Matt Holland was a new anchor -out and wanted to know what would happen to others after the proposed mooring field was full. Tim Keeler said his parents had been anchor -outs for years and it had always been a battle, but there was more communication now. He said there was no eelgrass back in those days but it was healthy now. Mr. Storms asked if the deadline for the stakeholder applications had been extended and Mr. Berto said it was still open pending Sausalito's decision. Mr. Storms felt vessels on RBRA moorings should not be allowed as they should be used for emergency only. He also explained that volunteers should have access to oil boom in emergencies. Mr. Bevington felt it was a new era of listening and stated that paranoia optimizes strategic thinking. Mr. Lindgren felt that incidents should be analyzed and that stakeholders shouldn't be tied to the anchorage program. Public Comments See above Staff Comments None Board Member Matters Chair Tollini asked that the posted date of the next RBRA meeting be changed from February 12 to February 11, 2016 in the record. The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 PM. NOTE: The next meeting of the RBRA is tentatively scheduled for February 11, 2016 at 5:30 PM at the Sausalito City Hall Chambers. 3 RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY HARBOR ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT February 3, 2016 WORKING RELATIONSHIPS • Boating and Waterways — Submitted a request for the first SAVE reimbursement in January for $32,121 for 20 vessels. 2) Preparing second reimbursement request for an additional $45K for 21 vessels disposed under the SAVE Grant. Approximately $40K remains in the grant. 3) Re -applying for the 2017 SAVE grant early to assure that funds will be available ASAP in the next fiscal year • Port San Luis Harbor District — procured $29,500 in surplus grant funds from PSLHD to dispose of 3 vessels. • MSO and SPD — reviewing legal steps to follow through with new Boating laws that come into effect on January 1, 2016 concerning marine debris. AB 1323/Gov't Code 550-552 provides a new tool that allows law enforcement to be able to deal swiftly with marine debris. DEBRIS REMOVAL • 24 vessels were disposed since 12/1/2015 • 3 boats are currently impounded RAPID RESPONSE • 5 vessels recovered and secured. 2 drifting docks secured and disposed. • Recovered a sunken vessel in the channel: disposed under Marine Debris code. WATER QUALITY • Houseboats at the Gates Coop are starting to move onto the new docks. • Conducted a site review with the Clean Vessel Act program personnel, trying to get them to reinstate funding for pumping out live -aboard vessels • Conducting winter wet weather water tests, to be completed in March OTHER • Toured the anchorage with Senator McGuire, Chair Tollini and staff • Assisting Gates Coop with a houseboat removal. All costs to be paid by Waldo Point Harbor RBRA - BALANCE SHEET November 24, 2015 - February 2, 2016 DATE 12/10/2015 12/10/2015 12/10/2015 12/30/2015 12/30/2015 12/30/2015 12/30/2015 1/7/2016 1/7/2016 1/7/2016 1/7/2016 12/23/2015 12/23/2015 12/24/2015 11/25/2015 11/30/2015 11/28/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/22/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 11/28/2015 11/30/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/21/2015 1/14/2016 12/23/2015 1/14/2016 12/3012015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 1/28/2016 1/6/2016 COST CENTER Bldgs & Grounds Rent Bldgs & Grounds Rent Sales and Services Bldgs & Grounds Rent Bldgs & Grounds Rent Bldgs & Grounds Rent Sales and Services Bldgs & Grounds Rent Bldgs & Grounds Rent Bldgs & Grounds Rent State - Grant Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Rent - Equip Rental ProfSery-CntySalRe Prof Svcs - Other HazMat Clean Up Com Srvc - Broadband Com Srvc - Broadband Rent - Off Space Rent - Off Space Rent - Off Space Prof Svcs - Other Printing Supplies Oil & Gas Outside Trav-Meals Oth Maintenance Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Legal Prof Svcs - Other Rent - Off Space Rent - Equip Rental Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Com Srvc - Cell Phon Prof Svcs - Other Memberships & Dues Prof Svcs - Other Maint & Rep Su - Oth Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other HazMat Clean Up Com Srvc - Broadband DESCRIPTION REVENUES Mooring rental -150.00 Mooring rental -160.00 Mondeau - boat disposal fee -120.00 Mooring rental -150.00 Mooring rental -150.00 Mooring rental -100.00 Alliant - Insurance refund -15.82 Mooring rental -160.00 Mooring rental -150.00 Mooring rental -150.00 Port San Luis - SAVE reimbursal -29,500.00 total -30,805.82 Dave's Diving Dave's Diving Denny Creative - website Hertz - heavy equipment rental Salary and benefits San Rafael Yacht Harbor Bay Cities debris removal AT&T - phone line AT&T - Internet Schoonmaker marina - slip rent Schoonmaker marina - slip rent Schoonmaker marina - slip rent Computer repair, day labor Staples - printer ink Chevron - workboat fuel work crew lunches Home Depot - yard tools San Rafael Yacht Harbor MT Head - honeybarge Marin County Counsel San Rafael Yacht Harbor ICB - office rent Hertz - heavy equipment rental Denny Creative - website Parker Diving - vessel salvage AT&T - mobile charges San Rafael Yacht Harbor CA Assoc. of Harbormasters San Rafael Yacht Harbor Hertz - heavy equipment rental Whiting - vessel survey Whiting - vessel survey Whiting - vessel survey EMS - honeybarge Parker Diving - vessel salvage AT&T - phone line EXPENDITU RES 375.00 100.00 260.00 693.33 11,580.75 2,000.00 1,497.65 40.00 48.57 243.00 160.00 480.00 545.00 86.30 136.30 67.47 157.31 6,000.00 325.00 205.00 3,500.00 454.99 618.45 360.00 2,360.00 74.61 1,300.00 300.00 2,700.00 243.47 235.00 235.00 235.00 225.00 652.50 40.00 1/6/2016 12/24/2015 12/24/2015 1/27/2016 12/30/2015 12/30/2015 12/30/2015 1/13/2016 1/13/2016 12/30/2015 12/30/2015 1/13/2016 12/31/2015 12/30/2015 1/12/2016 1/27/2016 1/14/2016 1/27/2016 1/27/2016 1/27/2016 1/27/2016 1/27/2016 1/27/2016 1/28/2016 1/28/2016 1/28/2016 Com Srvc - Broadband HazMat Clean Up Prof Svcs - Other Rent - Equip Rental Prof Svcs - Other Maint & Rep Su - Oth Rent - Off Space Rent - Off Space Rent - Off Space Prof Svcs - Other Rent - Off Space Rent - Off Space ProfSery—CntySalRe Prof Svcs - Other Com Srvc - Cell Phon Maint & Rep Su - Oth Prof Svcs - Other Rent - Equip Rental Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other HazMat Clean Up Prof Svcs - Other Prof Svcs - Other Rent - Equip Rental AT&T -Internet 48.58 Bay Cities debris removal 3,136.15 Whiting - vessel survey 235.00 Hertz - heavy equipment rental 2,388.90 Legal ad, labor, award, sign 1,408.40 West marine - boat parts 79.89 Clipper Marina - slip fees 250.00 Schoonmaker marina - slip rent 160.00 Schoonmaker marina - slip rent 243.00 Parker Diving - vessel salvage 1,506.25 ICB - office rent 428.00 Libertyship - dry storage 480.00 Other - Chrgs for Cur Svcs - Misc 17,545.12 MT Head - honeybarge 350.00 AT&T - mobile charges 53.09 Hertz - heavy equipment rental 1,429.88 San Rafael Yacht Harbor 4,500.00 Hertz - heavy equipment rental 923.43 Dave's Diving 2,350.00 Dave's Diving 365.00 Dave's Diving 580.00 Whiting - vessel survey 235.00 Bay Cities debris removal 1,924.85 San Rafael Yacht Harbor 5,450.00 MT Head - honeybarge 350.00 Marin IST - PC Lease 341.00 total 85,296.24 Percent of Budget and Percent of FY2015-2016 as of February 3, 2016 Expenditures vs. Adopted Budget Expenditures $225,250 Adopted Budget $407,508 Realized Revenue vs. Budgeted Revenue Realized Revenue Budgeted Revenue $296,224 $408,400 RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY REPORT February 5, 2016 TO: RBRA Board FROM: RBRA Clerk SUBJECT: Anchorage Management Update Sausalito continues to dominate anchorage matters. At the December RBRA meeting, Staff reported on its Sausalito community presentation at the Spinnaker restaurant held on November 12. The Sausalito City Council heard at their January 26 meeting a report from the Sausalito Police Department entitled "Richardson Bay Vessel Anchoring and Public Safety Report" (see attached), which references the RBRA several times. The Sausalito Council directed Sausalito PD to implement the program outlined in the report. Among the actions the PD report recommended was future coordination with the County of Marin (Sheriff) and the RBRA. Staff from these three agencies and US Coast Guard met today and had a very productive discussion about future options related to achieving regulatory compliance. It was noted that lack of an adequate budget would leave all agencies with few options for effective anchorage management. Staff from Sausalito PD, County Sheriff, US Coast Guard, and RBRA will continue discussions on coordinating efforts and how to secure necessary resources. On that note, RBRA Chair Erin Tollini, Belvedere Mayor Claire McAuliffe, 3rd District Supervisor Aide Leslie Alden, and RBRA Staff held a very informative on -the -water tour with Senator Mike McGuire on January 15. Staff left that tour confident that Senator McGuire is very aware of RBRA's many challenges and issues, and appears ready to assist RBRA when our Agency implements a program that is ready for his help. Staff was also hoping to have more to report from the Anchorouts, but aside from a preliminary email (see attached) they have not provided any written material as of this report. Their presentation has been included in the meeting's agenda. Sausalito PD (and RBRA Staff) recognize that obtaining compliance with anchorage regulations requires a community-based approach. Their enforcement program first focusses on stored vessels and those being used for storing trash, debris, and property. At their Council presentation, Sausalito PD stated the need for a coordinated program to avoid the problem of vessels just ping-ponging from one side of Sausalito's jurisdictional boundary (the main navigational channel) to the other. 1 RBRA current vessel abatement funding from State Department of Boating and Waterways provides enough to salvage approximately 50 vessels this fiscal year. As noted in the separate Staff report in this packet on RBRA functions, RBRA performs the critical and unique/ irreplaceable function of local vessel salvage. Staff recommends that, to the extent that RBRA is capable, vessels that Sausalito PD (or County Sheriff) ends up taking through the enforcement and abatement process be salvaged by RBRA. Conclusion: Sausalito appears to be adopting an enforcement mode, a major shift in its heretofore longstanding position. A variety of efforts are occurring to resolve Sausalito's anchorage management funding relationship with RBRA's. Enforcement will likely be featured prominently in ongoing efforts, and will be reported on at the next RBRA meeting in April, where your Board is scheduled to adopt a work program and draft budget for FY 2016-2017. Attachments: 1. Sausalito Police Department report "Richardson Bay Vessel Anchoring and Public Safety Report", 1/26/16 2. Alden Bevington email Anchorout Presentation summary 1/22/16 2 RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY MEMORANDUM January 11, 2106 TO: RBRA Board FROM: Ben Berto, RBRA Clerk SUBJECT: RBRA future functions Challenges facing the RBRA The RBRA is facing a number of major challenges in the lead -up to fiscal year 2016- 2017 from fiscal, political, and agency mission standpoints. 1. Fiscal Sausalito demonstrated its lack of support for RBRA's proposed anchorage management program through its ongoing refusal to pay its share of this year's approved anchorage management budget. This prevented the anchorage program from going forward this year, and raises uncertainty about what future RBRA undertakings will be supported. Sausalito has continued to fund RBRA at the maintenance plus cost -of -living level of previous years. That does not address pressing needs relating to anchorage issues (see agency mission discussion below). Unfunded Staff resources will not be available. Under the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement setting up the RBRA, to which Sausalito is a signatory, every agency is legally obligated to fund the budget that the RBRA Board approves. However, a legal fights over an unpaid share would put the agency in an untenable position in terms of the consensus necessary for the long term, concerted effort that an effective anchorage program requires. A separate but looming legal issue is the threat of pending litigation. Whether from waterfront property owners or dissatisfied anchorouts, RBRA's legal budget is going to have to go up, at a time that the agency is potentially financially constrained from being able to do more than baseline maintenance activities. Member jurisdictions will need to be prepared to provide additional legal funds in FY '16-17. The stepped-up enforcement activities of the Sausalito Police Department (discussed in the anchorage report) cannot help but spill into RBRA's purview. Demands for legal services are on the rise and unlikely to lessen any time soon. The RBRA is going to need to grow to continue to meet the demands intrinsic to its role and proper functioning. RBRA's long-range program emphasis in the last year -and -a - half makes a strong case for developing a multi-year budget. Local contributions to the RBRA are likely to continue to grow. A multi-year budget for a comprehensive, longer - range program has the potential for steering the RBRA out of a reactive or passive mode. For the time being, the RBRA is in a maintenance orientation, deferring substantive efforts for the future. 1 2. Political At their last meeting, the Sausalito Council directed the Police Department to proceed with an enforcement program inside their jurisdictional waters. That may help predict what RBRA program and funding Sausalito may support. Efforts will continue in advance of April's Board meeting to attempt to determine this, and will be reflected in Staff's recommendations to the Board about next year's work program and budget. Staff continues to be very grateful to the Board members for guiding Staff's efforts and successfully secured their Council's funding for this fiscal year's (terminated) anchorage management program and budget. 3. Agency mission Since its 1985 inception, RBRA has been without direction or a program to actively enforce its regulations. As noted in Sausalito Police Department's January report to the Sausalito Council, that City has up to now tacitly supported the anchorage's bohemian lifestyle. Sausalito voted 4-1 on January 26 to direct its police department to initiate a multi- faceted enforcement program to secure compliance with its own 10 -hour anchoring limit (the one dissenting vote because the enforcement program did not go far enough). While the program outline emphasizes that efforts will be designed to secure voluntary compliance, Sausalito has nonetheless sent a strong statement that that its hitherto laissez- faire position has ended (at least for the time being). At some level, enforcement is now a high priority. How does this fit into RBRA's functioning and mission? A look at the Special Area Plan that led to the formation of RBRA, and our Agency's governing documents show that regulatory compliance is integral to RBRA's purpose and mission. Enforcement a necessary accompaniment to doing so. RBRA's recently initiated registration and documentation program illustrates our Agency's increasing efforts to secure regulatory compliance on the anchorage and upgrade its enforcement activities. The $495,000 grant our Agency secured was helpful in achieving the highest rate of vessel abatement in the agency's history. It also demonstrated that abatement requires ongoing enforcement and enhanced anchorage organization in order to be successful long-term. If your Board so directs, Staff will prepare anchorage regulation compliance options for the April meeting and potential inclusion in next year's work program and budget. Alternatives to the RBRA Multiple challenges face the RBRA. One option heard being discussed is what would happen if the RBRA were disbanded? Disbanding would certainly address who pays for what. Each agency would be individually responsible for all RBRA — related expenses accruing within its jurisdiction. Of the five member agencies, Mill Valley is the only one that arguably would likely not experience substantially increased expenses. 2 Other RBRA member jurisdictions are unlikely to save in expenses. A walk through the current budget reveals why. Currently, gross member agency contributions to the RBRA total $269,100. Generally vessel abatement costs approximately $10,000 per vessel (RBRA being a notable exception with Bill's skills at getting the most boats per buck). So $269,000 might yield roughly 27 vessels, about half of what the RBRA removes annually. RBRA annually applies for and successfully secures grants from multiple agencies that cover more than 90% of the costs of all vessel salvage and disposal. Absent RBRA's supplemental revenue, each member jurisdiction would be on their own to either secure outside funding or underwrite the complete costs on their own. Costs aside, a typical enforcement and abatement scenario reveals the impossibility of any individual jurisdiction being able to fulfill RBRA's role. A report is received that a vessel has run aground/sunk. Who this report is transmitted to, and how it comes to the attention of the applicable jurisdiction is unknown. Presumably public safety responders for several jurisdictions would be involved in such instances until it is determined in whose jurisdiction the vessel now rests. Now what to do? Outside RBRA, none of the five member jurisdictions would be qualified or equipped to intercept, raise and keep floating, address any leaking hazmat issues, etc. involved with any problem vessel. A commercial salvor would have to perform the work. At whose expense would the boat be raised, stabilized, and hazmat abated? Once a vessel sinks, it will sink again without active ongoing intervention, and even that is only a temporary fix. Whether it is a sunken vessel or one stuck under somebody's dock or washed on shore, it needs to go somewhere. Once a vessel is moved, responsibility for it belongs to the mover. Where does it go? The Army Corps facility will almost certainly not be available. Their function is not to deal with salvage vessels, with associated hazmat leaks etc.. Even if ACE or other emergency responder were willing, hazinat containment needs to take place immediately, by qualified responders (such as the RBRA Harbor Administrator) or the results can be disastrous to nearby environmental resources, vessels in nearby marinas etc. Even with a proactive approach to at-risk vessels, RBRA has to deal with hazmat leaking from vessels several times a year. Therefore the question of what to do with the vessel(s) remains largely unanswerable in a non-RBRA context. If the Army Corps facility is not available, it would be very challenging or impossible in some instances to haul vessels anywhere else, due to their marginal condition. That is why unmanaged anchorages end up with sunken vessels for years/decades (witness the recent multi-million dollar efforts necessary to remove a relatively few vessels sunk for years in the Petaluma River and Oakland Estuary). Dealing with sunk/aground vessels would similarly represent a virtually insoluble problem for individual Richardson's Bay jurisdictions. If each RBRA jurisdiction decided to become individually and proactively responsible for enforcement and abatement of vessels within its jurisdiction, additional regulations would need to be adopted. Those regulations would need to be developed and then reviewed and approved by BCDC and state division of boating and waterways. 3 Given Richardson Bay's long-term status is a federally designated special anchorage, it is unlikely that jurisdictions would be successful in closing (their jurisdiction's portion of) the anchorage. Each jurisdiction would be undertaking what would likely be a multi-year process to get to a final answer on how they could regulate the anchorage. Assuming the Anchorage cannot be closed, jurisdictions would be left with regulations restricting the types of and duration that vessels can stay in Anchorage. So-called transient vessels would likely continue to be allowed to come and go. Who would be keeping tabs on whether vessels stayed or left? The only way to ensure that is through regulations, regular water patrols, and enforcement. Each jurisdictions enforcement arm would then have to provide patrols (new in most instances) and undertake enforcement. What would that new patrol vessel, officers conducting regular patrols, and the newly implemented enforcement cost? How likely would new patrols be better at monitoring, not to mention preventing or abating what is currently occurring? Vessels would continue to arrive in Richardson's Bay in the middle of the night with no registration or documentation. Would jurisdictions be willing to incur the expense and hassle for ongoing enforcement in their jurisdiction? Enforcement involves more than issuing citations. As enforcement agencies can attest, citations by and themselves have little weight when it comes to addressing vessel problems. A vessel can move over a jurisdiction boundary and the whole process would need to start from the beginning. Even assuming the vessel isn't relocated, in order to actually abate vessels, due process must take place. This often will mean hearings will need to be held before the respective councils, each with its own unique circumstances. If the council is determined that the vessels must go, the individuals ostensibly responsible for these vessels (assuming they can be found) are highly unlikely to be forced to pay for anything. As part of the vessel abatement process, the vessels may have to be stored for the several months. Where will that storage be? Once a storage yard is found, the vessels must be hauled to that location, and the yard must be paid for the multiple months of vessel storage, all at local government expense. Conclusion While the RBRA faces acknowledged challenges in fully performing its many functions, local governments cannot reasonably expect to perform many of the functions the RBRA does well on an ongoing basis. The expense and administrative hassle would almost guarantee that nothing would be done until the problem becomes exceptionally adverse. Staff recognizes that one of the most significant challenges is raising the level of awareness of what the RBRA does, and the consequences of attempted alternative approaches to managing the anchorage. Staff hopes that this report informs decisionrnakers and other interested parties about of what is involved. RBRA must continue to evolve as an agency, and a consensus on future direction and scope needs to occur quickly. RBRA will be preparing next year's work program and budget for the April Board meeting. Future actions by RBRA board members should be consistent with what their councils support to avoid a repeat of this year's truncated program. Staff looks forward to helping develop a consensus on how to proceed. Agency future discussion 0211 l6rpl.doc 4 SAVE_Anchorage Community Design Presentation Summary to RBRA for February 2016.txt From: Alden Bevington <alden@pragmatical.org> Sent: Friday, January 22, 2016 10:38 AM To: Berto, Benjamin Subject: Anchorage Community Design: Presentation Summary to RBRA for February, 2016 Hello Ben, I pray this email find you well. Here's the draft summary of the presentation for the next RBRA meeting in February. This is a technical overview of the framework we have been building from, which is one that I have presented for some time to RBRA and staff, and which we have consent from a broad group of the anchorage to work within. The outreach continues. Thanks so much for your steady work and collaboration on this issue. Please email with any questions. Best, Alden Alden Bevington m. +1-415-272-7519 skype: alden.bevington Principal Pragmatical www.pragmatical.org Co -Creator The open Collaboration Encyclopedia Buy on Amazon Freemium version - here Presentation Overview of Anchorage Community Steering Group January, 2016 In response to the request from RBRA and the municipalities to develop and present a formal plan for establishing a sustainable and well-managed anchorage in Richardson Bay, members of the anchorage neighborhood have been meeting and collaborating to identify issues, present solutions, and come to some workable agreements on meaningful approaches to achieve these solutions. we have aimed to apply the insights of those who live in the anchorage and find ways in which we can reasonably meet the needs of a diversity of stakeholders on water and land. This summary gives a broad perspective on the nature of our efforts, and a technical overview of our methodology. Page 1 SAVE Anchorage Community Design Presentation Summary to RBRA for February 2016.txt In adddition to this work summarized here, for this presentation we have developed an ad hoc steering committee which this overview is the output of, and have been taking steady action as subcommittees and individuals on the anchorage to proceed with the neighborhood's demographic survey, community outreach, ground tackle checks, and making headway in educing agreement among a diverse community on consenting to basic game rules. This summary may appear too technical for some audiences, but we agreed this was important nonetheless, and will be useful background in advance of the presentation to get everyone up to speed, and to create the opportunity for others in decision making positions to more deeply educate themselves on the work, and to consider the implications of the framework as a launch point for discussion and further inquiry. we will be sharing all the details of the system design, as it applies to the Richardson Bay Anchorage, in our comprehensive presentation to the RBRA and other authorities in February, 2016. These details have been worked out in our community and committee meetings and we look forward to sharing them, but so there is real-time opportunity for questions, clarifications, and comments as they arise, we will use the time and format of the presentation to present them in full Please feel encouraged to consider these points here in advance of the presentation, contemplate their application, so we can all be generative in the discussion. The strategy and plan we are working with is structured upon the Nobel work of Dr. Elinor Ostrum, known as the "Design Principles for Common Pool Resources", for which she was awarded the Prize in Economic science in 2012, being the first woman to do so. This work, and the Social -Ecological Systems (SEs) framework built from it, is widely considered the state of the art in "Governing the Commons". It presents us with novel insights into how to institutionally resolve the confounding challenges that we commonly face when we have a shared resource in common, without resorting to measures which will sacrifice its historical cultural assets, unique character, and ecological sustainability. our beautiful Richardson Bay and its Anchorage is such a common pool resource, with a unique set of circumstances, and it is a suitable candidate for application of these frameworks There is a reason Richardson Bay's open anchorage still exists, and why it had proven to be so confusing to determine and come to some consent regarding the correct way to govern it, or decisively justify its removal or right to be. The socio-economic science of 'the commons' is not something we have been raised to understand. At best we have learned models of governing the commons that fit well into the political arts of development and representative, but not direct, democracy. But these are methods too ham-fisted to address the nuances inherent in our local situation. Applying them we might risk losing things that we will come to regret. Fortunately, Page 2 sAVE.-Anchorage community Design Presentation Summary to RBRA for February 2016.txt Dr. Ostrum left us with her life's work, and showed us things we couldn't see at first. Ostrum's Law, as it has come to be known, states: A resource arrangement that works in practice can work in theory. That is to say, her work was deeply reasonable and realistic, it was not abstract. To develop her list of design principles she studied common pool resources around the world and in traditional societies. specifically, as she noted which arrangements were sustainable and which fell apart over time, she discovered there were 8 institutional governance structures that were present in systems that worked. If any one of these were missing, she found that the common resource would be abused and in time be destroyed, privatized, or become in time governed by bodies which were functionally unaccountable to the local authorities and appropriators. These are those Design Principles. 1. Clearly defined boundaries; 2. Rules regarding the appropriation and provision of common resources that are adapted to local conditions; 3. collective -choice arrangements that allow most resource appropriators to participate in the decision-making process; 4. Effective monitoring by monitors who are part of or accountable to the appropriators; 5. A scale of graduated sanctions for resource appropriators who violate community rules; 6. Mechanisms of conflict resolution that are cheap and of easy access; 7. self-determination of the community recognized by higher-level authorities; 8. In the case of larger common -pool resources, organization in the form of multiple layers of nested enterprises; Elinor Ostrum recognized that there was no panacea that would resolve the issues in a given common pool resource, and recommended that each system be approached with respect to its unique and multi -faceted nature. we have approached our work on this by from sources as close to the scene of the issues of the anchorage neighborhood as possible to get a good understanding of these nuances. As a result, the work of members of the Anchorage Neighborhood and its sub -working groups has resulted in a detailed assessment of the issues that have come to exist in t h e absence of each of these design principles. we have further developed what we largely believe are workable and cost-effective solutions to each, institutional structures for applying those solutions, and social strategies already underway for increasing consent within the anchorage community and increased functional rapprochement with the municipalities that make up the RBRA, and their communities on the waterfront and land. Page 3 SAVE Anchorage Community Design Presentation Summary to RBRA for February 2016.txt We will be presenting this output of our efforts formally at the RBRA meeting in February, 2016. The presentation has been organized in such a way that it will be made by a number of members of the anchorage who will each explain the details of an issue/solution area that they have shown a proven expertise in. We can provide a list of presenters, their presentation time, and their topics if requested. Thank you. Page 4 Richardson Bay Anchoring and Public Safety Report Presented to City Council At Tuesday's Council meeting, Lieutenant Bill Fraass presented a Richardson Bay Anchoring and Public Safety Report to the Sausalito City Council. According to the report, since 1986, the number of vessels anchored in Richardson Bay has grown from approximately eighty to well over two hundred. Approximately seventy vessels are currently anchored in Sausalito waters, with the rest anchored in Marin County waters. Many of the boats in Sausalito waters are unoccupied. Some unoccupied boats have been anchored as a way for their owners to store them free of charge. Others are being used as storage containers for trash, debris and excess property. With the increase in the number of vessels anchored in the waters of Sausalito, the Sausalito Police Department has observed a concurrent increase in violent crime, theft crime, environmental hazards and navigational hazards. In an attempt to address the growing number of boats and the public safety concerns associated with them, the Sausalito Police Department has developed a program to gain community compliance with the municipal code that limits the amount of time the vessels can be anchored in Sausalito waters. Sausalito Municipal Code 16.040.020 states that vessels can be anchored for only ten hours without the written permission of the Chief of Police. The program would encompass activities such as: • Outreach to community leaders • Community meetings • Distribution of information regarding the municipal code • Posting compliance notices on vessels The program would first focus on those vessels that are being stored or being used for storage of trash or debris or property in Sausalito waters. Afterwards, vessels that are inhabited will be contacted as part of this program. The Richardson Bay Regional Agency, Marin County Sheriffs Office and the United States Coast Guard will collaborate with the Sausalito Police Department on the program. Questions may be directed to Lieutenant Bill Fraass at bfraass cr.ci.sausalito.ca.us. WATCH THE RICHARDSON BAY ANCHORING AND PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT TO COUNCIL 7-1 N CC w CO w a- ) 0 0 4.1 17:1 c!J t:AD m E •C i c0 i U 0 >. C ' ul0a'0eIay ,a .te. • y as , Y ' a, ° . 'D sA•etoa C caia0 vt<ad m n awcc a y c _ _. VI. E .° Zr)E= o a) 0 = c' a ..0 c .L.. *' 0 a) c n != •61 +•' -.-. c o . w fa 0 ,o al • a7 .0 0 A 0 v= CO Q 9 ..= .. • :J_. Q i E E C .L'7 R7 rte. ti '0 CO 'C I = ca N •a+ y �_ = N a7 y w c, C7 U a) D 0 .c a E: e m v o o E E =� n m a' CO y < 1.3 "-' c"a •o o m v E. . 3- ►' '•• .0 L e!1 0 i a] 0 0 0 0 ['0 0 0 fa 3-.0 .0 = y wZ i s Y icsa; El= mL=° c = E �o-aE=s0«I-m ain—.�.•a•co: n=Cal co - ..- • -no .oE m •c a• eff '▪ r o w a uD r' c r „......6- y 0 Q .c ca _ o n >` == m E -'-- >•. c,: ca i N i y.00 = by C p C..r G7 =.. }. 61= L +4.' L .Q 0 en Z sym. t 3 cd -a C d'r• a' vmi `•"' .= > i i ° 'a CO ° 10 •� LI U y ntt CI C N v o a 13 Yo e 117 o = o •'r.....,,•,_— D nmo 60 41 eacacca , m as c 0 ._ G c o m_• co �w 3q) co cn•e7.,•io v1—sem ca 3 3._ m co cs Q.ccn•o -I.. a ::., 0. �.�� U Nom�++ � U �;ca. .[2.y0�.' � � :v w ro.,,. :�, �0y..� � � i r-, ..TS •� . O •- coy SZ, by• �F al ++ w a1 s� c� .. c3 rn, 4 O r'' O uij n-m n b. U] U ,d .d ›, iR-fl4RRI 'v. aa'i `t -I > - ° 'fl rti v 'a m T+ • tin tato . -a1 O s v S cd a ami rn 2 .' O 6, w 1. o y j 8 0 v • bA b ' cep t.. 0 . v ,o cd ;-' 2. a1 9• a d zu O C7 w O 8 `a# :A 'a�# N v a) •'' 'a U •�..', •• � � O › . 0 b1). ~ �d aj OL' V, �r R' UFjq �° ,-,..a. v *, ( ,� 'tan tan �'M j3. 6. o'cl o rd 0 ;4 p� cd m +' 6 .a.' cd a N i•, . . c' mt. a) U] c) •." .G .1 a1 r..-.,..÷-• . O '.a :-' t~" ,. ¢.. '11-c — ' C!) +s :.8 V F'+ �' a1 4' o m. .ca w bo �a c ; : .v cl ccv1=.,>' •d • 0 v.. m .5 ,•o .,; 0 v g' }., tan H. ro -'Q. aa1.� cin o 'er $.'' 0 o.o o • q b: �•:0 . . '- 6) o .) CU 4 7, ccs 0 c0 -- u cda- v1 o 0 l'n a ti o J;Uiilil a cc P� �: m o. a,��, °U' ;� O. o 0 LO o od 4 15- .�,; A2r' e) b v7 rP� ;0 al E-, Gr• m "i;',. -;4.. . o 4a o C01 lap d• E[7. (Z-1.-8- % TI, m-v� o.. r0 -CL.�' o' •0. c+,.c• c. 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 .0 rts til o , , + +g bd : cd o wo . v i + v o �n iv Cf s-,ti3 tri ti .i:je03. o ••-� ' CA p' 'd" 3 cd ., o p zt ei o o F. 'tl 0 ,"0 a la fes" {�. c'� p _ y `N ^Iti., C]+ v F... ''d %.] TLLI 0 `ti 0 o ▪ SS 0 0 0 0 yam.,, ' o y� c'b . �' t� .a '8 '��`J r/7 ren c`�i - g m ..q , p' t . tip ' v-, a3 2 'q `o tn p Rs Pf o�_m a� v.�:� a 's g vi o @' b 0y 2 a ° p c7E4u rFF 0 U • d •0` ,afth -�yo .0ot£oo0�io a, p, • a, o . p p '7'" ap. y��• rd mO to 0 •gyp. °8�� -6 yQ-q?'d�� ▪ ,o ia'v�(vi0c. CR CO a"ddd o D. � 'cr.,' � cO a? �o co -o O y o a a ` G a o ' a.O m a). '�.d O 'CI NO p '7 C) -Q 2 6 bLr -Si Q CU r3.3 00cO al "tti ' 0a, co ga; ., tic' . �q .q .0ya) t - .m im p wti . 1t ,..Ti.4 y,,Y3.op, o .ti�mo �' y, -6 m d v o6,,,,palebto q a� 'ma a' b°E d C5 m MA � q g 2.,-_, L. � .� -� caap -G�orb • .6 :5 2y nnem oab�No °'bSA. .p iti0d O' Qt m yOocn-o "�•dwaio• Om o m o o ' .a • 'o Nto '� 00 •Z L/) -L.1C a4�.0: >:., 63 a) (3.3 , .- a ' p�°' .a co 04,?U ZOd N 7 ..: a, 777 Ti DIGEST 40 Warlin Local Agency Fc r"r(u a't!;;ien Co 1'ii11ss on oli Regional Service Planning / Subdivision of the State of California NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING AND AGENDA Marin Local Agency Formation Coinznissionr Thursday, February 11, 2016 City of San Rafael Council Chambers 1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, California 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER BY CHAIR ROLL CALL BY CHAIR APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Chair or designee will consider a motion to approve the agenda as prepared by the Executive Officer with any requests to remove or rearrange items by members. OPEN TIME This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Commission on any matter not on the current agenda. All statements that require a response will be referred to staff for reply in writing or will be placed on the Commission's agenda for consideration at a later meeting. Speakers are limited to three minutes. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS All items calendared as consent are considered ministerial or non -substantive and subject to a single motion approval. With the concurrence of the Chair or designee, a Commissioner may request discussion of an item on the consent calendar. 1. Financial Report and Year -End Projections for Fiscal Year 2015-16 (action) The Commission will review a report comparing budgeted and actual transactions for the fiscal year through December 31St and its projection the agency is on pace to finish with an operating shortfall of ($22,384) or (5.4%). This projection marks a significant improvement over the budgeted operating deficit of ($50,000) and is largely tied to anticipated savings in salary and accounting expenses. The report is being presented to the Commission to accept and file as well as to provide direction as needed. View Staff Report 2. Approval of Meeting Minutes (action) The Commission will consider approving meeting minutes for January 14, 2016. View Staff Report 3. Progress Report on 2015-2016 Work Plan (action) The Commission will receive a report on progress made to date in accomplishing the administrative and planning activities established in the work plan for 2015-2016. This includes summarizing the four projects that have been completed to date while highlighting activities that have been recently initiated. The report is being presented to the Commission to formally accept and file as well as to discuss any desired amendments going forward. View Staff Report 4. Current and Pending Proposals (information) The Commission will receive a report identifying active proposals that are on file with Marin LAFCO as required under statute. The report also identifies pending agency proposals to help telegraph future workload. The report is being presented to the Commission for information only. View Staff Report 5. CALAFCO Biennial Survey Results (information) The Commission will receive a report prepared by CALAFCO on the results of its most recent survey of the membership. The survey ranges topically from budget outlays to work activities. The survey is being presented for information only with the invitation for Commissioners to provide direction to staff on a related item of interest for presentation at a future meeting. View Staff Report MARIN LAFCO February 11, 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda Page 2 of 3 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING I Municipal Service Review on Countywide Public Water Services / Actions to Accept Executive Officer's Report and Adopt Resolution (action) The Commission will return to a public hearing opened on January 14, 2016 and consider taking two fmal actions to complete the agency's scheduled municipal service review on countywide public water services. This involves accepting the Executive Officer's final report on the municipal service review and adopting a resolution that makes determinative statements on all the factors required for consideration under State law ranging from growth and development projections to infrastructure needs and deficiencies. Both documents return intact with two substantive exceptions as detailed in the agenda report and based on testimony received during the January meeting. View Staff Report 7. REQUEST FOR CONTINUATION 1 Reorganization to Detach 91 Glenside Way from the San Rafael Sanitation District and Annex to Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District / Sphere Amendments (action) The Commission is scheduled to return to an open hearing to consider a landowner's reorganization proposal to detach unincorporated territory at 91 Glenside Way in Los Ranchitos from the San Rafael Sanitation District and concurrently annex into the Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District. The subject parcel is identified by the County of Marin Assessor's Office as 179-261-72. In concurrence with the applicant staff recommends a continuance to the next regular scheduled meeting. View Staff Report BUSINESS HEARING ITEMS 8. Review of Draft Scope of Analysis / Municipal Service Review on San Rafael and Lucas Valley Region (action) The Commission will receive a draft scope of analysis to guide the preparation and timing of the agency's scheduled study on general governmental services provided in the San Rafael and Lucas Valley region. This includes setting the depth and range of the analysis as well as establishing any discretionary determination requirements in addition to the mandatory factors required by the Legislature. Per policy the draft scope of analysis is being presented for first -reading in anticipation of its review by the affected agencies and is expected to return to the Commission for formal approval at a future meeting. View Staff Report 9. Request for Time Extension to Complete Approval Terms / 1501 Lucas Valley Road Annexation to Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District (action) The Commission will consider an applicant's request for a time extension to complete the terms established by Marin LAFCO in approving the annexation of territory at 1501 Lucas Valley Road (164- 280-35) to the Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District at its February 12, 2015 meeting. Staff recommends approval of a six month extension as well as waiving the associated fee in the amount of $252. View Staff Report 10. Legislative Preview for 2016 (information) The Commission will receive a verbal report from staff on legislative items of interest as part of the second year of the 2015-2016 session. This includes an update on a proposal initiated by the Commission through CALAFCO to establish a reporting requirement for legal stand-alone JPAs file their agreements and amendments with LAFCOs; an item being authored by Senator Mike McGuire. No written report though handouts will be provided at the meeting. 11. Policy Committee Update (information) The Commission will receive a verbal report from the Policy Committee (Baker, Blanchfield, and Burdick) on current activities. No written report. MARIN LAFCO February 11, 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda Page 3 of 3 CLOSED SESSION 12. Potential/Anticipated Litigation The Commission will meet in closed session concerning one item of significant exposure to litigation under Government Code Section 54956.9. EXECUTIVE OFFICER REPORT COMMISSIONER ANNOUCEMENTS AND REQUESTS ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING: • Special Meeting / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 for Annual Workshop - 9:00 am to 12:30 pm at 555 Northgate Drive in San Rafael • Regular Meeting / Thursday, April 14, 2016 (Tentative) Attest : Keene Simonds Executive Officer Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection at least 72 hours before each scheduled regular meeting at the LAFCO office at 555 Northgate Drive, Suite 230, San Rafael. Pursuant to GC Section 84308, if you wish to participate in the above proceedings, you or your agent are prohibited from making a campaign contribution of $250 or more to any Commissioner. This prohibition begins on the date you begin to actively support or oppose an application before LAFCO and continues until 3 months after a final decision is rendered by LAFCO. If you or your agent have made a contribution of $250 or more to any Commissioner during the 12 months preceding the decision, in the proceeding that Commissioner must disqualify himself or herself from the decision. However, disqualification is not required if the Commissioner returns that campaign contribution within 30 days of learning both about the contribution and the fact that you are a participant in the proceedings. Any person with a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) may receive a copy of the agenda or a copy of all the documents constituting the agenda packet for a meeting upon request. Any person with a disability covered under the ADA may also request a disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in a public meeting. Please contact the LAFCO office at 415-446-4409 at least three (3) working days prior to the meeting for any requested arraignments or accommodations. DIGEST Marin Local Agency Formation Commission 441 Regional Service Planning / Subdivision of the State of California NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING AND AGENDA Marin Local Agency Formation Commission Wednesday, February 17, 2016 555 Northgate Drive, 1St Floor Conference Room San Rafael, California 94903 8:30 A.M. - DOORS OPEN Light breakfast offerings will be available for all attendees during this informal networking opportunity with Commissioners and staff members. 9:00 A.M. - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL OPEN TIME This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Commission on any matter not listed on this agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes unless otherwise provided by the Chair. ANNUAL WORKSHOP The Commission will hold its annual workshop with William Chiat from the Alta Mesa Group. Scheduled topics are listed below with approximate starting and ending times. • LAFCO Primer 1 Part II (9:00 A.M. to 9:50 A.M) This session will be a big -picture overview of LAFCOs' existing and emerging duties/responsibilities in providing regional growth management services. The session expands on the primer provided at the prior year's workshop with additional focus on LAFCOs' authority to impose terms and directive to prepare service reviews. • Marin LAFCO Snapshot 1 Structure and Capacity (9:50 A.M. to 10:10 A.M.) This session compliments the preceding big -picture overview on LAFCOs and summarizes trends specific to Marin LAFCO's organizational structure and capacity. This includes reviewing past and current staff and budget resources. Comfort Break (10:10 A.M to 10:20 A.M.) • Strategic Planning 1 2015 Review and 2016 Preview (10:20 A.M. to 11:20 A.M.) This session will review progress made in addressing goals and implementing objectives in the strategic plan adopted for 2015. The Commission will also discuss potential changes in advance of adopting a new strategic plan for 2016. • Study Schedule 1 Progress Report (11:20 A.M. to 11:50 A.M) This session will review the current adopted study schedule calendaring municipal service reviews through 2017/18. This review will provide the Commission an opportunity to discuss potential changes - if any - to the current schedule as well as related items of importance now and going forward.