Bolinas Community Public Utility District
A Regular  Meeting  Of  The Board  Of  Directors
November 28, 2001      270 Elm Road, Bolinas

1.  Call to Order

7:30 p.m.

2.  Roll

Directors Amoroso, Bertsch, McClellan, Siedman present. Director McClellan presiding.

3.  Manager’s Report

Directors received copies of a draft agreement for the American Land Conservancy to purchase and hold the District’s Pine Gulch Creek property until the National Park Service receives its funding to buy the land, which is expected to happen at the end of 2002. Director Siedman suggested adding a paragraph stipulating that any use the ACL makes of the land, should the Park Service fail to purchase it, be consistent with the ACL’s purpose as stated in paragraph 7 on page 2 of the agreement. Director Amoroso suggested simply waiting until the park Service is able to purchase the property directly. There were no objections to Manager Buchanan’s recommendation to send the Agreement and the associated Vierra settlements to district counsel Hadden Roth for review. If the sale goes through Buchanan recommended forming a committee to discuss the District’s priorities for the use of the money.

The Downtown Parking Committee submitted a letter of thanks to the Board and stated that the records of its work will be given to the BCPUD, as will its assistance in the future if any need should arise.

Pacific Bell is continuing its search for a location for its connector box for a new fiber optic cable to replace the old cable that runs under the lagoon. Although the one-time payment it is willing to offer has risen somewhat, it is still requiring a permanent easement rather than a lease. Staff will relay that that the Board might be open to locating it on BCPUD land if a specific location is identified and fair market value paid for the land.

Director Kayfetz arrived at 7:40 p.m.

Directors received a proposal for annual maintenance for the two standby generators.

--  Amoroso/Siedman  unanimous to approve Stewart and Stevenson’s maintenance schedule for the standby generators.

Marin County Department of Public Works is redesigning the barrier at the end of Wharf Road.

--Kayfetz/Bertsch unanimous  that staff should reiterate the Board’s earlier position on vehicular access to the beach, including the restriction of access by two-wheeled vehicles.

Bolinas Garage plans to install a 2-inch service line as part of its remodel. The District is also requiring a reduced pressure principle backflow prevention device. The 2-inch line is insufficient to serve a commercial-residential fire sprinkler system. A dedicated 4-inch water line with a double check backflow device, water meter and alarm for the fire suppression system will be necessary. The alarm will sound if water from the line is used, which, with the meter readings, will exclude the possibility of misuse of the supply. Staff recommended that the contractor engaged on the project handle the installation, including the regular water service.

Director Amoroso asked if the additional hookup would require amendment of Resolution 173 to exempt emergency service connections. Director Siedman opined that since no additional service is to be billed for, no additional connection exists.

4.  Community Expression

The Board was entreated by Bob Levitt  to reassess its position on BCPUD responsibility for dangerous trees in its rights-of-way, and specifically those adjacent to Richard Deats’ property. Levitt was informed that the draft budget for 2002-03 will include money for tree removal but that the budget would not be finalized until June 2002.

5.  Energy Generation:  Woodrat #1 anemometer installation; opportunity to purchase refurbished 65kw Vesta generator with tower

Bob Gold informed the Board that due to a variety of circumstances he now prefers to site the wind measurement anemometer at Woodrat 2 reservoir. He noted that the only access road to the hill at Woodrat 1 belongs to the Park Service. County of Marin regulations accept readings within a half-mile radius so the windmill could eventually be located at either site although Gold felt that the readings would be more indicative of Woodrat 2 activity.  Gold suggested that, since the meter does not have to be on the same property as the windmill, either a deal could be worked out with Commonweal where a mill at Woodrat 2 connects to Commonweal’s electricity meter and the District bills Commonweal for the energy it supplies, or energy could be transmitted over to Woodrat Treatment Plant.

Gold distributed pictures of used windmills that are being sold for $23,000, not eligible for the State buydown program but still cheaper than a new one. Director Bertsch felt that it was too soon to purchase any windmill but accepted locating the anemometer at Woodrat 2. Staff ascertained that moving the anemometer to different locations is relatively easy, aside from resetting the electronics. Director Amoroso expressed concern that a bird flyway might be affected. He proposed asking for comments on the proposal from Point Reyes Bird Observatory.

--  Amoroso/Bertsch  unanimous    to approve locating the anemometer at Woodrat 2, subject to review of any negative comment by PRBO at the December 19, 2001 meeting.

6.   Expanded Water Use Permit Application:  Hanley
     project location:  140 Fern

The applicant proposes to construct a single family dwelling, with water supplied through a meter transferred from a cliff top property whose structure was destroyed in a fire several years ago.

--  Kayfetz/Siedman  unanimous  to approve an Unconditional Expanded Water Use Permit.

Christine Weicher, a neighbor of the project, stated that twelve neighbors have written to the Marin County Department of Environmental Health, expressing fears for the stability of the nearby cliff. She stated that about twelve feet of Hanley’s property is in the bluff erosion zone. Hanley stated that a geotechnical study by Salem & Howes has shown that it isn’t and Salem & Howes’ engineer had told Hanley that any effluent from his drainage or septic system would affect the cliff in about 1.2 million years.

7.  Coastal Permit (02-5) / Use Permit (02-7) Applications:  Finkelstein
 project location:  35 Queen

Applicant David Finkelstein submitted an application for an Expanded Water Use Permit as part of the Coastal Permit process, even though the proposed garage construction involves no water use. Staff will fax any comments on the Coastal Permit Application the following day, since the deadline for comment was on the day of the meeting. Staff has already submitted the comment that the proposed construction appears to be in the bluff erosion zone defined in the Bolinas Gridded Mesa Plan and as such, prohibited. Director Kayfetz stated that, since the area of the residence would be expanded, an expanded water use permit is necessary.

-- Kayfetz/Bertsch  unanimous  to deny the applicant’s Expanded Water Use Permit Application and inform the County of Marin Planning Department of the Board’s decision

Director Amoroso stated that under the BCPUD’s own rules it is bound by the Bolinas Community Plan and the Bolinas Gridded Mesa Plan, as an amendment to the Community Plan, is also binding. The proposed construction appears to violate the Gridded Mesa Plan.

Director McClellan noted that this was one of the very few times that the Board has denied an expanded water use permit.

8. Solid Waste:  Waste Management Contract Proposal

Waste Management’s  proposal for a seven-year contract offered a 27% percent reduction in rates for residential 20-gallon can pickup and 19% for the 32-gallon can rate, bringing them in line with Stinson Beach revised rates. A franchise fee of $2,500 per annum would be paid to the District. Ken Foley explained that the franchise fee could be disposed of as BCPUD wished but that Waste Management is unable to reimburse the District directly for its legal costs in the cross-complaint brought by Shoreline/Waste Management against BCPUD, which have been estimated at $41,000.

There were no objections to Director Amoroso’s suggestion that Solid Waste Consultant Paul Rottenberg be engaged for two hours to review the proposal. Amoroso also asked Foley to consider making a lump sum payment of $40,000 rather than an annual franchise fee. The seven-year term of the contract, with renewal by mutual consent, was acceptable.

9.  Resolution 473, Proposing An Election Be Held In Its Jurisdiction; Requesting The Board Of Supervisors To Consolidate With Any Other Election Conducted On Said Date; And Requesting Election Services By The County Registrar of Voters

There were no objections to moving Item 9 to follow Item 10.

10.  Bike Path Proposal(s):  ballot wording for March 5, 2001 Election

Director McClellan stated that discussion of ballot wording was the purpose of this item rather than the respective merits of any proposal.

Apologizing for the absence of any prior public presentation, Judy Molyneux stated that she had felt it wasn’t wise to produce raw drawings that would be shown to people she didn’t know, other than adjacent property owners and potential funders of her proposal.

Molyneux then made an extensive presentation of her proposal for a multi-user path(s) along Olema-Bolinas Road from the Bolinas School campus to downtown and for additional improvements to existing pathways through the BCPUD land adjacent to Olema-Bolinas Road. Her basic proposal described a single, bi-directional path, no less than six feet wide and separated by two feet from the existing road, running from the school to the top of Finney’s Hill (the junction of Mesa and Olema-Bolinas Road). Crossing Olema-Bolinas Road, southbound path-users would then enter the BCPUD land and join up with an existing path down to Resource Recovery, where the path would be continued across the Community Garden, transitioning onto Olema-Bolinas Road before Mike Aitken’s house with a series of walls to ensure that cyclists dismount before joining the road. North-bound users would stay on the existing and improved path alongside the road from downtown to the top of the hill, where the path would become bi-directional. She proposed using a resin-coated, decomposed granite surface that could be earth-colored. Although she had no figures on cost she stated that full funding of her proposal has been assured from adjacent property owners.

Director Kayfetz proposed adding Molyneux’ proposal to the Class II bikeway proposal already before the community on the March/April 2002 ballot, describing it as a six-foot path of decomposed granite on one side of the road with a two-foot separation from the road.

Several people reported that they had been confused about the ballot deadlines, believing the December meeting to be the last opportunity for wording for the March ballot. Waiting until the December meeting would move the issue to the April election. Given that the April election, having no county or state-wide issues would probably have a low voter turnout, a truer picture of community sentiment would be obtained at the March election. In Director Bertsch’s view it was not possible to immediately decide on ballot wording for Molyneux’ proposal without more information on funding and County approval. Amoroso read from the July meeting minutes that Bertsch had stated that the deadline for a ballot decision would be the December meeting.  He stated that those working on the alternative were observing that schedule.

Discussion ensued as to the merits of a March versus April election. Bellak said that the March election was preferable because there were no local or county issues on the April ballot and therefore turnout would probably be low. Kayfetz preferred an April election because it was fair to both sides.

Amoroso stated that neither plan is fully developed and one looks as viable as the other to him. He reasoned that if a viable option is left off the ballot, then it makes a very strong case to vote against the one on the ballot. He further said that if it were left off the ballot he’d be inclined to vote against it just because of the process itself. He considered it undemocratic and not the way BCPUD has operated in the past. He said the viability of the alternative would be decided before the election.

Nina Bellak expressed concern that definite funding had not been identified and that no review by Marin County had taken place to ensure feasibility of the plan. She felt that a second proposal on the ballot should have an equivalent feasibility. Molyneux pointed out that the Class II bikeway proposal does not have equivalency of presentation in that no visual plans have been presented to the community.

Eleanor Lyman felt that it would not be democratic or fair to exclude the Molyneux’ plan from the advisory measure.

--  Kayfetz/Amoroso   to put both proposals on the March ballot if wording could be worked out that night, or on the April ballot if another month was needed to frame the wording

Some people wanted to wait until the November 2002 election, to allow all aspects of both proposals to be reviewed.

Motion failed.  Amoroso, Kayfetz  ayes, McClellan, Bertsch nays, Siedman abstained.

Director Siedman, regretting that Molyneux had not brought her plan forward earlier, stated that he felt that it was important to obtain approval from the County and that too many questions needed to be answered. He noted that Molyneux’ proposal is very close to what had been discussed at their meeting. Kayfetz stated that in the past many questions were put on the ballot without being fully developed at the time. He said that in the last election the parking plan was put on the ballot with the intention of presenting a final version at a later date. Several people, including Director Siedman, distinguished between the up/down vote for the Downtown Parking Plan versus adding the purported alternative to the Marin County 2-lane proposal vote without verification that the alternative is viable.

Kayfetz told the story of a lawsuit he had worked on as an expert witness where a young boy had been hit by a Snapple truck while riding on a Class II bikeway and had ended up as a living vegetable.

Barbara Kayfetz asked that her 300-signature petition requesting an advisory measure on the widening of the Olema-Bolinas Road be acknowledged and the wording used on that petition be used on a single issue ballot.

--  Kayfetz/Amoroso   to use Barbara Kayfetz’ petition language for an advisory measure on the March ballot

Bellak requested that the words “to be paid for by a grant from the state Safe Routes to School program and Marin County transportation funds” be added. Kayfetz amended his motion to include Bellak’s wording. The motion was later clarified to say “Shall a project be implemented to widen Olema-Bolinas Road (4 feet on each side), from the school to downtown, by adding bicycle/pedestrian lanes, with a white stripe separating the bicycle/pedestrian lanes from vehicular traffic; to be paid for by a grant from the state Safe Routes To School program and Marin County transportation funds?”

Amoroso withdrew his second. Director Bertsch seconded.

Dale Polissar asked that the measure be deferred to the April election.

Four ayes, Amoroso nay.

--  Kayfetz/Amoroso   to put on the March 2002 ballot the wording “Do you support the creation of a community pathway 6 to 8 feet wide for pedestrians and bicycles on the lagoon side of Olema-Bolinas Road between the school and downtown, crossing Olema-Bolinas Road and Mesa Road, proceeding through BCPUD land to downtown, to be funded completely by private donations and county funds if available?”

Kayfetz stated that he put the motion on the floor, knowing that it would fail but that he wanted Supervisor Kinsey to know that this Board of Directors had chosen to ignore a better detailed and presented proposal. He wanted it on the record that the Board had manipulated the measure, so that that County would not be able to force its proposal on the community when the measure in March fails.

Polissar asked Director McClellan if he didn’t think he should recuse himself from voting given his relationship to a main proponent of the Class II path. McClellan replied in the negative.

Molyneux did not affirm, upon questioning, that her proposal would be open to community input. Ward Young asked if that meant that local landowners would have a veto on the safest plan.

Kayfetz, Amoroso ayes, Bertsch, McClellan, Siedman nays, motion failed.

Director Kayfetz left at 11:40

9.   Resolution 473, Proposing An Election Be Held In Its Jurisdiction; Requesting The Board Of Supervisors To Consolidate With Any Other Election Conducted On Said Date; And Requesting Election Services By The County Registrar of Voters

--  Bertsch/Siedman     three ayes, Amoroso nay, Kayfetz absent  to approve Resolution 473.

11.  Letter Concerning Recent Land Auctions:  Newstedt

Directors received a letter from Stephen and Armida Newstedt describing a land auction they had attended where some unbuildable lots in Bolinas had sold for extremely high prices. Stephen Newstedt added that upon calling the County of Marin to inquire about use of the lots, the caller had been advised that farming the lots would be permissible, despite the recommendations of the Bolinas Gridded Mesa Plan to the contrary.

--  Amoroso/ no second to write to Marin County objecting to the sale of the lots under false pretences.

Upon clarification that the sale in question was held by a private company and not the county, Amoroso  withdrew his motion.

12.  Other Business

a.  Committee Reports

     -- Legal: Richard Harris and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe are communicating with each other, in an attempt to settle Orrick v. BCPUD before trial.

      -- Park and Recreation:  Cela O’Connor reported that the National Park Service no longer has a plan for Rancho Baulines and that the Bolinas Committee on Park Planning will be participating in the development of one.

         -- Solid Waste:  Resource Recovery Project:  finance / operations / tree removal

 Directors received the Resource Recovery minutes and finance reports without comment.

b. Minutes of October 17, 2001 Meeting

--  Siedman/Bertsch four ayes, Kayfetz absent to approve the minutes of the October 17, 2001 meeting.

c. Minutes of October 24, 2001 Meeting

--  Siedman/Bertsch four ayes, Kayfetz absent to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2001 meeting.

d. Warrants

--  Bertsch/Siedman  four ayes, Kayfetz absent  to approve the warrants

e. Scheduling of Next Meeting(s)

December 19, 2001

13. Adjournment

11:56 p.m.