REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JOHN BRISCOE (053223) LAWRENCE S. BAZEL (114641) MAX ROLLENS (308984) BRISCOE IVESTER & BAZEL LLP 155 Sansome Street, Seventh Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 402-2700 Fax (415) 398-5630 jbriscoe@briscoelaw.net lbazel@briscoelaw.net mrollens@briscoelaw.net Attorneys for Point Buckler Club, LLC and John D. Sweeney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION

John D. Sweeney and Point Buckler Club, LLC (jointly “Mr. Sweeney”) request that

Jim McGrath be recused from all proceedings in this matter. Mr. McGrath has participated in

ex parte communications and made incorrect statements about Mr. Sweeney that are not in keeping

with the obligations of an adjudicator and that create the appearance of an unfair hearing.

Due process requires agencies to separate advocates from decision makers, and prohibits

ex parte communications between them:

While the state’s administrative agencies have considerable leeway in how they structure their adjudicatory functions, they may not disregard certain basic precepts. One fairness principle directs that in adjudicative matters, one adversary should not be permitted to bend the ear of the ultimate decision maker or the decision maker’s advisers in private. Another directs that the functions of prosecution and adjudication be kept separate, carried out by distinct individuals.

In the matter of:

COMPLAINT NO. R2-2016-1008 ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL LIABILITY

JOHN D. SWEENEY AND POINT BUCKLER CLUB, LLC POINT BUCKLER ISLAND, SUISUN MARSH, SOLANO COUNTY

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL Hearing Date: December 14, 2016

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

(Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd. (2006) 40

Cal.4th 1, 5.)1

The State Board imposes a strict separation between the members of the prosecution and

advisory teams:

The hearing officer and the other [State] Board members treat the enforcement team “like any other party.” Agency employees assigned to the enforcement team are screened from inappropriate contact with Board members and other agency staff through strict application of the state Administrative Procedure Act’s rules governing ex parte communications. (Gov. Code, § 11430.10 et seq.) “In addition, there is a physical separation of offices, support staff, computers, printers, telephones, facsimile machines, copying machines, and rest rooms between the hearing officer and the enforcement team (as well as the hearing team),”….

(Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (2009) 45 Cal.4th 731,

735-736.)

In Howitt, the court noted that “true objectivity” is a “constitutionally necessary

characteristic of an adjudicator”:

By definition, an advocate is a partisan for a particular client or point of view. The role is inconsistent with true objectivity, a constitutionally necessary characteristic of an adjudicator.

(Howitt v. Superior Court (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 1575, 1585, citations omitted.) In Nightlife, the

court held that an appearance of bias was enough to violate a party’s right to due process:

It requires no citation of authority exactly on all fours with this fact pattern in order to justify the conclusion that [a prosecuting lawyer’s] role as advisor to the decision maker violated petitioners' right to due

1 Alcoholic Beverage Control reaffirmed the separation and ex parte rules applied by a line of cases reaching back to at least 1950. (See English v. City of Long Beach (1950) 35 Cal.2d 155, 159 (holding that an administrative board deprived a person of a fair trial when its decision was based on ex parte communications “of which the parties were not apprised and which they had no opportunity to controvert”); Howitt v. Superior Court (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 1575, 1586-1587 (holding that “performance of both roles [i.e. advocate for a party and adviser to the tribunal] by the same law office is appropriate only if there are assurances that the advisor for the decision maker is screened from any inappropriate contact with the advocate”); Nightlife Partners, Ltd. v. City of Beverly Hills (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 81, 93, 98 (confirming that “it is improper for the same attorney who prosecutes the case to also serve as an advisor to the decision maker”, and holding that when an advocate acted as legal advisor to a hearing officer he violated due process); Quintero v. City of Santa Ana (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 810, 812, 815 (holding that there was a “clear appearance of bias and unfairness” that violated due process when a deputy city attorney represented a party in proceedings before the Board, and then represented the Board itself in proceedings on “a writ petition in the superior court”).)

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

process. There was a clear appearance of unfairness and bias. This was sufficient to support the trial court's ruling.

(Nightlife Partners, Ltd. v. City of Beverly Hills (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 81, 94, emphasis in

original.) In Quintero, the court also found that “there was a clear appearance of bias and unfairness

at the administrative hearing”. (Quintero v. City of Santa Ana (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 810, 812.)

Although the prosecution team’s lawyer had maintained separation of functions in that case, he had

not maintained the separation in others. (Id. at 814-816.)

These cases, therefore, stand for the proposition that a party’s due process right to a fair

hearing are violated not only by actual bias, but also by the appearance of bias, and that an

appearance of bias can be created by ex parte communications.

The California Code of Judicial Ethics2 prohibits a judge from making statements that are

inconsistent with the “impartial performance” of adjudicative duties.

A judge shall not make statements, whether public or nonpublic, that commit the judge with respect to cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the courts or that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office.

(Canon 2A; see Gov. Code § 11475.20 (making code applicable to this proceeding).) The Code of

Judicial Ethics also requires that:

A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity…

(Canon 3B(4).)

A judge shall not make any public comment about a pending or impending proceeding in any court, and shall not make any nonpublic comment that might substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing.

(Canon 3B(9).)

A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in accordance with the following:

(a) Statements that commit the judge to a particular result

A judge is disqualified if the judge, while a judge or candidate for judicial office, made a statement, other than in a court proceeding, judicial decision, or opinion, that a person aware of the facts might

2 Available at http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/ca_code_judicial_ethics.pdf.

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

reasonably believe commits the judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular way in a proceeding.

(Canon 3E(3)(a); see Code of Civil Procedure § 170.1(a)(6)A)(iii) (superior court judge shall be

disqualified when “[a] person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge

would be able to be impartial”).)

These provisions stand for the proposition that an adjudicator must act impartially, and must

be disqualified for improper statements, including those that raise questions about impartiality.

Finally, the presiding officer has the authority to recuse an adjudicator. (Gov. Code

§ 11425.20(a)(2) (presiding officer has authority to make orders “[t]o ensure a fair hearing”); Gov.

Code §§ 11425.10(5), 11425.40 (adjudicator subject to disqualification for “bias, prejudice, or

interest”).)

Here, Mr. McGrath has engaged in ex parte communications with Ian Wren, a staff scientist

at San Francisco Baykeeper, which has appeared before this Regional Board and the San Francisco

Bay Conservation and Development Commission (“BCDC”) and argued against Mr. Sweeney.

Messrs. Wren and McGrath communicated about a statement made on Facebook by Mr. Sweeney,

which read in pertinent part:

Jim Mc[G]rath a die hard windsurfer has used his Board seat at Bay Conservation Development District (BCDC) to attack kiteboarding. He has succeeded in getting the act of kiteboarding in public waters a fine of $30k. That’s right Mr. Mc[G]rath voted to punish Point Buckler Island for the simple act of kiteboarding in the delta! His vote fined the Island 30k at the last BCDC meeting.

(Ex. 1 at 3.) Mr. Wren forwarded this message to Mr. McGrath, and added that “[i]f there is any

way we can help let me know.” (Id.) In response, Mr. McGrath wrote:

Well, it is a lie.

(Id. at 2.) Mr. Wren replied: “That’s a given.” Mr. McGrath relied:

Ian--here’s what I said, as reported in the BCDC minutes: “If this was a matter of somebody ticketing a windsurfer for windsurfing somewhere in the Bay, even somewhere arguably sensitive, I would be arguing against any penalties for that.”

(Id.) Mr. Wren replied: “Thanks, Jim. One of our board members will try to respond to the thread.

This guy is a real piece of work.” (Id.)

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Mr. McGrath forwarded this exchange to Dyan Whyte, head of the prosecution team, with

the comment that “[i]t is not remotely what I said at the BCDC hearing, which is of record.”

(Id. at 1.)

From this exchange, a reasonable person could conclude that (1) Mr. McGrath believes

Mr. Sweeney lied, and (2) Mr. McGrath and one of the parties interested in this matter are working

together to disseminate a particular point of view in public media.

Whatever one might think about the wisdom of Mr. Sweeney’s comments, there should be no

doubt that he had a First Amendment right to make them.

Mr. Sweeney’s statement was not “a lie”, as Mr. McGrath characterized it, but rather a

correct statement of an argument made by counsel for Mr. Sweeney, and a decision made by BCDC.

In November, BCDC held a hearing and imposed a $772,000 penalty against Mr. Sweeney. (Ex. 2.)

The statute at issue limits BCDC to a maximum of $30,000 per violation. (Id. at 18.) To get to

$772,000, the BCDC prosecution team had to argue that Mr. Sweeney committed many separate

violations. Violations were alleged for each trailer, container, and other facility, for cutting the

vegetation on the island, and for the levee repair, among other things. (See e.g. ex. 3 at 24

($262,000 in penalties for trailers and containers).) Counsel for Mr. Sweeney argued that one of

those alleged violations was for kiteboarding at Point Buckler Island—and only for kiteboarding.

(See ex. 3 at 39 (presentation by counsel for Mr. Sweeney questioning a $30,000 penalty for

recreation); ex. 4 at 14 (“this is just for the recreational act, a $30,000 penalty”).) Because each

facility was the subject of another penalty, the one that was directed at kiteboarding itself could only

be for the kiteboarding alone.

Mr. McGrath, in his role as a member of the BCDC board, said he was “confident that this is

not a matter of someone being punished for wind surfing”:

And then finally, the comment about kite boarders; many of you know that I am on the San Francisco Board Sailing Association and I represent wind surfers, kite boarders and stand up paddlers in trying to secure and improve access and maintain access around the Bay. If this was a matter of somebody ticketing a wind surfer for wind surfing somewhere in the Bay, even somewhere arguably sensitive, I would be arguing against any penalties for that. There are arguments under the State Constitution about rights to use the navigable waters. And where those rights have been changed, and I have been involved in a number of occasions where that use does result in impacts, the agencies go

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

through a process. I am confident that this is not a matter of someone being punished for wind surfing. This is a matter of installation of facilities in a wetland to encourage kite boarding and that is the issue.

(Ex. 4 at 18.) Mr. McGrath voted to impose the full penalty.

Mr. McGrath was incorrect when he characterized Mr. Sweeney’s statement as “a lie”.

A lie is not a mere mistake, but a knowingly false statement. Mr. Sweeney was correct when he said

that “Mr. Mc[G]rath voted to punish Point Buckler Island for the simple act of kiteboarding…”—at

least, Mr. Sweeney correctly repeated the argument of his counsel (which remains Mr. Sweeney’s

legal position). Mr. Sweeney was therefore neither mistaken nor knowingly making a false

statement.

Mr. McGrath missed the point when he asserted that Mr. Sweeney’s statement was

“not remotely what [he] said at the BCDC hearing”. Mr. Sweeney was commenting on what he did,

not what he said. Knowingly or not, Mr. McGrath voted for a penalty for kiteboarding in addition to

the penalties for the “installation of facilities”. His actions to penalize Mr. Sweeney can fairly be

characterized, without lying or mis-stating what was said, as an attack on kiteboarding.

Although he defended the right of windsurfers to go anywhere, he did not say anything good

about kiteboarders or kiteboarding, especially at Point Buckler Island. Someone who represents

kiteboarders might have been expected to put in a good word about kiteboarding.

Mr. McGrath did not object when Baykeeper asserted that “[o]ne of our board members will

try to respond” to Mr. Sweeney’s comment. Mr. McGrath should have made clear that he was not

authorizing Baykeeper to say anything on his behalf or contrary to Mr. Sweeney’s statements. His

silence gives the impression that he was endorsing Baykeeper’s proposal, and thereby working with

a party to the proceeding against Mr. Sweeney.

Whatever Mr. McGrath may think of Mr. Sweeney or the argument of Mr. Sweeney’s

counsel, he was not acting with judicial temperament when he accused Mr. Sweeney of lying, and of

repeating something that He was not being “patient, dignified, and courteous”, as required by

Canon 3B(4). He commented about a proceeding that is still pending—Mr. Sweeney will be filing

suit to overturn the BCDC decision—contrary to Canon 3B(9). Perhaps more than anything else, his

assertion that Mr. Sweeney told “a lie”, and his willingness to allow an interested party in the

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

proceeding to speak for him, would lead a reasonable person to believe that Mr. McGrath will not

act impartially, and is committed to reach a particular result in this matter. That is contrary to

Canons 2A and 3B(9).

The ex parte e-mail exchange also shows that in this case Mr. McGrath lacks the

“true objectivity” that is a “constitutionally necessary characteristic of an adjudicator”. (See Howitt,

discussed above.) The ex parte exchange creates a strong appearance of bias, and that is enough to

violate Mr. Sweeney’s right to a fair trial. (See Nightlife and Quintero, discussed above.)

It is also worth noting that although Mr. McGrath properly recognized that the e-mail

exchange was an ex parte communication, he improperly passed the e-mails on to Ms. Whyte, head

of the prosecution team, rather than to a member of the advisory team. That too was an ex parte

communication.

Although the advisory team has issued a hearing procedure for the parties to this matter, it

has not issued a hearing procedure for the Board members. To the best of Mr. Sweeney’s

knowledge, the Board members have not been advised of their obligations as impartial fact finders.

For this reason, Mr. Sweeney objects to the entire hearing as a violation of due process.

For the reasons given above, Mr. Sweeney requests that Mr. McGrath be recused from

participating this the proceedings in this matter, including the hearing set for December 14.

DATED: December 6, 2016

BRISCOE IVESTER & BAZEL LLP

By:

Lawrence Bazel Attorneys for Point Buckler Club, LLC and John D. Sweeney

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DECLARATION OF LAWRENCE S. BAZEL

I, Lawrence S. Bazel, declare as follows:

1. I am a lawyer admitted to practice in California and am counsel for Point Buckler

Club, LLC and John D. Sweeney in this matter. I have personal knowledge of the facts in this

declaration, and if called as a witness could competently testify to them.

2. Attached as Exhibit 1 is an accurate copy of an e-mail and attachments I received

from Tamarin Austin.

3. Attached as Exhibit 2 is an accurate copy of a BCDC order, as provided by BCDC

staff.

2. Attached as Exhibit 3 is an accurate copy of my powerpoint presentation to BCDC at

a BCDC penalty hearing on November 17, 2016.

2. Attached as Exhibit 4 is an accurate copy of the minutes of the November 17, 2016

hearing, as downloaded from the BCDC website. BCDC staff informs me that these minutes were

adopted by BCDC.

I swear under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California that the facts stated in

this declaration are true.

DATED: December 6, 2016.

Lawrence S. Bazel

San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 1 0600, San Francisco, California 941 02 tel 415 352 3600 fax 415 352 3606

Point Buckler Club, LLC 171 Sandpiper Drive

Pittsburg, CA 94565

and

John Donnelly Sweeney 171 Sandpiper Drive Pittsburg, CA 94565,

Respondents.

COMMISSION

CEASE AND DESIST AND CIVIL PENALTY ORDER NO. CDO 2016.02

Effective Date: November 18, 2016

TO JOHN DONNELLY SWEENEY AND POINT BUCKLER CLUB, LLC:

I. CEASE AND DESIST

Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 29601 and California Government Code Section 66638, John Donnelly Sweeney and Point Buckler Club, LLC, all of their agents and employees, and any other persons acting in concert with them (collectively "Respondents") are hereby ordered to cease and desist all activity in violation of the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act (SMPA) and the McAteer-Petris Act (MPA} at Point Buckler Island in Solano County, as described herein. Specifically, Respondents are ordered to:

1. Cease and desist from placing any fill within, or making any substantial change in use of, any area subject to tidal action, or that was subject to tidal action before Mr. Sweeney commenced the unauthorized activities described herein, including marshlands lying

between mean high tide and five feet above mean sea level, without securing a permit from the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (Commission or BCDC} as required under Government Code Section 66632(a);

2. Cease and desist from conducting or engaging in any "development" (defined in Public

Resources Code Section 29114(a) as including but not being limited to the placement or erection of any solid material or structure; discharge or disposal of any dredged

material; grading, removing, dredging, or extraction of any materials; change in the density or intensity of use of land or intensity of use of water; construction, reconstruction, alteration in the size of any structure; and the removal or harvesting of major vegetation other than for agricultural purposes) without securing a marsh development permit from the Commission as required under Public Resources Code

Sections 29500 and 29501(a); and

3. Fully comply with requirements of Sections Ill and IV of this order.

info@bcdc.ca.gov I www.bcdc.ca.gov State of California I Edmund G. Brown, Jr. - Governor

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page2II. FINDINGS

ThisOrderisbasedonthefollowingfindings.TheadministrativerecordinsupportofthesefindingsandthisOrderincludes:(1)alldocumentsandotherevidencecitedherein;and(2)alladditionaldocumentslistedintheIndexofAdministrativeRecordattachedheretoasExhibitA.

A. PointBucklerClub,LLCistheownerofapproximately39acresoflandatPointBucklerIsland(Assessor’sParcelNo.0090-020-010),whichislocatedoffthewesterntipofSimmonsIslandintheSuisunMarsh,SolanoCounty(theSite).JohnDonnellySweeney(Mr.Sweeney)isaprincipalofPointBucklerClub,LLCandownedtheSitefromapproximatelyApril19,2011,toOctober27,2014,whenheconveyedtheSitetoPointBucklerClub,LLC.PointBucklerClub,LLCandMr.SweeneyarehereafterjointlyreferredtoasRespondents.

B. In1965,theLegislatureenactedtheMcAteer-PetrisAct(MPA),whichiscodified,asamended,atGovernmentCodeSections66600-66694.TheSiteislocatedinthejurisdictionoftheCommissionasestablishedbyGovernmentCodeSection666610.Specifically,theSiteisintheCommission’s“SanFranciscoBay”jurisdictionasdefinedinGovernmentCodeSection666610(a).Anypersonwishingtoplacefill,toextractmaterials,ortomakeanysubstantialchangeinuseofanywater,land,orstructure,withintheareaoftheCommission’sjurisdiction,includingattheSite,isrequiredtoobtainapermitfromtheCommission.GovernmentCode§66632(a).

C. In1977,theLegislatureenactedtheSuisunMarshPreservationAct(SMPA),whichiscodified,asamended,atPublicResourcesCodeSections29000-29612.TheSiteislocatedinthe“primarymanagementarea”ofthe“SuisunMarsh,”asthosetermsaredefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSections29102and29101,respectively.

D. Anypersonwishingtoperformorundertakeany“development,”asthattermisbroadlydefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSection29114(a),attheSiteisrequiredtoobtainamarshdevelopmentpermitfromtheCommission,inadditiontoobtaininganyotherpermitrequiredbylawfromanylocalgovernmentorfromastate,local,orregionalagency.PublicResourcesCode§§29500,29501.

E. TheCommissionhaspreparedandadoptedthe“SuisunMarshProtectionPlan,”asthattermisdefinedintheSMPA(PublicResourcesCodeSection29113(a)).Inaddition,theCommissionhascertified,the“localprotectionprogram”(LPP)asdefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSection29111,consistingofanumberofcomponentspreparedby,orsubmittedto,SolanoCountyorpreparedbytheSuisunResourceConservationDistrict(SRCD),thatmeettherequirementsof,andimplement,theSMPAandtheSuisunMarshProtectionPlanatthelocallevel.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page3

F. OnecomponentofthecertifiedlocalprotectionprogramistheSuisunMarshManagementProgram(SMMP)preparedbytheSRCDpursuanttotheSMPA(PublicResourcesCodeSections29401(d)and29412.5).TheSMMPconsistsofthefollowingprincipalelements:

1. Ageneralmanagementprogram;

2. Individualwatermanagementprogramsforeachprivately-owned“managedwetland”withintheprimarymanagementareaoftheSuisunMarsh;

3. EnforceableStandardsCoveringDiking,Flooding,Draining,FillingandDredgingofTidalWaters,ManagedWetlandsandTidalMarshWithinthePrimaryManagementArea;and

4. RegulationsadoptedbySRCDtoensureeffectivewatermanagementonprivately-ownedlandswithintheprimarymanagementarea.

InPublicResourcesCodeSection29105,theSMPAdefinestheterm“managedwetland”tomean“thosedikedareasinthemarshinwhichwaterinflowandoutflowisartificiallycontrolledorinwhichwaterfowlfoodplantsarecultivated,orboth,toenhancehabitatconditionsforwaterfowlandotherwater-associatedbirds,wildlife,orfish….”SeealsoDeclarationofStevenChappell(April21,2016)at¶¶7,9.

G. NothwithstandingtheotherwiseapplicableprovisionsofPublicResourcesCodeSection29500regardingtheneedtoobtainaMarshDevelopmentPermit(MDP),inPublicResourcesCodeSection29501.5theSMPAstatesthatwithinthePMAoftheSuisunMarsh,noMDPisrequiredforanydevelopmentspecifiedinthecomponentoftheLPPpreparedbySRCDandcertifiedbytheCommission.

H. Inorabout1984,individualmanagementprograms(commonlyreferredtoasindividualmanagementplansorIMPs)weredevelopedforeachprivately-ownedmanagedwetlandintheprimarymanagementareaoftheSuisunMarsh,includingtheSite,andwerereviewedbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame(nowCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlifeorCDFW)andcertifiedbytheCommission.SuisunMarshProtectionProgramat34and70-71(map);ChappellDeclarationat¶11.

I. TheIMPfortheSite,denominatedthe“AnnieMasonPointClub”(AnnieMasonIMP),statesthattheclubiscontainedwithinasingleleveesurroundedbyGrizzlyBaytothenorthandSuisunCutofftothesouth,anddescribestwowatercontrolstructures:(a)amainfloodgateontheeastsidethatfunctionstobringwaterintotheclubviaaperimeterditchsystem;and(b)astructureonthenorthsideusedtodraintheclubintoGrizzlyBay.TheAnnieMasonIMPfurtherstates,inasubsectionaddressingWaterManagement,NeededImprovements,thatitis“necessarythattheclubfollowsaregularprogramofwatermanagement,”andthat:

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page4

Properwatercontrolnecessitatesinspectionandmaintenanceoflevees,ditches,andwatercontrolstructures….Leveesrequirefrequentinspectionandattentiontopreventmajorbreaksfromoccurring.

TheAnnieMasonIMPalsocontainsasubsectionaddressingVegetationManagement,NeededImprovements,thatdiscussesremovalofundesirablevegetationtoprovidefortheestablishmentofnewvegetationmorepreferredbywaterfowl.SeeChappellDeclarationat¶11.

J. InSeptember1989,theowneroftheSiteatthattime,JohnTaylor,submittedanapplicationtotheCommissiontoplaceapproximately50,000cubicyardsofdredgedmaterialfromthePortofOaklandonleveesattheSitetoimprovewatercontrol.InOctober1989,Commissionstaffdeterminedthattheapplicationwasincompleteandrequestedadditionalinformationfromtheapplicant.Noadditionalinformationwasprovidedtostaff,theapplicationwasneverfiledascomplete,andnopermitwasissuedbytheCommissionforthisproposedwork.

K. OnoraboutJanuary29,1990,a“WetlandsMaintenanceManagementReport”waspreparedthatproposedthefollowingworkattheSite:(a)clearingditches,1,000cubicyards,approximately1,200linearfeet;(b)interiorleveerepair,2,000cubicyards,500linearfeet;and(c)exteriorleveerepair,2,000cubicyards,750linearfeet.Thereisnorecorddocumentingthatthisworkwascommencedorcompleted.ChappellDeclarationat¶14.

L. AtalltimessubsequenttocertificationoftheAnnieMasonIMPin1984,allownersofpropertywithintheSuisunMarsh,includingtheSite,havebeensubjecttocertainregulatoryrequirementsimposedbytheUnitedStatesArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACE)undertheCleanWaterActand/ortheRiversandHarborsActof1899.Theserequirementsare,andtypicallyhavebeen,setforthinaseriesofRegionalGeneralPermits(RGPs)issuedbytheUSACEforsuccessivefive-yearterms.TheRGPcurrentlyineffect,RGP3datedJuly8,2013,regulates,amongotherthings:“2)ACTIVITIESONLEVEES:a.RepairofInteriorandExteriorLevees...torepairdamagefromstormsandtocounteractsubsidenceofthelevees.”UnderSection6,“PERMITADMINISTRATION,”thecurrentRGPrequirespropertyownerswhointendtoperformrepairandotherworkactivitiesthatareregulatedbytheRGPtoprepareandsubmittotheSRCDareport(calleda“workrequestform”)thatdescribestheproposedactivities.TheRGPgivestotheSRCDtheresponsibilitytocompileandsubmittotheUSACEthereportsthattheSRCDreceivesfrompropertyowners.PreviousversionsoftheRGPcontainedregulatoryrequirementsofsimilarscopeandcontent.TherecordsoftheSRCDsince1994revealnoreportssubmittedbyanyowneroftheSiteforpurposesofcompliancewithanRGPregardingrepairormaintenanceoftheleveesattheSite.ChappellDeclarationat¶¶15-16.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page5

M. AnaerialphotographdatedApril30,1985,shortlyafterpreparationoftheAnnieMasonIMP,showsthattheleveesattheSitewereintactatthattime,precludingtidalactionexceptviatheauthorizedwatercontrolstructures,andprovidedthenecessaryinfrastructuretocontrolwaterlevelsattheSiteformanagedwetlandsconditions.Notwithstandingtheforegoing,inananalysisperformedin1984bytheCaliforniaDepartmentofWaterResources(CDWR),theCDWRdeterminedthat“LeveesaboutAnnieMasonIslandarenotnowingoodrepair.”ChappellDeclarationat¶12.

N. Incontrast,aseriesofaerialphotographstakenfromJuly1988toSeptember2011showtheprogressiveleveebreachesthatconveyedtidalwatersfromGrizzlyBayintoandfromtheinteriorditchandchannelnetwork,andthusthereversionoftheSitetotidalmarsh.Thefirstleveebreach(inthenorth)hadoccurredbyAugust1988,andtwomorebreaches(oneinthesouthwestandanotherinthenortheast)hadoccurredbyMay1991.Twomoreleveebreaches(oneinthesouthandanotherinthenortheast)hadoccurredbyAugust1993,andtwomoreleveebreaches(bothinthenorthwest)hadoccurredbytheSummer2003.Beginninginorabout1988withthefirstleveebreach,continuingbetween1988to2003withthesixadditionalleveebreachesthatoccurredoverthisperiod,andcontinuingfrominorabout2003to2011withallsevenleveebreaches,thesebreachesprovideddailytidalexchangebetweentheBaywatersandthetidalmarshthatcomprisedtheSite,andtheinteriorchannelsandditchprovidedinternaltidalcirculationthroughouttheSite.Aerialphotographsdated:April30,1985;July14,1988;August18,1988;June13,1990;May28,1991;August23,1993;Summer2003;October20,2003;Summer2006;April2011;andSeptember1,2011.SiegelEnvironmental,PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentofCurrentConditionsandHistoricReconstructionSince1985(May12,2016)(PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport),AppendixG(OpeningofTidalConnectivityandEstablishmentofTidalMarsh,1985to2011),SectionG-3.1.

O. BeginningnolaterthanAugust1988,withthefirstleveebreach,theareasoftheSiteformerlyconsistingofmanagedwetlandsbeganrevertingto“tidalmarsh,”asthattermisdefinedinSectionII,ExhibitCoftheSMMPdueto:(a)thelackofmaintenanceoftheleveesandwatercontrolstructuresattheSite;(b)theconstantexposureoftheSitetodailytidesandtheforcesofthewavesandwinds;and(c)theperiodicexposureoftheSitetostormevents.ThereversionandpersistenceoftheSiteastidalmarshcontinuedafterMay1991fromthreeleveebreaches,afterAugust1993fromfiveleveebreaches,andafterAugust2003fromsevenleveebreaches,whichprovideddailytidalexchangebetweentheBaywatersandtheinteriorchannelsandditch,andprovidedinternaltidalcirculationthroughouttheSite.PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendixG(OpeningofTidalConnectivityandEstablishmentofTidalMarsh,1985to2011).

P. Duringthissameperiod(1988–2011),duetotheprogressiveerosionanddeteriorationoftheremnantleveesoverthisperiod,portionsoftheSiteinteriortotheleveesweresubjecttotheinflowandoutflowoftidalwatersintheformof“overtopping”ofthe

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page6

leveesduring“abouthalfofthehightides.”ThisformoftidalinfluenceontheSiteisreferredtoas“’overland’flowoftidalwaterstotheinteriortidalmarsh.”Pt.BucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,App.G,SectionG-3.2.

Q. Mr.SweeneypurchasedtheSiteonoraboutApril19,2011.AnaerialphotographtakeninApril2011showsthatatthattimetheleveesattheSitewerebreachedatsevendifferentlocationsandtheentireSitewasintersectedbycountlesstidalchannelsthat,togetherwiththeremnantinteriorditchandcombinedwithoverlandflowoftidalwaters,providedinternaltidalcirculationthroughouttheentireSite.ThesesameconditionsareshowninanaerialphotographtakenonSeptember1,2011.Aerialphotographsdated:April2011;andSeptember1,2011;PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendixG(OpeningofTidalConnectivityandEstablishmentofTidalMarsh,1985to2011).

R. ThestatusoftheSiteasconstituting,overtheoverwhelmingpreponderanceofitsarea,atidalmarshisalsoconfirmedbyCDFWSuisunMarshvegetationdatasetswhichshowvirtuallytheentireSitetobedominatedbythegrowthofvegetationtypescharacteristicoftidalwetlandareas.Pt.BucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendicesG(SectionG-3.2)andH(Fig.H-2).

S. Overanapproximately20-yearperiodbeforeMr.SweeneypurchasedtheSiteinApril2011:(a)theleveesandwatercontrolstructuresatthesitewerenotmaintained;(b)thesitewassubjecttotidalactionandconsistedoftidalmarsh,includingintheareasinteriortotheprogressivelyeroded,deterioratedandbreachedlevees;and(c)theSitedidnotcontainmanagedwetlandsasdefinedintheSMPA(PublicResourcesCodeSection29105).Forthesereasons,whenMr.SweeneypurchasedtheSite,theAnnieMasonIMPnolongerappliedtotheSiteandanypotentialdevelopmentattheSitewasnotspecifiedintheSRCD’scomponentofthelocalprotectionprogram.Therefore,atthetimeMr.SweeneypurchasedtheSite,aMDPfromtheCommissionwasrequiredpursuanttotheSMPA(PublicResourcesCodeSection29500-29501),toauthorizeany“development”(asdefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSection29114(a))attheSite,andapermitwasrequiredbytheCommission,pursuanttoGovernmentCode§66632(a),toauthorizetheplacementofanyfillortomakeanysubstantialchangeinuseofanywater,land,orstructureattheSite.ChappellDeclarationat¶¶17-21.

T. BeforeMr.SweeneybeganconductingleveeconstructionandexcavationactivitiesattheSite,heknewthattheplacementoffillonleveesintheSuisunMarsh,includingleveerepairwork,requiresauthorizationfrommultipleagencies.Specifically,inJune2011,Mr.SweeneycontactedtheSRCDandtheUSACEregardingproposedleveerepairworkatChippsIsland(Club915)intheSuisunMarsh.SRCDprovidedMr.SweeneywithcopiesoftheUSACE’sRegionalGeneralPermit(RPG3)andarelevantBiologicalOpinionpreparedbytheNationalMarineFisheriesServices,andMr.SweeneycompletedaUSACEWetlandsMaintenancePermitApplication.WorkingthroughthepermittingprocesswithSRCD,Mr.SweeneyobtainedauthorizationfromtheUSACEtoperformthe

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page7

leveerepairundertheRGP.However,Mr.SweeneydidnotadheretotheconditionsoftheRGP,andonOctober24,2011,theUSACEissuedaNoticeofViolationtoMr.SweeneyregardinghisunauthorizedworkatChippsIslandthatresultedinanillegaldischargeoffill.EmailmessagefromDavidWickens,USACE,datedJune23,2011;USACEWetlandsMaintenancePermitApplicationpreparedbyJohnSweeneyandapprovedbytheUSACEonJune24,2011;letterfromSteveChappell,SRCDtoDavidWickens,USACE,datedSeptember2011;USACENoticeofViolationissuedtoJohnSweeney,datedOctober24,2011.

U. BeginningbynolaterthanMay2012,andwithoutapplyingfororobtainingapermitfromBCDCundereithertheMPAortheSMPA,Mr.Sweeneybeganexcavatingtrenchesandditchesintidalmarsh,rebuildingerodedlevees,andplacingfillontidalmarshtoconstructnewleveesattheSite.Thisworkincludedbutmaynothavebeenlimitedtoconstructingnewleveesbyexcavatingmaterialfromtheditchinsidetheerodedleveesandplacingsuchmaterialon(a)theremnantsoftheerodedleveesinlocationswheretheerodedleveesremained;and(b)tidalmarshandwatersoftheStateinsideformerleveelocationswheretheformerleveeshadcompletelyerodedanddisappearedandhadbeenreplacedbytidalmarsh.Inaddition,withoutapplyingfororobtainingapermitfromBCDCundereithertheMPAortheSMPA,Mr.SweeneyremovedoneoftheformerwatercontrolstructuresfromtheSiteand,inapproximatelySeptember2013,replacedasunkendocklocatedinthesoutheastportionoftheSitewithalargerdockatthesamelocation.DeclarationofJohnD.SweeneyinSupportofExParteApplication,SonomaCountySuperiorCourtCaseNo.FCS046410(December28,2015),at¶4;EmailfromMr.SweeneytoJimStarr,CDFW,datedNovember19,2014.AerialphotographsorGoogleEarthimagesdatedMay19,2012,February3,2014,March24,2014,May22,2014,August6,2014,October29,2014,andJanuary29,2015.PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendixK(FillandExcavationinWetlandsandWatersSince2011).Eachoftheseunauthorizedactivitiesconstituted“development”asdefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSection29114,andtheconstructionofnewlevees,andinstallationofareplacementdockeachconstitutedbothplacementoffillandasubstantialchangeofuseoflandandwaterunderGovernmentCodeSection66632(a).

V. EveniftheAnnieMasonIMPstillappliedtotheSiteatthetimeMr.Sweeneyengagedintheabove-describedactivities,whichitdidnot,saidactivitieswerenotdescribedinandthuswerenotauthorizedbytheAnnieMasonIMP.Specifically,asnotedabovein¶I,theAnnieMasonIMPauthorizedthe“inspectionandmaintenance”ofexistinglevees,nottheconstructionofanentirelynewleveetoreplaceapreviouslyexistingleveethathaderodedawaytothepointthatitnolongerservedanyeffectivewatercontrolfunction.Moreover,theAnnieMasonIMPdoesnotauthorizeanyimprovementsorotherworktooccurinanyportionoftheSitethatqualifiesasa“tidalmarsh.”SeeChappellDeclarationat¶19.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page8

W. OnMarch19,2014,whiletwoBCDCstaffmembersandSteveChappell,ExecutiveDirectorofSRCD,weretouringtheSuisunMarsh,oneofthelocationstheyvisitedwasSimmonsIsland,locatedapproximately100yardseastoftheSiteacrossAnnieMasonSlough.FromthewesternleveeonSimmonsIsland,directlyeastoftheSite,theyobservedthatasignificantamountofheavymachinerywasontheSiteandthatsubstantiallandformalteration(i.e.,excavationandredepositofexcavatedmaterial)hadoccurred,whichappearedtohaveasitspurposetheconstructionofanewlevee.BCDCstaffandMr.ChappellalsoobservedafloatingdockandpieratthesoutheasternportionoftheSite.TheleveeconstructionworkobservedattheSitewasasurprisetoMr.ChappellbecausetheSitemettheSMMP’sdefinitionofa“tidalmarsh”andheknewthatworkofthisnaturewasclearlysubjecttotheUSACE,RegionalWaterQualityControlBoard,andBCDCpermittingrequirements.Mr.Chappellknewofhisownpersonalknowledgethat:therehadbeennosuchpermitauthorizations;thata“workrequestform”undertheUSACE’sRGP3hadnotbeensubmittedtoSRCDorapprovedbytheUSACEfortheconstructionactivityobservedontheSite;andthatsucharequestcouldnothavebeenauthorizedbytheUSACEundertheRGP3fortheconstructionactivityobservedattheSite.ChappellDeclarationat¶17.

X. OnoraboutOctober27,2014,Mr.SweeneytransferredtitletotheSitetothePointBucklerClub,LCC.

Y. Sometimeinorabout2014,andwithoutapplyingforandobtainingfromtheBCDCapermitundertheMPAoraMDPundertheSMPA,RespondentsbeganoperatingtheSiteasa“PrivateSportandSocialIslandlocatedintheCaliforniaDelta.IdeallysuitedfortheBayArea/SiliconValleyExecutiveswhowanttogetawayandenjoykitinginasafeandsecludedenvironmentwithoutboardingaplane.”www.pointbucklerisland.com.Seealsowww.facebook.com/pointbucklerclubVIP.Suchactivitiesconstitutedbotha“substantialchangeofuseoflandandwater”undertheMPA(GovernmentCodeSection66632(a))and“development”(asdefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSection29114)undertheSMPA.

Z. OnNovember14,2014,BCDCstaffinspectedtheSite,accompaniedbyJimStarrofCDFW,andidentifiedanumberofviolationsoftheSMPAandtheMPA(asdescribedinaletterdatedJanuary30,2015;see¶BB,below),includingbutnotlimitedto:

1. Duringunpermittedconstructionofnewlevees,threemajortidalchannelswerefilled,thusremovingtidalflowtotheinterioroftheisland.Further,itappearedfromtheextentoftheleveeconstructionthatRespondentswereintheprocessofdrainingthisoncetidallyactivemarshlandinordertoconverttheSitetoupland.

2. Unpermittedleveeconstructionworkhadbeenconductedoutsidetheappropriateworkwindowsforthefollowingprotectedspecies:ChinookSalmon,DeltaSmelt,ClapperRail,andSaltMarshHarvestMouse.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page9

3. Unauthorizedinstallationofanapproximately288-square-footdockontheeasternportionoftheSiteinAnneMasonSlough,whichsometimebetweentheFallof2013andSpringof2014wasenlargedtoroughly1,400squarefeet.

4. UnauthorizedplacementoftwomobilearmytrailersonthenorthwestsideoftheSiteandoneonthesoutheastsideoftheSite.

5. UnauthorizedplacementoftwoshippingcontainersonthesoutheastsideoftheSite.

DuringtheSiteinspection,BCDCstaffprovidedMr.SweeneywithacopyoftheAnnieMasonIMPbecausehehadpreviouslyinformedBCDCstaffthathedidnothaveacopyofthatdocumentandhadrequestedacopy.

AA. TheunauthorizedworkRespondentsperformedattheSitefromMay2012toJanuary29,2015isshowninaseriesofaerialphotographsandGoogleEarthimages.ThephotographsandimagesshowthatRespondents:

1. initiatedtrenchexcavationandfillingactivitiesbynolaterthanMay2012;

2. installedalargedockinAnnieMasonSloughandbegangradinginthesoutheasterncorneroftheSitebyFebruary3,2014;

3. conductedleveeconstructionandditchexcavationactivitiesalongthesouthernandsouthwesternportionoftheSite,closingtwoofthetidalbreaches,byMarch24,2014;

4. conductedleveeconstructionandditchexcavationactivitiesinaclockwisedirectionaroundtothenortheasternportionofthesite,closingoffthefiveremainingtidalbreachesandcuttingoffalltidalchannelconnectivitytotheinterioroftheSite,byAugust6,2014;

5. completedthefinalsegmentofleveeconstructionandditchexcavationactivitiesalongtheeasternportionoftheSitebyOctober28,2014;and

6. excavatedthreecrescentpondsintidalmarshintheinterioroftheSitebyJanuary29,2015.

AerialphotographsorGoogleEarthimagesdated:May19,2012;February3,2014;March24,2014;May22,2014;August6,2014;October29,2014;andJanuary29,2015.PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendixK(FillandExcavationinWetlandsandWatersSince2011).

BB. OnJanuary30,2015,BCDCsentalettertoRespodentsregardingtheunauthorizedworkobservedduringtheNovember14,2014Siteinspection.TheletterdiscussedtheregulatoryframeworkgoverningtheSuisunMarshand,inparticular,theSite,includingtheSuisunMarshProtectionPlanandIMPs,andexplainedthatbasedonavailableinformation,thehistoryoftheSite,andtherecentSitevisit,theSitehadneverbeen

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page10

managedinaccordancewiththeAnnieMasonIMPandhadlongagorevertedtoatidalmarshduetoneglect,abandonment,and/ortheforcesofnature.TheletteradvisedRespondentsthatamarshdevelopmentpermitfromBCDCwasrequiredpriortoperforminganydevelopmentattheSite,andthatanyworkthatcouldnotberetroactivelyapprovedthroughsuchapermitwouldlikelyneedtoberemoved,restoringtheSitetotidalmarsh.BCDCstaffrecommendedthatRespondentsrestoretheSite,followingBCDCapprovalofaprofessionallypreparedplan,orbegincompilingaMDPapplication.Furthermore,BCDCstaffrequestedthatRespondentsstopworkattheSite.Finally,theletteradvisedRespondentsofpotentialfutureBCDCenforcementoptions,includinganExecutiveDirectorCeaseandDesistOrder(CDO),CommissionCDO,andCivilPenaltyOrder.

CC. OnMarch25,2015,Respondents’counselwrotetoBCDCquestioningtheapplicabilitytotheSiteoftheSMPArequirementsforamarshdevelopmentpermit.ByletterdatedMay7,2015,BCDCstaffonceagainexplainedthatbecauseconditionsattheSitehadfundamentallychangedasaresultofyearsofneglect,failedattemptsatmanagement,andnaturalforces,theSitehadrevertedtoatidalmarshandwasnolongeramanagedwetlandasdefinedintheSMPA,and,therefore,theAnneMasonIMPnolongerappliedtotheSite.BCDCstaffreaffirmedthatgiventhefundamentalchangeinSiteconditions,anyfutureworkattheSitewouldrequireaMDP.Furthermore,BCDCstaffrecommendedthatRespondentsrestoretheSitetotidalmarshorbegintheMDPapplicationprocess.

DD. AGoogleEarthimagedatedApril1,2015showsthatRespondentscontinuedtoperformunauthorizedworkattheSiteafterreceivingBCDC’sletterdatedJanuary30,2015directingthatRespondentsstopwork.Thereferencedimageshowsnewwork(sinceanaerialphotographtakenonJanuary29,2015)including,butnotlimitedto:(a)excavatingafourthcrescentpondintidalmarshintheinterioroftheSite;(b)placingfillintheditchforaroadtocrosstheditchatthewestsideoftheSite;(c)placingfillontidalmarshforaroadtothewater’sedgeatthenorthwesterncorneroftheSite;(d)mowingvegetationandgradingforaroadontidalmarshacrosstheSite;(e)installingcontainersandtrailersontidalmarshinthewesternportionoftheSite;and(f)installinganothertrailerorcontainerontheeastsideoftheSite.GoogleEarthimagedatedApril1,2015;PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendixK(FillandExcavationinWetlandsandWatersSince2011).

EE. OnoraboutJuly21,2015,SanFranciscoBayRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard(RegionalBoard)staffprovidednoticetoBCDCandotherstateandfederalagenciesofpotentialviolationsofstateandfederallawsprotectingwetlandsandspecialstatusspeciesattheSite.EmailfromXavierFernandez,RegionalBoard,datedJuly21,2015,withattachments.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page11

FF. OnJuly28,2015,theRegionalBoardsenttoPointBuckler,LLCaNoticeofViolationforFillingWatersoftheUnitedStatesandStateattheSite,allegingviolationsofboththefederalCleanWaterActandtheCaliforniaWaterCode.

GG. OnAugust11,2015,BCDCstaffmetwithMr.SweeneyandhiscounseltodiscusstheviolationsoftheSMPAandMPAattheSite.Atthatmeeting,Respondents’counselofferedtoprovideadditionalinformationtoBCDCregardingthehistoricconditionsattheSiteandMr.Sweeney’srecentactivitiesthere.ByletterdatedAugust18,2015,BCDCstaffprovidedguidanceonwhattheadditionalinformationshouldfocusontobeusefultostaffindeterminingwhetherornottoproceedwithanenforcementaction.Insummary,staffsuggestedthattheadditionalinformationinclude:(a)ahistoricalperspectiveoftheinflowandoutflowoftidalwaterattheSitesince1984;(b)abiologicalSiteassessment;(c)documentationofMr.Sweeney’scultivationofwaterfowlfoodplantsattheSite;and(d)anyreportssubmittedbyMr.SweeneytotheSRCDdescribinganyactionswhichhehadtakentoimplementtheAnnieMasonIMP.Staffrequestedthat,asdiscussedattheAugust11,2015meeting,Respondents’counselprovideanyadditionalinformationtoBCDCbynolaterthanOctober10,2015.

HH. OnSeptember11,2015,theExecutiveOfficeroftheRegionalBoardissuedCleanupandAbatementOrderNo.R2-2015-0038toPointBucklerLLC,asnamedDischarger,forunauthorizedleveeconstructionactivitiesattheSite.OrderR2-2015-0038foundthatPointBucklerLLC’s“leveeconstructionactivitiesincludedconstructionofaleveearoundtheperimeteroftheSiteresultinginthedikingoffofthetidalchannelslocatedonthenortheast,northwest,andsouthwestportionsoftheSite,”andhadadverselyimpactedtidalmarshvegetationandtidalmarshlandsthatconstitutewatersoftheStateandtheUnitedStates.

II. OnOctober12,2015,Respondents’newly-retainedcounselrequestedthatBCDCprovideadditionaltimeforRespondentstosubmitinformationandanalysisresponsivetoBCDC’sallegationsofunpermittedactivitiesattheSite,whichRespondents’priorcounselhadofferedtoprovideandasdiscussedinBCDC’sAugust18,2015letter.Respondents’counselindicatedthatSweenywouldprovideBCDCwithcopiesofsubmissionstotheRegionalBoardrequiredbyOrderR2-2015-0038,andsuggestedthatthosesubmissionswouldprovideanswerstomostofthequestionsraisedbyBCDC.

JJ. OnOctober21,2015,representativesofBCDC,theRegionalBoard,UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,andUSACEinspectedtheSite,togetherwithMr.Sweeneyandhiscounsel.ThepurposesoftheinspectionweretoobserveanddocumentSiteconditionsandobtainabetterunderstandingof:(a)thenatureandextentofconstructionactivitiesperformedbyRespondents;(b)whethertheworkperformedbyRespondentswaswithinthepurviewoftheUSACERGP3;and(c)theextentofwatersoftheBay,theStateandtheUnitedStatesandtidalmarshhabitatthat

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page12

wasadverselyimpactedbytheworkperformedbyRespondents.DuringthisSiteinspection,BCDCstaffobservedthatRespondentshadperformedadditionalworksincetheNovember14,2014Siteinspectionincluding:

1. installedadirt“landbridge”overculvertsbyplacingfillattwolocationsacrossthedrainageditchtoprovideaccesstoportionsoftheSite;

2. constructedaroadacrosstheinterioroftheSite;

3. excavatedfoursemi-circularpondsintheinterioroftheSite;

4. installedanew,unauthorizedwater-controlstructureinthewesternportionoftheSite;

5. movedtwostoragecontainersfromthenorthwesternportionoftheSite,wheretheywerelocatedduringtheNovember14,2014,Siteinspection,totheinterioroftheSiteandaddedtwoadditionalstoragecontainers;

6. installedagoatpenandbroughtanumberofgoatstotheSite;

7. removed,mowed,grazed,and/orflattenedtidalmarshvegetationthroughouttheinterioroftheSite;and

8. plantedapproximately14treesontheSite,allofwhichhaddied,apparentlyduetohighsalinitylevels.

KK. OnDecember17,2015,BCDCwrotetoRespondents’counselandagreedtoprovideadditionaltime,asrequestedonOctober12,2015,forRespondentstoprovideinformationresponsivetoBCDC’sallegationsofunpermittedactivitiesattheSite.BCDCextendedtoFebruary16,2016,thedeadlineforRespondentstoprovideinformationandanalysisresponsivetothequestionsraisedinBCDC’sletterofAugust18,2015.

LL. OnJanuary5,2016,theExecutiveOfficeroftheRegionalBoardrescindedOrderR2-2015-0038inordertoaddressproceduraldueprocessclaimsassertedbyRespondents.TherescissionwaswithoutprejudicetoRegionalBoardstaff’sabilitytopropose,ortheRegionalBoard’sabilitytoissue,aCleanupandAbatementOrderand/orotherordersorpermitscoveringthesubjectmatterofOrderR2-2015-0038.

MM. AnaerialphotographdatedFebruary10,2016,showsthatRespondentscontinuedtoperformunauthorizedworkattheSiteafterreceivingBCDC’sletterdatedJanuary30,2015directingthatRespondentsstopwork.Thereferencedimageshowsnewwork(sincetheGoogleEarthimagedatedApril1,2015)including,butnotlimitedto,installationoftwohelicopterlandingpadsandplacementofthreewind-breakplatforms,allontidalmarsh.AerialphotographdatedFebruary10,2016;PointBucklerTechnicalAssessmentReport,AppendixK(FillandExcavationinWetlandsandWatersSince2011).

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page13NN. OnFebruary16,2016,Respondents’counselsubmittedalettertoBCDCandan

enclosedtechnicalreport,preparedbyAppliedWaterResourcesCorporation,entitledConditionsatPointBuckler,ResponsetoCleanupandAbatementOrderR2-2015-0038,datedOctober16,2015("ConditionsReport”),which,counselindicated,providedsomeoftheinformationregardingtheSiterequestedbyBCDCinitsletterdatedAugust18,2015.TheConditionsReportestablishesthattheSitewasatidalmarshbeforeRespondentsbeganperformingunauthorizedworkthereandprovidesevidencethattheyviolatedtheMPAandSMPAattheSite.AccordingtotheConditionsReport:

1. In2013,twoyearsafterMr.SweeneypurchasedtheSite,aerialphotographsshowthattherewereeighttidally-influencedchannelsthatbisectedtheerodedleveesandthroughwhichtidalwaterflowedtoortowardtheinterioroftheSite.ConditionsReportat9.

2. "RecentactivitiesattheIslandhas[sic]resultedintheplacementoffillmaterialintowatersoftheState."ConditionsReportat4.Thisworkinvolvedrebuildingandconstructingtheexteriorlevees,whichplacedfillintosectionsoftheformerditchsystemandtidalchannels.

3. Respondentsconstructedover40%oftheexistingexteriorleveeinlandofthelocationoftheformererodedleveebyplacingfillontidalmarsh.ConditionsReportat3.

4. Respondentsexcavatedapproximately68%oftheexistingditch,interiorofthenewlyconstructedandrebuiltlevee,inlandofthelocationoftheformerditch,whichnolongerexistedduetoerosionoftheformerleveesorhadbecomesiltedin,andRespondentsusedtheexcavatedsoilasasourceoffillforconstructingandrebuildingtheexteriorlevee.ConditionsReportat4.

5. Respondentsexcavatedtwoarc-likeshapedpondsinlate-2014,andhadpartiallydugtwomoreponds.Id.

6. Respondentsinstalledtwo24-inchdiametersteelpipeculvertsinandacrossthenewditchsystem,overfill,ontheeasternandwesternsidesoftheSitetoallowvehicularandpedestrianpassageovertheditch.ConditionsReportat3.

7. "RecentactivitiesattheIslandhas[sic]resultedintheremovalorcoverageofvegetation."ConditionsReportat6.Respondentsremovedatleast4.74acresoftidalmarshvegetationasaresultofexcavationorfillingactivities.ConditionsReportat6,7.

8. RespondentsdisturbedtidalmarshvegetationattheSitebyrotarymowingactivitiesthatcommencedin2012andwereconductedonthewest,north,andsoutheasternportionsoftheisland.Respondentsalsodisturbedtidalmarshvegetationbymovingtrack-mountedmachinesandrubbertiredvehiclesacrosstheisland.ConditionsReportat4.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page14

OO. NeithertheConditionsReportnortheFebruary16,2016letterfromRespondents’counselcontainanyofthefollowinginformationrequestedinBCDCinitsAugust18,2015letter:abiologicalSiteassessment;documentationofcultivationofwaterfowlfoodplantsattheSite;andanyreportssubmittedbyMr.SweeneytotheSRCDdescribinganyactionswhichhehadtakentoimplementtheAnnieMasonIMP.1

PP. OnFebruary17,2016,representativesoftheRegionalBoardperformedaboatsurveywiththeSolanoCountySheriffMarinePatrolaroundtheperimeteroftheSiteandobserved,amongotherthings:(a)recentunauthorizedgradingontheeastsiteoftheSitethatappearedtobemaintenanceorrepairtothelevee;and(b)placementoftwomobilehelicopterlandingpads.IntheMatteroftheInspectionatPointBucklerIsland,AffidavitforInspectionWarrant(ofBenjaminMartin,RegionalBoard),datedFebruary19,2016,at11(AffidavitforInspectionWarrant).

QQ. OnMarch4,2016,representativesoftheRegionalBoard,escortedbytheSolanoCountySheriff’sDepartment,inspectedtheSitepursuanttoanInspectionWarrantissuedbySolanoCountySuperiorCourt.Theinspectionconsistedofconducting:(a)atopographicsurveyoftheSite;(b)aforensicwetlandsurveydesignedtoidentifyandcharacterizetheextentofwetlandsandotherwatersoftheStateandcurrentconditionsattheSite;and(c)insituwaterqualitymeasurements.AffidavitforInspectionWarrant,at5.DuringthisSiteinspection,RegionalBoardstaffobservedthatRespondentshadperformedadditionalworksincetheOctober21,2015Siteinspectionincluding:(a)installedthreewhiteflat-rackcontainersaroundtwogreenclosedfreightcontainerstocreateanenclosure;(b)installedfourflat-rackcontainers(tworedandtwoblue),paintedwithayellow“H,”astwohelicopterlandingpads,onelandingpadontheeasternsideandoneonthewesternsideoftheSite;(c)installedagreengateandpostsacrosstheditchcrossingontheeasternsideoftheSite;and(d)mowedtidalmarshvegetationthroughoutanapproximately1.5-acreareaontheeasternsideoftheSite(thisareahadnotbeenmowedonOctober21,2015).Inaddition,RegionalBoardstaffobservedthatthewaterintheditchwasbrightgreenincolor,andnotablydifferentincolorcomparedtothewaterinSuisunBay,indicativeofstagnantandeutrophicconditions,incontrasttoobservationduringtheOctober21,2015SiteinspectionwhenthewaterintheditchwasgreenishbrownincolorandnotnoticeablydifferentincolorincomparisontothewaterinSuisunBay.RegionalBoard,InspectionReport(April19,2016),ExhibitA,atA-2toA-3.

1Inhistransmittalletter,Respondents'counselassertedthatthestatutoryexemptionfromtherequirementtoobtainamarshdevelopmentpermit(Pub.ResourcesCode§29501.5)turnsontheexistenceofacertifiedIMPandsuggestedthatitwasirrelevantwhethertheSitewasamanagedwetlandoratidalmarsh.However,asacomponentofSRCD’slocalprotectionprogram,anIMPmaybepreparedonlyfora“managedwetlandinprivateownershipwithintheprimarymanagementarea.”Pub.Res.Code§29412.5;SMMPat23.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page15

RR. OnApril22,2016,theExecutiveDirectorissuedaCeaseandDesistOrder(EDCDO)directingRespondentsto,amongotherthings,(a)ceaseanddesistfrom(i)placinganyfillwithin,ormakinganysubstantialchangeinuseofanyareasubjecttotidalaction,orthatwassubjecttotidalactionbeforeRespondentsperformedtheunauthorizedactivitiesdescribedintheEDCDO,and(ii)engaginginanyactivityontheSiteconstituting“development,”asdefinedintheSMPA,withoutapplyingforandobtainingapermitunderboththeMPAandtheSMPA,(b)applyforandobtainpermitsforallpriorworkattheSiteforwhichsuchpermitsarerequiredundereithertheMPAortheSMPA,orboth,and(c)applyforandobtainanyandallpermitsunderboththeMPAandtheSMPApriortoundertakinganyfutureactivitiesattheSiteforwhichsuchpermitsarerequired,includingbutnotlimitedtoanyproductiveuseoftheSiteinwhichRespondentsmaywishtoengage.

SS. OnMay17,2016,theRegionalBoardissuedtoRespondents(a)aComplaintforAdministrativeCivilLiabilityComplaintNo.R2-2016-1008seeking$4,600,000incivilfinesforviolating:(i)SanFranciscoBayBasinWaterQualityControlPlanDischargeProhibitionNo.9andCleanWaterActsection301forunauthorizeddischargeoffilltowatersoftheStateandUnitedStatesontheSite,and(ii)CleanWaterActSection401forfailuretoobtainaWaterQualityCertification,and(b)atentativeCleanUpandAbatementOrder,which,ifissued,wouldrequireRespondentstorestoretheSitetoitspre-developmentcondition.

TT. OnMay23,2016,theExecutiveDirectorissuedaViolationReport/ComplaintfortheAdministrativeImpositionofCivilPenaltiesagainstRespondents.AlsoonMay23,2016,Respondents’counselinformedBCDCstaffthathehadfiledinSolanoCountySuperiorCourtaPetitionforaWritofMandateandComplaintforInjunctiveRelief(PetitionandComplaint)againstBCDCanditsExecutiveDirectorchallengingtheEDCDO.Respondents’PetitionandComplaintalleges,amongotherthingsthatinissuingtheEDCDOtheExecutiveDirectoractedinexcessofhislegalauthority,andasksforreliefintheformofajudicialorderinvalidatingtheEDCDO.

UU. OnAugust10,2016,theRegionalBoardissuedCleanupandAbatementOrderNo.R2-2016-0038toRespondentsforunauthorizedactivitiesconductedattheSite(“RegionalBoardOrder”).Amongothertermsandconditions,theRegionalBoardOrder:

1. prohibitsthedischargeoffillmaterialexceptasallowedbyplansacceptedorapprovedbytheRegionalBoard;

2. prohibitstheremovalordestructionoftidalmarshvegetationinamannerthatadverselyimpactswaterqualityorbeneficialuses;

3. requiresRespondentstosubmitanInterimCorrectivePlanincludingspecifiedmeasuresbynolaterthanNovember10,2016;

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page16

4. requiresRespondentstosubmitaPointBucklerRestorationPlanincludingspecifiedactionsbynolaterthanFebruary10,2017;and

5. requiresRespondentstosubmitaMitigationandMonitoringPlanincludingspecifiedinformationbynolaterthanFebruary10,2017.

VV. PursuanttoGovernmentCodeSection66638andPublicResourcesCodeSection29601,whentheCommissiondeterminesthatanypersonhasundertaken,oristhreateningtoundertake,anyactivitythatmayrequireapermitoramarshdevelopmentpermitfromtheCommissionwithoutsecuringsuchapermit,theCommissionmayissueanorderdirectingthatpersontoceaseanddesist.TheCommission’sordermaybesubjecttosuchtermsandconditionsmaydeterminearenecessarytoensurecompliancewiththeMPAandSMPA,includingtheimmediateremovalofanyfillorothermaterialwherethatremovalisnecessarytoavoidirreparableinjurytoanyareawithintheCommission’sjurisdictionorsettingofaschedulewith,whichstepsmustbetakentoobtainapermitormarshdevelopmentpermit.

WW. RespondentshaveviolatedandcontinuetoviolatetheMPAbyconductingtheunpermittedactivitiesattheSiteasdescribedherein,includingbutnotlimitedto:

1. PlacingfillinwatersofSanFranciscoBay,includingtidalmarsh,byconstructingandrebuildinglevees,excavatingditchesandfourcrescentshapedponds,installinganewdockinAnneMasonSlough,constructingroads,andplacingnumerouscontainers,trailers,andotherstructuresandtwohelipadsontidalmarsh;and

2. Makingsubstantialchangesintheuseofwater,land,orstructureswithintheareaoftheCommission’sjurisdictionby:

a. closingallthetidalbreachesthatexistedin2011whenMr.SweeneypurchasedtheSiteandtherebycuttingoffalltidalactivitytotheinterioroftheSite;

b. installinganewwatercontrolstructureinthewesternportionoftheSite;

c. drainingtheSitetofurtheralterthepre-existingtidalmarshhydrology;

d. removingordestroyingtidalmarshvegetationbytheplacementoffill,excavationactivities,mowingactivities,drainageactivities,andbringinggoatstotheSiteandallowingthosegoatstograzeonthetidalmarshvegetation;

e. installingnumeroustrailersandcontainersandtwomobilehelipadsattheSite;and

f. developingandoperatingtheSiteforintensiverecreationalusesincludingbutnotnecessarilylimitedtokite-boarding.

XX. RespondentshaveviolatedandcontinuetoviolatetheSMPAbyconductingunpermitteddevelopmentattheSiteasdescribedherein,includingbutnotlimitedto:(a)placingfillinwatersofSanFranciscoBay,includingtidalmarsh,byconstructingand

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page17

rebuildinglevees;(b)excavatingditchesandfourcrescentshapedponds;(c)installinganewwatercontrolstructureinthewesternportionoftheSite;(d)installinganewdockinAnneMasonSlough;(e)constructingroads;(f)placingnumerouscontainers,trailersandotherstructuresandtwomobilehelipadsontidalmarsh;(g)removingordestroyingtidalmarshvegetationbytheexcavationactivities,mowingactivities,andbringinggoatstotheSiteandallowingthosegoatstograzeonthetidalmarshvegetation;and(h)developingandoperatingtheSiteforintensiverecreationalusesincludingbutnotnecessarilylimitedtokiting.

III. CONDITIONS

A. NolaterthanFebruary10,2017,theRespondentsshallsubmitaPointBucklerRestorationPlan,acceptabletotheExecutiveDirector,thatincludesthefollowing:

1. ARestorationPlandescribingcorrectiveactionsdesignedtorestore,ataminimum,thewaterqualityfunctionsandvaluesofthetidalmarsh,includingthelengthofchannelandareaofmarsh,existingpriortotheRespondents’unauthorizedactivities,including:

a. Restoringtidalflowintothechannelsandditches;

b. RestoringtidalcirculationthroughouttheinterioroftheSite;and

c. RestoringoverlandtidalconnectiontotheSite’sinteriormarshduringhighertides.

TheRestorationPlanshallincludeaworkplanandimplementationtimeschedule.Theworkplanshallidentifyallnecessarypermitsandapprovalsandaprocesstoobtainthem.TheRespondentsshallinitiateimplementationinaccordancewiththeapprovedimplementationtimeschedulewithin60daysofwrittenacceptanceofthePointBucklerRestorationPlanbytheExecutiveDirector.IfthePlanproposesanyalterationoftheSitesuchthatitisnotreturnedtopre-existingconditions,suchalterationsmustbeaddressedintheMitigationandMonitoringPlan.

2. ARestorationMonitoringPlan(RMP)shallincludemonitoringmethodsandperformancecriteriadesignedtomonitorandevaluatethesuccessoftheimplementedrestorationactions.Performancecriteriashallincludetargetsforwaterquality,soilandhydrologicconditions,andvegetationcompositionincludinginvasivespeciescontrol.TheRMPshallmonitorthesuccessoftherestorationactionsuntilperformancecriteriahavebeensuccessfullyachieved,andforatleastfiveyearsfollowingcompletionoftherestorationactions.

B. NolaterthanFebruary10,2017,theRespondentsshallsubmitaMitigationandMonitoringPlan,acceptabletotheExecutiveDirector,thatincludesthefollowing:

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page18

1. AproposaltoprovidecompensatorymitigationtocompensateforanytemporalandpermanentimpactstowetlandsandotherwatersoftheStatethatresultedfromunauthorizedactivitiesattheSite.TheMitigationandMonitoringPlan(MMP)shall:

a. Describeexistingsiteconditionsattheproposedmitigationsite;

b. Describeimplementationmethodsusedtoprovidecompensatorymitigation;

c. Includemonitoringthatwillbeimplementedandperformancecriteriathatwillbeusedtoevaluatethesuccessofthecompensatorymitigation;and

d. Includeanimplementationschedule.TheRespondentsshallinitiateimplementationinaccordancewiththeacceptedimplementationtimeschedulewithin60daysofwrittenacceptanceoftheMMPbytheExecutiveDirector.

C. BynolaterthanMarch3,2017,RespondentsshallapplyforapermittorequestauthorizationfromtheCommissionfortheplacementoffill,extractionofmaterials,substantialchangeinuse,ordevelopmentactivitiesthatRespondentshaveconductedorperformedattheSiteatanytimefromApril19,2011throughthedateofthisOrder.TheapplicationmustbepreparedincompliancewiththeCommission’sregulationsgoverningmajorpermits.See14C.C.R.§§10300-10316.

D. RespondentsshallapplyforapermitfromtheCommissionpriortotheplacementoffill,extractionofmaterials,substantialchangeinuse,ordevelopmentactivitiesthatRespondentsproposetoundertakeorconductattheSiteafterthedateofthisOrder.AnysuchapplicationmustbepreparedincompliancewiththeCommission’sregulationsgoverningmajorpermits.See14C.C.R.§§10300-10316.

E. RespondentsmustceaseanddesistfromanyfurtheractionsattheSitethatwoulddamageordestroymarshvegetationattheSite,includingmowingvegetation,discingsoilorvegetation,orgrazinggoatsattheSite.

F. Respondentsmustceaseanddesistfromanyfurtheractionsthatwoulddrainsurfacewaterorgroundwater,orotherwisefurtheralterthehydrology,oftheSite.

IV. CIVILPENALTYORDER

A. GovernmentCodeSection66641.5(e)providesthattheCommissionmayadministrativelyimposecivilliabilityforanyviolationoftheMPAinanamountofwhichshallnotbelessthan$10normorethan$2,000foreachdayinwhichtheviolationoccursorpersists,butmaynotadministrativelyimposeapenaltyofmorethan$30,000forasingleviolation.

B. GovernmentCodeSection66641.9(a)states:

Indeterminingtheamountofadministrativecivilliability,thecommissionshalltakeintoconsiderationthenature,circumstance,extent,andgravityoftheviolationorviolations,whethertheviolationissusceptibleto

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page19

removalorresolution,thecosttothestateinpursuingtheenforcementaction,andwithrespecttotheviolator,theabilitytopay,theeffectonabilitytocontinueinbusiness,anyvoluntaryremovalorresolutioneffortsundertaken,anypriorhistoryofviolations,thedegreeofculpability,economicsavings,ifany,resultingfromtheviolation,andsuchothermattersasjusticemayrequire.

C. Nature,circumstances,extent,andgravityoftheviolations.ExcavationoftidalmarshattheSitephysicallyremovedestuarinehabitatandtheplacementoffilleliminatedsurfacewaterandwetlandhabitats.TheharmfromRespondents’unauthorizedfilling,destructionoftidalmarsh,andcutting-offoftidalactionattheSitewasandissubstantial,hasadverselyimpactedbeneficialusesofSuisunandGrizzlyBays,andlikelyresultedintheillegaltakeofthreatenedorendangeredspeciesprotectedundertheCaliforniaandfederalEndangeredSpeciesActs.UnauthorizedfillingandexcavationactivitiesoccurredoutsideworkactivitywindowsestablishedtoprotectsensitivespeciesintheSuisunMarsh.BlockedtidalchannelsattheSitearepreventinglongfinsmeltfrombeingabletoaccessspawninggrounds,youngsalmonidsfromaccessingfeedinggrounds,andhavecutofftheexportoffoodmaterialfromtheSite’sinteriorwetlandsneededtosupportthethreatenedDeltasmelt.

D. Whethertheviolationsaresusceptibletoremovalorresolution.Respondents’unauthorizedfillingandotherunauthorizedconstructionactivitiesattheSitearepotentiallysusceptibletoremovalorresolution,buttodate,RespondentshavetakennoactiontoremovetheunauthorizedworkortorestoretidalactionortidalmarshattheSite.Moreover,thetemporalimpactstotidalmarshhabitatandbiologicalresourcesfromRespondents’unauthorizedactivitiesareunavoidable,continuing,andpotentiallyincreasingwitheverypassingday.

E. Thecoststothestateinpursuingtheenforcementaction.BCDCstaffhasincurredsubstantialstaffcostsinpursuingthisenforcementaction.ThesecostsconsistoftimespentbynumerousstaffmembersontwoSitevisits;twomeetingswithRespondentsandtheircounselatBCDC’soffices;numerousmeetingsamongBCDC,RegionalBoard,andUSEPAstaff,includingtwomulti-agencymeetingstogetherwithRespondentsandtheircounsel;preparationofanExecutiveDirectorCeaseandDesistOrderandaViolationReport/ComplaintfortheAdministrativeImpositionofCivilPenalties(Complaint);reviewingRespondents’StatementofDefenseandpreparingarecommendedenforcementdecision,andpreparingforandparticipatinginacontestedhearingbeforetheEnforcementCommittee.

F. Abilitytopayandeffectonabilitytocontinueinbusiness.TheRegionalBoardstaffinvestigatedandanalyzedRespondentsfinancialresources,anddeterminedthatRespondentshavetheabilitytopayasubstantialpenalty.Respondents

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page20

claimthattheRegionalBoardmadeanumberoffactualerrorsinitsanalysisofRespondents’abilitytopay.However,RespondentshavesubmittednoevidenceofMr.Sweeney’sassets,ortheassetsofPointBucklerClub,LLC,toestablishthattheywouldbeunabletopaythepenaltyproposedbyBCDCstaffintheComplaint.

G. Anyvoluntaryremovalorresolutionefforts.Asnotedabove,RespondentshavetakennoactiontoremovetheunauthorizedfillorotherworkortorestoretidalactionortidalmarshattheSite,andtheycontinuedtodeveloptheSitefortheirkiteboardingoperationsafterBCDCstaffrequestedthattheystopworkandapplyforapermit,inaletterdatedJanuary30,2015.RespondentsclaimthattheyintendtoapplyforaBCDCpermittoseekauthorizationforcertaincompletedworkorproposedfutureworkattheSite.However,BCDCstafffirstrequestedthatRespondentsapplyforapermitinaletterdatedJanuary30,2015,over20monthsago,buttodatethattheyhavefailedtodoso.RespondentsrecentlyproposedtoBCDCstaffaconceptualplanforfutureuseandpartialrestorationoftheSite.However,RespondentsdidnotpreparetheconceptualplanbasedonatechnicalanalysisofthenatureandextentoftidalexchangethatwouldbenecessarytorestoretidalmarshandassociatedhabitatvaluesattheSite.Furthermore,RespondentshavedeclinedtodiscussmitigationfortemporalimpactsresultingfromtheunauthorizedworkattheSiteandforRespondentsproposedfutureusesoftheSite.Respondentshavebeenonlyminimallycooperative.

H. Anypriorhistoryofviolations;thedegreeofculpability.BeforecommencingunauthorizedworkattheSite,Mr.SweeneyknewthattheplacementoffillonleveesintheSuisunMarshrequiresauthorizationfrommultipleagencies.InJune2011,Mr.SweeneycontactedSRCDandtheUSACEtoobtainauthorizationforleveerepairworkatChippsIslandintheSuisunMarsh(Club915).Mr.SweeneydidnotadheretotheconditionsoftheUSACE’sRegionalGeneralPermit,andonOctober24,2011,theUSACEissuedaNoticeofViolationtoMr.SweeneyregardinghisunauthorizedworkatChippsIslandthatresultedinanillegaldischargeoffill.BasedonMr.Sweeney’sexperiencewiththeSRCDandtheUSACEatChippsIsland,hemayhavemadeaknowingandintentionaldecisiontoproceedwithunauthorizedconstructionactivitiesandotherworkattheSitewithoutcontactinganyregulatoryagencyandwithoutapplyingforanyofthepermitshekneworshouldhaveknownwererequired.Ataminimum,Respondents’conductattheSitewasunreasonableanddemonstratedawillfulindifferencetotheregulatorypermittingprocessthatisintendedtoprotectwaterquality,beneficialuses,andtopreventillegaldischarges.

CommissionCeaseandDesistOrderNo.CDO2016.02Page21

I. Economicsavingsresultingfromtheviolations.Byconductingfilling,excavation,andotheractivitiesattheSitewithoutauthorization,RespondentsavoidedthecostsofobtainingpermitsfromBCDCandUSACE,aCleanWaterActSection401waterqualitycertificationfromtheRegionalBoard,andperhapsotherlocalapprovalsorpermits,aswellasthecostsofcomplyingwithresourceagencyrequirementstoprotectendangeredorthreatenedspecies(suchas,ataminimum,performingcertainworkonlyduringworkactivitywindows).RespondentsalsoavoidedthecostsofmitigationforfillingportionsoftheSiteandforassociatedadverseimpactstobiologicalresources.Inaddition,Respondentshavebenefittedeconomicallyfromtheirunauthorizedactivities.ThenewleveesRespondentsconstructedaroundtheperimeteroftheSitehaveprovidedaneconomicbenefitbyallowingthemtoconducttheircommercialkiteboardingbusiness,andexpandkiteboardingoperationsinthenorthwesternportionoftheSite,forthepasttwoyearswithouthavingthoseoperationsdisruptedordamagedfromtidalaction,includingtidalfloodingfromperiodicovertoppingoftheformerremnantlevees.

J. BasedonconsiderationoftherelevantfactorssetforthinGovernmentCodeSection66641.9(a),thepenaltyamountsauthorizedbyGovernmentCodeSection66641.5(e),andtheprecedingfindings,theCommissionherebyfindsthatanadministrativepenaltyof$772,000isjustifiedtoresolvethismatter.

K. PursuanttoGovernmentCodeSection66647,within30daysoftheEffectiveDateofthisOrder,RespondentsshallremitthepenaltypaymenttotheCommission,bycashier’scheck,intheamountof$772,000payabletotheSanFranciscoBayConservationandDevelopmentCommission–BayFillClean-UpandAbatementFund.

V. TERMS

1. UnderGovernmentCodeSection66641andPublicResourcesCodeSection29601,anypersonwhointentionallyornegligentlyviolatesanyceaseanddesistorderissuedbytheCommissionmaybeliablecivillyinthesumofupto$6,000foreachdayinwhichsuchviolationspersist.Inaddition,uponthefailureofanypersontocomplywithanyceaseanddesistorderissuedbytheCommissionandupontherequestoftheCommission,theAttorneyGeneraloftheStateofCaliforniamaypetitionthesuperiorcourtfortheissuanceofapreliminaryorpermanentinjunction,orboth,restrainingthepersonorpersonsfromcontinuinganyactivityinviolationoftheceaseanddesistorder.

2. Thisorderdoesnotaffectanyduties,right,orobligationsunderprivateagreementsorunderregulationsofotherpublicbodies.

3. Mr.SweeneyandPointBuckler,LLCmustconformstrictlytothisorder.

4. Thisorderdoesnotconstitutearecognitionofpropertyrights.

Commission Cease and Desist Order No. COO 2016.02

Page 22

5. This order is effective upon issuance thereof.

VI. OPPORTUNITY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

Under Government Code Section 66639 and Public Resources Code Section 29601, within thirty (30) days after service of a copy of a cease and desist order issued by the Commission,

any aggrieved party may file with the superior court a petition of writ of mandate for review of the order pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Failure to file such an

action shall not preclude a party from challenging the reasonableness and validity of the order in any judicial proceedings brought to enforce the order or for

DATED: November / 2016

List of Exhibits

Exhibit A: Index of Administrative Record

cutive Director

San Francisco Bay Conservation and

Development Commission

Document Description Date1 Suisun Marsh Protection Plan Dec-762 Suisun Marsh Management Program Sep-803 Annie Mason Point Club Management Plan 11/15/84

4Annie Mason Point Club Management Plan and Supplemental Materials 11/15/1984 - 1/29/1990

5 Letter from SRCD to Mr. James Taylor re: DWR Pump Facility 9/13/886 Application for BCDC Marsh Development Permit 9/18/89

7BCDC Response to Application for BCDC Marsh Development Permit 10/12/89

8 SRCD Wetlands Maintenance Management Report 1/29/909 Department of the Army, Regional General Permit 3 7/8/13

10 Email from Mr. John Sweeney to Jim Starr, CDFW 11/19/14

11BCDC Letter to Mr. John Sweeney re: Point Buckler Island Unauthorized Project, Suisun Marsh 1/30/15

12

Letter from Miller Starr Regalia to BCDC re: Point Buckler, LLC; Performance of Maintenance Activities Purusuant to Annie Mason Point Club Individual Management Plan, Club No. 801 3/25/15

13BCDC Letter to Miller Starr Regalia re: Point Buckler Island Unauthorized Project, Suisun Marsh 5/7/15

14

Regional Board Notice to BCDC and other agencies re: Potential Violation for Unauthorized Diking of Suisun Tidal Marsh at Point Buckler Island 7/21/15

15

Regional Board Letter to Mr. John Sweeney re: Notice of Violation for Filling Waters of the United States and State, Point Buckler Island in the Suisun Marsh, Solano County 7/28/15

16BCDC Letter to Miller Starr Regalia re: Point Buckler Island (BCDC Enforcement File No. ER2012.038) 8/18/15

17

Regional Board to Mr. John Sweeney re: Cleanup and Abatement Order No. R2-2015-0038 for Unauthorized Levee Construction Activities at Point Buckler Island in the Suisun Marsh, Solano County 9/11/15

18Letter from Briscoe Ivester and Bazel, LLP to BCDC re: Notice of Replacement of Counsel 10/12/15

19

Applied Water Resources, Conditions Report at Point Buckler, Response to Cleanup and Abatement Order R2-2015-0038 10/16/15

20

BCDC Letter to Briscoe Ivester and Bazel re: Point Buckler Island; BCDC Enforcement File No. ER2012.038 (Pt. Buckler, LLC; John Sweeney, Principal) 12/17/15

21Declaration of John D. Sweeney in Support of Ex Parte Application 12/28/15

22

Regional Board Letter to Mr. John Sweeney re: Recission of Cleanup and Abatement Order No. R2-2015-0038 for Point Buckler Island, LLC 1/5/16

23Letter from Briscoe Ivester and Bazel, LLP to BCDC re: Point Buckler Island; BCDC Enforcement File No. ER2012.038 2/16/16

24In the Matter of the Inspection at Point Buckler Island, Affadavit for Inspection Warrant 2/19/16

25 Solano County Inspection Warrant 2/19/1626 Regional Board Inspection Report 2/19/1627 Declaration of Steven Chappell 4/21/16

Commission Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order No. CDO 2016.02Index of Administrative Record

Document Description Date28 Grant Deed 7/27/0429 Grant Deed 4/19/1130 Grant Deed 10/27/14

31Business Entity Detail for Point Buckler Club, LLC Showing Sweeney As Registered Agent 2/19/16

32 Property Detail Report for Point Buckler Club, LLC 3/7/1633 Screenshot of Point Buckler Website34 Screenshot of Point Buckler Facebook Page

35Point Buckler Technical Assessment Report of Current Conditions and Historic Reconstruction Since 1985 5/12/16

36 BCDC Executive Director Cease and Desist Order 4/22/16

37Regional Board Complaint for Administrative Civil Liability Complaint No. R2-2016-1008 5/17/16

38

Aerial Photos or Google Earth Images 4/30/1985, 7/14/1988, 8/18/1988, 6/13/1990, 5/28/1991, 8/23/1993, Summer 2003, Summer 2003 (annotated), 10/20/2003, Summer 2006, April 2011, April 2011 (annotated),9/1/2011, 5/19/2012, 2/3/2014, 3/24/2014, 5/22/2014, 8/6/2014, 10/29/2014, 1/29/2015, 4/1/2015, 2/10/2016

39

Violation Report and Complaint for the Administrative Imposition of Civil Penalties

5/23/17

40

Letter, Joel Ellinwood to Ming Yeung (BCDC) Re. Levee Maintenance; Extension of BCDC’s “Bay Jurisdiction (BCDC Inquiry File No. SL.VS.7136.1 – Chipps/ Van Sickle Island) 12/11/09

41Email, David Wickens (USACE) to John Sweeney Re. Chipps Island Levee Breach 6/23/11

42USACE RGP3 Application, Chipps Island Sport and Social Club, LLC, John Sweeney 6/24/11

43 Letter, Steve Chappell (SRCD) to David Wickens (USACE) 9/22/11

44USACE Notice of Violation to John Sweeney Re. property identified as “Club 915” 10/24/11

45Expert’s Response to July 11, 2016 Evidence Package; Prepared by Stuart Siegel, Peter Baye, and Bruce Herbold 7/21/16

46Regional Board Cleanup and Abatement Order No. R2-2016-0038 8/12/16

47Regional Board Prosecution Team’s Staff Summary Report, Administrative Civil Liability Complaint R2-2016-1008 9/2/16

48

Statement of Defense, Larry Bazel Declaration with Exhibits,John Sweeney Declaration with Exhibits,Petition for Review with State Board

9/12/16

49Letter to Marc Zeppetello from Stuart Siegel re: Role of Daily Ebb and Flow of the Tides in Establishing Tidal Marsh 8/10/16

50 Declaration, Adrienne Klein 9/23/16

Page 2

Records Added to the Administrative Record After Issuance of Violation Report

Presentation of John Sweeney and Point Buckler Club, LLC

Lawrence S. Bazel

Briscoe Ivester & Bazel LLP

17 November 2016

I’m Supposed To Argue

“the Commission shall allow representatives of…each respondent…to present their respective arguments….”

14 CCR § 11332(a)

2

ContentsWhat happened?

What should happen now?

Proposed penalty is too high

Trailers & containers = $262,000

Crescent ponds = $120,000

Alleged road fill = $120,000

Dock = $60,000

Legal issues

Settlement proposal3

44

Part 1

What Happened?

Levee Repair

Material excavated from borrow ditch

Placed on old levee or inland

Spring-fall 2014

Std method for levee repair

Staff issue: long time since last repair

Brought disc and roller

5

Why?

Wanted to restore duck club

Duck club since 1920s

Didn’t need levee for kiteboarding

DWR wanted levee repaired

Committed to pump on repair

6

7

Feb 1948

Contact With Agencies

Called BCDC and SRCD

Told Chipps Island not in BCDC juris

Same with Point Buckler

Staff observed work in Mar 2014

Didn’t call

Staff: repair OK if consistent with IMP

Nov 2014

8

Effect

Cut off tidal flow to interior channels

Staff concerns

Endangered species

Marsh vegetation

9

Also

Kiteboarding

Cut vegetation

Trailers, containers, flat racks

Tide gates: removed one, repaired another

Four small duck ponds

Replacement dock

10

Harm From These?

Excavation removed habitat

But created water habitat

Otherwise no harm identified

11

Three In Dispute

Did not

Place fill to construct interior roads (2)

Install a new tide gate (repaired flaps)

$90,000 should be deducted

12

1313

Part 2

What Should Happen Now?

14

Restore And Permit

Meetings with staff, RB, EPA

Concept

Restore tidal flow to interior

Duck pond

Trailers or clubhouse

Mitigation and penalties

15

16

Orders

Staff cease and desist order

Haven’t applied for stay

RB cease and desist order (Aug 2016)

ICAP due Nov 2016 (submitted)

Restoration and mitigation plans Feb 2017

Haven’t applied to court for stay

Problem

Not much cash

Not clear if money can be raised

E.g. $895,000 landing craft hasn’t sold

Money raised should go to restoration

Penalty procedures take time and money

17

If Penalty Imposed

Should be paid over five years

Should be reduced for money spent on restoration

Enforcement Committee suggested $450,000 settlement

18

1919

Part 3

Proposed Penalty Is Too High

Top 10 BCDC Admin Penalties

Max ever $220,000

Paid over 5 years

Six of top ten $50,000 or less

Waiver if order complied with

2 cases: no penalty

2 more: half penalty waived

20

21

Max $30,000 per violation

Proposed penalty: 29 violations

Includes

Removal of broken tide gate

Parking trailers

Excavation of four small ponds

22

Proposed Penalty

Levee repair = $210,000

Trailers & containers = $262,000

Crescent ponds = $120,000

Interior use = $120,000

Dock = $60,000

Total = $772,000

Penalties in Suisun Marsh

For duck clubs:

No penalty ever imposed

For trailers and containers:

No penalty ever imposed

23

2424

Part 4

Trailers & Containers = $262,000

Comparison: Trailers

Elsewhere in Suisun Marsh, virtually every other duck club is using containers or trailers

67 photographs submitted to BCDC

Virtually all unpermitted

No penalty, no enforcement

25

26

27

28

29

Overcounting

One relaxation and storage area

Should be one penalty at most

Not 8

3030

Part 5

Crescent Ponds =$120,000

Only Purpose

Create duck ponds

Trees planted

Decoys installed

31

32

Waterfowl Prefer Duck Ponds

Suisun Marsh Protection Plan:

Waterfowl prefer duck ponds over natural tidal marsh

Because duck ponds provide food

Confirmed by recent scientific work from USGS

Duck Ponds Are “Vital”

“managed wetlands of the Suisun Marsh are a vital component of the wintering habitat for waterfowl migrating south” (SMPP Envt finding 5.)

33

34

“managed wetlands…are critical habitats” and “deserve special protection” (SMPP, envt policy 2.)All state agencies required to act in conformity with SMPP policies. (PRC §29302.)

Duck Ponds = Critical Habitats

Harm?

None identified

35

3636

Part 6

Interior Use = $120,000

Alleged Road Fill

Staff claim fill was placed to make two roads

No fill was added

$60,000 penalties should be dropped

37

Vegetation

Dead vegetation cut

Mostly grew back

$30,000 penalty

No comparison

38

Kiteboarding

$30,000 penalty for recreation?

No comparison

No harm identified

39

4040

Part 7

Dock = $60,000

Replacement

Replaced existing dock

One dock, cut to conform to existing piers

Two violations: overcounting

No enforcement against docks elsewhere in Suisun Marsh

41

4242

Part 8

Legal Issues

43

Penalty Factors

“Commission shall take into consideration…”

Gravity: “nature, circumstance, extent, and gravity” ….

Ability to pay: “the ability to pay, the effect on ability to continue in business” ….

(Govt Code sec. 66641.9)

44

Gravity

Factors not considered for most penalties

Most not grave

Kiteboarding

Removing tide gate

Parking trailers and containers

Crescent ponds

Replacement dock

45

Ability To Pay

No ability to pay

Little cash, no income

Other assets are not liquid

RB staff demanding $4.6 million penalty

Needs money to restore island

Why destroy Mr. Sweeney?

46

No Liability

No substantial change in use

Justification for penalties for tidegates, kiteboarding, mowing vegetation, trailers and containers

No permit required

For work specified in IMP

For repair, replacement, reconstruction

47

Suisun Marsh Preservation Act

PRC § 29508: “no marsh development permit shall be required” for

“(b) Repair, replacement, reconstruction, or maintenance that does not result in an addition to, or enlargement or expansion of, the object of such repair, replacement, reconstruction, or maintenance.”

48

Initially, No Big Deal

Mar 2014: Staff observes levee repair

Did not comment

Nov 2014: Staff says repair OK

If consistent with IMP

Early 2015: Corps offers after-the-fact permit

49

Levee at another duck club that had been breached for 15 years

Staff give owner another six months to repair

No penalty

Comparison

50

Penalties Only After Lawsuit 1

2015: No suggestion of penalties by any agency

RB staff issue CAO

Do not comply with due process

Mr. Sweeney tries to negotiate

RB staff refuse request to extend time

Dec 2015: Suit filed against RB

51

Dec 29: court stays CAO

Jan 5: RB staff rescind CAO

Jan 7: 3-hour meeting and call

RB staff, other agencies, consultants

Probably BCDC staff

Haven’t received notes or e-mails

Culminates in penalty proposal

Penalties Only After Lawsuit 2

Constitutional Rights

No penalty before suing RB

Now highest penalties ever

Message

Insist on your constitutional rights, and staff will destroy you

52

53

Retaliation

First Amendment retaliation

Constitutional vindictiveness

54

Eighth Amendment excessive fines

Criminal safeguards, incl jury trial

Heightened burden of proof

Wiping Out Assets Of Person

55

If Penalty Is Issued

Mr. Sweeney has 30 days to file suit

Or loses right

56

At Enforcement Committee suggestion

$450,000 proposal

Paid over five years

Credit for restoration activities

Settlement Proposal

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

November22,2016

TO: AllCommissionersandAlternates

FROM:LawrenceJ.Goldzband,ExecutiveDirector(415/352-3653;larry.goldzband@bcdc.ca.gov) SharonLouie,Director,Administrative&TechnologyServices(415/352-3638;sharon.louie@bcdc.ca.gov)

SUBJECT:DraftMinutesofNovember17,2016CommissionMeeting

1. CalltoOrder.ThemeetingwascalledtoorderbyChairWassermanattheFerryBuilding,PortofSanFranciscoBoardRoom,SecondFloor,SanFrancisco,Californiaat1:02p.m.

2. RollCall.Presentwere:ChairWasserman,ViceChairHalsted,CommissionersBates(arrivedat1:16p.m./departedat4:13p.m.),Cortese(representedbyAlternateScharff–departedat4:20p.m.),DeLaRosa(departedat4:17pm.),Gibbs(arrivedat1:20p.m./departedat4:14p.m.),Hicks(representedbyAlternateGalacatos–departedat4:17p.m.),Kim(representedbyAlternatePeskin–departedat4:12p.m.),Lucchesi(representedbyAlternatePemberton),McGrath(arrivedat1:07p.m.),Nelson,Randolph(arrivedat1:17p.m./departedat4:12p.m.),Sartipi(departedat4:12p.m.),Sears(departedat4:15p.m.),Spering(representedbyAlternateVasquez),Techel(departedat4:10p.m),Wagenknecht(departedat4:10p.m.)andZiegler(representedbyAlternateBrush).

ChairWassermanannouncedthataquorumwaspresent.

NotpresentwereCommissioners:AssociationofBayAreaGovernments(Addiego),AlamedaCounty(Chan),DepartmentofFinance(Finn),ContraCostaCounty(Gioia),SonomaCounty(Gorin),SanMateoCounty(Pine),Governor(Zwissler).

3. PublicCommentPeriod.ChairWassermancalledforpubliccommentonsubjectsthatwerenotontheagenda.

BrianneRileyfromtheBayPlanningCoalitionannouncedtheirupcomingannualluncheontobeheldFriday,December9thattheSaintFrancisYachtClub.Moreinformationcanbeaccessedattheirwebsite:bayplanningcoalition.org.

ChairWassermanmovedtoApprovaloftheMinutes.

4. ApprovalofMinutesoftheOctober6,2016Meeting.ChairWassermanaskedforamotionandasecondtoadopttheminutesofNovember3,2016.

MOTION:CommissionerWagenknechtmovedapprovaloftheMinutes,secondedbyCommissionerScharff.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

2

VOTE:Themotioncarriedwithavoteof17-0-1withCommissionersBates,DeLaRosa,Gibbs,Galacatos,Peskin,Pemberton,McGrath,Nelson,Randolph,Scharff,Sears,Vasquez,Techel,Wagenknecht,Brush,ViceChairHalstedandChairWassermanvoting,“YES”,no“NO”,votesandCommissionerSartipiabstaining.

5. ReportoftheChair.ChairWassermanreportedonthefollowing:

a. NewBusiness.Doesanyonehaveanynewbusinesstheywouldliketorequestweconsideratoneofournextmeetings?(Nocommentswerevoiced)

b. BayFillPoliciesWorkingGroup. IwouldnowaskCommissionerNelsontogiveusabriefaccountoftheBayFillPoliciesWorkingGroupthatwasheldearliertoday.

CommissionerNelsonreportedthefollowing:WehadaninterestingdiscussionaboutthechallengeposedaroundtheBaybylow-lyingareas,areasthateitherliebehindleveesandwouldbesubjecttofloodingasaresultofrisingsealevelsoroffluvialflooding,floodingfromourwatershedsoracombinationthereofandthechallengesthattheyposeforus.Andstaffpresentedusanumberofexamplesofplaceswherewearelikelytoseeinthenot-to-distantfuturesomeprettysoberingexamplesofsubstantialincreasedriskofflooding.

Andalsowewalkedthroughwhatwehadtalkedaboutastheislandeffect.Asshorelinedevelopersrecognizetheriskofsealevelriseandraisetheirbuildingpadsormodifytheirbuildingsinwaysthattheyaremorefloodresilientthatmayhelpthatbuildingbutitmaynothelpadjacentbuildingsandthosebuildingsmaybefloodresistantbutincreasinglyovertimesomeofthosebuildingsaregoingtosufferfromalackoftransportationandotherinfrastructureservingthem.

ItwasasoberingconversationthattiesinverynicelywiththeworkARTisdoingandraisedanumberofinterestingquestionsabouttheworkshopsthatwearegoingtobeplanningfornextyear.

ChairWassermancommented:ItcertainlyseemsthattheChineseblessing,wearecursedtoliveininterestingtimesistruerthaniteverhasbeen;andcursedtoliveinveryuncertaintimes.Aswehavetalkedaboutbeforeunfortunatelyinmanywaysneitherclimatechangenorrisingsealevelgotawholelotofattentioninthepoliticaldebatesthatwereconcludedearlierthismonth.Anditisunclearwhatthenationalpolicyonthosemaybe.Thatmakesitevenmoreimportantthatwefocuslocally,whichforusmeansregionally,ontheplansforourBayandwhatwecandotoaddressrisingsealevels.

Wearemakingsignificantstridesbasedontheplansthatwehaveadoptedandoverthenextmonthswearegoingtobebringingupasetofreportsandactionsbacktoallofus.Wereallyneedtodiginandmakesurewearedoingallthatwecan;makesureourstaffisdoingallwecan.Probablymoreimportantlyismakingsureallofourregional,local,stateandfederalpartnersaredoingalltheycanwhichisgoingtobeanever-broadeningcampaign.Myownmantraishunkerdown,stayfocusedlocallyandprepareforthefuture.

ItissaidthatifyouappearatDanielWebster’sgravesiteyouwillhearavoicecallingout,howstandstheUnion?Andyouarerequiredtoanswer,shestandsasshestoodrockbottomthencoppersheathedoneandindivisible.Ithinkitisastruetodayasitwasthen.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

3

c. NextBCDCMeeting.AtourDecember1stmeetingwewillholdaRisingSeaLevelWorkshoptoconsidernextstepstoimplementwhatweagreedupon.Thiswillbeourfirstmeetingattheregionalheadquarters,375Beale.Weexpectmostallofourmeetingswillbeheldtheregoingforward.IwanttoencourageallofyoutoattendandtoaskyourAlternatestoattend,aswell.

d. Ex-ParteCommunications.Thatcompletesmyreport.Ifanybodywishestomakeontherecordanex-partecommunicationreportnowisthetimetodoit.Youdoneedtosubmitthoseinwritingaswell.

ViceChairHalstedreported:IhavehadanemailcommunicationwiththePortofSanFranciscoonthemattercomingbeforeustoday.

ChairWassermanmovedtotheExecutiveDirector’sReport.

6. ReportoftheExecutiveDirector.ExecutiveDirectorGoldzbandreported:ThankyouverymuchChairWasserman.IamtemptedtotalkaboutwhatweallmighthavelearnedaboutallofusandallofourcolleaguesaftertheelectionbutIamnotsurewhatIhavelearnedsoIamjustgoingtokeepquiet.

ButIdidrecallaboutaweekagowhenIwasreadingabookthatIlovethatFrederickDouglassoncewrotethatthereisnoprogressifthereisnostruggle.Thatadmonitioncertainlyappliestotoday’sCommissionmeeting.Theissuesthatyouwillfacetodaywilltestyouinseveralways.Thequestionsthatstaffwillaskyoutodecidetodayaredifficultinmanyrespects.Youmaystruggletomakesomeharddecisions.Fortunately,youalwayshavedemonstratedthatabilityandweexpectthatyouwilldosoagaintoday.

IamverypleasedtoannouncethatLindyLowe,ourActingChiefPlanner,hasacceptedouroffertostopactingandbecomeourrealChiefPlanner.(Applause)LindyisnothererightnowbecausesheisoveratMTCbeingaChiefPlanner.DuringtheinterviewprocessLindywasplacedinthetoprankandIselectedherfromthefivecandidateswhointerviewedforthepositionlastmonth.WesoonshallfinalizeareorganizationofthePlanningUnitthatLindyled.We’llletyouknowofoursuccessindoingsoandmoveforwardwithLindyasatremendouslysuccessfulpartofseniorstaff.

IamalsopleasedtoletyouknowthattheMetropolitanTransportationCommissionyesterdayrequestedsuccessfullythattheBayAreaHeadquartersAuthority,whichisresponsiblefor375BealeStreet–soontobeournewofficebuilding–approvea$5,000,000budgettooutfitpartofthebuilding’sfifthfloorsothatBCDCcanoccupyitnextyear.Ican’tpromisethatwe’llmoveinbeforetheendofthesecondquarterbutthatismyhope.Sharon,Anna,andBradhavebeenworkingincrediblyhardtodesignagreatfloorplanandwearegoingtousealittlebitofgeneralfunddollarstohireamoveconsultanttohelp.Webelievethatwillrelieveallofusofsomeofthelogisticsandplanningwork.I’llkeepyouinformedasweprogress.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

4

Thatbeingsaid,asChairWassermanreported,ournextmeetingwillbeheldat375BealeStreet.Fornextyearweplantohavethefollowingschedule:WewillmeetasusualonthefirstandthirdThursdaysofthemonth.ThefirstThursdaygenerallywillbeyourregularBCDCCommissionmeeting;permits,consistencydeterminations,briefingsandalltheexcitingthingsthatwegenerallybringbeforeyou.ThesecondmeetingtobeheldthethirdThursdayofthemonth,ingeneral,willbeaworkshopforyouandthepublictohelpusallimplementtherecommendationsandactionsthatyouallapprovedlastOctoberaswellastherecommendationsandinterestingissuesthatwillbebroughtforthfromtheBayFillPoliciesWorkingGroup.

Planonbeingat375BealeonbothThursdays;knowthatwewillhavethefirstmeetingintheBoardRoomandthesecondmeetingacrossthehallinthebigroom.ItwillbeopentothepublicandwewillbeseatingyouaswehavebeforeattheoldMTCbuilding.

TheDecember15thmeetingwillnotbeheldat375Beale.ThismeetingwillbeheldupthestreetatthePortOfficesintheirBaysideConferenceRoom.

ThatcompletesmyreportChairWassermanandIamhappytoansweranyquestionsanybodymayhave.

ChairWassermanasked:AnyquestionsfortheExecutiveDirector?(Nocommentswerevoiced)

7. ConsiderationofAdministrativeMatters.ChairWassermanstated:Item7isConsiderationofAdministrativeMatters.WehavehadalistingmailedtousonNovember10th.JaimeMichaelsofourstaffisheretoansweranyquestionsanyofusmayhave.(Nocommentswerevoiced)

8. ClosedSessiononPendingLitigation:(1)PointBucklerClub,LLCandJohnDonnellySweeneyv.SanFranciscoBayConservationandDevelopmentCommission,SolanoCountySuperiorCourt,CaseNo.FCS047083;and(2)ProposedCeaseandDesistandCivilPenaltyOrderNo.CCD2016.002,PointBucklerClub,LLCandJohnD.Sweeney.ChairWassermanannounced:Item8isaclosedsessionregardingpotentiallitigationconcerningPointBuckler.AtthistimeIamaskingeveryonetoleavetheroomexceptforCommissionersandourAttorneyGeneral’sstaffonthismatter;thatincludesBCDCstaff.Wewillaskyoutorejoinusjustassoonaswearefinished.(Theroomwasvacatedbyallthoseneedingtodoso.)

ChairWassermanannounced:Wearebackinsessionafterourclosedsession.Wedidnottakeareportableaction.ThatbringsustoItem9.

9. ConsiderationofandPossibleVoteontheEnforcementCommittee’sRecommendedEnforcementDecisionInvolvingProposedCeaseandDesistandCivilPenaltyOrderNo.CCD2016.002;PointBucklerClub,LLCandJohnD.Sweeney.ChairWassermanstated:Item9isconsiderationandpossiblevoteontheEnforcementCommittee’srecommendedenforcementdecisionregardingaCeaseandDesistandCivilPenaltyOrderNo.CCD2016.002thatwouldbeissuedtoPointBucklerClub,LLCandJohnD.Sweeney.MarcZeppetellowillintroducethematterandthenCommissionerScharffwillpresenttheEnforcementsCommittee’srecommendationandthenwewillproceedtohearfromtherestofthespeakersincludingtherespondents.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

5

MarcZeppetello,ChiefCounseladdressedtheCommission:ThismatterinvolvesallegedviolationsoftheMcAteer-PetrisActandtheSuisunMarshPreservationActatPointBucklerIslandwhichislocatedinSuisunBayandintheprimarymanagementareaoftheSuisunMarsh.ThisenforcementactionwascommencedonApril22ndwhentheExecutiveDirectorissuedatemporaryceaseanddesistordertotherespondents.Thatorderwasgoodfor90days.Ithasbeencontinuedtwicebystipulationbetweenstaffandrespondentsbutwillexpiretoday.TheExecutiveDirectorthenissuedaviolationreportandcomplaintforadministrativepenaltiesonMay23rd.Thecomplaintproposedapenaltyof$952,000for35violationsoftheMcAteer-PetrisAct.

RespondentssubmittedtheirstatementofdefenseandaccompanyingdocumentsonSeptember12thandgenerallydeniedliability.

TheEnforcementCommitteeheldapublichearingonOctober6thandadoptedthestaff’srecommendedenforcementdecisionandproposedceaseanddesistorderwithonemodificationwhichwasthattheCommitteereducedtheproposedpenaltyby$180,000from$952,000to$772,000.Thiscompletesmyintroduction.

CommissionerScharffwasrecognized:OnOctober6ththeEnforcementCommitteeheldapublichearingonthismatter.Wetooksubstantialtestimony.Welistenedtostaff’spresentationofitsrecommendedenforcementdecisionwhichwastoadopttheproposedorder.Wealsolistenedtorespondents’presentationwhichincludedtestimonyunderoathbyrespondentJohnSweeney.

WealsoconsideredpubliccommentbyanumberofpartiesincludingtestimonyunderoathbyDr.StuartSiegel,anexpertretainedbytheSanFranciscoBayRegionalWaterQualityControlBoardinconnectionwithaseparateenforcementactionagainstrespondents.Dr.Siegelwastheauthorofthetechnicalassessmentreportconcerningthissite.

Wereadtherecord.Therewereasubstantialnumberofdocumentsprovidedtous.Wewentthroughallofthat.Welistenedtoallofthetestimony.Wethendeliberatedanddiscussedmanythings;oneofthosewas,therewassomediscussionwiththepartiesandtheywentoutoftheroomforawhiletodiscusssettlementoptionsandtotrytoresolvethismatteramongstthem.

Theywereunableatthathearingtoresolvethematter.Itwassuggestedtheycontinuetotryandworktogethertoresolvethismatter.AtthispointIunderstandtheyhavenotresolvedthematter.

TheCommitteeadoptedthestaff’senforcementdecisionwithonemodificationaswassuggested.TheCommitteedeterminedthattheplacementoffilltocloseeachoftheseventidalbreachesoftheremnantleveeatthesiteshouldbetreatedasasingleviolationratherthanthesevenviolationsimposedbystaff.OnthatbasistheCommitteereducedthepenaltyfrom$952,000to$772,000.Otherwisethestaffrecommendationwasadopted.

ChairWassermanasked:Doesstaffwishtomakeapresentationontherecommendations?

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

6

Mr.Zeppetelloreplied:AdrienneKleinandIwillmakeapresentationandwouldestimate15minutestocompletethispresentation.

DeputyAttorneyGeneralJoelJacobsaddressedtheCommission:OnesuggestionthatIhaveisiftheCommissionisinclinedtosettimelimitsontestimonyitshouldprobablydothatbeforeeithersidehasbegunpresentingitsargument.

ChairWassermanresponded:IwilltakeMr.Zeppetelloathiswordandwewillset15minutesforeachsideandwewillgiveyouthreeminutewarning.Iwouldnotethatwearenottalkingabouttestimony.Thisisforthepresentation.

Mr.LarryBazelspoke:MypresentationisaboutahalfhourandIwouldlikethattime.

ChairWassermanresponded:Wouldyoukindlyshrinkitto15minutesplease?YouhadasubstantialamountoftimetopresenttotheEnforcementCommitteeforatleastanhour.Wearereallyonlyreviewingthatrecommendation.Fifteenminutes,sir.

Mr.Bazelreplied:Okay.Thankyou.

Mr.Zeppetellopresentedthefollowing:Thisfirstslideisasummaryofwhathasalreadybeensaid.TheEnforcementCommitteeheldahearingonthismatteranditwasathreeandahalfhourhearing.Thestaffmadeapresentationofapproximately45minutesfollowedbyapresentationbyrespondentsthatwasequallyaslong.Therewasaboutanhourandahalfofpubliccomment,discussion,andquestionsfromtheEnforcementCommittee.

ThisslideshowsamapofthelocationofPointBucklerIsland.ItisintheSuisunBayandalsointhePrimaryManagementareaoftheSuisunMarsh.

Mr.SweeneypurchasedtheIslandinAprilof2011andlaterconveyedthepropertytoalimitedliabilitycompany,PointBuckler,LLC.

Iwouldliketosummarizethetermsoftheproposedorder.Theproposedorderhastwocomponents;aceaseanddesistcomponentandacivilpenaltycomponent.TheceaseanddesistorderwouldrequiretherespondentstoceasefurtherviolationsoftheMcAteer-PetrisActandtheSuisunMarshPreservationActatthesite.

Secondly,byFebruary10,2017,tosubmitarestorationplantorestoretidalflowandcirculationtotheIslandandalsobyFebruary10,2017,submitamitigationmonitoringplantoproposecompensatorymitigationtocompensateforimpactstowatersofthestateatthesite.

ThesetworequirementstosubmittheseplansbyFebruary10thofnextyearareidenticaltoprovisionsinacleanupandabatementorderthatwasadoptedbytheSanFranciscoBayRegionalWaterQualityControlBoardonAugust10th.

TheorderfurtherrequiresthatbyMarchthethirdofnextyear,therespondentssubmitanapplicationtoBCDCforapermittorequestauthorizationforworkthatrespondentsperformedsince2011whenMr.Sweeneypurchasedtheproperty.Theorderwouldalsorequirerespondentstoapplyforapermitpriortoanyfuturedevelopmentworkatthesite.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

7

ThecivilpenaltycomponentwouldrequireapenaltyforviolationsoftheMcAteer-PetrisAct.InthecomplaintthattheExecutiveDirectorissuedtherewasatablesettingforththeviolationsandsettingforththeamountproposedwithinthepenaltyrangeforeachoftheviolations.Manybutnotalloftheviolationsmaxed-outat$30,000whichisthemaximumallowedbythestatute.

TheEnforcementCommitteereducedthepenaltyfromthatproposedbystaffto$772,000.

TheCommissionhasjurisdictionundertheMcAteer-PetrisActandtheSuisunMarshPreservationAct.JurisdictionistobedeterminedatthetimethatMr.SweeneypurchasedtheislandinAprilof2011,andnotatanearlierpointintimeornotasitexiststodayafterunlawfulmodifications.

JurisdictionextendsundertheMcAteer-PetrisActtoareassubjecttotidalactionandincludestidelandsandmarshlandswheremarshvegetationispresentuptoanelevationoffivefeetabovemeansealevel.

ThisisaphotographoftheislandasitappearedinAprilof2011andyoucanseethetidalchannelsandvariousbreachesandchannelsthroughoutlargeportionsoftheisland.

ThisisafigurethatwaspreparedbyanexpertretainedbytheRegionalBoard.Theareainblueistheareathat,accordingtotheexpert,issubjecttoyourjurisdictionundertheMcAteer-PetrisAct;approximately30acresoftidelands,7.7acresofmarshland.

Theareaontheeastsideistheareathatispossiblenon-jurisdictionalareas,uplands,ofapproximately0.54acres.

UndertheSuisunMarshPreservationAct,PointBucklerisinthePrimaryManagementareaoftheMarshandthereforeapermitfromtheCommissionisrequiredpriortoanydevelopmentasthattermisbroadlydefinedintheAct.

ThereisanexemptioninthePublicResourcesCode.NopermitisrequiredfordevelopmentthatisspecifiedintheSuisunResourceConservationDistrict’scomponentofthelocalprotectionprogram(LPP).SRCD’scomponentoftheLPPincludesindividualmanagementplansformanagedwetlands;managedwetlandsbeingdefinedasdikedareaswherethewaterinflowandoutflowisartificiallycontrolledorinwhichwaterfowlplantsarecultivatedorboth.

In1984theCommissionadoptedindividualmanagementplansforapproximately160to165managedwetlandsinSuisunMarshincludinganIMPforthissitethatiscalledtheAnnieMasonIMP.

TheislandwasnotmanagedinaccordancewiththeIMPforover20yearsbeforeMr.Sweeneypurchasedtheproperty.TheAnnieMasonIMPcalledforfrequentinspectionandmaintenanceoftheleveesandemphasizedtheimportanceofmaintainingtheleveesforwatercontrol.

ThereissubstantialevidenceintherecordthatthesitewasnotmanagedinaccordancewiththeIMPforover20years.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

8

TheSuisunResourceConservationDistrictmaintainsrecordsofworkdoneinaccordancewiththeCorpsofEngineersregionalpermitformanagedwetlandsintheMarshandatleastsince1994,whentherecordsareavailable,thereisnorecordofanyworkbeingdoneonPointBucklerIsland.

In1989theformerowneroftheislandappliedtoBCDCforapermittoplace50,000cubicyardsoffillatthissite.Staffwrotealetterandsaidtheapplicationwasincomplete,pleasesubmitmoreinformation.Theinformationwasneversubmitted.Thepermitwasneverissued.

Thesitewasexposedtotidescomingfromthewestfor20years,towavesandwinds,andasaresultofthattherewerebytheearly1990ssevenbreachesoftheformerremnantlevee.Thesiterevertedtotidalmarsh.Therewasnoeffectivewatercontrol.Infact,thetidesandtidalhydrologyprevailedandtidalmarshvegetationdominatedtheIsland.

Instaff’sviewwhenMr.SweeneypurchasedthesitetheIndividualManagementPlandidnotapplyandapermitwasrequiredfortheworkthathedid.

IwouldmentionbrieflythatthereisanotherprovisioninthePublicResourcesCodethatprovidesforanexemptionfrompermitrequirements.Itis29508(b);nopermitisrequiredforrepair,replacementorreconstructionthatdoesnotresultintheadditiontoorenlargementorexpansionoftheobjectbeingrepaired.Thatexemptiondoesnotapplybecauseinthiscase,theexemptionforanIndividualManagementPlan,whichisamorespecificapplicationofanexemptionformanagedwetlands,iswhatwouldgovern.Inanycase,heretheworkwasnotreconstruction;itwasanewlevee.

Accordingtothereportpreparedbytheexpertsapproximately83percentofthenewleveethatrespondentsconstructedwaslocatedoutsidethefootprintoftheformerremnantlevee.Also,totheextentthatthenewleveewashigherinelevationandlargerinvolumeandmassthantheoldlevee,itconstitutedanenlargementratherthanreconstructionandthereforetheexemptionwouldnotapply.

WiththatIwillturnitovertoAdrienne.

ChiefofEnforcementKleinaddressedtheCommission:Ihavethreeslideswiththetimelineofeventstoshowyou.Thepropertywaspurchasedin2011byrespondentsandunauthorizedworkbeganaboutoneyearlater.AndbetweenthatperiodtherewasapermitobtainedfromtheCorpsofEngineersindicatingknowledgeoftherequirementsofatleastoneregulatoryagency.

InJanuaryof2015BCDCstaff,followingasitevisit,sentaletteraskingforrespondentstoceaseunauthorizedworkandapplyforapermit.

In2015and2016respondentscontinuedthatwork.In2016BCDCissuedanExecutiveDirector’sceaseanddesistorderexpiringtoday.

TheRegionalBoardalsoissueditsowncleanupandabatementorder.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

9

TheJanuary15thBCDCenforcementletterstatedthattheworkthathadoccurredappearednottoberetroactivelyapprovable;thatsiterestorationwasaveryprobableoutcome.Anditidentifiedtheexistenceofworkwindowstoprotectspeciesbecauseitwasunclearthatworkhadnotoccurredduringthoseimportantperiodsoftime.

RespondentscontinuedworkafterreceivingtheBCDCstopworkletter.Theyplacedshippingcontainers,helicopterpads,builtcrescentpondsbyexcavatingtheinteriorofthetidalmarsh,mowedmarshvegetationandconstructedroadbridgesoveraditch.

Thisisoneofmanyimagesfromtheexpert’sreport.Thegreenisshowingyouthedailytidalactiondistinctfromthebluewhichisdailytidalinundation.

Theinundationisdirecttidalflowandtheactionisthroughsub-surfaceflowsandoccasionalovertoppingaswell.

Youcanseethelocationoftheoriginalsevenleveebreaches.Thisisaclose-uptogiveyouthesenseofthechanges.Youcanseeintheupperphotothepre-existingconditionsandinthelowerphotoyoucanseethenewlevee.Ifyoulookatthedifferenceinthecolorofthewaterinthebottomphototheabsenceoftidalactionisclear.Thebrownwateristidallyinfluencedandthewaterinthenewleveeisalgaegreenindicatingeutrophicationintheabsenceoftidalaction.

Thisimageshowsyoutheoriginal1985leveealignmentandyoucanseethatthemajorityofthenewleveeinyellowdoesnotoverlapatallwiththeoriginalleveealignment.

Thisimageshowstheditchadjacenttothelevee.Again,themajorityofthenewditchisinanewlocation.

Thisisaphotocomparingthepre-existingandnewconditionsatthesitewithcirclesindicatingthelocationsoftheformerleveebreaches.

Youcanseeintotalthenewleveesurroundingtheditchandthenewleveesurroundingtheisland.

Thisphotoshowsthenewleveebisectingtheformertidalchannel.Thisshowsthenewborrowditchandshippingcontainersinthebackgroundofthephotograph.

Thisisanaerialimageshowingmarshvegetationmowingandtheclubhouseareasandkitesurfinglayoutareas.Thisshowsoneofseveralhelicopterpads.ThisshowsoneofthefourcrescentpondsandintheforegroundyoucanseethatitconnectstotheinteriorendofoneofthetidalchannelsinthecenteroftheIsland.

Thisisanotherphotographshowingyoumarshvegetationmowingandalsoaroadbridgeacrossthenewinteriorleveeditch.Thesitesupportsmanyspecialstatusspecies,bothstateandfederal.Myfinalslideisshowingyouacombinationofimages;thepre-existingandcurrentconditions.

WiththatthestaffrecommendsthattheCommissionadopttheproposedorderandIwouldliketopointouttwominortypos.OnpagethreeoftheNovember4thstaffreportinthethirdparagraph,wehavetypedLLPinsteadofLocalProtectionProgram,“LPP.”Onthelastpageoftheceaseanddesistorder,theyearofissuanceisindicatedas2017anditshouldbecorrectedto2016.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

10

IwouldalsoliketodrawyourattentiontoaletterofpubliccommentfromtheMarinAudubonSociety.Thankyou.

Mr.JacobsaddressedtheCommission:BeforetherespondentbeginsitspresentationIdowanttodrawtheCommission’sattentiontoanevidentiaryquestion.

TherespondenthastwobindersofdocumentsthathaveinformationpertainingtothefinancialconditionofMr.SweeneythattherespondentshaveaskedtheCommissiontoconsiderinconnectionwiththisproceeding.TheywerenotpartoftherecordbeforetheEnforcementCommittee.Thereisaprohibitionintheregulationsagainsttheintroductionofnewevidenceatthisproceeding.Theprovisionconcerninglateevidence,evenwhenitapplies,saysthattheCommissionshallnotacceptintotherecordanyevidencenotfiledinatimelymannerunlesstheCommissionfindsthatthepersonseekingtointroducetheevidencemadeallreasonableeffortstoobtainandsubmittheevidenceinatimelymannerandwouldbesubstantiallyharmediftheevidencewerenotadmittedandthatnootherpartywouldsuffersubstantialprejudicebyitsadmission.

Therehasbeenthatrequestthatyouconsiderthisinformation.ThepartieshavealsorequestedtheopportunitytoaddresstheCommissiononthespecificevidentiaryquestions.ItiswithintheCommission’sdiscretionifyouwanttogivehimabriefopportunitytospeaktoit;youmaydothat.

OnewayoranothertheCommissionneedstodecidewhethertoconsiderthisevidence.ThisisagoodopportunitytodothatbecauseMr.Bazelmaywanttorefertoitinhispresentation.

ChairWassermanasked:Mr.BazelwouldyouliketoaddresstheissueoftheevidencedescribedbyMr.Jacobs?

Mr.Bazelspoke:ThankyouMr.Chair.WhatwesubmittedwasabriefthatwesubmittedtotheRegionalBoardthatwassenttotheRegionalBoardandwasdueaftertheevidentiaryhearinginthismatter.

Itisabriefalongwithsomedeclarationsandexhibits.ThebriefitselfisnotevidenceandmyfirstslidewastomakethepointthatIamsupposedtoargueatthishearing.AndthebriefthatwesubmittedtotheRegionalBoardisargument;itisnotevidence.Thebriefitselfshouldbeallowedupuntilnow.Wesentitafewweeksagosotherewasplentyoftime.

Asfarastheexhibitsmostofthemwerethesamethatwerepreviouslysubmitted.Thatisnotnewevidence.TherewereafewthingsthatwerenewparticularlyrelatedtothefinancialconditionofMr.Sweeney.

ThereisnosurprisetoBCDCstaff.Ithinktheyactuallyinvitedtheinformation.TherewasacommentduringtheEnforcementCommitteemeetingaboutdisclosingfinancialinformation.

Ourbasicargumentisthatthebriefwesubmittedcouldnothavebeensubmittedatthetimebecauseitwasnotwrittenyetanditisallargument.AnyevidenceinthereiskindofbesidethepointexceptasBCDCstaffhasrequestedit.

ChairWassermanasked:Wouldstaffliketoaddresstheissue?

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

11

Mr.Zeppetelloreplied:Themainissueherewiththeseadditionaldocumentsissomeinformationthatisclaimedtobeconfidential,personalfinancialinformationofMr.Sweeney’s.RespondentsclaimthattheycouldnothaverespondedsoonerbecausetheywererespondingtoadditionalpointsmadebytheRegionalBoardregardingtheRegionalBoard’sanalysisofMr.Sweeney’sabilitytopay.

ItistruethatthestaffreliedontheRegionalBoard’sanalysisofabilitytopay,butitistherespondentsthathavetheinformationthatcanestablishornotMr.Sweeneyandtheotherrespondents’,thelimitedliabilitycorporation’s,inabilityorabilitytopay.

Theycouldhavebutchosenottosubmitadditionalevidenceonthisissuewiththeirstatementofdefense.Infact,theyraisedtheinability-to-payargumentwiththeirstatementofdefense.

IwouldnotethattheEnforcementCommitteediddirectthepartiestotrytoattempttoreacharesolutionandtheynotedthatthefinancialinformationshouldbeprovided,butthecontextwasforsettlementdiscussionsbetweenthepartiesfollowingtheEnforcementCommittee;nottosupplementtherecord.

WhatstaffaskedforfollowingtheEnforcementCommitteewasMr.Sweeney’s,copiesofhisfederaltaxreturns,copiesoftheLLC’sfederaltaxreturns,afinancialstatementfromMr.SweeneyandafinancialstatementfromtheLLC.

RespondentshavedeclinedtoprovideanyofthatinformationandinsteadtheyhavesoughttosupplementtherecordherewiththefinancialinformationthatultimatelycomesdowntoafewstatementsbyMr.Sweeneyinasupplementaldeclarationregardinghisfinances.

Instaff’sviewthesupplementalinformationisnotfundamentallydifferentthantheevidenceandtheargumenttheypresentedtotheEnforcementCommittee.

Andfinally,iftheadditionaldocumentsareadmitted,instaff’sviewthismattermusteitherberemandedtotheEnforcementCommitteeortheCommissionmustholdadenovohearing.

Iamrelyingonourregulation11332(b)(4).IftheCommissiondecidestoholdadenovohearingitcannotbetodaybecausethematterundertheregulationshastobescheduledtoafuturemeetingandstaffneedstohaveanopportunitytoreviewandrespondtotheadditionalevidence.

Forallthosereasons,staffwouldurgetheCommissiontodenytherequesttosupplementtherecord.Staffwouldhavenoobjectiontothebriefasargumentbutwewouldobjecttoredactingtheparagraphortwothattheyidentifiedasclaimingtohaveconfidentialinformation.Thankyou.

ChairWassermanasked:DoesanyCommissionerhavequestionsontheevidentiaryissue?

CommissionerMcGrathwasrecognized:WhatwasthedateoftheRegionalBoardhearingwherethequestionofcapacitytopaywasfirstraised?

Mr.Zeppetelloanswered:Idonotbelievethathearinghasbeenheldyet.ThereisahearingonadministrativeliabilityscheduledbeforetheRegionalBoardinDecember.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

12

CommissionerMcGrathcontinued:SothiswasnotmaterialfromthefirstRegionalBoardhearing?Thisisfromtheprospectivehearing?

Mr.Zeppetelloreplied:Correct.

Mr.Bazeladded:Thatiscorrect.

ChairWassermancontinued:AsIunderstanditweneedtomakeadecisionwhethertoaccepttherespondent’sofferoftheadditionalevidence.Iwouldnotethatstaffhassaidthebrief,redactinganyreferencetotheevidenceitself,canbeconsideredbutthatleavesthequestionofwhetherthesupplementalevidenceconcerningfinancialabilitywhichwasnotbeforetheEnforcementCommittee,shouldbeconsideredornot.

MOTION:CommissionerScharffmovedtonotacceptanysupplementalevidence,secondedbyCommissionerVasquez.

ChairWassermanasked:Doyouwantustotakeahandvoteoravoicevote?

Mr.Jacobsreplied:Itprobablydoesnotmatterforthisparticularissue.Ontheactualenforcementdecisionthereshouldbearollcallvote.

ChairWassermancontinued:Allthoseinfavorofthemotionnottoaccepttheadditionalevidencesay,aye.

Anyopposed?Themotionpassesunanimously.

Themotioncarriedbyavoicevotewithnoabstentionsorobjections.

ChairWassermanasked:Arethereanyotherpreliminarymattersbeforewehearfromthe--

Mr.Jacobsinterjected:NotasfarasIamconcernedMr.Chair.

ChairWassermanrecognizedMr.Bazel:IamLarryBazel.IrepresentJohnSweeneyandPointBucklerClub.HereiswhatIwasintendingtotalkaboutbutIwillcutthisinhalf.

Iwillskipwhathappened,forthemostpart,andwhatshouldhappennowandtalkalittlebitabouttheproposedpenaltyastoohigh.ThatisthemainargumentthatIwanttomakeandmorespecificallytherearetoomanypenaltiesbecausethereare29penaltieshere.

Thestaffisfocusedononeortwoissues;theleveerepair,maybetheborrowditchassociatedwiththeleveerepair.

Andiftheleveerepairisaviolationthatisfinebutthatisone$30,000.00violation.Whathashappenedhereisanother28violationshavebeentackedonaboutthingsthatdonotwarrantpenaltiesatall.

Iwillalsotalkaboutthelegalissuesandthestatusofthesettlementproposal.

Thisphotographshowsthatasfarbackas1948inaerialphotographstherewasaleveearoundtheIslandandtherewerepondsontheIsland.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

13

Whatshouldhappennow?Therehasbeenachangeinposition.IntheJanuary2015letterweheardthatnoneofthiswaspermittablebutwearenowindiscussionswithstaffhereandwiththeRegionalBoardaboutrestoringtidalflowandhavingasmallpond.

HadMr.Sweeneyknown,hewouldnothaveneededtorestoretheleveeallthewayaroundtheIslandalthoughthatisthewayitwasandthatisthewayitwasgoingbacktothe40sandmaybeintothe1920s.Hecouldhavehadasmallduckpondandwhatthatwhiteovalisshowingisasmallduckpondwithaleveearoundit;therestoftheislandcanbetidallyopen.Itdoesnotneedtohavetheleveetomaintainthewaterlevelsthatyoudoinaduckpond.

Whatwearenowtalkingaboutisgettingpermittingforasmallduckpond,foralittlekiteboarding,foralittleclubhouseandforrestoringmostoftheislandtotidalconditions.

Ifapenaltyisimposedwerequestthatitshouldbepaidoutoverfiveyears.Mr.SweeneydoesnothavethemoneytopayanypenaltyofanysubstantialsizenowanditshouldbereducedformoneyspentonrestoringtheIsland.

Wearenotaskingthatitbereducedformoneyspentoncreatinganewduckpondbutcertainlyforrestorationbecausewhatmoneyisavailable,andthereisnotmuchmoneyavailable,itshouldbedevotedtorestoringtheisland.Thatseemstobethemainwaytoprotectandimprovetheenvironment.

TheEnforcementCommitteesuggesteda$450,000settlementandwehavebeentalkingalittlebitwithstaffaboutthat.Ithinkstaffisinterestedinyourdirectionaboutwhetherstaffshouldproceedalongthoselines.Werequestthatyougivestaffthatdirection.

Ontheproposedpenalties,thehighestadministrativepenaltyeverimposedbythisCommissionwas$220,000.Itwasrequiredtobepaidoverfiveyears.Thatiswherewegotthefiveyearsfrom.

Sixofthetoptenpenaltieswere$50,000orless.Infourofthosepenaltiestherewerewaivers.Intwocasesthepenaltywascompletelywaivedandtheothertwoitwaspartlywaivedandthatiswherewegetthewaiverfrom.

Wehaveheardthatthemaximumallowedis$30,000perviolation.Someofthepenaltieshereareforthingslikeremovalofabrokentidegate,forparkingtrailers,forexcavationofsmallponds.Bytheway,onthreeofthemwedisagree.Twooftheproposedpenaltiesareforfill-relatedtoroads.Buttherehasnotbeenfillonthoseroads.Ifthereareroadsthere,thedeadvegetationwasknockeddownbythedrivingbackandforth.Butthoseroadshavenotbeengradedorfilled.

Ononeofthem,asecondtidegate;theaccusationisthathereplacedthetidegate,Ithinkinstalledanewone,butinstead,whathedidwasherepairedtheflapsattheendofthetidegate.

Theproposedpenalty,theleveerepairisnow$210,000sothatissevenviolationsbuttheyareevenmorefortrailersandcontainers,fourcrescentpondsat$30,000apondforinterioruse,$120,000,andforthedock$60,000.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

14

ComparedwithotherpenaltiesintheSuisunMarsh,nopenaltyhaseverbeenimposedonaduckclub.NopenaltyhaseverbeenimposedfortrailersandcontainersinSuisunMarsh.

AndpreviouscounselforMr.Sweeneysubmitted67photographsshowinghugenumbersofcontainersandtrailersatmany,manyduckclubs.Inthisphotothereare20shippingcontainersand12trailers.Inthisonetherearesevenshippingcontainersandonetrailerandinthisonetherearebunkhousesandshippingcontainers.

Wesawthattheclubhouseareaconsistedofflatbeds,containersandtrailers.Thatisreallyonearea.Thatisonefacility.Itshouldbeonepenaltyatmost,noteight.

Thecrescentponds;theonlypurposeforthosepondswastocreateduckponds.Treeswereplanted,decoyswereinstalled.Thetreesdied.Theduckpondsweretoosmall.Mr.Sweeneyisanenthusiast.HelovestheMarshandhewantstorestoreaduckclubbutheisnotanexpertatit.

Theduckpondsareimportant.Theyareenvironmentallyimportant.TheSuisunMarshProtectionPlanandtheU.S.G.S.saythatwaterfowlpreferduckpondsovernaturalmarshandthatisbecausevegetationisgrownthatprovideduckfood.Mr.Sweeneybroughtadiscandaroller.Heintendedtodiscthesoilandplantduckfoodandthenrollit.Henevergotaroundtothat.TheAgencysteppedinandtoldhimtostop.Duckpondsarevital.ThisisalsofromtheSuisunMarshProtectionPlan.Theyarecriticalhabitatsandtheydeservespecialprotection.Diggingforsmallduckpondsshouldnotbea$120,000violation.Theharmcreatedbytheseduckponds;nonehasbeenidentifiedinthestaffreport.

Fortheinterioruse,wedisagreewiththeclaimthatfillwasplacedtomaketworoads.Wethink$60,000.00ofthepenaltyshouldbedropped.

Vegetation;therewasvegetationthatwascut.Mostofitgrewback;notallofit.Thereisapenaltyforthat.Thereisnocomparison.Wedonotknowofanyothercasewherepeoplehavebeenpenalizedforcuttingvegetation.

Kiteboarding;andthisisjustfortherecreationalact,a$30,000penalty.Wedonotthinkpeopleshouldbepenalizedforrecreation.Wehavenotfoundanycomparisonandthereisnoharmthathasbeenidentified.

Thedockthatreplacedanexistingdock;itwasonedockcuttoconformtothepiers.NoenforcementagainstdockselsewhereintheMarsh.

Thelegalissues;wethinktherearemanylegalissues.FirstofalltherearethepenaltyfactorsthatIthinkyouareawareof.TheCommissionisrequiredtolookintomanykindsofpenaltyfactors.Iamjustgoingtofocusontwo,thegravityofthesituation,oftheactivity,andtheabilitytopay.Thegravityoftheharmwasnotconsideredformostpenalties.Andtheyareobviouslynotgrave;kiteboarding,tidegates,parkingtrailers,thingslikethat.

Theabilitytopay;Mr.Sweeneyhaslittlecashandnoincome.Hehassomeotherassetsbuttheyarenotliquid;onethatwasidentifiedintheEnforcementCommitteeisalandingcraftlistedfor$895,000forthreeyears.Ithasnotsold.Thepricehasbeenreducedto$850,000butitisavaluableasset.Itisworthsomethingbutitishardtosaywhatitisworthbecausenooneisbuyingit.Itisnotveryliquid.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

15

Mr.Sweeneyneedsmoneytorestoretheisland.Heneedstobeabletoraisethemoneytoimplementtherestorationplan.Hedoesnothavethecashtopayapenaltynow.Forcinghimtopaymoneynowdoesnotdoanygood.Itjustinterfereswithhisabilitytorestoretheisland.Thatiswhyweareaskingforpenaltiestobepaidovertime.

Wethinkthereisnoliabilityhere,atleastonmanyoftheseforvariousreasons.Insomeofthemtherewassubstantialchangeinuseasserted.Wedonotthinkanychangesaresubstantial.

TherehasbeensometalkabouttheexemptionforworkspecifiedinanIMPoraclubplan.The29508Mr.Zeppetelloreferredto;nopermitrequiredforrepair,replacement,reconstructionormaintenance,wethinkthisfitsexactly.Itiscertainlyreplacementorreconstruction.Thereisnothingthatsaystheleveehastobeintheexactsamefootprint.Andthereasonitwasnotintheexactsamefootprintisbecausetheislanderodedaway.Wheretherewasnotabaseoftheleveetoaddto,Mr.Sweeneywentinland.

Butagain,herewearetalkingaboutwhatshouldbe,atmost,oneviolation.

Initially,thiswasnotseenasthemostegregioussituationthatevertookplacethatwouldrequirethelargestpenaltyever.StaffsawtheleveerepairinMarch2014whenitwasjustbeginning.Theydidnotcomment.TheyknewMr.Sweeney.Theyhadhisphonenumber.Theycouldhavecalledhimup.Theydidnot.

WhentheyfinallyvisitedtheislandathisinvitationinNovember,whentheleveerepairwasessentiallycomplete,thestaffsaidtherepairwasokayifitwasconsistentwiththeClubPlan.ItwasonlyinJanuary2015thatstafffirstsaid,youcannotdowhatyouaredoing.Sothisdidnotjumpoutearlyonasbeingamajorproblem.

Inearly2015,theCorpsshowedupanditofferedanafter-the-factpermit.IthadMr.Sweeneysignsomeformsandittookitback.Thosewerenotprocessed.Butatthetimeinearly2015,theCorpsalsodidnotthinkthiswasamajorissue.

Thereisevidenceintherecordthatanotherduckclubhadleveesthathadbeenbreachedfor15years;staffsaying,noproblem,youhaveanothersixmonthstorepair.

TheonlytimeweheardofpenaltieswasafterwefiledthelawsuitagainsttheRegionalBoard.TheRegionalBoardstaffissuedacleanupandabatementorderinSeptember2015anditdidnotcomplywithdueprocessrequirements.Weletthatgoandtriedtonegotiateuntiltherewasarefusaltoextendtime.Andthentoavoidviolatingthecleanupandabatementorderwehadtofilesuitandgetastay.

SowefiledsuitandgotastaybecausetheCourtagreedwithus.ThestaywasissuedonDecember29th;onJanuary5ththeRegionalBoardstaffrescindedthecleanupandabatementorderandonJanuary7thaccordingtotheRegionalBoard’srecordstherewasathreehourmeetingandcallwithotheragenciesandwiththeconsultants,someofwhoseworkyouhaveheardheretoday;wethinkBCDCwasthere–wedonotknowbecausewehavenotseenanyofthedocumentation;butthat,asfaraswecantell,wastheinitiationoftheprocessthatledtothepenaltyproposalsinMayandthatgotusheretoday.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

16

ItsureseemstohavebeenmotivatedtobearesponsetooursuitagainsttheRegionalBoard.AndthatraisesissuesrelatedtoconstitutionalrightsandIwouldthinkthatitalsosendsthewrongmessage,thatifwefilesuittoprotectourconstitutionalrightsthereshouldnotbeanypenaltyforthat.

ThelegalissuesarecalledFirstAmendmentRetaliationorConstitutionalVindictivenessthatisrelatedtorespondingtothelawsuit.

ThereisalsotheproblemherebecauseMr.Sweeneyisaperson.Heisnotacorporation.Hedoesnothaveabigincomestreamthathecanpaythispenaltyoutjustbytakingalittlebitoffhisprofits.WhatyouaredoingalongwiththeRegionalBoardistryingtotakeawayeverythinghehasandthatraisesallkindsofconstitutionalprotectionsusuallyforcriminalpenalties.

AndtheyshouldapplyherebecauseoftheextremenatureofthepenaltyinconjunctionwiththeRegionalBoard’spenaltyonMr.Sweeney’sassets.AndneitherstaffherenortheRegionalBoardassertthathecanpaythetwopenalties.

Onthesettlementproposal,the$450,000,wecamebacktotheEnforcementCommitteeandsaidwewouldsettlefor$450,000withconditions–theconditionswerefiveyearsandcredit.Wehavebeentalkingwithstaffnowaboutworkingoutthedetails.ButasIsay,staffwantsyourdirectionandwethinkyoushouldaskthemtocontinuetodiscusssettlement.

ChairWassermancontinued:WedohavesomepublicspeakersandwewillhearthembeforewegointoquestionsandcommentsfromtheCommissioners.

Ms.NicoleSasakiwasrecognized:IamanassociateattorneywithSanFranciscoBaykeeper.BaykeeperhasmonitoredtheillegalfillactivitiesatPointBucklerIslandandtheenforcementactionsbyboththeRegionalWaterQualityControlBoardandBCDC.

Weappreciatetheagencieseffortstorestoretheisland’stidalmarshlands.WhileBaykeepersupportstheadoptionofBCDC’sceaseanddesistorderfortheallegedviolationsoftheMcAteer-PetrisActandtheSuisunMarshPreservationActattheIsland;wedisagreewiththeEnforcementCommittee’sdecisiontoreducestaff’soriginallyproposedcivilpenaltyof$952,000to$772,000.

BaykeeperbelievesthatstaffproperlycountedtheplacementoffilltoclosetheseventidalleveebreachesassevenseparateanddistinctviolationsoftheMcAteer-PetrisAct.Lumpingtogetherseveralsimilarviolationsandthencountingthemasasingleviolationinordertostrikeacompromisesendsthewrongmessagetorespondentsinthismatterandfuturemattersalike.

IllegallyfillingtheseventidalleveebreachesandcuttingofftidalactiontotheIslandwasarguablyrespondent’smostegregiousactioninthismatterandshouldnotbeimproperlydiscounted.

WetlandsandtidalmarshesarevitaltoahealthyBayecosystem.TheywillplayanessentialroleintheBayArea’sresiliencytosealevelrise.Wecannotsitidlybyandletexistingtidalmarshlandbeillegallyfilled.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

17

BCDCneedstomakeitcleartothepublicthatillegallyfillingwetlandsandtidalmarshlandsisunacceptableandsuchactionwillnotbetolerated.

Inclosing,BaykeeperappreciatesBCDC’sactiontoprotectandrestorePointBucklerIslandandweaskthattheCommissionersadopttheEnforcementCommittee’srecommendationsandconsideradoptingstaff’soriginallyproposedcivilpenalty.Thankyou.

Dr.StuartSiegeladdressedtheCommission:IwastheleadauthorforthetechnicalassessmentworkthathasbeendoneonbehalfoftheRegionalWaterBoard.

PrimarilyIwanttoletyouknowthatIamavailableheretodaytoanswerquestionsforyou.Idowanttomakeacommentaboutthisideaofchangeinuse.ThelasttimethetidalmarshesinSuisunweredikedforanyotherlandusewasabout100yearsago.Ithinkintermsoftheseverityofthischangeinuse,IwanttobringthattotheattentionoftheCommissioners.Thankyou.

DyanWhytecommented:IamwiththeSanFranciscoBayRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard.IamtheAssistantExecutiveOfficerandIserveastheprosecutionteamleadforthismatter.

InAugusttheWaterBoardadoptedacleanupandabatementorder.AndinadoptingthatordertheyfoundthatJohnSweeneyandPointBucklerClubviolatedstatewaterqualitydischargeprohibitionsandtheCleanWaterActbydischargingfillintoapproximatelythreeacresoftidalwetlandsandchannelsandcontributingtothedegradationof27acresoftidalmarshhabitat.

Iamheretoemphasizetoyoutheharmtowaterqualityandassociatedbeneficialuses.

AsyouknowSuisunBayisintheDelta.TheDeltaisrecognizedasoneofthemostsignificantestuariesinNorthandSouthAmerica,onthewesterncoastlines.

Andwhenyoublockoffthesetidalchannels,whatMr.Sweeneyisdoing,andthisactionhasblockedoffover10,000feetoftidalchannels,aboutfivepercentofthetidalchannelsinthearea;thesechannelsserveastheareawhensalmonareheadingouttotheGoldenGate,thisiswheretheystop,theyrest,theyfeed,theygettheirfoodreserves.Thisiswherethelongfinsmeltspawn.ThesearethechannelsthatexportfoodandnutrientsintotheBay,feedingtheDeltasmelt.

TheDeltarightnowisatareallyecologicallybalanceddelicatebalance,andweareheretodowhatwecantopreserveandprotectthat.Thankyouforyourtime.

ChairWassermancontinued:Questions,commentsfromCommissioners?

CommissionerMcGrathcommented:Justtoremindusthatwearedealingwiththerecordthatwehave.Ithasampleevidencebothabouttheimpact,andsecondIwanttotalkaboutafewofthefalseequivalenciesthathavebeenmadebytherepresentativeofthelandowner.

Thisisnotatallcomparabletotalkaboutinstallationofatraileroracontaineronasitewhichishighanddrytoasitethatisinamarsh.Whatwesawtodayandtheevidencebeforeuswasthattheentiretyoftheislandwassubjecttoourjurisdictionandwetlands.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

18

AndasDyanWhytesaid,thissystemhadsubstantialvalueforendangeredspecies,butthecirculationwithinthissystemwasalsovitaltothehealthofthosespeciesandalsothevegetation.

IwasstruckbyoneofthecommentsbyMr.Sweeney’srepresentative,thatMr.Sweeneyisnotanexpertatthis.TobegintodoconstructiononthisscalewithoutconsultationwithexpertswhenyouarealreadyalittlebitsidewayswiththeCorpsonyouractionsonanotherislandandwherethereisarequirement,ifyouaregoingtousetheargumentthatthereisaplaninplaceandthattheSuisunManagementAreaorwhatevertheparentorganizationthatismanagingthese;andtonotconsultwiththemisperhapsalittlemoreegregiousthanjustnotbeinganexpert.

Andthenfinally,thecommentaboutkiteboarders;manyofyouknowthatIamontheSanFranciscoBoardSailingAssociationandIrepresentwindsurfers,kiteboardersandstanduppaddlersintryingtosecureandimproveaccessandmaintainaccessaroundtheBay.IfthiswasamatterofsomebodyticketingawindsurferforwindsurfingsomewhereintheBay,evensomewherearguablysensitive,Iwouldbearguingagainstanypenaltiesforthat.ThereareargumentsundertheStateConstitutionaboutrightstousethenavigablewaters.Andwherethoserightshavebeenchanged,andIhavebeeninvolvedinanumberofoccasionswherethatusedoesresultinimpacts,theagenciesgothroughaprocess.Iamconfidentthatthisisnotamatterofsomeonebeingpunishedforwindsurfing.Thisisamatterofinstallationoffacilitiesinawetlandtoencouragekiteboardingandthatistheissue.

IamcomfortablewiththeactionsoftheEnforcementCommittee.WecouldgetintofinancialquestionsbutthereisnottherecordbeforeusandIthinktherecordthatisbeforeusiscertainlysufficienttojustifyasubstantialpenalty.

AsafinalpointIwouldnotethatconstructiondidnotstopwhenfirstnoticed.Andthatwouldmakebothresolutionoftheviolationsandthequestionofpenaltiessubstantiallylessonerous.

MOTION:CommissionerBatesmovedapprovaloftherecommendation,secondedbyCommissionerWagenknecht.

VOTE:Themotioncarriedwithavoteof16-0-2withCommissionersBates,Scharff,DeLaRosa,Gibbs,Peskin,Pemberton,McGrath,Nelson,Randolph,Sartipi,Sears,Vasquez,Techel,Wagenknecht,ViceChairHalstedandChairWassermanvoting,“YES”,no“NO”,votesandCommissionersGalacatosandBrushabstaining.CommissionersGalacatosandBrushrepresentFederalAgencies.

10. PublicHearingandPossibleVoteontheSanFranciscoBayAreaWaterEmergencyTransportationAuthority(WETA)andPortofSanFrancisco’sApplicationforPermitApplicationNo.2016.001.00forExpansionofWaterTransitandEmergencyEvacuationFacilitiesandPublicAccessAmenitieswithintheSanFranciscoFerryTerminal,intheCityandCountyofSanFranciscoChairWassermanannounced:Item10isapublichearingandvoteontheWETAandPortofSanFranciscoproposedexpansionofferryterminals,emergencyevacuationfacilitiesandpublicaccessattheSanFranciscoFerryTerminal.JhonArbelaez-NovakwillintroducetheprojectforBCDC.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

19

CoastalProgramAnalystArbelaez-Novakpresentedthefollowing:OnNovember4thyouweremailedastaffsummaryonBCDCpermitapplicationNo.2106.001.00fortheproposedexpansionoftheSanFranciscoFerryTerminallocatedatthesouthbasinadjacenttotheFerryBuildingonitssouthside.

TheprojectislocatedentirelyinyourBayjurisdiction.

Theco-applicants,theSanFranciscoBayAreaWaterEmergencyTransportationAuthorityorWETAandthePortofSanFranciscoproposetoaddtwoferrygates,realignanexistinggateandinstallfacilitiesforvesseldockingandpassengerboarding,cueingandcirculation.TheprojectwouldremovePier2ontopofwhichSinbad’sRestaurantusedtositandincludenewandexistingmaintenancedredgingwithdisposaltooccuratthefederaloceandisposalsitelocatedoutsideoftheCommission’sjurisdictionoratthepermittedMontezumaWetlandsBeneficialReuseRestorationsiteinSolanoCounty.A10,000footopen-waterlagoonwouldbefilledtocreatetheproposedEmbarcaderoPlaza.Thismapshowsthegeneraldetailsoftheproject.Itshowstheexistingareasthatwouldberetainedandimprovedandthenewareas.PublicaccessisrequiredandwouldbeimprovedunderadifferentBCDCpermit.Pier2wouldberemovedandtheeastBaysidePromenadewouldbeaddedalongwiththeEmbarcaderoPlaza.TheproposedfacilityisdesignedtowithstandamajorearthquakeandalsowouldserveasanemergencyevacuationareathereforeWETAandthePortdevelopedaplantoaccesstheterminaliftheseawallcollapsesduringanearthquake.

Inthestaffsummaryprovidedtoyouitwasmentionedthattheapplicantswouldnotinstallseismicinstrumentationintheproposedferryterminal.Thatissuehasnowbeenresolved.TheproposedprojectwillincludeseismicinstrumentationtoprovideinformationontheeffectsofearthquakesonallkindsofsoilstotheCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey.Theexpectedlifeoftheprojectis50yearsthereforetheprojectistobeconstructedatanelevationabovethe100yearfloodlevelandfuturesealevelriseestimatesfor2068.Theprojectwouldresultinapproximately28,000squarefeetofBayfill.TheapplicantsproposetoremoveanequalamountoffillataformerterminalinthecityofRichmond;aprojectmanagedbytheCoastalConservancy.Consequently,theprojectwouldresultinnonetincreaseoffillintheBay.Theprojectincludespublicaccessimprovementscreatedinpartbyfillinga10,000squarefootopen-waterlagoonjustsouthoftheFerryBuilding.ThenewEmbarcaderoPlazawouldhaveamphitheater-styleseating,lightinganddecorativepaving.Theadjacenteastsidepromenadewillbeestablishedprimarilyforcueingferrypassengersandwillhaveprotectivecanopies,seatingandtrashcans.AnewoverlooktoseetheBayBridge,YerbaBuenaIslandandTreasureIslandwouldalsobeconstructed.Intotal,theprojectwillresultinapproximately36,000squarefeetofnewandimprovedpublicaccess.TheapplicantshaveappliedtousethenewlyfilledareathatreplacesthelagoontoexpandtheFarmersMarket.

RegulatoryDirectorBradMcCreaaddressedtheCommission:Normallywewouldhavethestaffpresentationfollowedbytheapplicants’projectpresentationandthenpubliccommentandthenastaffrecommendation.Thereasonthatwearedoingitslightlyoutoforderisbecausetherehasbeensomelast-minutenegotiatingaroundtheconditionsofapprovalthatareinyourstaffrecommendation.WewillgivetheapplicantsamomenttospeakbuttheyaskedthatIclarifysomethingaheadofthemspeaking.Thematterthatwearediscussingistheuseofthe

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

20

EmbarcaderoPlazafortheusesofaFarmersMarket.Intheoriginalrecommendationbeforeyouwethoughtthatawaitingperiodwouldbeprudent;an18monthwaitingperiodwherenouseofthePlazawouldtakeplace.Wewouldevaluatehowitworked,afterwhichwewouldrecommendthatyouentertainpossiblyanamendmenttothepermitfortheuseofthePlazaforaFarmersMarket.

Indiscussionswiththepermitteeswehavecometoanewrecommendationthatwillincludea12monthevaluationoftheEmbarcaderoPlazaforFarmersMarketuseonTuesdaysonly.ThatwouldbefollowedbyanothersixmonthsofevaluatingtheEmbarcaderoPlazaforaFarmersMarketonSaturdaysonly.Followingthatwewillrecommendthatyouauthorizeasixmonthgraceperiodduringwhichthestudyresultswillbereviewedandapermitamendmentmaybeconsideredduringthatperiod.Soitwouldbea24monthreviewandgraceperiod.Youwillhearmoreaboutthisasthisunfolds.AtthispointIwouldliketohaveJhonfinishupwiththedetailsoftheprojectandthenhavetheapplicantpresentitsproject.Thankyou.

Mr.Arbelaez-Novakcontinued:SincemailingthestaffsummaryonNovember4thseveralminorerrorshavebeendiscoveredthatneedcorrecting.IhaveindicatedintheerratasheetprovidedtoyouthattheseincludetheremovalofarecommendationoftheNationalMarineFisheriesServiceregardingrestorationoflistedfishspecieshabitatwhichtheapplicantisnotproposingtoimplementaswellasgrammaticalandspellingerrors.

InconsideringtheproposedprojecttheCommissionshouldassesswhethertheprojectmeetsthedesignatedusesandpoliciesoftheSpecialAreaPlan,meetsthelawsofpoliciesoffillrequirementsincludingwhethertheproposedfillwouldbeconstructedinaccordancewithsoundsafetystandards,isconsistentwiththeBayPlanpoliciesontransportation,isconsistentwithBayPlanpoliciesonnaturalresourcesincludingwaterquality,fish,otheraquaticorganismsandwildlife,isconsistentwiththeBayPlanpoliciesondredgingandmaterialdisposal,providesmaximumfeasiblepublicaccessconsistentwiththeprojectandisdesignedandwouldbemanagedtoberesilientandadapttoimpactsofsealevelrise.IwouldliketointroduceMichaelGoughertywithWETAandDanHodappwiththePort.

Mr.GoughertyaddressedtheCommission:IwanttoacknowledgethatwehavemembersourprojectteamfromWETAandthePorthereaswell.IamtheProjectManagerwiththePortofSanFrancisco.

Ihavebeenonthisprojectsinceitsinceptionin2010.ThisprojecthasbeenaclosepartnershipbetweenWETAandthePortofSanFrancisco.TheSanFranciscoBayFerryisknownastheWaterEmergencyTransportationAuthority.ThelastpartofthepresentationwillbemadebyDanHodappwiththePortofSanFrancisco.

SanFranciscoBayFerryisoneoftwoagenciesthatoperatepublicferryserviceonSanFranciscoBayinadditiontotheGoldenGateFerryService.WeoperatefourroutesthreeofwhichservetheSanFranciscoFerryBuilding.Overthelastfouryearsourridershiphasincreased77percent.ThishasbeenagreatproblemforusbecausetheresourcesthatarelimitedattheFerryBuildinghavereallybeentaxedandaffectourabilitytoincreaseserviceandmeetdemandforthoseservices.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

21

Wehaveanambitiousexpansionplanwhichyouwillbeseeingmoreofoverthenextfewyears.WehaveourRichmondFerryTerminalprojectscheduledtoopenin2018andshouldbecomingbeforetheCommissioninthenextfewmonths.WealsohaveaprojectthatwearepartneringwiththecityofAlamedaon;theSeaplaneLagoon.Thisprojectisslatedtoopenin2020andhasalreadygonetoyourDesignandReviewBoard.ThereistheTreasureIslandprojectwhichisanewprojectisunderdevelopmentwhichisapartnershipbetweenandthePortofSanFranciscoandtheMissionBayFerryTerminalproject.ThestartdateofthisistobedeterminedandthePortwillbeinitiatingtheBCDCpermittingprocessinthenear-termfuture.

InadditiontoterminalexpansionprogramwealsohaveasuiteofcapitalimprovementprojectswhichwerefertoasourCoreSystemEnhancementProgram.Thisconsistsofthreeprojects;twoofthesehavealreadycomebeforetheCommissioninthelasttwoyears;ourNorthBayandCentralBayOperationsandMaintenancefacilities.Thesearecurrentlyunderconstruction.Thethirdprojectinthesuiteistheprojectbeforeyoutoday;itisourDowntownFerryTerminalexpansionproject.

Asawholethistrioofprojectsrepresentsourinitiativetoprovidetheinfrastructurethatweneedtomeetthedemandfortheexistingservices,accountfortheincreasedcapacityneededtoimplementtheexpansionservicesandrealizethemandateofthe“E”inourname;theEmergency.ItwillgiveusthecapacityweneedindowntownSanFranciscotofillouremergencyresponserequirementstoprovidetransitserviceintheeventoftheaftermathofamajorearthquake.

ThecurrentterminalconsistsoffacilitiesoperatedbyWETAthatwerebuiltin2003bythePortofSanFrancisco.Duetoourincreaseinridershipwehaveexpandedservice.Mostofourcommuteservicesnowoperateon30minuteheadwaysduringthepeakinsteadof60minutes.Thatistaxedatthelandsideexistingcapacitytosupportthewaitingandcueingofpassengersbutalsoonthewaterside.Wearerunningoutofberthspacetoaddtheadditionalvesselsthatweneedtomeetdemandfortheexistingservicesandcertainlytheplannedexpansionservices.AspartoftheworkthatthePortdidin2003thatworkincludedtheconstructionoftheexistingfacilitiesbutalsocontemplationofamasterplanfortheultimatebuild-outofthefacility.WETAastheagencythatsecuredfundingforthatphaseofworkhastakentheworkthatthePortdidin2003andadvancedthatintoamasterplanforthebuild-outofthefacility.Alotofconditionshavechangedsincethosefacilitieswerebuiltin2003andcertainlysincetheGoldenGatefacilitieswerebuiltinthe60s.Evensince2003theareahasbecomemuchmoretrafficked,muchmoreintenselyusedcreatinganewdesignchallengeforourprojectthatwasnotquiteessentialtothe2003improvements.

WeneedtobuildanddesignthisfacilitytonotonlymeettheneedsofferryusersbuttoaccommodatetheneedsofotherusersoftheFerryBuildingareamorethanever.MovingforwardwiththeMasterPlanwehavesecuredfundingtobuildthesouthbasincomponentsoftheprojectandthatistheprojectthatisincludedinthepermitbeforeyoutoday.TheothercomponentoftheMasterPlanforexpansionincludesGateEinthenorthbasin.ThisisaprojectthatWETAwouldpursueasdemandwarrantsinthefutureandwouldbepartofaseparatepermitapplication.TheDemolitionPlanincludestheremovalofPier2whichwasarequirementoftheoriginalDowntownFerryTerminalproject.Anotherkeypartofthepre-constructionphase

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

22

oftheprojectwillbeprotectingthehistoricalresourcesinthearea.TheseincludetheAgricultureBuildingwhichisinaveryvulnerablecondition,theseawallwhichisinequallyvulnerableconditioninadditiontotheFerryBuildingandothercomponentsoftheHistoricDistrictinthearea.

TheConstructionPlancallsfortheconstructionoftwonewgates;wearecallingthesegatesFandG.Thiswilltripletheberthingcapacitywehaveavailableinthesouthbasin.WealsowillbeexpandingthedeckspacesavailablefortheFerryTerminalandtheseincludeanewpromenadeareaontheBaysideoftheAgricultureBuildingaswellaswhatwearecallingtheEmbarcaderoPlaza;anewdeckthatwouldcoverthelagoon.Thiswouldgiveusthelandsidecapacityweneedtosupportthewaitingandcueingoffutureferrypassengersofthefacility.

Alltheseimprovementswouldbedesignedandbuilttoessentialfacilitystandard,whichmeanswewouldexpectthemtobeoperationalinthelikelyaftermathofanearthquake.CanopiesareaneededcomponentintermsofweatherprotectionandweworkedcloselywiththeDRBinproposingourcurrentconceptforthese.Wefeelwehaveasolutionherethatworksforpassengersaswellastheaestheticsandviewqualitiesofthearea.

Thecanopieswillalsofeatureanarrayofsolarpanelsontop,whichwilloffsettheexpectedenergyconsumptiongeneratedbytheproject.WeraisedthenewplazaasameanstoaddresstheCommission’ssealevelriserequirements.Weputalotofeffortindoingthisinadelicateandartfulway.Wehavecreatedraisedseatinginanamphitheater-stylefashion.Thismeetsthesealevelriserequirementsandalsoprovidesanewandinterestingpublicseatingspace.OurarchitecthasdevelopedaneatdesignconceptforthePlazawhereitfeaturesanoutlineoftheSanFranciscoBayArea.Ithasaverypleasingdesignaesthetic.

OurinterestasWETAintheprojectwastodesignaprojectthatfirstandforemostmettheneedsofourferryusers;currentandfuture.Thisisaveryheavilytraffickedareawithamultitudeofusers.WehaveworkedcloselywiththePortofSanFranciscotoensurethatwhiletheneedsofferryusersaremetatthefacility,wecouldalsoincorporatedesignandprogrammingaspectsthatencouragemaximumpublicuseandeventprogrammingtotheextentpossible.

Mr.DanHodappaddressedtheCommission:IamwiththePortofSanFrancisco,thePlanningandDevelopmentDivision.Iamhonoredtobepartofthisveryexcitingproject.Ithasbeenalongtimecominganditisagreatthing.FromthePort’spointofviewthisprojectreallyaccomplishesthreethings.ThefirstthingitaccomplishesisithelpssolidifytheveryauthenticuseofferryserviceattheDowntownFerryTerminal.ThisreallyhelpsanchortheexistingFerryBuildingandweareveryproudtobepartofthat.Thesecondthingitdoesisitmakesridingtheferryapleasantexperiencewhetherwearegoodeconomictimesornotsogoodtimes.Thisprojectismeanttolastandisdesignedforsealevelrise.Thethirdthingitwilldoisprovidegreatpublicspacesandgreatpublicaccess.ThePortislookingattheentireFerryBuildingareainalargerviewthanjustthisproject.Thisisonenewplazaanditisanactivityarea.ThereisaFarmersMarketbehindthebuildingonSaturdaysandithas220deliveryvehiclesonadailybasis.Thereareplacesinfrontofthebuildingthathaverestaurantuses,theytransition,theychangeandtherearesomeprimarypedestriancirculationareas.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

23

TheEmbarcaderoPromenadeatthebottomofthescreenisaveryheavilyusedpedestrianarea.Thisprojectcreatesanotherpromenadethatextendsalongthebackofthebuilding.Wearetryingtofigureouthowthisplazafitsintothatmix.Mostofthepublicaccessinthisprojectwillbenewpublicaccessaddedtotheexistingpublicaccess.Theamphitheater-styleseatingwillaccommodate445people.Belowthepassengershelterstherewillbeanadditionalbenchseatingof120people.Thisprojectisbringing565newseatstothisarea.

TheMarketbringsanaverageofabout23,000peopletothewaterfrontonaSaturday.PeoplecomefortheMarketbuttheyalsocomefortheBay.Theycomebecausetherearebothofthemthereandthatisaverycompatiblebenefit.Weexpectmoreofthemtobecomingbyferryinthefuture.ItwillbeaneasydestinationfromacrosstheBayandfromotherparts.Someofthecomponentsofmakingagreatpublicspaceareadequateseating,sunlight,anidentityofwhatitisandacultureofactivitiesthathappenonit.

ThePorthasproblemswithsomeofitspublicspaceswhereoneusergroupoccupiesittothedetrimentofothers.Wearetalkingabouthowthisphenomenatakesplaceandwhatwearehopingtodowitharotatingmarketuseisprovidingapublicspacethatchangesduringtheweekandthatnoonegroupgetsownershipandthatisknownforacultureofactivities.WeareveryhappytohaveworkedwithBCDCstaffandcomingupwithacompromisethatwecanreallysupportandlivewith.

Wewillcomebacktoyouandinformyouastowhatwethinkisworkingandaskforyourinput.Thatiswhatsomeofthepermitconditionsareabout.ThePortthinksitisimportanttoestablishthiscultureofactivitiesonthespace.Wewantittobeonethatchanges.Webelievethischange-of-usestrategywillbemoreequitableforallusers.

ChairWassermanannounced:Wewillopenthepublichearing.Ihaveafewpublicspeakercards.

Mr.LeeKofflercommented:IamaBoardMemberforCUESAwhichistheCenterforUrbanEducationforSustainableAgriculture.WeruntheFarmersMarketthatyouheardaboutinthelastpresentation.InadditiontobeingaBoardMemberresponsibleforthegovernanceoftheorganizationanditsconstituentsandasacustomeroftheFarmersMarketsIamalsoafatherandamarathonrunner.IbelievetheproposalthatthestaffhaspresentedtoyoutodayisagooduseofthePlaza.ThecurrentplazaareathatisnotbeingutilizediscompletelydifferentwhenitisFarmersMarketday.Itissofulloflifeandsomanyeducationalactivitiesaretakingplacethatlivenuptheareaandmakeitveryenjoyable.IwasthrilledtohearaboutthepotentialexpansionoftheseactivitiestothenewplazaandIamhopefulthatyouwillapprovewhatthestaffhasproposed.

Ms.MarcyCoburnwasrecognized:IamtheExecutiveDirectorofCUESA.ThankyouforconsideringthestaffrecommendationforthistrialexpansionoftheFarmersMarketontothisplaza.CUESAisdifferentfromalotoffarmersmarketorganizations.Wearenotafor-profitorganizationthathasmarketsallovertheBayArea.Wehavethisoneandwemayhavejust

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

24

begunoneinJackLondonSquare.Wehaveadifferentfocusandadifferentvisionthanotherfarmersmarketorganizations.Ourmissioniscultivateahealthyfoodsystemthroughtheoperationoffarmersmarketsbutalsothrougheducationalprogrammingwhichisquiteextensive.

Wehavea$2millionannualbudget.Weraisemoneythroughfundraising,grantsandprivatedonations.Thelion’sshareofthatmoneyisspentoneducationalprogrammingforelementaryschoolkids,forhighschoolkids,foradultswhowanttolearnaboutcookingandfarming,forfarmtours,forconnectingourfarmerstothelocalcommunity,educatingthemaboutwherefoodisgrown,howitisgrown,whereitcomesfromandtalkingaboutthehistoryofagricultureinthisarea.Wehaveoneofthebestfarmersmarketsintheworldandisregularlybroughtupinthepressandthemedia.

Thankyousomuchforthisopportunity.

Ms.JanetGriggscommented:IamapastpresidentofCUESA.Duringtheyearsofmytenureweworkedveryhardtocreateastrongorganizationwhosemissionwaseducation.Thisisanopportunitythatweallworkedfor.Wewholeheartedlysupportthestaffrecommendation.IamTreasurerofSSTravel.Theimportanceofthisproposaltoeducatingourtouristsandmakingthemawareofwhatisimportantwithrespecttoourfoodsystemshelpsthemtakethatmessagebackwiththemwhentheyreturnhome.

Mr.JonBallesteroswasrecognized:IrepresentSanFranciscoTravelAssociation.Wearehereinsupportoftheproposaltousetheraisedareaasaculinaryandfoodeducationalvenue.LastyearSanFranciscowelcomed24.6millionvisitorsandtheyspent$9.3billion.Thoseexpendituressupport75,500jobsandcontributemorethan$738milliontotheGeneralFundofSanFrancisco.

Weknowthatmorethan55percentofourvisitorsaredayvisitorsthatcomefromareas50milesorbeyondtheCitylimits.Forthesevisitorseducational,culturalandculinaryattractionsaremajordriversthatbringthemintotheCity.TheCUESAFarmersMarketisasignificantcontributortothisvisitorset.Weknowthat25percentoftheirpatronsarefromoutsideofSanFrancisco.

WebelievethattheproposaltousetheraisedplazatoexpandculinaryandfoodeducationopportunitieswillonlygreatlyenhancethevisitorexperienceofourCityoverall.ForthesereasonswehopethisCommissionwilllookfavorablyupontheproposal.Thankyou.

MarinaSecchitano,IamRegionalDirectoroftheInlandBoatmen’sUnion,wearetheMarineDivisionoftheILWUandwerepresentdeckhandsonferries.Wespeakinfavorofgrantingthispermit.Overthelastfouryearsourferryserviceshaveexpandedtremendously.Wehavedoubledourcrewsinthelastfewyears.Thesearegreatmiddleclassjobsforourmembers.Iamexcitedtoseeourvisioncomeintofruition.Wearehopefulthatwillmakethisagreatterminal.Thankyou.

ChairWassermancontinued:Thatconcludesthepublicspeakers.Iwouldentertainamotiontoclosethepublichearing.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

25

MOTION:CommissionerPeskinmovedtoclosethepublichearing,secondedbyCommissionerTechel.

VOTE:Themotioncarriedwithavoteof16-0-0withCommissionersBates,Scharff,DeLaRosa,Gibbs,Peskin,Pemberton,McGrath,Nelson,Randolph,Sartipi,Sears,Vasquez,Techel,Wagenknecht,Brush,ViceChairHalstedandChairWassermanvoting,“YES”,no“NO”,votesandnoabstentions.

CommissionerPeskinhadquestions:IhaveadesignquestionastothewherethePlazawillbe.IsthatatgradeattheeastsideorwhereistheADAaccessforthat?

Mr.Goughertyanswered:TherearetwoADAaccessramps.RaisingthePlazaforsealevelrisewhileconformingtothegradesoutsideoftheprojectwasachallenge.WehaveaccomplishedtheADAgradeaccessalongthedrivewayareabyGateE.

CommissionerPeskincontinued:SoattheeasternsideattheeastpromenadeatthebackofthePlazathosetwoareasarelevel?IsthatareaatthesamelevelasthePlazathere?

Mr.Goughertyreplied:Yes,correct.ThisspandownhereisatthesameelevationasthePlaza.

CommissionerPeskinasked:Relativetotheoff-sitefillremovalinRichmond;wasanyconsiderationgiventofillremovalwithintheSpecialAreaPlanarea?

Mr.Arbelaez-Novakexplained:TheSanFranciscoWaterfrontSpecialAreaPlanrequiresfillremovalwithinthegeneralnortheasternwaterfront.StaffaskedtheapplicantandthePorttosearchforopportunitiestodofillremovalintheareabuttheywerenotabletolocateanyopportunitiesorthefillwasalreadydesignatedforremovalforotherprojects.ThatiswhystaffacceptedfillremovaloftheTerminal4projectinRichmond.

CommissionerPeskinclarified:SoyouaresayingthatfromChinaBasintoFisherman’sWharfundertheSpecialAreaPlantherearenootherareasidentifiedforfillremoval?

Mr.Goughertyanswered:Thatiscorrect.WehadtheinitialproposaltoremovethefillthatwewereproposingtoremoveinRichmond.WetookittoBCDCstaffandtheystatedexactlywhatyouareasking,isn’ttheresomethinginSanFranciscoyoucanremove?WecoordinatedcloselywithseveraldepartmentsatthePortofSanFranciscoandthelikelyareasthatwerepotentialcandidatesforremovalhavealreadybeenspokenfor.

OnthescaleofwhatwewereproposingtoremoveasmitigationforthisprojectthePorthadnothingavailabletoofferandtheBCDCstaffconcurredwiththatfinding.

CommissionerPeskincontinued:CanwehearfromBCDCstaff?WhataboutPiers30,32?

ChiefofPermitsJaimeMichaelreplied:IwanttoreiteratewhatMikeGoughertysaidfromWETA.WedidaskthemiftheycouldremoveanythingfromthecityandthecountyofSanFranciscoandweheardbackthattherewasnothingavailable.TheproposalthatwegotwastoremovefillacrosstheBayinthecityofRichmondatTerminal4andweacceptedthatbecauseitwasafeasibleremovalalternative.Wedidnotexplore30/32.ThatwasnotpartoftheproposalfromWETA.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

26

CommissionerPeskinadded:IfwegobacktoearlyonintheWillTravisdaysandthetri-parttidebetweenSavetheBay,BCDCandthePortthatledtotheSpecialAreaPlancirca2000;IthinkthelasttimewereviewedwefoundthattheyhadbeenslowinmeetingcertaintermsoftheSpecialAreaPlanincludingbutnotlimitedtofillremovalwithinthePlanarea.ItseemsalittleoddtomethatBCDCstaffissaying,welltheysaidthattherewasnothingavailableandsoRichmondwasfine.

Haveyouindependentlyanalyzedwhetherornotyoubelievetobetrue?

Ms.Michaelanswered:Nowedidnot.IdowanttoaddthatapartoftheproposalistoremovePier2attheprojectsite;thepieronwhichSinbad’sRestaurantsits.

CommissionerPeskininterjected:IfIrecallcorrectlythatwaspartofaseparatepermitthatthisCommissionissued.Iamdelightedbythewholeproject.WealllovetheFerryBuilding.WealllovetheFarmersMarket.Thisisawater-orienteduse.AllofthatisgreatbutminusthefactthatthefillremovalwhichIbelieveshouldunderourPlanobjectivesbeinthePlanareaisontheothersideoftheBaymilesandmilesaway.

Ms.Michaelstated:OurpreferencewouldhavebeensomethinginthecityofSanFranciscoaswell.ThatiswhatthepoliciesrequirebutaccordingtobothoftheapplicantstherewasnothingintheCitytoremoveexceptforPier2whichisattheprojectsite.

CommissionerPeskinclarified:IusedtobeontheAdvisoryBoardofWETAorpre-WETA;WETAdoesnotcontrolsevenmilesofSanFrancisco’swaterfront,thePortofSanFranciscodoes.

Mr.Goughertycommented:BeyondjusthavingthesquarefootagebeavailablethisisarequirementnotonlyofBCDCbutalsooftheNationalMarineFisheriesServiceandweneedtoremovethefill.Sothishastobeaprojectthatcanbeaccomplishedwithinpriortothecompletionofconstruction.

Youmentioned30/32asapotentialoption.Ican’tknowforsurewhythatwasnotofferedtousasanoptionbutoneofthereasonsmayhavebeenitwasnotgoingtobefeasibletoremovepriortothecompletionofconstruction.

CommissionerPeskinhadmorequestions:WhataboutallofthederelictpilingsdownbyMissionBaysouthofMissionBay;allofthosedownbytheRampRestaurant?Havethosebeenremovedyet?

Mr.Goughertyreplied:Icannotanswer.MaybesomeonefromthePortcanspeakonthatone.

Mr.ByronRhettanswered:IamthePlanningandDevelopmentDirectorforthePort.Thosepilesinthatareathatyoujustreferredtoarebeingremovednowandarebeingremovedaspartofadifferentproject.

Wecanbeabletoprovidetostaffspecificallywhatfillisscheduledorplannedforremovalandunderwhatotherprojectswearedoingthatandbeclearwithstaffwhat,ifany,mightbeavailabletoaddressthis.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

27

Obviously,Piers30/32isalotlargerthantheamountoffillthatisrequiredtoberemovedforthisproject.Atthispointwedonothavetheresourcestoremove30/32;thatmighthavebeenwhyitwasnotconsideredbuttheremaybeotherfillthatmightbeavailableforthis.Thatissomethingwecouldprovidetoyourstaff.

ChairWassermanchimedin:Inthenatureofnewbusiness;outoforder,IwouldlikeforPortstaffandBCDCstafftoworktogetheranddoapresentationtousonpreciselythatissueincludingtheverydifficultissueofPiers30and32.

ViceChairHalstedcommented:IwouldliketosayhowpleasedIamthatthisprojectismovingaheadandIthinkitisgreatandsoistherightbalanceofpublicaccess.Ihopethattheexperimentwilldemonstrateagoodbalance.

IntheFerryBuildingweputinthatsignthatshowswhenferriesareleaving.Whatkindofsignageisbeingincorporatedintothisprojectthatwouldreflectthestyleandcontinuethatkindofthemeandinformationsothatpeopleknowwheretofindwhatferry?

Mr.Goughertyreplied:UnfortunatelyIamafraidasignlikethatwouldnotsurviveinthemarineconditions.WewereanearlyparticipantintheMTCHubSignageprogramandwefoundthattypologytoworkverywellforourterminals.Wewouldliketoexpandandcontinuethatsigntypology.

ViceChairHalstedstated:ThemajorthingIwasinvolvedwithwastryingtofindtherightlocationsforthemandwehadahardtimedoingthis.Iamconcernedthatwegetitdoneaswellaswecaninthesenewlocationsbeforewebuildit.

Mr.Goughertystated:Iwassomewhatinvolvedinthatprojectandthedifficultywaswewereplacingsignageintheleaseholdscontrolledbyothers.WeareworkingwiththePortforaninternalleasefortheproperties.WETAagreestoplacesignageonourownbehalfintheleasehold.

WeworkcloselywithMTC’sTransitandWayfindingCoordinatorthatadministerstheHUBSignageprogram.

ViceChairHalstedadded:ItisabigproblemintheBayAreaactually.ThislookslikeaninvitationtoskateboarderstomeandIdon’tthinkwearedesigningaskateboardpark.Iwonderhowyouarethinkingaboutthat.

Mr.Goughertyreplied:Thisisabsolutelyaconcern.YouseethishappenedveryclosetotheprojectareainthemedianoftheEmbarcadero.Oneofgoalsistoactivatethespacebeyondjustapublicaccessandpublicuseperspective.Weseehavingtrafficinthisspace,havingactivitiesplannedthereasanaturallow-impactdesignwaytopreventcertaingroupsfromtakingownershipofthefacility.Theskateboarders’ownershipofthisareawouldhaveadetrimenttothepublicatlarge.

Weseethisspacebeingthoroughlyactivatedduringitsusesforferryterminalpurposes.WehaveworkedcollaborativelywiththePorttoproposesomeusesthatwoulddisruptthespaceenoughtonotallowcertaingroupstoexpropriateit.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

28

ViceChairHalstedasked:Sothereisnophysicaldesignissue,whichwouldmakeitdifficultforskateboarderstodominateit?

Mr.Goughertyreplied:Wewillhavesomekindofskateboarderabatement;littlemetalnotches.Wewillhavesomehandrailsaswell.Ifthefacilityisnotoccupiedandactivatedasapublicspacetoprovidethekindofphysicaldesignobstaclesthatwouldeliminatethepotentialoftheskateboarduse;Iamnotsurethosewouldbecompatiblewithamulti-usepublicspace.

ViceChairHalstedadded:Iamnotsurewhattheansweris.Itisaconcernbecausetheycankeepotherpeopleawayandtheydodestroythings.

Mr.Goughertycommented:BCDCstaffandthePorthasmentionedthisevaluationperiodthatwearedoingwiththeFarmersMarket;oneofthethingswewillhaveanopportunitytolookatisthatitdoesnotjusthavetobeanevaluationoftheFarmersMarket,ourotherpublicusesofthespacebeingfunctioning,otherdesigntreatmentsthatwecandotomakeitabetterexperienceforeveryoneoneofwhichmaybesomedetrimenttoskateboarding.

ViceChairHalstedhadanotherquestion:WetalkabouttheMarketonTuesdaysandthenonSaturdays;theMarketisgenerallytherefrom9:00to2:00orso,isn’tit?

Mr.Goughertyanswered:Iamhearing10:00to2:00.

ViceChairHalstedcontinued:Soitisnotatthepeakrushhourfortheferriessoitnotasdisruptiveasthatperiodasitmightbe.

Mr.Goughertyadded:Onethingtoreinforcehere;WETAhasworkedverycloselywiththePortandthePortwasverycognizantthatthishastofunctionasaferriesfacilityfirstandforemost.WhiletheFarmersMarketisgoingtobeavailableonatrialbasis,thereareself-imposedparametersthatwehaveestablished.

ThereisaspatialparameterwheretheeventswillbelimitedtothePlazaarea.Therearetemporalrestrictionsaswell.Sotheyarenotgoingtobeabletooperatetheferryterminalduringthepeakhoursofcommute.

ViceChairhadadditionalcommentary:MyenthusiasmaboutthishastodoCUESA’sstrengthinprogramminganddoingagreatjobofpromotinglocalagriculture.IfitwereabunchofcoffeecartsandhotdogstandsIwouldnotfeelthesamewayaboutit.IaskCUESAnottoloseitsvaluesanditsconsistency.

CommissionerScharffspoke:Iamreallypleasedwiththenotionofactivatingthatspaceandhavinglotsofactivitythere.IdorunupanddowntheEmbarcaderoalotandIliketodothatandhavebreakfastattheFerryBuilding.Iwouldagreethatthisconcreteareabehindwhenitisnotbeingusedforanythingcanbealittledepressinglookingoutthereasopposedtowhenitisfullofactivity.

IhadsomerealconcernswithNo.5ontheSpecialConditions.IthoughtalotofthoseSpecialConditionswereunnecessaryandwoulddeactivatethePlazaanddeactivatethearearatherthanactivateit.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

29

Iunderstandwhyyouwouldnotwanttohaveprivateeventsbecausethatisantitheticaltotheideaofpublicaccess.Idonotthinkcommercialeventsareantitheticaltotheideaofpublicaccess;theyoftenbringlargenumbersofpeopledown.

Ireallytookissuewiththenotionofwhywouldwelimitlargepublicevents?Largepubliceventsbringlotsofpeople.Formethatispurelyanissueofwedon’twanttointerferewiththeferryoperationsbutIdon’tknowwhythatwouldhavetobesostringentastorequireCommissionapproval30daysbeforehandorthedesignee.

Isortoffeltthesamewayabouttablesandchairs.IthoughtweshouldbemuchmoreflexibleandstaffshouldbeencouragedtoactivatethePlazaandencouragedtobringasmanypeopledownthereaspossibleaslongaswedonotinterferewithferryoperations.Tomethatiswhatpublicaccessisallabout.

IthinkaboutthisintermsofwhatitislikeinmycityofPaloAlto.Whenwehaveapublicplazawhereweallownothingtooccuronitbecausethepublicissupposedtobethere,nooneactuallyusesit.Whenwehavetablesandchairssetupandweallowfoodthereisitwellactivated.

IalsothinkaboutEurope;whenyougototheirpublicplazastheyaremorefunthanourpublicplazasinAmerica.Theyhavetheserestaurantsringingthem.Thereisalotofactivity.

IactuallywouldtakeissuewithCondition5aswediscussit.

Mr.McCreacommented:Thechallengethatthestaffoftenfindsishowtofindthatbalancebetweendevelopingtheseareasforcommercialpurposestoactivatethemandconservingthemforthepublicaccessareasfortheuseofeveryone.

Thisbalanceissomethingthatweundertakeeveryday.InthisFerryBuildingareabythePort’sownwebsite15millionpeopletravelalongthiswaterfront.Threemillionpeopleadaypassthisareajustinfrontofthebuilding.

Theferrieswillbring28,000additionalpeopleaday.TheFarmersMarkethas23,000peopleonSaturdays.

ThestaffbelievesthatthisPlazashouldbeconservedforopenspace;thatinthisareaitisimportanttohaveareliefvalve,haveaspacewherepeoplecanjustrelaxandthatitdoesnotallhavetobeactivated.

However,wearewillingtoexploretheuseofthisintensiveFarmersMarketonthisPlazawhen23,000peoplearehereandthreeadditionalferriesarerunning.Wewillseehowitworks.

Thatisindependentfromalloftheotherthingsthatyoumentionedthatwecompletelysupportwhichistablesandchairs,vendorsthatcomeandgo,smallmusicaleventsanddifferenttypesofincidentalactivationthatdoesbringthelifetotheCityasopposedtolarge-scaleprogrammedregulareventsthatmayormaynothaveanadverseimpactonthepublicaccess.Andwewillfindoutoverthenextcoupleofyears.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

30

Ms.Michaelscommented:IwanttoclarifyonepointontheSpecialCondition;thatSpecialConditionisnotwrittentomeanthatwehavetobringeveryspecialeventandeverytableandchairbacktoyouforyourapproval.Wecandothatatthestafflevelbutwemakethatapprovalonyourbehalf.

CommissionerScharffopined:Iwouldsaythatitiswritteninawaythatseemstoindicatethatyoushouldnotdoitasopposedtobeingmoreopentoit.Thewayitiswrittenseemstobeverynegativetowardsthosetypesofevents.

CommissionerNelsonhadquestionsforstaff:Thefirstquestionforstaffisifyoucanwalkusthroughexactlyhowthegraceperiodworksandwhatsortofevaluationwillhelpusduringthatperioddeterminewhetherourexperimentshavesucceededorfailedwithpublicaccess.

Mr.McCrearesponded:IamgoingtostarttheAuthorizationSectiononpage3;wewilladdanauthorizationthatallowstheFarmersMarket.ItwillbeAuthorizationLanditwillsaysomethinglike,consistentwithSpecialConditionOusefor24monthstheEmbarcaderoPlazawillaccommodateaFarmersMarket.Thenwewillchangeonpage14SpecialConditionO(5)thatwasjustbeingreferencedandwewillstrikemuchofthatlanguage.

Ihavesomenoteshereongenerallytheintentofanewspecialcondition.WhatwewouldrequestisthattheCommissiondirectthestafftofinalizethislanguageinamannerthatisconsistentwiththisintentthatIamabouttoread.

Iamgoingtostartwith,followingthecompletionanduseoftheferryterminalandthepublicaccessandtheuseofthepublicaccesswouldbereviewedbySanFranciscoEmergencyServicesofficialstomakesurethatthetablesandtentsofaFarmersMarketdon’timpedeevacuationoftheCityduringemergencies.

ChairWassermaninterjected:IamgoingtocutthisshortandIapologize.IamgoingtomakeaveryquicksuggestionwhichIthinkwilltakecareofmostoftheissuesandIamgoingtoaskforavoteotherwisewearenotgoingtobeabletovoteonthis.

Iamgoingtosuggestthatasamonitoringpiecethiscomesbacktousin12monthswithsomefairlydetailedreportonwhathasbeentakingplacetheresothatwehaveasenseofwhatactivationandwhatusewhenthereisnothingtherehasgoneon.

IfthatwasacceptableasanadditionIthinkweknowwhatthestaffrecommendationisasmodifiedbythedealthatwaspresentedandifIhaveamotionforthatandiftheapplicantaccepts.Thatisanaffirmativefromtheapplicantandweshallhavearollcallvote

MOTION:ViceChairHalstedmovedapprovalofthestaffrecommendation,secondedbyCommissionerPemberton.

VOTE:Themotioncarriedwithavoteof14-0-0withCommissionersBates,Scharff,DeLaRosa,Gibbs,Peskin,Pemberton,McGrath,Nelson,Randolph,Sartipi,Sears,Vasquez,ViceChairHalstedandChairWassermanvoting,“YES”,no“NO”,votesandnoabstentions.

CommissionerGibbswasrecognized:IjustwantedtopointoutthatthisisMayorTomBates’lastBCDCmeeting.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

31

CommissionerBatesadded:Thisistrueandnotonlyisthismylastmeeting,butIamnowleaving.(Laughter)IwantedtosayhowmuchIappreciatedbeinghereandhavetheopportunitytoserveonthisCommission.IthinkitisanamazingCommissionandalotofgreatstuffhashappened.IthinkwehaveafabulousstaffandIthinktheBoardisdoingagoodjob.Goodluckinthefuture.(Applause)

CommissionerGibbsadded:Healwaysgottothepointandhewasalwaysinagoodmoodandwewillmisshim.

ChairWassermanagreed:Wewillmisshimverymuch.WehavelostaquorumthereforedefactowehaveadjournedtheCommissionandwewillgointoacommitteemeeting.

13.Adjournment.TheCommissionmeetingwasadjournedat4:14p.m.andcontinuedasaCommittee.

11.BriefingontheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers’TransferofaPortionoftheOaklandInnerHarborTidalCanaltotheCityofAlameda.JhonArbelaez-NovakintroducedItem11:TodayyouarescheduledtoreceiveabriefingontheproposedtransferoflandsownedbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers.IwillprovideabriefintroductionandthenintroducethecityofAlamedastaff.

ThisisamapoftheOaklandInnerHarborTidalCanal.TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersownsa1.8milelong400meterwidesectionoftheCanal.TheCorpsplanstotransferitsownershipofthisentireareaonbothsidesoftheCanalwhichisalsoknownastheOaklandEstuary.OnJuly19thofthisyearasrequiredbytheCoastalZoneManagementActtheCorpsrequestedthattheBCDCstaffconcurwiththeCorps’negativedeterminationregardingthesubdivisionandtransferoftheCorps-ownedsubmergedtidalandadjacentuplandareasoftheCanal.OntheOaklandsideoftheTidalCanaltheCorpsisplanningtotransferitspropertytotheEastBayRegionalParkDistrict.OntheAlamedasideoftheTidalCanaltheCorpsplanstotransferitspropertytothecityofAlamedawhichinturnwouldre-transferthepropertyto92separatepropertyownersalongtheBayshoreline.Themajorityoftheparcelsareinthewateralthoughsomeparcelscontainpartsoftheshoreline.Theprojectareaincludesresidentialandcommercialindustrialproperty.

BasedintheinformationinthenegativedeterminationthatwasprovidedbytheCorpsonSeptember19ththeCommissionstaffdeterminedthattheproposedpropertytransferbythecityofAlamedatoprivatepropertyownerswouldsignificantlyreduceifnoteliminatethepossibilityofpublicaccesstotheBayoversuchproperty.ThestaffstatedthattheCorps’negativedeterminationfailedtoshowthatthetransferwouldhavenoeffectonthecoastalzoneoritsresourcesforthepurposesoftheCZMA.TheCommissionstaffalsodetermineditwouldbenecessaryfortheCorpstosubmitafederalconsistencydeterminationtofullyevaluatethetransferprojectparticularlyitseffectsonfuturepublicaccesstotheshorelineandtheBay.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

32

TwoweekslateronOctober4,2016theCorpsresubmittedthenegativedeterminationandincludedchangestothesubdivisionoflandandtoownershiptransfersinanattempttoaddressthestaff’sconcernregardingpublicaccess.UnderthesechangesthecityofAlamedawillmaintainownershipofthreewaterparcelswhichwillbeconnectedtothreeexistingpublicwalkwaysthatcurrentlylinkFernsideBoulevardtotheshoreline.

However,theabilitytoaccessthewaterfromthesepublicwalkwaysremainsinquestionasthecityofAlamedadoesnotyethaveafirmplanforfuturepublicuseofthethreewaterparcels.Becausetheprojectinvolvestransferring1.8milesoffederalpublicpropertyintoprivateownershipwehavescheduledthismattertothefullCommissionforeducationanddiscussion.

NoCommissionactionisscheduledfortoday.AsrequiredbyfederallawthestaffmustactontheArmyCorps’submittalnolaterthanDecember2nd.

IwouldnowliketointroduceAndricoPenick,AndrewThomasandJillianBlanchardwiththecityofAlamedawhowillpresentadditionalinformationontheproject.

Ms.JillianBlanchardaddressedtheCommission:IamoutsidecounseltothecityofAlameda.IwantedtoprovideabriefoverviewontheexcitingthingshappeninginthecityofAlameda.AftermanypreviouseffortsbymanypeopleweareveryclosetoresolvingalongstandingissueontheAlamedawaterfront.Throughthispresentationwehopetoclarifyacoupleofthingsthathavebeenpresentedtoyou.

Iwilltalkaboutthehealth,safetyandpropertyconcernsthataregoingtobeaddressedbythistidalcanaltransfer.In1882theArmyCorpsofEngineersobtainedthispropertythroughacondemnationaction.Itwasalluplandsandtheyobtainedittodredgetheuplandstocreateatidalcanalfortidalaction.Forthenext10to15yearstheydredgedtheCanaloutofuplandstocreatethecanalthatyouseehere.TheCanalisabout85acresandapproximately400feetwide.

TheCorpshasowneditexclusivelyforthepast100yearsandduringthattimetheyhaveauthorizedtheconstructionofhouseboats,docksandalotofmaritime-relatedstructuresallalongtheCanal.Thereareabout100privatepropertyownersthatliveadjacenttotheCanal.

In1990CongressdirectedtheCorpstotransfertheTidalCanal.Theynolongerwantedtokeepthistypeofpropertyontheirbooks.IntheWaterResourcesDevelopmentActtheyauthorizedtheCorpstotransferhalfoftheTidalCanaltothecityofAlamedaandhalftothecityofOakland.ThroughsubsequentamendmentstoWRDAtheyalsoauthorizedthetransferoftheTidalCanaltoadjacentpropertyowners.TherewasnotthatmuchinterestbythecityofOaklandorAlamedatotakeownership.Notmuchhappenedafter1990.

Until2000theCorpsofEngineersinanefforttoenticethecitiestotakeacloserlookandconsideracceptingthepropertytheyinstitutedapermittingmoratorium.ThispreventedanyregulatoryapprovalsbytheCorpsofEngineersalongthat1.8milesofwaterfront.

Asaresultitpreventednewconstruction,maintenanceandrepairoftheexistingstructuresexceptinextremecircumstances.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

33

Whatthathasresultedinoverthepast16yearsisanongoinghealthandsafetyconcern.TheCityhasbeenunabletoeffectivelyregulatebecauseiftheyweretobringanenforcementactionforcodesafetyviolationstherewouldbenowayforthepropertyownertocompletetheimprovementsbecauseofthepermittingmoratorium.ResourcesagenciessuchasBCDCandtheRegionalBoardhavebeenunabletoeffectivelyregulatethewaterfront.

Thishasledtodeferredmaintenance,dilapidatedstructuresandtherearealsopropertyissuesattachedtoitbecausethesestructuresareimmediatelyadjacenttoprivateproperty.Eitherthepropertyownerortheirpredecessorhasconstructedthestructureandthereisthisassumptionthattheyownthestructure.Sowhentheytransferthepropertytosubsequentownersthereistitleconfusion.Realtorshavebeensuedoverthis.Ithasbeenabigproblem.

After2000thepropertyownersthatlivetheregotveryconcerned.TheywerehavinglotsofissuesasIhavedescribed.Theywereconcernedenoughthattheygottogetherandformedavoluntaryhomeowner’sassociationtoaddresstheproblem.TheyhavebeenlobbyingtheCityandinSeptemberof2014thisparticularCityCouncilofAlamedasaid,it’senough,wearegoingtoaddressthisproblem,let’sfigureitout.

TheyhadpublicmeetingsinMarchof2015andSeptemberof2015toworkshopwiththecommunityonwhatisthebestapproachfordealingwiththis.Thegoalsthattheyusedtodirectthestaffwere:Weneedtoliftthepermittingmoratorium,weneedtoalloweffectivelocal,stateandfederalregulationalongthewaterfront,weneedtoresolvetitleissuesbutatthesametimeweneedtolimittheCity’sliabilityasapotentialpropertyownerofexistingprivateproperty.

WiththatIwillturnitovertoMr.PenickwhowilldescribehowthecityofAlamedatooktheleadoncomingupwithasolution.

Mr.AndricoPenickaddressedtheCommission:IamanassistantcityattorneywiththecityofAlameda.AsJillianhasstatedthisisalongstandingproblemwhosecreationwasevenlongerinthemaking.ThesolutioninvolvestheCityactingasanhonestbrokertofacilitateatransferoftheTidalCanalontheAlamedasidefromfederalownershipintopublicandprivateownership.Thisisasimultaneoustransferthatisfacilitatedbythetentative,finalmapprocess.WehavecreatedafinalmapwhiletheArmyCorpsisstillinownership.TheArmyCorpsisgoingtotransfer94parcelstotheCity.TheCityisgoingtoretaintwoparcels.Wecallthemtheopen-waterparcelsalongthecenteroftheCanal.Wearegoingtokeepthoseopenfornavigationandcommerce.Theremainingparcelsaregoingtobeofferedforprivateownership.Thissolutionwillliftthepermittingmoratoriumandwouldallowfortheeffectiveregulationofthewaterfrontbytheregulatoryagencies.Wehavethisdisconnectwherewehaveprivatepropertyownerswithprivateimprovementsonfederalland.TheCityandotherregulatorybodiescan’teffectivelygoafterthoseprivatepropertyownersbecausetheyareshieldedbythefederalgovernmentbecauseitisonfederalland.

TheArmyCorpshasbeenreluctantorresistanttoprovidingpermissionandfacilitatingtheenforcementoflocalregulationonitsproperty.ThissolutiontakesthefederalgovernmentouttheequationandnowwewouldbedealingwithprivatepropertyownerswithprivateimprovementsonprivatelandandboththeCityandotherregulatoryagencieslikeBCDCcanexercisetheirjurisdictiontocleanupthislongstandingproblem.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

34

Itwouldalsorectifythetitleissueswhereyouwouldn’thaveprivateimprovementsownedbyonepersononpublicpropertyownedbythefederalgovernment.ThisisfirstandforemostarealestatetransactionandIamgoingtospeaktothepublicaccessissueinamoment.Ican’temphasizeenoughthatwhatthisprojectdoesisitisaveryimportantfirststepingettingustoapositionwherewecanstartsolvingthoseproblems.Thereisnofill.Thereisnodevelopment.Thereisnoprojectandthistransactiondoesnotlegalize,legitimizeorgrandfatheranypriorillegalactivity.

IfyouhaveadockorpieroutthereanditispermittedthenGodblessyou.Ifyoudon’tyouaresubjecttothesameregulatoryauthorityandenforcementactionthatyouwouldhaveifyouhaddonethisanywhereelseinthecityofAlameda.Anunpermitteddockisanunpermitteddock.

Whatthisdoesdoistransferatitle.Onceweeliminatethepresenceofthefederalgovernmentasapropertyownerwecanthenuseourregulatoryauthorityinthewayitshouldhavebeendone.AndthisareawillbesubjecttothesameregulationsasanywhereelseintheCity.Thestructureofthetransactionistoprovidethissimultaneoustransfer.WewantedtodothisinordertoeliminatetheCity’spotentialliabilityforhazardousmaterialsorotherconditionsoftheproperty.Wealsocleanedupthezoning.ThezoningthatwecalltheEstuaryZoningDistrictisalreadylimitedtothemaritime-dependentusesbutwemadethatclearbymakingeveryuseadiscretionaryapproval.

CommissionerMcGrathhadaquestion:Thezoningordinanceseemstobecritical.TheCorpsofEngineershadindicatedapierheadline.Andmostofthestructuresarebehinditbutoneortwoextendseawardofit.Doesyourzoningordinancecapturetheideaofapierheadlineinsomesense;inotherwords,alimitationtohowfaroutintotheCanalstructurescango?

Mr.Penickreplied:Itdoesn’tinthatway.FirsttheEstuaryZoningDistrictgoesfromthehigh,highwatermarktothejurisdictionallimitline,basicallythecenteroftheTidalCanal.Itcoversallofthewater.Thereisadiscretionaryuseandthatwouldbeforprivateproperty.Sowehavecreatedanewpropertyline.Andwedrewtheboxesinthisway.Wehavetheuplands.Wehavehousesandtheyhavepropertylinesthatdividethosehouses.WetooktheexistingpropertylineandweextendeditoutintotheTidalCanal.Westoppedwherethedocksandpiershadalreadystopped.Inotherwords,wecreatedanewestuarypropertylinethatcreatesaboxthatcapturesthoseprivateimprovementsononeparcel.

CommissionerMcGrathposedahypothetical:Soifyouhadlegallyadockyoucouldnowpurchasethepropertythatcontainsyourdock.Andifyoudidn’torifthatdockextendedfurtherseawardthanwouldhavebeenauthorizedyoucouldnot.

Mr.Penickagreed:Thatiscorrect.Whatwehavedoneiswehavecreatedaboxwheretheprivateimprovementsownedbyonepersonarecontainedononeparcel.Wedidn’twanttocreatealinethatbisectedanexistingdockorpier.Sowheneverweranintoanobstructionwewoulddeviatethatlineslightlytotheleftorrightsowecouldcapturetheimprovementsallononeparcel.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

35

CommissionerMcGrathcontinued:Andsolookingatthatredlineiftherewereminorencroachmentsofthestructuralsupportforahousethathasbeentherefor40yearsthosewouldnotbealteredinanywayandtheycouldhavecleartitletothoseareas.

Mr.Penickadded:Thatiscorrectandourhopeisthatthepersonthathasthoseencroachmentsintowhatisnowfederalpropertywillbuytheirbackyard.Therewillbecommonownershipbetweenthetwo.

CommissionerMcGrathstated:Andthatwouldbeverysimilartorecognizinganexistingnon-conforminguse.

Mr.Penickconcurred:Ifitispermittedthatiscorrect.Alsotheyhavetheabilitytomergethoselotsatalaterdate.Publicaccessonthisprojectcomesintwoforms.Oneformisoutsideoftheprojectandonethatisinsideoftheproject.Iamgoingtotalkabouttheonethatisoutsideoftheprojectfirst.Thatisrepresentedbytheredareayouseeontheslide.Thepropertylineisthewater’sedge.ThesewerecreatedasviewcorridorsthatwouldallowthepublictolookoutontotheTidalCanalandacrosstoOakland.Theseareoutsideoftheprojectareaandarenotaffectedbytheprojectinanyway.ThisprojecthashighlightedthefactthatthecityofAlamedahasnotmaintainedthosepublicaccesspointstothelevelthatitshouldhave.Therehavebeensomeencroachmentsbyadjacentpropertyowners.WhattheCityisproposingtodoiscleanupthoseprivateencroachmentsonCityproperty.Theotherthingthatthisprojecthaswithregardstopublicaccesswasadesiretoincreasepublicaccessoutintothewater.TheCitynevertookanystepstorequestfromtheArmyCorpsaccessintothewater.Unfortunatelyalloftheotherpropertyownersdidandwehaveallthoseimprovementsthatwenowhavetodealwith.

AtthePlanningBoardlevelthisissuecametothefore.Thereareacoupleofschoolsofthoughtastowhatweshoulddo.Therewasaconcernthatbytransferringthepropertyintoprivateownershipwemaybeforeclosingtheopportunityforfuturepublicaccessintothewater.StaffandtheCityCouncilaresensitivetothisissueandacoupleofoptionswerediscussed.Oneoptionwasdisposingofthepropertywithan18footpublicaccesseasement.ThiswouldallowtheCitytobeabletocreatepublicaccessintothewaterintothefuture.Thatmetwithresistancebecausesincewehadnoplansonesaid,howcouldyouknowthat18feetwouldbeenough?Theothersolutionwouldbetodoa35footpublicaccesseasement.Thatposedanissueof,wellwhatifthatistoomuch?Wedidnotwanttobeputinapositiontomakeasnapjudgmentandfindoutlaterthatwesolvedoneproblemjusttocreateanother.BoththeArmyCorpsandtheCityhavetakenalloftheactionstheybelievenecessaryinordertoallowthisprojecttogoforward.WearehopingtoclosethefirstphaseofthisprojectbyDecember13thorshortlythereafter.

WedohavestrongsupportbytheRegionalBoard,bytheArmyCorpsofEngineerswhoistheselleroftheproperty,theRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard,StateLands,thecityofAlameda,thecommunitythataskedtheCitytodothisinthefirstplaceandalsooureffortshavefacilitatedthetransferontheothersidetoEastBayRegionalParks.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

36

CommissionerNelsonhadquestionsforstaff:Iamprettyfamiliarwiththewatersideandthelandsideinthisarea.Itisveryconstrainedfromtheperspectiveofgettingadditionalpublicaccesswiththeexceptionofthosesmallaccesscorridors.Iwantedtoaskifthestaffissatisfiedthatthecurrentproposalwon’tlimitourabilitytorequireappropriatepublicaccessdowntheroad.

ChairWassermanadded:TherewassomereferencetopublicaccesswithintheprojectandIthinkIhavetoldthatthereiswhatisperceivedtobepublicaccessnowthroughsomeoftheseareasasidefromthosethreeidentifiedareas.Ifthatiscorrecthowisthatbeingpreservedordealtwithinthistransfer?

Mr.Arbelaez-Novakanswered:ThereissomeexistingrequiredpublicaccessuponthenorthernsideoftheCanalinsomeofthecommercialproperties.Thestaff’sconcernisthatthereisnoguaranteethattheseareaswillremainpublic.ItmaybepossiblethatduringtheCityplanningprocesstheCitymaydecide,wedon’twanttodealwiththisanymoreandlet’sjusttransferittothepropertyownersaswehavefortherestoftheparcels. InthatcasethereisconcernthattheCommissionwouldloseaccesstoareasthatarepubliclyaccessible.

CommissionerNelsonopined:Butthatwouldbeasubsequentaction,subsequenttothisproject.

Mr.Arbelaez-Novakagreed:Right.WhenwelookateffectsfromthetransferandthesearesecondaryeffectsandweareallowedtolookatthatundertheCZMA.

CommissionerNelsoncontinued:Thesecondquestioniswhetherthisjurisdictionalconfusionhaslimitedourabilityonthegroundtopermitanddoenforcementandwhetherwearegoingtowakeupandfinditisallabunchofunpermittedstructuresherethatwehavetodealwithfromtheperspectiveoflookingforwardattheburdenonstaff.

ChiefDeputyDirectorGoldbeckcommented:AstheCitytoldus,thetransferofthiswon’taffectyourlegalabilitytoenforceanythingandtherearealotofstructuresoutthereandtheyaregoingtohavetocomeinandgetpermittedorwearegoingtohaveenforcementactions.WhatwearehopingtodoisworkwiththeCitygoingforwardbecausetheyhavetodealwiththesethingsaswellandhopefullywecancoordinateourworksothatwecanfigureoutwhatwecanallapproveandontheotherhandwhatwecan’tapproveandwhatwehavetoworkthrough.

CommissionerNelsoncontinued:Sothosearenotmostlygrandfatheredfacilitiesonthewater?

Mr.Goldbeckreplied:Thatstillneedstobecompletelypuzzledout.IbelievetheremaybeafewthatgotpermittedinthepastbutIwouldbetthatthevastmajorityofthemarenotpermittedbyBCDC.

Mr.Arbelaez-Novakadded:TheparticularstructuresthatarewithintheparcelsoftheCitywillkeepinthewater.Wehavecheckedintherecordsforthosesixdifferentpiersordocksandtheyarenotpermitted.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

37

CommissionerMcGrathcommented:Iamcertainlyawarethatthereareencroachmentsdownthere.ButthisisacomplicatedsituationinthatitisnotaregionallypartoftheBay.Thiswascreatedlandownedbyafederalagency.ItiscertainlyabletoberegulatedunderourActbutwearenevergoingtogetaccessalongthatbulkheadunlessthisareahastoberedevelopedaspartofprotectionforsealevelrisesometimeinthefuture.Frommyperspectiverecognizingalegalnon-conforminguseaslongasitwasoneisnotproblematic.Ialsothinkthatyouwanttomaintainaccesspointswheretheyexist;atleasttothewaterandhaveconsiderationgiventheWaterTraillegislationwhetherornottheyarealsoappropriate.Anditseemsthatthemoneygeneratedbysaleofthislandandtaxfromitshouldbeusedforsomepublicaccess.Iseeapathwaytoconsistencythatrecognizesthatwecan’tgobackinandfixwhathasbeenintherefor40or50yearsbutwecanmakesurethatwegetpreservationandimprovementofthepublicaccessareas.

ChairWassermanvoicedsomeobservations:One,thishasbeenaproblemforalongtimeanditdoeslooklikethisismovingtowardsasolution;that’sgood.Ithinkthereareawholelotofcomplicationsthathavenotyetbeenthoughtout.InrealityIamnotsurewehaveawholelotofcontrolexceptonthisissueofwhatwehavetherighttodoandwhatwechoosetodoonpropertythatwasnotinourjurisdictionbecauseitwasfederallycontrolledandnowwillbe.Thatisablessingandacursebecausethisisabloodyheadacheforourstaff.Itisaheadacheforthepropertyowners.IunderstanditisaheadachefortheCityalthoughIthinkyouaremovingtowardssomesolutions.Youtalkedaboutthepropertyownersbuyingthispropertythatwasfederallyowned.Haveyouestablishedapricingmechanismandwhathappensiftheydon’twanttopayit?

Mr.Penickreplied:Wewrestledwiththosequestions.Astopricing,wehadanindependentappraisal.Thereareeightcommercialparcelsandtherewere90butnowwiththeremovalofthesixthereare84.Whatwedidwasthateachofthecommercialparcelswereappraisedindependentofeachotherathighestandbestuse.Wehadeightdifferentvaluesfortheeightparcels.Ontheresidentialsidewetookthemintheaggregate.Wetooktheentireresidentialparcelguideofvalueandthendivideditbythe90sowehaveaperparcelpricing.

Theactualperparcelpricefortheresidentialis$10,000.00andtheCityiscappingtheclosingcostsat$1,000.00soyouare$11,000.00allin.

Giventhatpricepointandgiventhefactthatit’sintheirbackyardandwillhaveimmediateequitytotheirexistingpropertyweareanticipatinghighparticipationrates.Wearerequiring100percentparticipationandtheHOAhasagreedtobuyholdoutparcels.

Wewillnotmoveforwardwiththistransactionunlesswehavethat100percentbecauseotherwiseitwouldexposetheCitytoliabilityfortripfallsetcetera.

ChairWassermancontinued:ThereweresomeearliersuggestionsthatlookingtothisproblemwhichanumberofpeopleknewweregoingtocomeupthattheremightbeapossibilityofobtainingsomestatefundingforapilotprojecttofigureouthowtonavigatethroughtheregulatoryproblemforBCDCandpotentiallyfortheCityaswell.

BCDCMINUTESNovember17,2016

38

Itseemstomethatissueisstilltherebecauseifthisisdonepiece-by-pieceitisgoingtobeanightmareforeverybody.

12.BriefiningonSandMiningPermitComplianceandProgressonStudies.Thisitemwaspostponed.

13.Adjournment.UponmotionbyCommissionerNelson,secondedbyCommissionerMcGrath,theCommissionmeetingasacommitteewasadjournedat4:53p.m.