April 4, 2024 Commission Meeting

1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Public Comment Period (Each speaker is limited to three minutes) A maximum of 15 minutes is available for the public to address the Commission on any matter on which the Commission either has not held a public hearing or is not scheduled for a public hearing later in the meeting. Speakers will be heard in the order of sign-up, and each speaker is generally limited to a maximum of three minutes. It is strongly recommended that public comments be submitted in writing so they can be distributed to all Commission members for review. The Commission may provide more time to each speaker and can extend the public comment period beyond the normal 15-minute maximum if the Commission believes that it is necessary to allow a reasonable opportunity to hear from all members of the public who want to testify. No Commission action can be taken on any matter raised during the public comment period other than to schedule the matter for a future agenda or refer the matter to the staff for investigation, unless the matter is scheduled for action by the Commission later in the meeting.
   (Steve Goldbeck) [415/352-3611; steve.goldbeck@bcdc.ca.gov]
4. Approval of Minutes for February 15, 2024 Meeting
   (Reylina Ruiz) [415/352-3638; reylina.ruiz@bcdc.ca.gov]
5. Report of the Chair
6. Report of the Executive Director
7. Commission Consideration of Administrative Matters
   (Harriet Ross) [415/352-3615; harriet.ross@bcdc.ca.gov]
   Public Comment
8. Public Hearing and Vote on an Enforcement Committee Recommended Enforcement Decision, including Proposed Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order Number CCD2024.001.00 (BCDC Enforcement Case ER2021.080.00)
   The Commission will hold a public hearing to address the permit violation and unauthorized development at 660 Bridgeway Boulevard, Sausalito, Marin County, and vote on whether to adopt a Recommended Enforcement Decision proposed by the Enforcement Committee which includes a proposed Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order to require compliance at the site and payment of $60,000 in administrative civil liability.
   (Rachel Cohen) [415/352-3661; rachel.cohen@bcdc.ca.gov
   Presentation // Public comment letters
9. Public Hearing and Vote on an Enforcement Committee Recommended Enforcement Decision, including Proposed Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order Number CCD2024.001.00 (BCDC Enforcement Case ER2021.080.00)
   The Commission will receive a briefing and consider authorizing the Executive Director to amend an existing contract with the Resource Legacy Fund to administer funding to BCDC’s Environmental Justice Advisors as payment for their services related to implementing Bay Plan Environmental Justice and Social Equity Policies and Bay Adapt. The amendment will add $106,000 and extent the time period to June 30, 2025, bringing the total to $180,000.00.
   (Phoenix Armenta) [415/352-3604; phoenix.armenta@bcdc.ca.gov]
   Presentation
10. Adjournment – in honor of the late Joe Bodovitz

This report lists the administrative permit applications that have been filed and are pending with the Commission. The Executive Director will take the action indicated on the matters unless the Commission determines that it is necessary to hold a public hearing. The staff members to whom the matters have been assigned are indicated at the end of the project descriptions. Inquiries should be directed to the assigned staff member prior to the Commission meeting.

Administrative Permit Applications

Articles about the Bay and BCDC

• Would California bridges stand up to a direct hit? We asked experts
• As tides turn, anchor-outs reach for a way off the bay
• Remembering Joe Bodovitz
• California coastal advocate Joe Bodovitz dies at 93
• Pioneer who helped save San Francisco Bay and California coast dies at 93
• ‘People who move here don’t leave’: Why this rich California enclave is bracing homes for rising seas
• Fresh batch of YIMBY housing bills clash with California’s coastal protections
• Richmond-San Rafael Bridge pedestrian lane may soon be removed after four-year pilot
• On this Bay Area bridge, a celebrated bike path might revert to being a breakdown lane for cars

April 4, 2024 meeting minutes

Audio transcript

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: good afternoon all welcome to another hybrid meeting of bcdc. We’re going to start with a video. Welcome to this meeting of the san francisco bay conservation and development commission. This commission meeting will operate as a hybrid meeting under teleconference rules established by the bagley-keene open meeting act. Commissioners are located both at metro center and at publicly accessible venues throughout the bay area as specified on the meeting notice. Commissioners who participate virtually will keep their cameras on throughout the meeting so they will be visible to the public for members of the public attending virtually, if you would like to speak either during the public comment period, which is item three on the agenda or during a period reserved for public comment during another agenda item you will need to do so in one of two ways. First if you are attending virtually on zoom, please raise your hand in zoom.to do so click the participants icon at the bottom of your screen, find your name and the small hand to the left and click on that hand. If you are joining our meeting via phone, you must press star six on your key pad to unmute your phone to make a comment. Individuals who have raised their hands will be called in the order they have been raised and they will be unmuted. Attending this meeting in-person either at metro center or at a publicly noticed teleconference location who want to address the commission should follow the protocol at your location. Those attending the meeting at the metro center will use the podium on their right. Wherever you choose to attend from please state your name to provide your comments. All members of the public will be allowed three minutes to address the commission at the discretion of the chair.comments must be respectful and focused each individual has the responsibility to act in a civil manner without using hate speech director, indirect threats, and/or abusive language. Bcdc has also established an e-mail address to compile public comments its address public comment at bcdc@ca.Gov. E-mails received before ten this morning have been shared with the commissioners and any received since then will also be shared with the commissioners and the public. Welcome to this meeting of the san francisco bay conservation development

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: with that and my very short additional comments that I hope that we do not need to worry about being zoom bombed by virtual speakers; we have not been. But if that occurs, you I have a fairly stern gavel. Please call the roll.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: chair wasserman?

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: sorry, chair wasserman. Vice chair eisen?

>>v. Chair, Rebecca Eisen: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: addiego?

>>speaker: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: benson?

>>Stephen Benson: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: eckerly?

>>Jenn Eckerle: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: ecklund.

>>Pat Ecklund: present. And I am located on the front porch at charles drive san rafael, and there is no one else here except the beautiful blue sky and some clouds but the sun is out and life is great.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: thank you.commissioner gilmore?

>>: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner gunther?

>>Andrew Gunther: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner lee?

>>Otto Lee: present. Santa clara.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: thank you. Commissioner nelson?

>>Barry Nelson: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner pine?

>>Dave Pine: present.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: Randolph?

>>Sean Randolph: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: showalter?

>>Patricia Showalter: here. I’m at mountain view city hall.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: thank you. Commissioner vazquez?

>>John Vasquez: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: zepeda?

>>Cesar Zepeda: here.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: did I forget anyone? 17 commissioners present.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you. We have a quorum, so we can conduct business. A organizational announcement. We’re going to switch items 8 and 9. Nine will be a fairly brief item.public comment? Do we have any public speakers?

>>speaker: yes chair wasserman, you have one present in the building, I do believe.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: the only card I have is for item eight.

>>speaker: I stand corrected. You have no public comment at this time.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: that brings us to approval of the minutes of our february 15th meeting.we have been furnished copies of them. I would entertain a motion and second to approve the minutes.

>>speaker: so moved.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: commissioner gilmore moves. Commissioner nelson seconds. Anybody wish to make a correction or a comment? Anybody oppose to approving the minutes?the minutes stand approved. Thank you. That brings us to my report. We had an interesting and productive meeting this morning in this building and by zoom on our rising sea level working group talking about the outline as we move forward for our regional adaptation plan, and implementation of the sb72 guidelines. The laird bill guidelines. A lively discussion about what they’re going to mean about various things to make sure that various important policy issues are appropriately emphasized. Supervisor — commissioner gioia raised the issue of when we’re going to talk, again, about governance and whether we believe we need more authority.we will have that discussion. But we’re building towards it, and, indeed, it was discussed in the second presentation, which was on how our staff is working to modernize and organize more efficiently, our permitting system, including — well, a number of things about it were encouraging. One of them is that they are looking to how we can, in fact, get our application process as fully as possible, online. Which will help everybody, our staff, as well as applicants and those concerned about applications. It’s a very significant effort. Most of it will be done internally, some will need additional resources, something we are consistently fighting for. I, also, noted with interest with the article in the new york times this morning with the cloud gun being shot off in san francisco bay as a way of trying to redirect heat upwards by creating micro particles in the air.it was sent to me by a friend who had a tag line, does this need a bcdc permit? ” and in fact staff is look into that (laughter) but it was actually encouraging to me in a different context. The article is worth reading in part because it talks about a range of new ways looking at climate change and global warming using new scientific techniques, some of which may have their own side effects that need to be evaluated, and I still hold out hope that there will be some scientific breakthroughs that are going to help us on adapting to rising sea level. I don’t think it will involve turning the sea into micro particles. But I do think that there are some things out there that will help us, but we’re not depending on them. We’re moving forward with our efforts, using the techniques that we know to address the need that we know we need to meet. A couple of things about meetings.our next meeting on april 18th will occur fully virtually, because of construction here at metro center that will not allow us to be present here. So, the meeting of the 18th is fully virtual. Everybody needs to register with sierra where they will be, and she is very good at helping you do that. If you need assistance, hopeful you can do it in clusters as a number of you have been doing. But we need do that. At that meeting we may take up the following matters, consideration of a permit application for development at 505 east bay shore drive redwood city enforcement case in the city of san rafael progress report on regional shoreline adaptation plan and new regulatory roadmap that we’ll draw from the discussion I described this morning and a briefing by nasa on the science news to create california’s draft rising sea level guidance. I also want to encourage for our may 2nd meeting, that as many people as possible actually come in, I want to describe it as one of our anchor meetings where we can get more of us together.it will be an important meeting in terms of a number of topics to be discussed so I think it will be worth your time to join us in-person if you possibly can.

>>speaker: chair Wasserman f I may?

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: you may.

>>speaker: I know we have implemented a new process for quorum, and for that april 18th meeting, it is due — the quorum is due today, if you could notify me by the end of the day today, I would greatly appreciate it, since you are all here and a captive audience. Thank you.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: so, just to repeat I asked you to provide the information. Sierra is telling you to do it right now.and if not this moment, by the end of the day. I don’t want to steal larry’s thunder, there are a few of us who may not have filed our form 700 divorce, I have been in contact, and did file mine just turned it in. Not a wonderful example. But please do get it in yes, I could not have bugged you if you hadn’t done that, I would have hidden underneath the table. On a sadder note, although it’s also a celebratory note, I hope that all of you would have seen the publication on the web site about our appreciation of joe bonovitz’s work who passed last month. He was bcdc’s first executive director and went on to be the first executive director of the coastal commission. And is really a giant in the regulatory, ultimately pc as well, as executive director goldman wrote in the statement that posted no individual in the state’s history was more directly responsible for the creation of our coastal zone management policies than joe he was a terrific example I did have the pleasure of having a couple of conversations with him when I first joined the board.he was a quiet, solid leader. I’m not going to make comparisons, but we had no desire to be flamboyant — and not talking about you — (laughter) but he provided tremendous leadership in areas that, to a slight extent we have come to take for granted, but was really pioneering work when he did it. He is missed, and at the end of this meeting I’ll ask for a motion to adjourned in his memory. If there is any commissioner who wishes to report an ex parte communication that you have not filed in writing, now is the time to do so. This is on an adjudicatory matter that we have not heard. Any commissioner wish to make such ex parte communication report? Seeing none.that brings us to the report of the executive director.

>>Larry Goldzband: — your, hopefully, not flamboyant executive director. Welcome to our first commission meeting during the spring of 2024. Quoting charles dickinson who noted that spring feels like summer when the day is sunny and it feels like winter in the shade. I take heart and that lesson not just because it’s hard to know how I will dress for tomorrow’s opening day ball game at oracle park. Spring is complex and candidly so is what bcdc does the rising sea level working group her two very substantive presentations this morning centering on how bcdc may define where the local governments rising sea level plan should contain and the staff’s multi-dimensional planned reform on many regulatory processes. Finding the answers to these documents and processes will depend on our collective ability to understand and resolve intricate and difficult issues and conversations during which unfamiliar sun and shade may be present. While our job as staff is to help you through those tricky conversations, we should remember that mark twain once said that in the spring I have counted 136 different kinds of weather inside 24 hours.with regard to staffing, unless we hear otherwise, we plan to hire dr. Britton clifton as a climate adaptation specialist working in the regulatory improvements team with ethan lavine. Britton has expertise in restoration climate adaptation worked as research associate at the oak ridge national laboratory and as a graduate researcher and restoration research projects, britton is a bobcat having earned her doctorate in environmental systems in uc merced a charger having earned a master in earth system science from university of alabama huntsville and bs in biology from athens state university. Unless we hear from you otherwise, britton will start with us on april 18th. Happy to report that your staff has started series of presentations about sb272 implementation to city and county local elected officials. Commissioner Dave Pine stepped forward almost immediately after we asked for your help and he arranged our briefing to san mateo county cities almost two weeks ago, for which we thank you. I want to thank you, gorin, gioia, lee, ramos and vazquez for arranging presentations in their counties.we’re working with the remaining supervisors to reach their elected officials about the development of the sb272 guidelines and answer their questions about bcdc. We’ll report on discussions. Steve goldbeck worked with chair wasserman and approved an emergency permit for a homeowner in belvedere whose dock broke free of its piles in winter storm, the emergency permit allowed the homeowner to remove the dock and apply for replacement of the dock. I was returning from washington, d.C. Because planning director jessica fain and I attended the coastal states organization and noaa meetings for coastal zone managers. I am impressed by the caliber of our colleagues. We all tackle challenges such as rising sea levels, permitting and budgeting et cetera. Jessica and I were fortunate to be with staff members of both u.S. Senators and staff of six house members including pelosi, mullin, desaulnier, garamendi, huffman, and eshu, all supporters of enterprising coastal zone management.jessica briefed staff members and I spoke quickly about bcdc’s emerging role and the reconstruction of highway 37. You may have seen a few stakeholders raise concerns about the safety of bridges above the bay in light of the disaster recently in baltimore harbor. Caltrans district four director and bcdc commissioner dina el-tawansy let us know caltrans plans to present a briefing to the commission and likely mtc as well later this spring or early summer to inform you about bridge safety and stability in the bay. I’m excited to announce bcdc’s firsts ever rising together bay adapt summit, a community event in san francisco on august 8th. Mark your calendars now. Rising together will be an immersive and dynamic summit it will bring together community leaders to celebrate sea level rise adaptation in the region. As part of the event we’ll be hosting an awards ceremony hosting exemplary climate change leaders. Those leaders are advancing bcdc joint platform advancing the protection of people in the natural and built environment from rising sea levels.now the ask. We’re looking to honor one local government staff member, one community leader, and one elected official, each of whom will be helping build more resilient shorelines in their communities. Please nominate a leader in your community who has displayed excellence in your communities for rising sea levels. Our bay adapt website has information and we’ll be e-mailing the link to all bay adapt stakeholders, commissioners and advisory board members. As chair wasserman said, joseph bonovitz passed away in march. I was honored to represent the commission at the memorial service. I want to read to you the appreciation that’s on bcdc’s web site because it’s important for the public to hear and for all of us to hear again.joe’s contributions to california’s conservation policies cannot be overstated who began his career as a journalist working for the san francisco examiner. He moved to spur in 1964 he began work on bay related issues, resulted in leading staff consultant team that drafted the original san francisco bay plan as bcdc’s first executive director. When bcdc’s first chair mel lane was asked by ronald regan in 1972, to chair the coastal commission, joe was hired away from bcdc nobody in the entire state of california was more influential in development california’s coastal zone management policies than joe. Seven years later, joe became executive director of the california public utilities commission which he led for seven years served as head of california environmental trust and later as project director for bay vision 2020 which attempted to reduce silo effects and redundancies caused by the myriad of regional planning implementation government bodies in the bay area developed during post world war ii period. Joe was born in oklahoma city in 1930 studied english literature at northwestern university, a wild cat, and served in the u.S. Navy and korean war. After, joe completed graduate degree in journalism at columbia university, so he was a lion. Always generous with his time and efforts to help bcdc.joe routinely answered questions and using experience to forecast issues. His advice was always relevant even through change in 2024. I encourage to you visit the web site of the university of california’s library to examine joe’s oral history because it is absolutely a great read. Finally, chair wasserman, I want to reiterate what you said about the important announcement due to construction here, our next commission meeting in two weeks will be held totally virtually, and we’ll be posting the me meeting notice and agenda as we normally do, and you can expect those next two meetings later in the following two months, may and june, also to be virtual. We are hoping that we will get our space back in july, but we’re not quite counting on it yet. With that, chair wasserman, I’m happy to answer any questions.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: are there any questions for the executive director from the commission? I see none.that brings us to item seven, consideration of administrative matters. We have received a report of the administrative listing and regulatory director harriet ross is here to answer any questions. Any questions on that? You know you’re getting off easy. Because you do a good job. To item nine, as I noted we’re going to shift the order, a request from staff to consider authorizing the executive director to amend an existing contract with the resources legacy fund to further administer funding for the commissions environmental justice program. Our advisor, environmental justice policy manager phoenix will provide the staff analysis.

>>speaker: thank you, chair wasserman.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: can we have the presentation up please?

>>speaker: good afternoon commissioners. Phoenix Armenta climate equity community engagement for bcdc. Coming to you with a staff report recommendation to approve amendment to contract with resource legacy fund in order to fund ej advisors program. Next slide please. Our ej adviser program launched in 2021 with generous funding from this resource legacy fund, a philanthropic non-profit organization.the ej advisors program was created to help bcdc implement its environmental justice and equity policies which the commission adopted as bay plan amendment in 2019. The resource legacy fund originally funded six ej advisors with annual stipends of $6,000 per year. [indiscernible] committed to funding three years of the program with understanding bcdc would gradually take over funding from them. In 2022 they provided stipends for five advisors and in 2023 provided stipends for three ej advisors with bcdc making up the remainder of funding. Our original agreement has come to an end, rls agreed to continue sponsoring the ej adviser program. Next slide please. Here are six current ej advisors: nama from the watershed project, myria garcia, india culture organization, julio garcia rise up south city, violet, climate resilient communities, salina feliciano sf consulting anthony bayview hunters point advocates. Julio, nama, and anthony have been with the program from the beginning and about to start their fourth year with bcdc.nama began their tenure with ej advisors in december of 2023. Next slide please. On this slide we have the overarching goals of the ej advisors program created with the ej advisors. They include advance and recommend to the commission how best to embed equity and environmental justice principles through bcdc’s programs, policies and processes. Work with bcdc staff and commission to develop metrics to track the implementation of such changes. Encourage commission pointing authorities to select commissioners and alternate who is reflect the diversity of bay shoreline and inland communities, increase strategies for more diverse workplace at bcdc, and develop a permitting and planning model that incorporates meaningful engagement during development and permitting processes especially in areas in most vulnerable to sea level rise. These goals are aligned with our ej and social equity policies regional equity plan and strategic plan. Next slide please.over the past three years the ej advisors have advised us on a variety of topics to achieve goals hold monthly meetings and regular participate investment j working group meetings they participated in a workshop and environmental justice concerns in the permitting process, advice on the permitting process continues as we’re working to implement some of their suggestions. They also participate in drafting original objectives in the racial equity plan, participated in our october 2022 racial equity workshop and expected to review the updated draft whether it comes out. Activities include commenting on and making recommendations for the cbo mapping tool and most recently project focused on planning series of toxic tours for bcdc staff and commissioners. Currently undergoing organizational development assessment of the program with consultants from mig. Next slide please. This contract allows us to pay the final installation for the ej advisors from the grant we received from the state coastal conservancy for bay adapt work allow us to pay for 6e j adviser stipends at $10,000 per year. In addition this will fund their activities on the bay adapt implementation committee and the advisory group.because we requested an additional year of sponsorship we’re charging an administrative fee of 17% per invoice, bringing the total of the contract up to $180,000. Next slide please. This contract help us to align the ej advisors program with gavin newsom’s executive order to embed equity into state government operations our strategic plan and the forthcoming racial equity action plan we previously were contracting with an organizational development consultant to continue development of the ej advisors program. Next slide please. In conclusion, the staff recommends that the commission authorize its executive director to amend an existing contract with the resources legacy fund from $74,000 up to $180,000 to administer stipends to bcdc’s ej advisors and extend the end date to june 30th, 2025. Thank you.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you. With that presentation complete, I want to open up a public hearing on the matter and invite anyone from the public who wishes to do so, to make a comment. Do we have any speakers on this matter?

>>speaker: there is no public comment, chair.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you. Any questions or comments from commissioners? Commissioner ahn?

>>eddie ahn: appreciate the presentation, and as chair of the ej working group always believe stipends are a really important part of resourcing community participation making sure people feel valued for input they provide to this body. I want to hopefully provide a better sense of context, a sense of agency what is they do something like a community participation stipend, I’m hoping the community leaders appreciate the increase from 6,000 to 10,000 it seems like a big jump I’m hoping you can speak to how it compares to the larger ecosystem and, two, who are the community leaders who are part of the current body okay with it too?

>>speaker: phoenix?

>>speaker: in terms of other agencies, I think it is comparable to what other agencies are offering. We have set it out that they are getting paid 125 an hour at 80 hours for the entire year. So, you know, that includes, like, a meeting a month plus ej adviser working group plus extra activities yes it seems they’re satisfied with that payment. So far everyone seems to be okay with it.

>>eddie ahn: that’s good to hear. Thanks.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: any other questions or comments?i don’t see any. I would entertain —

>>speaker: chair? You do have commissioner showalter.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: oh I’m sorry. I apologize, pat. Why is she not —

>>Patricia Showalter: can you hear me? Can you hear me?

>>speaker: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: yes.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: yes.

>>Patricia Showalter: sorry I’m having a technical difficulty here. I want to thank the resources legacy fund for this grant. It’s very helpful to us..

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you, pat. Indeed it does.i’ll entertain a motion and second. Eisen and second. Take ag the closest ones. I’ll ask for the staff recommendation.

>>speaker: staff recommends the commission authorize its executive director to amend the existing contract with the resource legacy fund from $74,000 to $180,000 to administer stipends to bcdc advisors to extend the end date to june 30, 2025.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: any questions? I would entertain a motion to approve the recommendation.

>>speaker: so moved.

>>Pat Ecklund: second.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: who moved? Vazquez? Commissioner lee. Thank you. Will you call the roll on the motion, please?

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner addiego?

>>mark addiego: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: ahn?

>>eddie ahn: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: ambuehl?

>>david ambuehl: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: eckerly?

>>Jenn Eckerle: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: ecklund?

>>Pat Ecklund: aye.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: gilmore?

>>: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: gunther?

>>Andrew Gunther: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: lee?

>>Otto Lee: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: nelson?

>>Barry Nelson: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: pine?

>>Dave Pine: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: randolph?

>>r. Sean randolph yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: showalter?

>>Patricia Showalter: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: vazquez?

>>John Vasquez: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: zepeda?

>>Cesar Zepeda: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: thank you.did I forget anyone? At the end of my list. I’m sorry. Eisen.

>>v. Chair, Rebecca Eisen: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: chair wasserman?

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: 16 yes, no-nos. No abstention.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: the motion passes. Thank you for the good work. That brings us to item eight, a public hearing and possible vote on the enforcement committee’s proposed recommended enforcement division to require statutory and permit compliance at 660 bridgeway in sausalito marin county and payment of $60,000 in administrative civil liability in order to resolve bcdc’s enforcement case er2021.080.00 against the owner of record bayview one llc. In a moment, rachel cohen of our enforcement team will present the item. But first I would ask mr.chris henry who owns bayview, or his representative to come forward and identify themselves as being present.

>>speaker: good afternoon commissioners attorney for bayview one llc, darien key with benmore wendell.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you. I want to state the process we’ll go through. Bcdc enforcement staff will present the case and proposed cease and desist civil penalty order for our consideration. After which time, mr. Henry’s representative will be given opportunity to comment.after all the presentations have been given, the public comment period will be opened. Those comments will be limited to three minutes per person. After the public comment period has been closed the floor will be opened to members of the commission to ask follow-up questions of staff and mr. Henry’s representative and deliberate on the matter. All speakers must limit their presentations and comments to evidence are already made part of the record which has been published online with this meeting’s agenda and the public implications of such evidence. We will not allow the presentation of any oral testimony or new evidence. First, I want to open the public hearing on the matter.it is so open. Second, I invite commissioner gilmore, chair of the enforcement committee to give a brief summary of the committee’s hearing on this matter that took place on march 14th 2024. You have the floor.

>>: on march 14th the enforcement committee held a hearing and vote on executive director’s recommended enforcement decision against mr. Henry to address long-standing violations of bcdc permit number m1979.088 as amended and section 66632 of the mcateer-petris act at the commercial property at 660 bridgeway in downtown sausalito. Upon reviewing the evidence pertinent to this case and conducting our hearing which included presentations and comments by staff, as well as the respondent represented by mr. Henry who is the sole owner and officer of bayview one llc, the enforcement committee voted to adopt without changes the executive director’s recommended enforcement decision as the enforcement committee’s recommendation to the full commission. As a reminder to my fellow commissioners, I will now review in summary the actions that we are allowed to take today.we may, number one, adopt the recommended enforcement decision without any change and the proposed cease and desist and civil penalty order. Two, we may dismiss the entire matter by voting not to issue the proposed order. Three, remand the matter back to the enforcement committee or the staff for further action as the commission directs. Or, four, reject the recommended enforcement decision and decide to consider the entire matter de novo. In this event the commission shall continue the public hearing to the next available commission meeting when it shall proceed in accordance with the same procedural requirements as the commission must follow under regulations 11/3/27. With all of that in mind, I’m going to invite miss cohen to make her presentation.

>>rachel cohen: thank you chair gilmore, and chair wasserman. Allow me a minute to share my screen, please.it will look funky for a minute then it will look correct. All right. Can everyone see that in full screen?

>>: yes.

>>rachel cohen: thank you. Good afternoon, all. Today I’ll present enforcement case er2021.080.00 for which the respondent is mr.chris henry and his company bayview one llc this case involves long stand obstruction to public access and unpermitted redevelopment activities in bcdc’s jurisdiction. Mr. Henry’s 15 year history of failing to comply with terms of bcdc’s permit and mcateer-petris act has caused staff to commence a formal enforcement proceeding to restore public access. We’ll go through the location of violations, history of non-compliance timeline of events violation summary and respondent defenses and staff rebuttals and enforcement committee’s recommended enforcement decision these are vicinity maps of two scales of 660 bridgeway sausalito marin originally ferry terminal privately owned two story building now the home to a restaurant and shops in downtown sausalito, this is a site plan, exhibit a, bridgeway boulevard is over here, building is here and the bay is over here on the eastern side of the building. The approximately 1,158 square foot public access area shown in faint red line wraps around the southern and eastern sides of the building and includes the staircase landing pad halfway up the staircase offering the public an elevated view of the bay. The original permit in 1979 allowed renovations to the grown floor restaurant piccolo cafe and repairs to the deck support required landscaping public trash containers and no fewer than two benches to be made available access area provides sweeping bay views and connection to the park immediately south. This dark blue dashed polygon outlines the space which was formerly used by el piccolo cafe, and the area outlined with the black rectangle represents 155 square feet of the public access space, which the second permit amendment authorized the permittee to use for outdoor dining, chairs that were accessible to the public and patrons of el piccolo cafe public access areas to outdoor dining ceased to exist in the doors closed in 2016. This was a photo from march 2022 from south of the building facing north, the public access area partially shown under overhangs and the plywood sheets partially blocked access, continues around the southeastern corner of the building sun and the stairs here.this photo was taken in march of 2024 from the southeastern corner was the building facing west. The public access area, again, includes the area under the overhang here and this walkway. The public access space which was authorized by bcdc included a continuous paved surface and this raised wooden decking was placed throughout the public access space without bcdc authorization. This photo was taken in march 2024 from the eastern side of the building facing northeast. These are the stairs that ascend to the second floor public access stair landing pad and you can see the unauthorized raised wooden decking continues through the this section of the public access area. This slide shows bcdc’s shoreline ban and bay jurisdiction showing that nearly the entire building within bcdc’s jurisdiction. So, now that I have reviewed the permit public act requirements I’ll review history of non-compliance at this site before circling back to the current violations.mr. Henry took ownership of 660 bridgeway in 2007 and the long list of prior enforcement cases shows permit under mr. Henry’s ownership began in 2010 and have occurred since then six cases between 2010 and 2016 dealt with restaurant staff refusing to allow members of the public to use the outdoor dining tables public were told to either purchase food or leave the area. Two cases mr. Henry was find for repeating the same violation within five years. Two cases dealt with requirement to provide public shore signage and failure to address unauthorized outdoor dining tables. I want to draw your attention to 2016.013 when mr.henry announced intent to construct a new restaurant space on the first floor demolishing the former cafe space and expanding into the neighboring business suites within the building mr. Henry was informed in april and september of 2016 he was obtain a bcdc permit prior to commencing this project however in november 2016 much of the public space had been blocked off and construction commenced without bcdc permits staff initiated fines and mr. Henry submitted an incomplete permit application to — [indiscernible] the project. After more than a year mr. Henry failed to complete his permit application and it was returned unfiled and with note reminding him his property was within the commission jurisdiction subject to the 1979 permit and mcateer-petris act when informed of the violation staff directed him not to resume the project before seeking out a bcdc permit. Mr. Henry reinitiated the renovation project in 2022 without obtaining approval from bcdc and this is one of the subject projects of food’s enforcement proceeding.moving on to counter case. In august 2021 staff received an enforcement report which alleged that the respondent again on-instructing public access pathway with plywood and tables september 2021 enforcement staff mailed a violation notice and enforcement action and standardized administrative fines staff of second floor restaurant replied public access path had been blockaded by plywood due to a fire and marin southern fire district instructed them to close off the back patio. Bcdc staff requested documentation of the fire marshall direction but never received it mr. Henry’s process is separate from distinct from bcdc’s. Later that year in december enforcement staff asked for documentation from mr. Henry that the public access had been blocked off. In march and december of 2022, and april of 2023, staff visited the site and documented the persistence of the violations shoreline public access had been blockaded and unauthorized work was occurring on the ground floor public access area and within the grouped floor commercial space. The entire public access area was being used to store furniture construction materials and trash bins making it unusable to the public.in december of 2023 the public e-mailed staff documenting development of activities expanded to include raised wooden flooring, high top bar and new glass wall railing in the public access space appearing to staff mr. Henry intended to privatize the public access space for use by the restaurant enforcement staff responded to the opportunity resolving the case standardized find were no longer available on january 24th, 2024 enforcement staff issued violation report and complaint and penalties to mr. Henry on january 31st mr. Henry e-mailed staff and said he hadn’t received the violation report and complaint. Mr. Henry agreed to completing an permit assignment form on february 6th but staff have not yet received one. February 8th, 2024 mr.henry pledged to send documentation he had made public access area with the 1979 permit he also pledge said to submit an after the fact permit application for the unauthorized work. On february 27th, 2024 staff spoke with mr. Henry and his architect and staff explains the enforcement committee commission hearing processes and the statement of defense form due date again mr. Henry applied for after the fact permit authorization for fire repairs and interior restaurant renovations since both occurred in bcdc jurisdiction without bcdc approval and staff advised him that bcdc may require additional public access in lieu of years of closure and unauthorized work on february 28th, 2024 staff received mr. Henry’s incomplete application for after the fact approval of the fire repair project. Despite staff’s recommendation that mr. Henry include both the fire repair and the restaurant renovation project, the application excludes the restaurants renovation project and the changes to the public access space completely.as noted earlier on march third 2024 bcdc’s staff conducted a site visit and observed that wooden barricades were still being used to block the public access area and other portions of the public access area were being used for private storage of restaurant materials and rubbish. Work on the interior of the restaurant appeared incomplete. These are snapshots of the restaurant renovation plan. The image on the left shows preconstruction conditions with former el piccolo cafe outlined in a dashed blue outline and the former wine bar and retail space on the other side of this hallway. The image on the red post construction conditions and as you can see from the solid blue outline the restaurant has expanded into the former hallway and wine bar and retail space, and fill has been placed internally consisting of new restrooms, new kitchen, new dining room and office space. The public access areas outlined in red show the intent to access space for use by the restaurant by placing tables and chairs through the. So, in sum, violation one is for the unauthorized redevelopment activities on the ground floor of the building and violation two is for closing, blockading, and removing the public required access amenities and intending to privatize the public access area for restaurant use.mr. Henry submitted a statement of defense form with attachments on february 28th, 2024. In it, mr. Henry admits to owning the property subject to the complaint that worked was performed on the back deck and that he installed plywood to block access to it. Moving on to defenses and rebuttals, defense one is that mr. Henry received building permits from the city of sausalito for the restaurant remodel work, however receiving a city of sausalito permit does not absolve the respondent from process to consult bcdc prior to performing work in bcdc’s jurisdiction, to obtain bcdc’s approval for the work and to comply with the mcateer-petris act. The separation and distinction from the city of bcdc and sausalito’s processes was explained to mr. Henry in writing in 2021 and even if it had not been mr.henry is responsible for obtaining bcdc’s authorization prior to placing fill within or making any change of use within bcdc jurisdiction or change to existing required public access. Defense two is that nobody mentioned anything to mr. Henry about having to get bcdc approval for the restaurant remodel work. Despite it being solely mr. Henry’s responsibility to comply with mcateer-petris act and regulations applicable to his property staff informed him three times in 2017 and 2018 that he must obtain a bcdc permit amendment prior to commencing this project. Defense three is that nobody mentioned anything to mr. Henry about having to go through bcdc to get approval for the fire repair restoration work.mr. Henry should have known he needed to consult bcdc, staff repeatedly asked implementation that fire department directed closure of the public access area and staff informed him that the blockade was violation and asked him to remove the sheet of plywood that was blocking public access. Defense four is that mr. Henry was directed by the city of sausalito department and fire marshall to install plywood and block access to the deck as it was unsafe from the fire mcateer-petris act — [indiscernible] bcdc authorization prior to making any substantial change to any water land or structure within bcdc’s jurisdiction such as closing the public access bcdc has proceeds in place to respond to instances when emergency work is required yet there is no record of mr. Henry proactively informing bcdc about the fire and need to close public access areas for emergency repairs prior to or just after the repairs occurred. There is history of correspondence with mr. Henry that demonstrates that he should have known that he needed to inform bcdc about the closure of the public access area.lastly bcdc has never seen documentation that the department directed him to close the deck. Defense is that mr. Henry went through the required channels of the city and was issued a permit. Mr. Henry did not go through all required channels to receive approvals for the fire restoration and restaurant renovation work because bcdc is a required channel. Case history demonstrates that mr. Henry should have known that he needed to inform bcdc about the closure of the public access area yet mr.henry did not voluntarily apply for a bcdc permit until he was subject to enforcement action and the permit application is not inclusive of all work that was performed. Defense six is that mr. Henry did not add any fill while staff sees that the footprint of the deck is the same now as it was before the unauthorized work performed, mr. Henry expanded the original restaurant space by demolishing and utilizing the adjacent commercial spaces. Mr. Henry changed the use of the area by reducing public access and views, placing impediments in the public access space, and intending to privatize the public access area for restaurant use. Mr.henry removed public trash containers, removed a public bench, added a standing bar in the bench’s place, added raised wooden decking and a new glass deck rail and the plans for the new restaurant illustrate his intention to place restaurant dining tables and chairs throughout the public access area. All activities require bcdc consultation and authorization. Defense seven is that the administrative civil penalty would possibly bankrupt respondent or put him out of business and bayview one llc employs many different people and they and their families rely on the respondent for their living. The statement of defense form allows respondents opportunity to express whether they will be unable to pay the proposed penalty or whether paying the penalty would have substantial adverse effect on ability to continue in business however since relative to these considerations is exclusively in the possession and control of the violator appendix j of commission’s regulation requires violators to submit factual information supporting. A violator should provide and include audited financial statements balance sheets profit and loss statements, statements of net worth, tax returns and more. However since no factual information or documentation was submitted to support this claim, staff cannot consider this as a viable defense and mr. Henry’s title pay is not in question.to review the proposed administrative civil penalty, appendix j of the commission’s regulations requires staff to assess certain characteristics when settling on the appropriate fine amount including but not limited to respondent’s degree of culpability history of violations voluntary resolution efforts economic benefit and violator other factors we determined the violation and gravity of harm for this case is moderate and extent ever deviation from the statutory requirement to provide permit required public access and secure permit or remove unauthorized is major. Daily penalties violation were assessed at $937 per day mr. Henry failed to take action to correct violations, capped at $30,000 and staff proposes penalty amount of $60,000. Moving on to our recommended enforcement decision, the enforcement committee recommends that the commission authorize the executive director to issue the proposed cease and desist and civility penalty order number ccd2024.001.00, which would order the respondent to cease and desist from violating bcdc permit m1979.088.02, and the mcateer-petris act to fully restore and maintain public access within 30 days of order issuance by december 31st, 2024, to obtain a permit or permit amendment for extensive grounds floor restaurant redesign work that commenced in or around november 2016 and has continued to date as well as any work that was performed in the public access areas to complete a permit assignment for the 1979 permit within 45 days of order issuance to cease and desist from any development of the ground floor’s restaurant space, and to not conduct any business or other use of the space until a commission permit that authorizes such use and fill in place therein is obtained and pay $60,000 administrative civil penalty within 30 days of order issuance and that concludes the staff’s presentation.

>>: thank you, rachel. I will now invite mr. Henry’s representative, mr. Key to comment.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: I would note although mr. Key may do see, that apparently mr. Henry is virtually participating.

>>speaker: that’s correct. He’ll be available for any questions should you have any, or myself. Good morning commissioners. My name is darin key attorney with benmore and weldell on behalf of bayview one llc, as to bcdc enforcement hearing er21.080. My client’s requests, as a continuance of 30 days since our office was required last friday to present bayview we request to review the record and to better understand strategy for bayview to come into compliance with obligations for bcdc permits second is that the administrative fee be stayed until the final compliance obligation due date of december 31st, 2024. The reason for this request is he can come into compliance with bcdc obligation.six points for the commission to adopt I’ll not repeat they’re in the report 1 and 2. I would like to address the six points. First bayview has admitted permit amendment to try to come into compliance, to the extent bcdc believes a different permit amendment is needed he will do that within 30 days so they’re now properly reviewing new permits. Second bayview has opened the public access area removed tables, chairs, materials and waste containers we submitted photos yesterday demonstrating that. In addition bayview is working on providing required benches and trash containers. Bayview is requesting continuance and enforcement so we can focus on preparing compliance obligations as opposed to paying enforcement cost to resolve underlying problems requested he can come into compliance. Fourth bayview will submit application for permanent assignment within 45 days bayview will cease and desist all future development operations until bcdc permit has been authorized. And lastly bayview requests the state of enforcement for $60,000 be stayed until december 31st, 2024. If all requested work is stayed until december 31st by that date he requested the fee be waived.if not properly permitted by that date, bayview would not impose imposition of the fee extension of the time. Thank you for your time and hearing our request. We’re available for questions should you have them.

>>: thank you for your comments, mr. Key, and thank you to staff for the presentation. Would you please open the public comment period?

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: public comment period is now opened.i believe there are no members in the audience who have submitted cards. Do we have any virtual cards submitted?

>>speaker: there are no hands raised, chair wasserman.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: with that, I will close the public comment period and ask commissioners if they have any questions. I do want to point out, reemphasize two things, that chair gilmore of the enforcement committee stated: that, one, we cannot consider evidence that was not presented at the enforcement committee. So, the pictures that mr. Keys referred to cannot be considered.two, our choices in action are in fact very limited. We can approve the recommendation, we can reject it entirely, or we can send it back to the enforcement committee. With that are there any comments or questions from commissioners?

>>speaker: commissioner vazquez has his hand raised.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: commissioner vazquez.

>>John Vasquez: you said in your presentation that mr. Henry took over the property in 2007 and that there were already issues of compliance? is that correct?

>>rachel cohen: I was referring to issues of compliance that occurred after mr. Henry took overstep ownership.

>>John Vasquez: yes but he took over according to the powerpoint, in 2007.

>>rachel cohen: yes. The violation around his ownership began in 2010.

>>John Vasquez: 2010. Okay that — it’s only 14 years he’s had an opportunity to come into compliance.

>>rachel cohen: pardon me on my math.

>>John Vasquez: I just raise the issue that asking for more time when you have had plenty of time to come into compliance then you ask us to waive it, the fines for the past non-compliance, not because you do the work and somehow that goes away, those are just my thoughts.

>>Pat Ecklund: are we allowed to ask a question of the applicant?

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: yes, you are.

>>Pat Ecklund: my question to the applicant, not his representative, is why didn’t he seek legal counsel earlier?

>>speaker: good afternoon. Chris henry here. Thank you for taking the time to hear me today. I appreciate it.i hired mr. Attorney — I didn’t realize I was going to need legal representation until the hearing. I moved during covid, and I didn’t receive a lot of the correspondence that rachel said that were sent out, and once I found out the situation, I hired the attorney.

>>Pat Ecklund: thank you.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: any other questions from commissioners? Yes, commissioner randolph.

>>r. Sean randolph: was the correspondence sent by mail during covid or by e-mail?or how was that communicated.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: rachel?

>>rachel cohen: first correspond was sent by mail and e-mail during covid and mr. Henry was responding to us for e-mail in 2021. There were some mailing issues that the first version of the violation — of the violation report and complaint that was mailed in december. It was returned undeliverable. So we reissued it with a new hearing date to mr. Henry’s current address and he did get in touch with us just a few days after it was mailed to him at his new address.

>>speaker: thank you.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: and did he appear at the enforcement committee?

>>rachel cohen: yes. He appeared virtually.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you. Any other questions or comments? Public comment is now closed.chair gilmore, would you like to move the enforcement committee recommendation?

>>: thank you chair wasserman. Okay. I move to adopt, without any changes, the executive director’s recommended enforcement decision, as was ably stated by staff.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: is there a second? Commissioner nelson seconds. Any comment on the motion?i see none. Will you call — sorry. Oh, an affirmative vote of a majority of those voting are needed to approve the order federal representatives can vote on this motion. Call the roll, please

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner addiego?

>>mark addiego: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: ahn?

>>eddie ahn: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: ambuehl?

>>speaker: aye.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: benson?

>>Stephen Benson: aye.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: eckerly?

>>Jenn Eckerle: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner ecklund?

>>Pat Ecklund: aye.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner gilmore?

>>: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: gunther?

>>Andrew Gunther: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner lee?

>>Otto Lee: aye.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner nelson?

>>Barry Nelson: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner pine?

>>Dave Pine: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner randolph?

>>speaker: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner showalter?

>>Patricia Showalter: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner vazquez?

>>John Vasquez: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: commissioner zepeda?

>>Cesar Zepeda: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: vice chair eisen?

>>v. Chair, Rebecca Eisen: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: chair wasserman?

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: yes.

>>clerk, Reylina Ruiz: 17 yeses, zero nos, and zero abstentions.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: thank you, all, for that effort. That brings us to adjournment. And, as stated earlier, I would ask that the motion to adjourn — oh, you want to make the motion. The motion to be made in honor of joe bonovitz, our first executive director.

>>Barry Nelson: I wanted to make that motion and simply say that I worked for save the bay for many years and had the pleasure of working with joe during those many years and after. And I just wanted to reinforce what the chair and larry have already said, joe was wise and kind and generous and modest. He has an enormous responsibility both for the agency world we live in, and the coastal zone we all enjoy, but, really, I think had a gift for demonstrating, showing that effective government agencies can work effectively for people. It’s a tremendous legacy. Joe is among the last of the original save the bay generation. We have lost the three ladies, mel lane, diet steel, the legislators of the mcateer-petris act, and joe is among the first generation of the pioneers. Save the bay movement which remember folks is arguably the first major urban environmental movement on the globe, the first coastal protection movement on the globe.Joe was a part of a really visionary generation, and a wonderful person. So, I’ll move the recommendation.

>>chair,Zachary Wasserman: and I’m going to exercise chair’s prerogative and second that motion in joe’s memory. Unless there is a negative vote, we are adjourned in the memory of joe bonovitz. May he be an example for us all. [adjourned]

Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act

As a state agency, the Commission is governed by the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act which requires the Commission to: (1) publish an agenda at least ten days in advance of any meeting; and (2) describe specifically in that agenda the items to be transacted or discussed. Public notices of Commission meetings and staff reports (as applicable) dealing with matters on the meeting agendas can be found on BCDC’s website. Simply access Commission Meetings under the “Public Meetings” tab on the website and select the date of the meeting.

How to Provide Comments and Comment Time Limits

Pursuant to state law, the Commission is currently conducting its public meetings in a “hybrid” fashion. Each meeting notice will specify (1) where the meeting is being primarily held physically, (2) all teleconference locations, which will be publicly-accessible, and (3) the ZOOM virtual meeting link. If you would like to comment at the beginning of the meeting or on an item scheduled for public discussion, you may do so in one of three ways: (1) being present at the primary physical or a teleconference meeting location; (2) emailing comments in advance to public comment until 10 a.m. on the day of the meeting; and (3) participating via ZOOM during the meeting.

If you plan to participate through ZOOM, please use your ZOOM-enabled device and click on the “raise your hand” button, and then wait to speak until called upon. If you are using a telephone to call into the meeting, select *6 to unmute your phone and you will then be able to speak. We ask that everyone use the mute button when not speaking. It is also important that you not put your phone on hold. Each speaker may be limited to a maximum of three minutes or less at the discretion of the Chair during the public comment period depending on the volume of persons intending to provide public comment. Any speakers who exceed the time limits or interfere with the meeting may be muted by the Chair. It is strongly recommended that public comments be submitted in writing so they can be distributed to all Commission members in advance of the meeting for review. You are encouraged to submit written comments of any length and detailed information to the staff prior to the meeting at the email address above, which will be distributed to the Commission members.

Questions and Staff Reports

If you have any questions concerning an item on the agenda, would like to receive notice of future hearings, or access staff reports related to the item, please contact the staff member whose name, email address and direct phone number are indicated in parenthesis at the end of the agenda item.

Campaign Contributions

State law requires Commissioners to disqualify themselves from voting on any matter if they have received a campaign contribution from an interested party within the past 12 months. If you intend to speak on any hearing item, please indicate in your testimony if you have made campaign contributions in excess of $250 to any Commissioner within the last year, and if so, to which Commissioner(s) you have contributed. Other legal requirements govern contributions by applicants and other interested parties and establish criteria for Commissioner conflicts of interest. Please consult with the staff counsel if you have any questions about the rules that pertain to campaign contributions or conflicts of interest.

Access to Meetings

Meetings are physically held in venues that are accessible to persons with disabilities. If you require special assistance or have technical questions, please contact staff at least three days prior to the meeting via email. We will attempt to make the virtual meeting accessible via ZOOM accessibility capabilities, as well.