February 1, 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 December 21, 2023 Meeting
   (Reylina Ruiz) [415/352-3638; reylina.ruiz@bcdc.ca.gov]
5. Report of the Chair
   Resolution of Senator John Laird // Resolution of Graciela Gomez
   
6. Report of the Executive Director
7. Commission Consideration of Administrative Matters
   There is no administrative listing
   (Harriet Ross) [415/352-3615; harriet.ross@bcdc.ca.gov]
8. Public Hearing and Vote on a Recommended Enforcement Decision to Resolve Enforcement Case No. ER2000.004.00
   The Commission will consider whether to support a recommended enforcement decision to enter into a settlement agreement to resolve a violation at 3025 Marina Drive, City and County of Alameda.
   (Adrienne Klein) [415/352-3609; adrienne.klein@bcdc.ca.gov]
   Staff Presentation
9. Public Hearing and Vote on a Recommended Enforcement Decision to Resolve Enforcement Case No. ER2021.044.00
   The Commission will consider whether to support a recommended enforcement decision to enter into a settlement agreement to resolve a violation at 5 Blanding Lane, Belvedere, Marin County.
   (Rachel Cohen) [415/352-3661; rachel.cohen@bcdc.ca.gov]
10. Briefing on Updates to the California Sea-Level Rise Guidance
    Representatives of the California Natural Resources Agency Ocean Protection Council (OPC) will brief the Commission on updates to the California Sea-Level Rise Guidance, last issued in 2018. This update aims to incorporate the most current scientific knowledge and improved planning and decision-making guidance to support preparedness for rising sea levels, and is used by BCDC to determine how best to ensure that projects and plans are resilient to rising sea levels.
    (Jessica Fain) [415/352-3642; jessica.fain@bcdc.ca.gov]
    Draft California Sea Level Rise Guidance
    https://opc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SLR-Guidance-DRAFT-Jan-2024-508.pdf // Presentation
11. Briefing on the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan Progress
    The Commission will receive a briefing from staff on the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan and the plan’s draft “One Bay Vision,” which was developed based on extensive public engagement in Fall 2023. The briefing will also include an update on the project’s relationship with SB 272 (Laird 2023) and plans for spring outreach.
    (Jaclyn Mandoske) [415/352-3631; jaclyn.mandoske@bcdc.ca.gov]
    Public Comment // Presentation
12. Briefing on Plan Bay Area 2050+
    The Commission will receive a briefing by staff from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments on Plan Bay Area 2050+, a limited and focused update to Plan Bay Area 2050, the region’s long-range plan. The briefing will include a general overview of the update, with a focus on the plan’s sea level rise adaptation, conservation, and parks and open space strategies.
    (Jessica Fain) [415/352-3642; jessica.fain@bcdc.ca.gov]
    Presentation
13. 2023 Enforcement Program Annual Progress Report
    The Commission will receive a progress report on the program improvements and developments in 2023.
    (Matthew Trujillo) [415/352-3633; matthew.trujillo@bcdc.ca.gov]
14. Commission Strategic Plan Progress Report
    Senior staff will present an update on the progress associated with the Commission’s 2023-2025 Strategic Plan.
    (Larry Goldzband) [415/352-3653; larry.goldzband@bcdc.ca.gov]
15. Adjournment

Articles about the Bay and BCDC

• Solano County billionaires’ utopia: Seeking support but picking fights
• Is the Bay Area entering a ‘golden age of ferries’?
• California coastal protections versus housing: The battle is on
• How S.F.’s Embarcadero could be transformed by this $13.5 billion proposal
• As abandoned boats pile up in Bay Area waters, who’s responsible for the environmental damage?
• RICHARDSON BAY REGIONAL AGENCY RECOGNIZES BANNER YEAR FOR PROTECTING LOCAL ENVIRONMENT AND COMPLYING WITH STATE MANDATES

Meeting Minutes

Audio Recording

Transcript

Boardroom SX80: Good afternoon and welcome to our once again. Hybrid VCDC. Commission meeting.

Boardroom SX80: My name is Zach Wasserman, and I am the chair of BCDC.

Boardroom SX80: Our first order of business is to call the role Commissioners. If you are participating virtually, please unmute yourselves when you’re called, and then mute yourselves again after responding

Boardroom SX80: a new, ragged.

Boardroom SX80: sorry, Ragathaan.

Boardroom SX80: Close enough, Ragan. Thank you. Thank you. Our Hr. Analysis will be sitting in for Alina today. Anu, will you please call the roll

Boardroom SX80: chair? Wasserman here?

Boardroom SX80: Vice Charizon

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: here.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Adiego, here.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner on here, Commissioner, Bird

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Eklan.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: present

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Goren.

Susan Gorin, Commissioner: present

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Haas.

Karl Hasz, Commissioner: Yeah.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Freskin, present Commissioner Pine. present Commissioner Randolph

Boardroom SX80: here

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Zapida. here Commissioner Beech. present Commissioner Kimball.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: here

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Kishimoto

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: here

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: here’s Nervousness

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner, Gallagher, here. Commissioner Gilmore, here. Did I miss anyone?

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Yes, Commissioner, show Walter is here

Boardroom SX80: now. Bask was this here.

David Ambuehl, Commissioner: Thank you. Commissioner. Commissioner Gunther is here.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Here. I’m meeting

David Ambuehl, Commissioner: Commissioner. Ambul is here.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Decisions happen.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Did I miss anyone else?

Boardroom SX80: We have 20 who attended the roll call?

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. We have a quorum, and so we may conduct our business.

Boardroom SX80: That brings us to item 3, which is public comment period. If anyone wishes to address the Commission on any matter on which the Commission either has not yet held a public hearing or is not on today’s agenda. You may have 3 min to do so, and I’m going to start with and not impose a strict time limit and recognize

Boardroom SX80: John Coleman.

Boardroom SX80: Some of you will know this, if you may not. He has an announcement, I won’t steal his thunder.

Boardroom SX80: I might make a few comments after he speaks. John, the floor is yours.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Now it’s on. Thank you. Chair Wasserman Commissioners and BC. DC. Staff. Some of you may have read or heard A week ago, Tuesday last week I made an announcement at East Bay mud that I’m resigning from East, famous board of directors, and I’m leaving the Bay planning coalition at the Effective. I think. March 6 or so.

Boardroom SX80: and it’s for new opportunity. It’s a new, really a new opportunity. I’m going to becoming become the manager of natural resources at the Calaveras County Water district. The other Ccwd up in the mountains. And what’s unique is for 33 plus years I’ve created policy.

Boardroom SX80: Now, I have to implement policy, and it’s gonna be a big change, but one I’m really looking forward to. It’s gonna afford me the opportunities. My first years of college at Oregon State in the forestry program and after transferred to Uc. Berkeley in the natural resources department working on water policy. So I get to actually finally put all those together and work in an area that I’ve not had that chance in in a different realm. And I need to really think.

Larry and Zach! And actually the Commission and the entire Bcd. C. Staff. When I came here 13 years ago, I guess it might be

Boardroom SX80: okay to say our relationship was not

Boardroom SX80: always real good, and we still disagree with some things. However, having said that we’re able to work through the issues in a plight, cordial manner, and work to get solutions to problems and be able to support many of the programs that you’re working on. And you’ve done a great job. And I think Bpc has done a really good job in terms of working with this regulatory agencies and others like the corps of Engineers and

Boardroom SX80: State water resource. San Francisco Regional Water Quality control board.

Boardroom SX80: I’ve loved it. I have many friends from who I’ve done the work with Bpc. Annie Spay mud, and I hope that those friendships will continue going into the future.

Boardroom SX80: I’m going to be living in Calaveras County, moving up there in March. And yes, it’s a little bit different, and will take 45 min from my place to the office, but it won’t be like what it took to go from my home to here this morning. It’ll be a little different. It may take more than 45 min, depending on the elements, if it’s a heavy snowstorm.

Boardroom SX80: or whatever. But I have the vehicle to make sure I can get through all that, and don’t have to put chains on, and that’ll put me closer to next year. Skiing when I can resume skiing at Bear Valley. Yes, Aaron, we’ve talked about that. And one of your board members is not here today. That’s John Joya and John and I go back 33 years when we served together on East Bay. Mud board, I believe, is

Boardroom SX80: San Diego now, and Senator Laird’s up there, and I worked with Senator Laird, who was at the California Conservation Corps, and he was great to work with, and so many of you were, and it’s an opportunity I could not pass up

Boardroom SX80: for a lot of reasons. I leave with some

Boardroom SX80: reluctance, I guess, because I’ve really enjoyed what I’ve done in working with the people I’ve worked with, and I am leaving Bpc. In good stead, like Cameron car to stand, and hopefully you’ll be taking a greater role at the Bay planning coalition.

Boardroom SX80: and Robert Rogers if he could stand behind me, and he’s doing our legislation and taking over more responsibilities. So Bpc. Is not going away in any measure to act. We’re becoming more active and are getting new members and taking on new challenges. As I’m gonna take on a new challenge.

Boardroom SX80: They’re taking on more challenges. But it’s one that I’m really looking forward to, and I’d like to thank

Boardroom SX80: all of you and the staff

Boardroom SX80: for working with me at Bpc. In a very proactive role, and if you’re ever in Calaveras County, look me up because I have a house, and Arnold might work in San Andreas, and it’s little different. You may notice I’m Maureen sort of

Boardroom SX80: blue, gray blue jeans

Boardroom SX80: down there up there. You don’t wear a tie. You don’t wear a sports coat, and blue jeans are the norm. So I’m so really gonna fit in because I won’t have to wear a suit anymore unless it’s something really special, but probably won’t be up there that I having to wear the suit, because then I’ll be people. Look at you with suspicion going!

Boardroom SX80: What are you doing? You’re in a suit and a tie that doesn’t look right. What are you up to? So I’m gonna go from suit and tie, giving you a look of what it’s gonna be like in terms of more casual. And with that I’d like to again say thank you to everybody for the great opportunity I’ve had over the last 13 years in this role.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you, John. Thank you. You most certainly will be missed. We

Boardroom SX80: from my perspective.

Boardroom SX80: In addition to our individual constituencies as as commissioners. We have a number of specific constituencies, but sort of the 2 leading ones, if you like our Bay planning Council and save the bay.

Boardroom SX80: and you have done, I think, an an excellent job, not only representing your constituents and your group, but also working with us and helping us steer our ship and ships as we go through the various issues that bring us together. So I thank you for that. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Cool, and I

Boardroom SX80: wait. I can sit down now. You may sit down now. I’d just like to say Thank you very much. I’ve been honored and loved doing what I’ve been doing so. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: I have no other cards. Are there any virtual public speakers? There is one public comment.

Boardroom SX80: oh.

Boardroom SX80: caller, unmute yourself and you and you have 3 min.

David Lewis (he/him/his): Hi, thanks very much. This is David Lewis, executive director at Save the Bay.

David Lewis (he/him/his): And I also wanna add my congratulations. And, thanks to John Coleman. I’m particularly disappointed that he’s stepping out, because now I can’t avoid confronting the fact

David Lewis (he/him/his): that, I am probably the longest continuously serving BC. DC. Stakeholder at 26 years with save the day. I wanted to briefly. Add to my to probably 2 year history of

David Lewis (he/him/his): flagging concerns with cargill storage of bittern and open ponds. Next to the bay south of the Dunbar Bridge. As many of you know, Staff has been working for several years to try to to finalize a new permit for operation and maintenance of Cargill salt making operations, especially focusing on

David Lewis (he/him/his): their maintenance of the levees and burns that separate their material from the bay.

David Lewis (he/him/his): One of the optimistic signs that we had was that cargo is developing a plant

David Lewis (he/him/his): or a pipeline to move their toxic bittern from open ponds. There’s 60 million tons of bitter and stored there just south of the Dunbarton Bridge, right next to the bay, and the plan was a pipeline to connect with the East Bay dischargers

David Lewis (he/him/his): authority, facility and dilute that material and get it

David Lewis (he/him/his): back into the day in a safe manner.

David Lewis (he/him/his): however, as soon as the environmental impact report last year was completed, to authorize a preferred alternative route for that pipeline, Cargill decided not to pursue that. And they’re basically going back to the drawing board to come up with a new route and a new Eir and new permits and new construction, and the bottom line is the soonest that pipeline could be reducing the bitterness in those ponds. Is 8 to 10 years from now.

David Lewis (he/him/his): so this makes it even more urgent for Vcdc. And the Regional Water Board to strengthen the protections for the bay by insisting on stronger integrity, and of the berms that separate this highly toxic material from the bay

David Lewis (he/him/his): and from the marshes right next to those ponds that contain endangered species assault marsh, harvest mouse so as this permit, slowly moves along the the delay of this pipeline makes it even more important for BC. DC. To ensure that those berms have integrity, not only in the event of an earthquake, but in the

David Lewis (he/him/his): expected and anticipatable higher tides during king tides and with sea level rise. Thanks very much.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Any other public speakers. There are no more public comments. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: That brings us to item 4. Approval of the minutes of our December 20, first, 2023 meeting. We have been furnished a draft of these, and I would appreciate a motion, and second, to approve the minutes.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: I’ll move approval of the minutes.

Boardroom SX80: I’ll take Commissioner Eklan’s motion, and I’ll take Commissioner Pescin’s second

Boardroom SX80: is there any objection to the minutes.

Boardroom SX80: any abstentions? The minutes are approved unanimously. Thank you very much.

Boardroom SX80: That brings me to my report. I’m going to start on what is certainly a high note we have a

Boardroom SX80: I’m not telling you. I’m going to get to low notes, but I’m starting on a high note that we have prepared a resolution of appreciation for the tremendous work that State Senator John Laird has done to preserve and enhance the California coast, including the San Francisco Bay shoreline. In particular, we are gratefully acknowledging his steadfast work to move. SP. 272, through the State Legislature last year.

Boardroom SX80: This measure will ensure that coastal local governments will prepare plans to address and prepare for rising sea level.

Boardroom SX80: As we stated, the resolution, the legislation signed by the Governor is entirely consistent with, and will significantly move forward. Our Bay adapt initiative and our upcoming regional shoreline adaptation plan.

Boardroom SX80: I think one of the keynotes in the resolution, and and that, in fact, is a hallmark of Senator Laird’s career is persistence. I’m sure he learned it in many places, but one of them is what the University of California, Santa Cruz, which we share. So banana slugs may move slowly, but we are persistent. I would we all have the resolution.

Boardroom SX80: and I’m not going to read it in full. But again, the most important part is the vision that this measure contains in it the practical application and the persistence in getting it passed and approved by the Governor.

Boardroom SX80: I would appreciate a motion, and second, to approve the resolution. Happy to move it. I think when I was there, John? Was the Mayor.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Is there a second

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Eklan? Seconds the

Boardroom SX80: Please raise your hand? I’m sorry. Do I hear any objection to the motion. hearing and seeing none, it is approved.

Boardroom SX80: We thank you very much, Senator Laird, and the virtual floor is yours.

Senator John Laird: Well, thank you very much. I really appreciate it, and I appreciate the recognition of the persistence because it took 2 years. And until I sort of threw down the gauntlet. In the last week, before

Senator John Laird: amendments I had to throw down the gauntlet to people that wanted to to move it on, and I think the thing that really helped make a difference was the fact that we had the storms last year.

Senator John Laird: Because that’s while this was going on, and and the central coast really took an incredible hills wharves trashed see? Walls wiped out, roads wiped out, and I think it really made the case. And in one hearing I said, this, bill’s important, because to have those conversations before these things happen and not after. And I just worry

Senator John Laird: that we still won’t be having some of these discussions in time. And so

Senator John Laird: it it also puts an onus on you and the Coastal Commission to work really hard to make this happen. And the collaboration with the cities and counties is gonna be really important. And I just stand ready

Senator John Laird: to work together on that, because this is just too important. And we got the money and for local assistance in the budget. And we’re gonna have to fight to hold that. So just thanks for this honor. And I just look forward to working together because some of the hardest work is still to come.

Boardroom SX80: Amend that one. Thank you very much. With that I’m going to move to another resolution

Boardroom SX80: which we have prepared for our now retired executive secretary, Grace Gomez, who needs no introduction to the Commissioners, as you know, or may remember. Grace retired at the end of last year, after a long and illustrious career at VCDC.

Boardroom SX80: She was, when she retired, the longest currently serving Staffer at BCDC. A little over 40 years, and we have all enjoyed her friendly demeanour and get it done. Attitude!

Boardroom SX80: I am going to read a couple of things from her resolution.

Boardroom SX80: Whereas Gracie’s positive outlook, quick smile, and her ability to get work done well were always on display at BCDC. Allowing her to become BCD. C’s executive secretary. 11 years after she started.

Boardroom SX80: just after high school as a seasonal clerk. Since there was a hiring freeze she has always been ready for any and all tasks with a team approach from the Friday evening mailings back in the day to supporting the Commission remotely during the Covid emergency.

Boardroom SX80: and whereas it is widely known that VCD. C’s current Commissioners and alternates will always open an email from Gracie prior to one sent by the executive director, vividly demonstrating who’s really more important in the big scheme of things.

Boardroom SX80: She is our format queen, she, her smile and her winning ways have inspired all of us, and she is missed. You may have poached the podium and make a few remarks if you would like.

Boardroom SX80: Sorry!

Boardroom SX80: Oh, Larry wants me to vote on your resolution. First Cause, you know, if you talked first, we might not approve it.

Boardroom SX80: I would entertain a motion to, and a second to approve the resolution. So moved Commissioner Randolph and Commissioner Eisen Seconds. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Any objections

Boardroom SX80: approved unanimously. Thank you, ma’am.

Boardroom SX80: You can.

Boardroom SX80: Chair Wassaman Commissioners and Bcd staff, and of course I can’t forget

Boardroom SX80: our core reporters from one and her husband.

Boardroom SX80: I can’t believe it’s been 40 years that I’ve worked at BCDC.

Boardroom SX80: It feels like a lifetime.

Boardroom SX80: It’s bittersweet moment embarking on a new chapter of my life, but I’m ready to experience the new adventures of retirement will bring me.

Boardroom SX80: Throughout my career. I’ve learned so much and worked alongside with many amazing and talented people.

Boardroom SX80: I’ve also developed long time friendships. I will forever look back at my time

Boardroom SX80: at BC. DC. And treasured the wonderful memories, especially on mailing days in the mail room. We had so much fun back in the day when we had mailings we had to mail over 100 IP. Sometimes 300, and, thanks to Larry, we cut those mailing lists down in half. And he said one day, We’re gonna do emails instead of snail mail.

Boardroom SX80: And thanks to him, that’s all we’ve done now. And it’s cut down all that time, but I do remember all our fun times in the mail room when it would be late.

Boardroom SX80: But we would all have a ball of a time we would all get together and make it happen. Make sure that it was the mail was driven to the rink on center, or trying to find out which mailing which post offices were open at that time, and so I will remember those days

Boardroom SX80: when I take my walks at the San Diego, Marina. I see the public shore signs. I will always be reminded of the wonderful work Bcd. Has done so, even though I’ve retired. I do see the public shore signs, and it reminds me of all the wonderful work that Bcd. Has done and that I was part of.

Boardroom SX80: and

Boardroom SX80: some commissioners I’ve I’ve seen and known for a while in the background. I remember you, Gilmore Peskin, Randolph, and I’m sure there’s some others, Joya and I.

Boardroom SX80: We’ll miss all of that, sending you the quorum email. Blast and

Boardroom SX80: I’ll still be. I’ll still be behind the scenes, seeing what goes on and checking in with Raina, who’s covering, for until we fill the position, and

Boardroom SX80: I would treasure everything that I have learned. and take with me those beautiful memories that were created at BCDC.

Boardroom SX80: It was my family. It’s hard to let go, but

Boardroom SX80: I’m gonna look over for now, and I just thank you for for everything.

Boardroom SX80: and I just can’t believe the 40 years is here. It’s like, I remember back in the day, I used to think, oh, it’s going to take forever to retire. But look, it’s here. I was like, Wow.

Boardroom SX80: but yes, thank you, and take care, and I’ll be in the background.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you very much, Tracy.

Boardroom SX80: Our we did have a meeting of our rising sea level working group on January eighteenth, and normally I would ask for a report on that. However, we’re going to have a staff report, so I will defer to that. There was an article this morning in the New York Times. I commend to you nationally, but including the West Coast, on how coastal cities are and how they need to adapt. We get

Boardroom SX80: a little bit of benefit from the fact that the east coast and the Gulf coast tends to be hit more by storms than we do, but it is keeping the issues at a significant level.

Boardroom SX80: Our next meeting will be held on February fifteenth, under Bagley Keynes. New attendance rules at that meeting. We expect to take up the following matters, a briefing on the draft. San Francisco waterfront coastal flood study a briefing on our 2023 Enforcement work and a briefing on our strategic plan. Progress

Boardroom SX80: that brings us to X party reports. If any commissioner wishes to make an X party report on communications outside of commission meetings

Boardroom SX80: on an adjudicatory matter, they are welcome to do so now, regardless of whether you do it orally. You do need to file a written report.

Boardroom SX80: Any ex-party reports.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Commissioner. Yes, I just like to report that I had a conversation with Gita Dev of this Year Club. I’ll submit the necessary report in writing as well.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: I see no others

Boardroom SX80: that brings us to our the Executive director.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Chair washerman. On February first, 1843,

the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York opened its doors for business, and it remains the oldest continuous writer of insurance in the United States. Exactly 41 years later, February first, 1884, the first volume of the Oxford English Dictionary was published. It included words starting from the beginning of the alphabet through those beginning with the letters, a NT.

Boardroom SX80: You’ll note that the word insurance was not included in the first volume. It took 44 more years for the final volume to be published in 1 28

from this music lover’s perspective, perhaps nowhere and at no time, was the absence of the word insurance felt more than February first, 1, 96. On that day, 128 years ago. Today

Puccini’s opera, La Bohem, premiered in Turin, Italy, and since then poor Mimi has died in the opera’s fourth and final act without ever having purchased a life insurance policy

Boardroom SX80: with regard to staffing. I’m very pleased to let you know that we have 2 new hires coming into Bcd. C. This month. First, Kate Lyons has accepted an offer for the environmental scientist position in the adapting to rising tides data and science unit. Kate is from the City of Brotherly Love, and earned her Bachelor of Science in Geology at Temple University, so she may be the first owl to be hired by Bcd.

Boardroom SX80: After graduating, she worked in the energy efficiency and renewable energy engineering field, then joined the Civics Park Fellowship program where she worked for Mtc. And with Vcd. C. In preparing the technical analysis that was part of the funding and investment framework. She then became a planner in the Governor’s office of planning and research where she helped develop the regional resilience grant program guidelines and supported programs that provide regional resilience throughout the State of California.

Boardroom SX80: Kate will work with our adapting to rising tide science team as it develops new and exciting products.

Boardroom SX80: and you will soon meet Sierra Peters, whom I have selected as Bcd’s new executive liaison a new position. When Gracie announced to us that she planned to retire, we decided that we had to reimagine what a new role could bring to BCDC. Including acting as a commission secretary.

So starting in March, Sierra will be sitting where you now see anew. And now also Raylena, and before her Peggy Sharon, Howard, Russ, and Grace. I don’t know who was before Russ, but in any case the chair was. The chair has been, has been sat in, occupied, but not

Boardroom SX80: previously, by what we would call a commission secretary.

For the past 2 years Sierra worked as a program manager, managing the logistics and execution of multi-tiered events across the US.

Boardroom SX80: She has led projects prepared internal and external correspondence, and developed new processes for both her Alma Mater, Rocky Mountain College, in Billings, Montana, and for enacts U.S.A. A program for college students to develop leadership in business acumen. As I noted, Sierra is a Batlin bear. Having earned her bachelor’s degree in business administration from Rocky Mountain with Minors Nikon and Small business.

Boardroom SX80: I should also note that Bcd. C. Continues to search for great candidates, to fill our open positions in the regulatory, in the enforcement and in the planning sectors. And I’ll send you a list of those vacancies today, and please send them to your networks also on a staffing note. Abag Ina inaugurated Napa County Supervisor, Belia, Ramos as its new president.

Boardroom SX80: and Berkeley, Mayor, Jesse Aragine is Vp. In January, as both serve on Bcd. C. We’re thrilled that we have even more of a direct link with that important agency.

And with regard to the State’s budget situation, Bcd. C. Is subject to a budget freeze along with all other state bodies. However, this freeze can be categorized, perhaps, as somewhere between late autumn sweater weather and a major frost, while our spending will be monitored by the Department of Finance, we are allowed to continue expending funds, unnecessary training expenses that actually save the State funds in the long term emergencies, etc. We have instituted an internal process to ensure that

we don’t make any mistakes, and I want to commend our financial services. Staff, led by Sean Williamson for taking on this task so well.

Boardroom SX80: this morning, at a meeting of the Highway 37 Policy Committee, led by local government representatives, California, State Transportation Agency, Secretary Tokes, omishaken and natural resources. Secretary Wade Crowfoot

Boardroom SX80: jointly announced that Cal. State and C. Nra are launching the new partnership and leadership structure about which I spoke late last year. It is designed to improve transportation, hasten natural resource, restoration, and public access strengthen equitable solutions and resolve. Climate change challenges in the North Bay along Highway 37.

We all know that 37 is essential to the entire bay region, but its traffic jams are intolerable for workers trying to get to their jobs. It has no transit option. It’s already flooded during storms, and it is at high risk from sea level rise. This new organizational structure will elevate environmental and equity goals alongside fundamental transportation goals.

I think that it is important to recognize that this new approach is changing, how the state of California views the rebuild, that is, from a series of connected projects with different timetables and outcomes to a larger scale integrated program of improvements whose outcome will be greater than the sum of its parts.

This is a once in a generation, opportunity to re envision, transportation, infrastructure that will meet the many challenges of the century from increasing mobility to strengthening equity, to restoring desperately needed natural habitat

during the next few months as Bcd’s representative on the new leadership structure. I’ll be working with my colleagues, including David M. Buell, who is here on the screen today to daylight a lot of information about Highway 37. And I really want to say publicly how much we appreciate David and Dina, for all of their great work in helping us try to figure this one out. We’ll schedule a briefing for the Commission on the program’s progress this spring, and please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Meanwhile, that you may have

our sediment for Wetlands Adaptation project held day one of its 2 day stakeholder workshop last month. This was the first solely in person. Public workshop BCDC. Is held since the pandemic began, and we think it was a success. We had over 50 attendees, and Commissioner Gunther opened the break and opened the workshop with a stirring call to action.

The events included 6 breakout sessions, in which participants engaged in conversations about barriers and challenges of beneficial reuse of sediments and soils, and proposed actions to address them. Day 2 of the workshop is on February thirteenth, and will focus on fine tuning proposed actions. It will also include additional breakout sections on governance, Coalition Building and funding information on registering for the event can be found on the homepage of the Bcd. C. Website.

Ashley Tomerlin, our Bay design analyst and senior landscape architect, met a couple weeks ago with a group of students at Redwood City’s Design Tech High School to work through the students, planting design and restoration project at the oracle campus. The proposal includes removing invasive species like ice plant fennel, and black acacia, and replanting the Slu bank with native species.

Ashley introduced the students to the principles of planting design and priorities, and Ashley will continue to provide support as the design progresses. They’re hoping to complete the removal of the species this year, and the group’s freshmen will continue with the project in upcoming years.

Speaking of freshmen or sophomores, such as our son

Boardroom SX80: Bcd. C. Is now live on Instagram. Please follow us and send us to your friends, your colleagues, your relatives, your coworkers, and anybody else. You know we’ve already received an awful lot of very, very welcome messages to do that, and we appreciate your support.

Finally, an announcement for our county supervisors.

Boardroom SX80: I shall contact each of you next week with a request. We want you to arrange for you the 2 City Council members representing your county, who sit on Bcd. C’s local elected task force and Bcd. C. Staff to brief the Mayor City Council members and planning directors in your county on Bcd. C’s plans to complete the guidelines, they will use to begin work on their local rising. C-level

adaptation plans as required by Sb. 272. We know that each county has regular meetings of their mayors and council members and other senior staff, and we think it’s vital that you introduce us and join with us as we explain what we expect to occur during the remainder of the year as we develop and you all approve. Fingers crossed those guidelines.

We would prefer that these meetings occur sometime in March or April, and I also want to mention that our staff and Mtca. Bag staff will be reaching out to your planning staffs and throughout your counties to update project information that’s already in our shoreline Project inventory map.

So all this leads me to report chair Wasserman, that I’m happy to answer any questions.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Are there any questions for the executive director.

Boardroom SX80: seeing none. There are no administrative listings before us today, so we will move on to Item 8,

Boardroom SX80: which is a public hearing and vote on a recommended Enforcement decision

Boardroom SX80: to resolve the enter into a center settlement agreement and resolve enforcement case number er 2,000 point 0 0 4.0 0.

Regarding the owner of the residential property located at 3 0 2 5 Marina drive in the city of Alameda.

Boardroom SX80: I would like to ask Mister Roger Standridge, the owner of that property, to identify himself and make his presence known.

Boardroom SX80: Is he on? Virtually

Boardroom SX80: we were hopeful, but we were not expecting him. All right, that is his privilege.

Boardroom SX80: BCDC. Enforcement staff will present the case and the proposed settlement agreement for our consideration. If Mister Standridge does appear, you will have the opportunity to comment if you wish to do so. After all the presentations have been made, public comment period will be open and will be limited to 3 min per person.

Boardroom SX80: After that has been closed the floor will be opened to members of the Commission to ask, follow up questions of ECDC. Staff, and deliberate on the matter. All speakers must limit their presentations and comments to the evidence already made part of the Enforcement record which has been published online with this meeting’s agenda.

Boardroom SX80: and or to the policy implications of such evidence. we will not allow the presentation of any oral testimony

Boardroom SX80: before Adrian Klein gives her presentation. I want to do 2 things. First, I want to open the public hearing on the matter. Second, I invite Commissioner Gilmour, the chair of the Enforcement Committee, to give a brief summary of the committee’s hearing on the matter that took place on January eleventh

Boardroom SX80: chair. Gilborn, you have the floor.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Chair Wasserman. On January eleventh, 2024, the Enforcement Committee held a hearing and a vote on Staff’s recommendation to approve a settlement agreement between BCDC. And the respondent. Mister Standridge, addressing an unauthorized boat dock at his home in Alameda, Mister Standridge as of yet, has chosen not to attend this hearing.

Boardroom SX80: After the staff presentation, the Enforcement Committee voted unanimously to adopt the Staff recommendation as the Enforcement Committee’s recommendation to the Full Commission

at this time I will invite Miss Klein to make her presentation.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone.

Boardroom SX80: Grace is gone. Alright, next slide. That introduction was adequate. So, as usual, we’ll just have a quick outline. Or, as you can see, so next slide 2 location images one. This is the

Boardroom SX80: Bay Bridge to the south, Oakland and Alameda, and the Red Arrow shows you 3025. Marina drive. Next slide is closer. This is an image of the residential neighborhood and the property in question next slide.

Boardroom SX80: So just a quick timeline of events, it’s slightly unusual. So on or before July 2,000. A former owner of this property replaced an existing boat dock with a new boat dock

Boardroom SX80: in roughly the same location, but with smaller dimensions without a BCC. Permit. That same year that former owner submitted an incomplete application to replace a 336 square foot dock with a 44 square foot. Dock and staff responded, indicating that the application was incomplete.

Boardroom SX80: to which the former owner did not respond, leaving it unfiled

Boardroom SX80: between 2,000 and the year 2,022 Bcd. Staff did not pursue resolution of this violation, and the former owner did not follow through several years before that in 2,018, Mr. Standrich purchased the property.

Boardroom SX80: and we engaged with him. In the year 2022, and 2023 to try and solicit an application or have the dock removed. We were unsuccessful, despite having issued a letter commencing a standardized fine penalty clock.

Boardroom SX80: so we terminated his opportunity to resolve using the standardized fines, commenced a formal enforcement proceeding, issued a violation report and complaint. And that was in October of 2023 that resulted in productive conversations. Mister Sandridge agreed to submit, and after the fact, application for the asbilt dock.

and expressed interest in resolving the matter with a settlement agreement instead of an order.

Boardroom SX80: So in November we agreed to order terms after conversation, and during that time he submitted draft site plans and evidence that Regional Water Quality Board approval was not required for the 23 year old structure.

Boardroom SX80: He informed us the flotation material was encased in plastic boxes which is promotes water quality protection. And he submitted site plans identifying the location of the bay and the Shirlin band. All of this is required as part of the application

Boardroom SX80: he

Boardroom SX80: did submit the penalty payment that the summit agreement would require if adopted, although we do await his application, fee and additional application materials.

Boardroom SX80: Next slide, please. So to resolve this single violation of a failure to obtain a permit to authorize a smaller replacement boat. Dock next slide, please, Angela, thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Mister Standard has agreed to do the following, which, as Enforcement Committee chair, Gilmour just mentioned as of the eleventh of January, the Exec de

Boardroom SX80: Enforcement Committee recommends that the Commission authorize the Executive director to execute the proposed settlement agreement which requires a respondent to remove the unauthorized Doc or submit an application by the middle of this month, and pay an administrative penalty which has been paid. And that concludes the staff presentation.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you, Adrian. If Mister Sandridge is present, I would invite him to comment if he so chooses.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, well, I’m going to say thank you to Miss Klein for the presentation and chair. Wasserman, would you please open public comment? Period?

Boardroom SX80: Certainly. Do we have any public speakers? There are no public speakers.

Boardroom SX80: Mister Standridge is not here, but I assume he is not objected in any way.

Boardroom SX80: I’m seeing the negative response from the chair of the committee. No, I’m sorry to put it on the record. We have not heard any objections from Mr. Standridge.

Boardroom SX80: public comment period is closed. Do commissioners have any questions or comments.

Boardroom SX80: I don’t see any

Boardroom SX80: chair, Gilmore, would you like to move the?

Boardroom SX80: I would like to entertain a motion, and would offer Chair Gilmour.

Boardroom SX80: to make the motion and seek a second closing

Boardroom SX80: close the public hearing. Do I need to vote on a close? The public hearing voice vote the we have a little difference here. All those in favor of closing the public hearing say, Aye, aye, any opposed public hearing is closed. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Now you can make the motion. Thank you. Chair Wasserman, I would like to move the Enforcement Committee’s recommendation, which is to accept the Settlement agreement.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: and I’ll second the motion. This is Commissioner Eklund.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you, Pat.

Boardroom SX80: will you please call the roll on the motion

Boardroom SX80: chair, wasn’t you? Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Cheriasen, Vice-chairizan?

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Adiego. Yes, Commissioner on

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Burke.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Kimbo.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Yes.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Commissioner Eklund.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Ambu.

David Ambuehl, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Corin.

Susan Gorin, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Gunther.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Yes, yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Haas.

Karl Hasz, Commissioner: Aye.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Shimoto.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Hi.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Pasquos

John Vasquez, Commissioner: yes.

Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Commissioner: Commissioner Malton Peters. Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Prescott. Aye. Commissioner Pine, Commissioner Gallagher. Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Rancho.

Sanjay Ranchod, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Randolph, Commissioner, show Walter Commissioner Gilmore yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Zephyr yes.

Commissioner Beech

Boardroom SX80: abstain.

Boardroom SX80: Did I miss anyone?

Boardroom SX80: We have 22 years. no nose and one abstained. The action is approved. Thank you all for your efforts.

Boardroom SX80: That brings us to item 9, a public hearing and vote on a recommended enforcement decision to resolve enforcement case

Boardroom SX80: ER. 2021.0 4 4.0 0 regarding a residential property located at 5 Landing Lane in Belvedere.

Boardroom SX80: I would ask that Mr. Carl Johan Smyer, or the attorney for Mr. Johan Smyr, Mr. John Sharp to

Boardroom SX80: make their presence known physically or virtually, if they are here physically or virtually. I am here virtually.

_John Sharp: Thank you very much. Sir

Boardroom SX80: Bcd. C. Enforcement staff will present the case and the proposed settlement agreement for the Commission’s consideration, after which time Mr. Sharp will be given an opportunity to comment, if he wishes to do so, after all of the public comment period.

Boardroom SX80: After the presentations public comment

Boardroom SX80: period will begin. The hearing will be opened, public comments will be minutes limited to 3 min

Boardroom SX80: after that has been closed, the floor will be open to members of the Commission to ask follow up questions.

Boardroom SX80: All speakers must limit their presentation and comments for the evidence already made. Part of the Enforcement record which has been published online with this meeting’s agenda and or the policy

Boardroom SX80: implications of such evidence, we will not allow presentation of oral testimony.

Boardroom SX80: I will open the public hearing. And now invite Commissioner Gilmore, the chair of the Enforcement Committee to make a presentation.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Chair Wasserman.

Boardroom SX80: On January eleventh, 2024, the Enforcement Committee held a hearing and a vote on the Staff’s recommendation to approve a settlement agreement between BCDC. And the respondent, Mister Joan Johansmeyer, to resolve Enforcement case ER. 2021.0 0.

Boardroom SX80: Excuse me point 0 4 4.0 0. Addressing an unauthorized fence at his home in the Belvedere.

Boardroom SX80: The respondent’s attorney, Mister Sharp attended the hearing on his behalf, and affirmed for the committee that his client agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement.

Boardroom SX80: After hearing a presentation and comments by Staff and Mister Sharp.

Boardroom SX80: the Enforcement Committee held deliberations and voted unanimously to adopt the staff recommendation as the Enforcement Committee’s recommendation to the full commission

Boardroom SX80: at this time. I will invite Miss Cohen to make her presentation.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Thank you, Commissioner Gilmore. Just a moment while I share my screen.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Hey?

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Good afternoon, sure, Wasserman Commission members and all in attendance today I’ll present Enforcement case number er 202-14-4400, for which the respondent is Mr. Carl H. Johansmeyer, represented today by Attorney John Sharp.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: I’ll begin by familiarizing you with the location of the violation, followed by a timeline of events, and then end by summarizing the violation and finally presenting the staff’s recommendation.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: There are 2 images on this slide. The one on the left is a zoomed out vicinity map, and the one on the right focuses in more closely on the location of the violation.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: There’s a red PIN on each image at 5 blending Lane, Belvedere Island, Marin County. The home is close to the southern tip of Belvedere Island, and faces east.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: This is a photo of the property from the lower shoreline area taken facing west, there’s a yellow oval outlining the specific location of the violation.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: This photo on the left of the screen. Is of the property from the lower shoreline area taken facing west, there’s a yellow oval outlining the specific location of the violation. Oh, I’m sorry it’s red to run slides or notes.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: This image on the left shows the violation more closely. The respondent has represented that there has been a fence surrounding this property for the past century, that they needed to replace an 11 foot 2 inch long section of a 6 foot tall wire fence, and approximately 2021.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: That 11 foot 2 inch long. Section is the section that the respondent needed. Vcdc authorization prior to placing.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: I’ll now review the timeline of events in this case.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: In starting in May of 2021 Bcd. Enforcement Staff received a report from City of Belvedere Staff, alleging that unpermitted fencing had been installed on the property of 5 blending lane within DC. DC’s 100 foot shoreline ban jurisdiction. Bcd. Opened this Enforcement case and made initial contact with respondents authorized representative attorney, John Sharp.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: between May and June, of 2021, respondent and Mr. Sharp inform staff that they were meeting with consultants in a survey, and had hired an architect, indicating that they were beginning to put together initial application materials to seek and obtain an after the fact permit for the fence replacement.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: In September of 2021, city of Belvedere Staff, and a surveyor conducted a site visit and reported their findings to BC. DC. Staff, who were unavailable to attend

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: city staff, confirmed that fencing had been placed on Mr. Johans Myers property without permits, and with this information, in October of 2021 Pcdc. Staff issued a notice of violations to the respondent, initiating a standardized fine process which gave him 35 days to either remove the unpermitted fill, or to seek and obtain a permit for the fence before standardized fines began accruing.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: In March of 2022, Mister Sharp submitted an incomplete region. Wide permanent application on behalf of Mr. Johan’s Meyer seeking after the fact authorization for the fence.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: And then, between October 2022 and October 2023, Enforcement staff made several attempts to urge Mr. Johan’s mayor, to complete his application.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: On October thirteenth, 2023, Staff notified the respondent that the executive director was rescinding the opportunity to resolve the violation using the standardized fine process. After determining that the respondent had not made a good faith effort to resolve the violation.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Then, on October thirtieth, 2023, Staff mailed a violation report and complaint for administrative civil penalties to the respondent, and finally, on November thirtieth, 2023, responded, and Staff agreed to resolve this violation via the proposed settlement agreement.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: To briefly summarize the proposed settlement agreement. It would require Mr. Johan’s Meyer to one pay $2,500 an administrative civil liability within 30 days of execution of the agreement, and 2 by February 20, eighth, 2024. Either a remove the unauthorized fence and submit photographic evidence of the same, or B submit a filed application seeking after the fact authorization for defense.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: When the Enforcement Committee heard this case at their meeting on January eleventh, 2024, committee members were curious about the Commission’s option to take action in the case of respondent noncompliance with the proposed settlement agreement due to the length of time the case has remained unresolved. So far.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: so first mentioned that Bcd. C. Can extend the deadlines in the settlement agreement. If causes beyond the respondents. Control prevent timely compliance.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: however, in the event of failure by Mr. Johans Meyer to comply with the settlement agreement for causes within his control. BC. DC. Can recommence formal enforcement proceedings by issuing a new violation report and complaint with recalculated administrative civil penalties.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Appendix J. Of the Commission’s regulations requires staff to consider certain characteristics of a violation when calculating the appropriate administrative civil penalty amount, such as the cost of the state, of pursuing the enforcement action, and whether the violator has delayed compliance.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: using the original violation report and complaint penalty amount as a baseline. If staff issued a new violation report and complaint, we would have the opportunity to factor in the additional days that the respondent has been out of compliance as well as the violators, bad faith and reaching compliance.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Lastly, we do not expect Mr. Johans Meyer to fail to comply, and we are entering into the settlement agreement with utmost confidence, and Mr. Johan’s Meyers ability to comply.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: So to summarize the one violation for the failure to obtain A BC DC. Permit prior to placing fencing in BC. DC’s 100 foot shoreline ban jurisdiction in violation of the Macetier Petrus Act section 6, 6, 6, 3, 2, a.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: And to resolve this case, the Enforcement Committee recommends that the Commission vote to authorize the Executive director to execute the proposed settlement agreement, which again requires respondent to one pay, $2,500, an administrative civil liability within 30 days of execution of the agreement, and 2 by February 2820 24.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: Either a remove the unauthorized fence and submit photographic evidence of the same, or B submit a filed application, seeking after the fact authorization for the fence.

_Rachel Cohen, BCDC: And that concludes the staff’s presentation. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you, Rachel. I now invite Mr. Sharp to comment if he so chooses.

_John Sharp: Thank you. Members of the Commission and staff. I do not intend to go into granular detail about the timeline here unless you want me to.

_John Sharp: I am authorized to enter into this agreement in Mr. Johan’s Myers behalf.

_John Sharp: and I do want to emphasize that we are committed to complying with the terms of the agreement. I will say this is a complicated property, where that fence is that you saw in.

_John Sharp: I think it was slides one and 2 is the apex of

_John Sharp: at least 3 properties, one of which is on by my client, another of which is on by the city of Belvedere, and is open space. and another of which is owned by.

I think it’s Sanitation. District 5. So the

_John Sharp: the topography, the geology. All of it is complicated. I won’t go into exhaustive detail about what led to the creation of that fence. But,

_John Sharp: There were some invitations by members of the public in Belvedere

_John Sharp: and committee members for the public to

_John Sharp: enter the open space, which is very steep, unimproved.

_John Sharp: and dangerous.

_John Sharp: and there were some events of those folks.

_John Sharp: people entering that property, falling off the rocks under my clients property, and getting into the bay.

_John Sharp: wandering out onto the dock and jumping in the water, and that’s why the fence went in. So with that, unless you have questions, I will thank you, and again commit to the terms of the agreement.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you for your comments and your affirmation of the contents of the agreement, Mr. Sharp, and, thanks to Staff for the presentation chair. Wasserman, would you please open the public comment period, the comment period, the public hearing is open

Boardroom SX80: any one from the public wish to comment, now is the time.

Boardroom SX80: ano, do we have any come? People who wish to comment?

Boardroom SX80: We have Commissioner Eglin

Boardroom SX80: any from the public before we get to Commissioner. None from the public. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Is there any objection to closing the public, hearing.

Boardroom SX80: hearing, and seeing no objection? If the public hearing is closed, I would recognize Commissioner Ekland.

Thank you very much. Chair, Walterman.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Ii read this report a couple of times because I was really struck with the fact that the applicant was

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: non responsive to Bcd staff

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: for over a year and a half and then the what was submitted was, that’s something that was not complete. And I do

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: thank Mr. Sharp, for getting involved and helping to resolve this issue.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: My concern is that here, almost 3 years later, now, we’re at a proposed settlement. but from what I read from the settlement agreement, it doesn’t appear to deal with

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: the fact that if he is non-responsive and when I work for the Us. Environmental Protection Agency, I was in charge of the Npds permitting program, which is not only permitting but enforcement.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: When we dealt with applicants like this, we actually, if there was a settlement agreement, we actually included a condition that if

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: the respondent, or if the applicant was not responsive, we actually included in there what would happen rather than having to issue another new violation report and and panel with penalties.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So I guess my question for staff is that

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: has BC. DC, tried to incorporate something like this in a settlement agreement in the past, and

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: and if not, why not? And then

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: you know. Just sort of like, if if if there is not a response?

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Then, and then just actually stating in there what what the consequences would be, and that we will consider this to be another violation of which then we’ll be seeking penalties of such and such.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So I’m kind of curious

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: about whether or not that’s something that’s possible, or maybe not necessarily for this particular applicant. But

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: II am struck with the fact that what 3 years is this going on? And the city of Belvedere apparently has been dealing with this, and probably complaints from the public for such a long time.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So if Staff can help me to understand that I’d appreciate that

Boardroom SX80: this is Michael Inge, acting general counsel. We have had some internal discussions about that very topic

Boardroom SX80: in relation to you know this case and just going forward. And it is certainly something that we can look into. I think, you know, if you look at various settle settlement agreements that we’ve used in the past. There may be slight deviations, and so I think there’s an opportunity to figure out sort of a

Boardroom SX80: you know what may be the best sort of drafting or provisions that proactively get at the concern that you just raised. So we’ll definitely take a look at that for future settlement agreements.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: II would really super really encourage folks to do that, because when you get a recalcitrant in person or company, or whatever it takes to have so much more time to do a new violation. And

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: and this way it’s sort of wrapped into the same in a way.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So II did this not only when I was in charge of the Npds permitting program EPA, but also the San Francisco pay program as well when I was working with the the regional board.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So not not working as an employee, but as a working as an EPA employee with the regional board and setting up the programs way back

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: in long time since I work for Eba for over 35 years. So anyway. So I just really want to encourage that. And I’d love an opportunity to talk with Staff in the future

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: if that’s something and I’d encourage the Commission to really support that idea cause. I found that it really helped facilitate compliance.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: and it also help facilitate and reduce the amount of staff time that’s devoted to it. Especially if you wait for 3 years. There’s staff turnover a lot.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So this way, it’s sort of like an automatic thing that happens.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: And I want to thank Mr. Sharp for getting involved. And I am hoping that you’re gonna make sure that your client does comply.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Because it is something that has adversely impacted from what I could tell.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: The public’s asset access to public waters. And the city of Belvedere has been able has had to. I don’t know this for sure, because I haven’t talked with them, but

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Has had to spend staff time on this, and cities just don’t have the staff time to do this kind of stuff

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: given all the State mandates, and that we have to comply with so comments in the panic gallery up in Nevada.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Vice chair, eisen

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: I echo everything that Commissioner Eklund, said the Enforcement Committee was also concerned that so much staff time can be taken up with relatively small matters given the scope of what the BC. DC. Is charged with

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: doing. And that’s why we asked specifically to have the question address, what happens if the settlement agreement is not abided by I think. Commissioner Eklins. Idea of placing something in settlement agreements that would have a kind of automaticness about it. If there’s a failure

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: to respond. I understand that there can be complications, but would be a good idea, and would hopefully get move some of these matters along a lot faster than they have been moved along.

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: So thank you, Pat, for that comment. And, believe me, the Enforcement Committee is thinking along the exact same lines.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Molten Peters.

Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Commissioner: Thank you. I wanna add to the 2 previous speakers and agree. And in addition to the staff time, I wanna comment that I’m aware that

Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Commissioner: there’s been a desire to create access to the water or the public on the publicly owned property, and that has been held up for 3 years

Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Commissioner: until this matter could get settled. So there’s there’s some additional issues that arise when we, when we can’t get them to a a settlement more quickly.

Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Commissioner: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: I see no other hands or comments from commissioners.

Boardroom SX80: With that.

Boardroom SX80: sure. Gilmour, would you like to make a motion?

Boardroom SX80: We have closed the public hearing just type. make a motion to accept the Enforcement Committee’s recommendation.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Thank you. Chair Wasserman. I make a motion that the Commission accepts the Enforcement Committee’s recommendation to approve the Settlement agreement, and I’ll second the Motion

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Commissioner Ackland

Boardroom SX80: Roll call, please.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Adiego. Yes.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Commissioner on Commissioner Berg.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Kimball.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Reclin.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Aye.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Goren.

Susan Gorin, Commissioner: Aye.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Gunther.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Aye.

Karl Hasz, Commissioner: Commissioner Haas, Hi.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Kishimoto.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Commissioner Raspberries. Yes.

Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Commissioner: Commissioner Malton Peters, yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Pesca all Right Commissioner Pine. Yes, Commissioner Gallagher. Yes, yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Rancho.

Sanjay Ranchod, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Randolph.

Boardroom SX80: Yes, Commissioner, show Alder.

Boardroom SX80: I still count that as one s. Commissioner Gilmore. Yes, Commissioner Zephyr.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Beech abstain

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner eisen sorry, wise chair. Eisen.

Rebecca Eisen, Commissioner: Yes.

Boardroom SX80: chair Wasserman.

Boardroom SX80: Yes. so we have 22. Yes, no-no’s and one abstain

Boardroom SX80: thank you the enforcement Committee’s recommendation is approved.

Boardroom SX80: and hopefully will result in the follow up actions described.

Boardroom SX80: That

Boardroom SX80: brings us to Item 10, which is a briefing on the California sea level Rise guidance issued by the Ocean Protection

Boardroom SX80: counsel BCD. C’s planning Director Jeff Caffane will introduce the briefing.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Chair Wasserman. Good afternoon, commissioners so shifting gears a little bit from enforcement to sea level Rise adaptation. So the next 3 briefings you’ll be hearing this afternoon. All have to do with sea level rise, and it’s a particularly apt week to be thinking about this. We didn’t plan the weather, but what we’re seeing this week is a glimpse into what we are going to be expecting to see a lot more of in the coming years and decades. So

our first briefing that we’ll be hearing now is on the draft. California sea Level Rise guidance updates which present updated science on sea level rise across the State through the year 2,150,

as well as policy guidance on how to incorporate those sea level rise scenarios into planning and projects. We’re grateful to the Ocean Protection Council for their leadership in bringing the best available science to California. And this is the guidance that Bcd uses and that we rely on as we plan for and permit projects around the bay shoreline.

Boardroom SX80: So with that, I’d love to turn it over to Commissioner and Dr. Justine Campbell, senior scientists and lead for Opc’s climate change program. Who will present this item?

Boardroom SX80: Justine. Africa?

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Hmm.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: I’ve got some slides. Yep.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: great.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: I don’t know.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Sancho. Right?

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Great thank you. And good afternoon, everyone

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: thanks for letting me present here today on the draft State of California civil rights guidance at 2024 science and policy update. It was released on January nineteenth for public comment. And so I’m here today to provide an overview flag opportunities for outreach and engagement and answer any questions. This is actually the first public presentation on the guidance. So it’s it’s exciting to be here.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So this is the fourth update since Opc released its first guidance back in 2,010. The original and continuing purpose of this guidance is to support state and local action, to assess vulnerability to rising seas and climate, driven flood flooding, and the creation of adaptation, plans and projects that build resilience into the future.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: It was last updated in 2,017 and 18, and Opc. Has committed to updating approximately every 5 years in order to stay current with the most recent science. In the last iteration the Science and policy reports were separate. Rising sees. The science update was released in 2,017, followed by the policy guidance. The following year, in 2,018,

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: the science was presented in tables for 12 noa tide gauge locations that included 3 probabilistic projections provided alongside an extreme sea level rise scenario that had an unknown probability that was referred to as H. It also included a stepwise process on how to select sea level Rise projections based on risk, tolerance, and recommendations for adaptation and planning.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Since then there have been significant advances in scientific understanding and the ability to project future sea level rise which is captured in the 2024 update. And this update includes both the science and the policy reports package together next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So to leave this update, we convened an independent Science task force in partnership with the California Ocean Science Trust.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: This is our all Star task force team here that we was assembled for the effort. And this is the format of the report. With the task force authorship clearly identified as focused on the science portions. Chapter 2 and 4. Where Opc. Was the author for the policy portions. We also closely coordinated with the State and Regional sea level rise collaborative, which includes BC, DC staff

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and provided them with multiple points of review and feedback during the process. Next slide

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: so, chapter 2 is the tech technical methodology portion of how the new projections were developed. It’s a different methodology than the last guidance. Instead of the probabilistic projection approach we now use the scenario approach. This was based on the strong recommendation and decision from that science task force

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: to align with the 2022 national sea level Rise technical report shown here in the front, the global and regional sea Level rise scenarios for the United States

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: the scenario approach relies on the Intergovernmental Panel, on Climate Change, 6. Assessment report, or AR 6 projections.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: The Ipcc. Is the premier scientific body based through the United nations for assessing the science related to climate, and the AR 6 represents the current consensus understanding on sea level rise modeling.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So the Ipcc AR. 6 represents a step forward in scientific understanding of the IC contributions of sea level rise, and in how this understanding should be incorporated into projections. This is the main factor in altered altering the projections. Of sea level rise. In this updated report, compared to the previous report.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: In addition to being an important source of future sea level rise projections of future I. Sheet change represents the largest source of uncertainty in estimating sea level rise towards the end of century and beyond, and even with this new understanding in AR 6 I see, change is still, still represents the largest source of uncertainty.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: so using the AR 6 framework, a set of reduced sea level rise scenarios were developed. This methodology was used in that that 2022 National Report which underwent extensive peer review for our guidance. These scenarios were localized to California and underwent a additional peer review at that time. As well.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then to help with interpretation. Story lines were created for each of the scenarios. Which I will cover in more detail next, and the scenarios are available as a statewide table, and then including local vertical land motion at 13 tide gauges, including an additional tide gauge and Alameda that was not included in the the previous report.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: But next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So to provide a bit more conceptual understanding of the scenarios. These are the story lines, but there’s much more information in the document. on on the storyline. So please see the full descriptions there

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then, just to note when I refer to low confidence processes. That is a term that is used to denote a low level of agreement on how the models represent key processes, such as rapid and partial ice sheet disintegration. And then, in addition, there’s limited evidence supporting those model output. So so that’s what I mean when I

talk about low confidence processes.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So the low scenario relies on the assumption that current, the current rate of sea level rise will continue on into the future.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: This assumption is is very inconsistent with the the understanding of of acceleration, of sea level rise and and current observation, showing that but could still be considered plausible if there was

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: very aggressive. Emissions reduction in in the future global emission reductions the intermediate low scenario includes a range of of warming and emission pathways and can be considered a reasonable lower bound of the most likely sea level rise

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: in 2,100. The intermediate scenario includes a range of warming and emission pathways as well. But also includes contributions from some of those low confidence processes that I mentioned, and this could be considered a reasonable estimate of the upper bound of what is most likely to be seen in 2,100.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: The intermediate high scenario includes intermediate to high futures, initi emissions, and a high warming assumptions. This scenario is heavily reflective of a world where rapid ice sheet loss processes are contributing to sea level rise.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then the high scenario includes high future emissions and high warming with large potential contributions from rapid ice sheet loss

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So with that orientation, hopefully helpful to understand what what those 5 scenarios are. Here are the the new numbers you can see the low to high scenarios at time. Steps of decadal time steps from 2020 to 2150

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and this is the statewide table again, with also, in addition those 13 tag age tables that include the the localized vertical land motion component, and then this probability on the on the up next to it as table 2.2 in the report.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and this is to help create some understanding of probabilities. Of for the different scenarios. So this table only looks at. It’s a snapshot of 2,100. And with global surface temperatures currently on track to reach 3°C above pre industrial levels by 2,100. That’s why the 3°C box is, II put there.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And so the way to read this is to look at the 2,100 numbers in the in the state wide table of scenarios there and then, save for the low scenario, you can see 2,100 at the low scenario is one foot, and then, if you look at the red box. You see that there is a

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: 99% chance that sea level rise will exceed one foot in 2,100. Again assuming 3°C of warming. And then for intermediate low, there’s an 82% chance that that in the intermediate low is 1.6 feet that that would be exceeded. And then intermediate is is 3.1 feet, and there’s only a 5% chance that that would

will be ex exceeded. So that’s how that likely range is is defined for 2,100, with roughly 77 chance that sea level rise would be between

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: 1.6 and 3.1 at 2,100

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: that, it’s it’s a little bit hard. It’s a little bit complicated. But hopefully, that helps provide a little bit more understanding of how to how to think about the numbers

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So in terms of key takeaways, the new science shows much greater certainty, and the amount of sea level rise in the next 30 years. Statewide sea levels are most likely to rise 0 point 8 feet by 2050,

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then by 2,100 sea levels are most likely to rise between 1.6 and 3.1 feet, and that’s what I just covered. In that probability table.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And then, beyond 2,100, the range of sea level rise becomes increasingly large, due to uncertainties associated with physical processes, such as the the low confidence processes that I mentioned that earlier than expected, I sheet lost. So by 2150, you know, there’s really a large range between 2.6 and 11 feet that are.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: that’s there and then. That extreme sea level rise scenario, the h plus plus from rising fees is now considered much higher than best available science suggests, based on that that scientific the advances in scientific understanding around modeling of ice sheet.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And then again, that vertical land motion component is is where you get the local numbers from next line.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: A few additional things to flag here is that similar to the last iteration. Those numbers do not include episodic events. Such as storms, King tides El Nino and then, unfortunately, a direct comparison between the 2,018 guidance and this new guidance. Oh, sorry. Let’s say 2024 you’re hoping to release in December.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: 2024. Guidance is not possible. It’s really apples to oranges, because the methodologies change so from a scientific point of view, and looking at probabilities, you you really can’t do it. A comparison to to say, you know this change from this to this.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: but from a policy application point of view, you, you can take that perspective and do a comparison, and you can see here from the tables that there is a lot of consistency, with the exception of that h plus plus scenario at the end. So

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: if if you, there’s that shows tables comparing the different probabilistic projections in the scenarios that (205) 021-2150. And so. Yeah, you can see that.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: there’s still very. There’s a lot of consistency there to work with. And then, if you were using the h plus plus numbers, like thinking about a 2,100 application. For instance, you could shift that to 2150 when there’s, you know, roughly, 4 to 10% chance of reaching the 2,100 H plus plus values at 2150 for the high scenario. So

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: you know, basically, you can do a crosswalk from a policy application. And and that’s that’s the takeaway. With that next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So that’s the summary of the new science. There isn’t expected to be any adjustments to those scenario values, those projections in the Co. Public comment period. They are also very consistent, of course, with the 2022 National report where, you know they cheered off of so the numbers really weren’t a surprise.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And then so chapter 3 is where the policy recommendations come in. How do you apply these numbers in planning and projects?

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So similar to 2,018 guidance? We’ve taken a step, wise process to go through. And so those are the steps you can see there. But instead of going one by one through the steps, I’m just going to flag a few takeaways

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: that for most planning and projects we’re recommending evaluation of the intermediate, the intermediate high and the high scenarios at the you know, at the lifespan of the project that you’re considering and then consideration of storm conditions in combination with those scenario numbers is also recommended to look at extreme water levels at appropriate.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And then, you know, we’re really encouraging. You know that that existing vulnerability assessments should be used and leverage whatever pro possible. We’re not trying to keep people in a never ending, you know, planning process for those that already have vulnerability assessments. You should be able to use those with a crosswalk, and will likely result in sort of shifting of time horizons back from the on the expected impacts

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: rather than having to analyze with new numbers. And that’s where I was trying to go with that table. Comparison.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And then step 5 is is new in the stepwise process. We really tried to mirror these steps with the real world as much as possible. And we heard that there’s a really important step focused on exploring adaptation options and feasibility that occurs before the decisions are actually made. And so we added that step there to reflect that.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then, same as the 2,018 guidance we are recommending that selection of sea level rise, be guided by a risk assessment. But we also added that selection, particularly at the project level, is often a multi factor process.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and I have a quick example of that. If you advance one slide, I have some photos here. These are photos from the Cardiff State Beach Living Shoreline project. Sorry I didn’t have an example in the in the bay. This is an Encinitas and the pictures a here the before and B are the after this was a first of its kind project, a prototype

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: to use a living dune with engineered components for protection of hard infrastructure, specifically highway 101.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: This project was many years in the making and then, when it came time to do design final design and construction. Sea level rise was off, obviously a very critical consideration as part of that process. But it was also one of many other factors, including the visual impacts of of the doing construction, the adjacent freeway engineering feasibility that all factored into the final design

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: design decision. So in the end selection of the final design specification was really a compromise and negotiation of trade offs. And so that last step in in the process. We really tried to reflect that those real world situations next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then chapter 4, all also authored by the the task force, includes a synthesis of of much more information on the combined impacts of sea level rise and other coastal hazards include, including projected flood frequency, which is expected to increase significantly in the 2030 s. Groundwater erosion and extreme coastal storms

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: next slide

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: so that’s the summary of the guidance. I wanted to end here with highlighting that the State has prioritized and continues to prioritize funding for coastal resilience. This includes the Senate Bill, one Sea Level Rise adaptation

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: program released by Opc to support the development of sea level Rise adaptation plans. It has, 71.4 million available for funding right now. In addition to 660

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: 1 million maintained in the Fy. 2425 budget for critical coastal resilience programs and projects. We also have worked closely with the Bcd C. Staff to align that grant program with Bcd shoreline, regional shoreline adaptation plan efforts, and it also directly implements. You heard about the beginning of this meeting from Senator Laird.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then Opc. Continues to convene the State and regional sea level rise collaborative through both an executive team and a working group. Next slide.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and then just to flag the the public comment and outreach opportunities. We have a website that includes all this information as well as registration links and instructions for how to submit public comment. We’re really excited to see what we get during public comment period. We have a webinar coming up this coming Monday, February fifth, that one to 2, the science portion of that webinar will be

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: presented by Dr. Ben Hamilton, at Jpl, who was really the the lead in in the scenario development. And so any really nitty, gritty technical questions on on the methodology, you know, I would probably pass to him. And you know, if you’re interested in that would suggest joining for that webinar, it’ll go into really more more detail of the modeling approach.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: And then we have regional workshops that are really meant to focus more on the application piece and really understanding how this guidance can be adjusted to be more useful. You know, more reflective of the work on the ground. And so the San Francisco workshop. Just a flag is is February sixteenth and then any questions you can send to me, and and then public comment

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: to our C. Grant, fellow. But again, there’s instructions on our website and that next slide. That’s it. Thank you.

Excellent

Count.

Boardroom SX80: That concludes that presentation, I think back to you, Chair Wasserman, for public comment.

Boardroom SX80: Are there any? I have no cards? Are there any virtual

Boardroom SX80: public speakers?

Boardroom SX80: There is one public comment.

Boardroom SX80: Speaker Sarah. you have 3 min to state your public comment.

Sara Greenwald: Hello, I’m Sarah Greenwald with 3 50 Bay area, which represents several Bay area shoreline communities around the bay. I have a brief comment

Sara Greenwald: our concern is that this document, of course, has to set the foundation for measures to protect shoreline communities from sea level rise, and you know the adaptation plan is to be submitted to the State in 2034, and I want to emphasize that you will have wanted to do all you can to protect the communities starting long before then, because the Senator Laird mentioned. The recent floods show that sea level is rising now. Not later.

Sara Greenwald: Dr. Kibble explained that estimates are changing as research continues. Of course in general the expected rise is probably increasing.

Sara Greenwald: and therefore

Sara Greenwald: you will need to be prepared to implement measures

Sara Greenwald: sooner than expected. This is been your experience, I’m sure. And

Sara Greenwald: build in a lot of flexibility.

Sara Greenwald: that’s all. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Comments or questions from Commissioners.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Ekland.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Thank you very much. Chair Wasserman. I’m just seeing a fantastic presentation. And I just thought an aside. I

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: happened to be in Terre Linda this morning. Which is a suburb of Santa Fe. But it’s a suburb that was developed in the sixties. and during that time the developments had, like an open ditch

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: for drainage, and when I saw the open ditch this morning it was almost full

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: of water, which just really just reinforces in my mind that cities and counties really need to speed up

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: their discussions about how to deal with sea level rise, which brings me to

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: a.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: The fact that to to what degree are you working with? Like the League of California Cities which I was past? I am past president of that organization.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: To really help to work with cities. About their plans, especially those cities that have some coastal waters.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: of of how to incorporate some of these techniques that you’re talking about into their local plans that they have to develop?

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So I’m kinda curious what kind of outreach are you doing with cities? And if you’re not doing too much outreach, I’d sure love to talk with you. Offline

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: to

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: to help you, because II have a lot of contacts and cities throughout the State because of my leadership role that I played there for many years. And II know cities are just grabbling for data and information and guidance on on how to approach this issue?

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Can I answer the question now?

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Okay, we. I will say, we don’t have any specific contact at a League of Cities. I’d love to get one if if you have one.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: okay, great our, the grant program that I mentioned, is focused on specifically supporting local and regional government entities, on their, on incorporating sea level rise into their land use planning efforts.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and so that has been the the focus of that program. It was recently launched a couple of weeks ago. And

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: so that is, I would say, our sort of our main connection. Right now, as part of that program, we are also standing up a technical assistance program. That should be launched in the next in in March, I believe, which is going to be going to provide there will be a sort of an eligibility portion of the technical assistance. But we’ll

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: be providing under served communities with specific technical assistance on how to apply to the Grant program which which supports and funds, like all stages of of planning, and then will eventually find projects as well.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: One thing to note, though, is, we don’t really want to, you know, BC DC. And on the Coast the Coastal Commission are really the experts in, like the the local post coast coastal program and the the sub regional resiliency plans. And so as a staff, we don’t really have the expertise to play guide in updating those specific plans. And we don’t want to fund something that would then not be aligned with that later on down the road. So

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: in a lot of discussions with BC. DC. And Coastal Commission Staff, we, we have a path forward now, or we’re really supporting a lot of the work around that. And then. But we’re leaving the actual updating of the plans to being routed through Ecdc. And Coastal Commission. So that can be a really clean process. And we’ve developed letters of alignment as well for the other parts of the project to make sure we’re not getting out of

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: step there. And then, you know the regional workshops that are coming up. I really, you know we’re trying to get the word out on those to get as many you know, representatives of local government to come to that, and we’d be very open to hearing about other ways that we can

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: be connected and be engaged and and be providing information. We definitely see that as part of the role of the Ocean Protection Council and our convening of the the State Collaborative. As well.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Yeah, so not not happening. I don’t know what your local experience is but based on the fact that I’ve been on the city Council since 1,995 city staff.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Has so much to so much responsibility. And there’s not enough because we’re a poor property tech city in the bottom. So we don’t have that much staff.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So they’re they’re really taxed to the Max. I mean in terms of the amount of work. So this kind of pre planning is very difficult for them to attend a workshop like this.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: They don’t have the necessary staff. And so I do have contacts at the League. There’s an environmental Policy Committee which I served on for decades.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: And and I know a briefing 2 elected officials. At the League of California Cities Conferences would just really help to

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: make elected officials aware of of the it. They they know it. But having your presentation just reinforces the fact that you need elected leadership

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: to really locally elected leaders.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: not only cities, but counties, because they’re Csac as well, which definitely, I’m sure can talk about. But you know, we we need more elected officials that hear this, the more you’re gonna get local governments wanting to get involved. And I think

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: the leadership you know, there’s funding available. So elected officials can help lobby for more if they hear from their staff saying, Hey, look at! We’re not getting enough money to help do this right? So II will. Offline. I’ll get your contact information, I guess, from Larry.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: And so I’ll be definitely in in touch with you

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: and give you the contact information so that you can play more leadership role. In cities across the State.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: and it’ll attract a lot of people that live around the coastal waters, I think to learn more about sea level rise. So thank you very much for your presentation. And I’m actually gonna be telling the cities, at least in county

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: about this report. Because II think it’s something that everybody needs to know about. So thank you very much.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Appreciate that.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Gunther.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Doctor Kimball. Thank you for the presentation I was.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: II found your revision of the projections for H. Plus plus to be rather good news. and I don’t want to get into the scientific weeds. But I was wondering if you might be able to provide just a little more explanation.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: I hear frequently that you know ice sheet dynamics, or the things we know least about.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: and the highest present the highest risk

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: for extraordinarily accelerated sea level rise. So how is it that we’re able to push that that a a scenario further into the future.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: This might be a question for one of the modelers, because my my understanding is sort of limited to what I presented on is that that h plus plus was always a

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: a, an unknown probability, a a speculative scenario. It was sort of like a worst case, like, if if all the things that you know we ha! We don’t. That modelers, not we. The modelers, didn’t understand very well all the worst case sort of happened at the same time. That was sort of what h plus plus was. And so in those intervening years, you know that that AR 6

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: framework. Basically they there was better understanding. They had higher, you know. They gained confidence in some of the understanding around the ice sheet dynamics. And so some of those worst case scenarios with that better understanding were no longer considered plausible. And so

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: without those those really extreme things happening, you can’t get to h plus plus. So if you understand them better to know that they’re not gonna happen, then you’re not gonna get there. And that’s my layman’s understanding of

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: of why the H plus plus scenario.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: It’s it’s just not plausible, based on the the advances and understanding of of the High Sheets.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Showalter.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Yes, I wanted to. I’m sorry about. Maybe I can just turn this on

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: no. Can you hear me?

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Excellent! Okay, great. Alright, I just wanted to suggest another outreach opportunity which, hopefully, you’re already doing giving a presentation at the state of the Estuary Conference that’s coming up in March

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: that gets to get to

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: together many practitioners of flood protection in the Bay area. So it’d be great opportunity to share information about this report.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: And then I have a question. One of the things you mentioned was that storm intensity is going to increase in the 2030 s.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: And that, of course, is a major source of flooding as well as sea level rise. So can you talk about that a little more.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: So actually, the new guidance doesn’t include projections for storm frequency. What I said with flood frequency. And so the projections of flood frequency are expected to increase in the coming decades.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: and that is essentially a function of sea level rise and in an acceleration of sea level rise. And so

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: so essentially you can the no one. NASA, has a flood projection viewer that you can look at for each of the tide gauges and based on the number of of flooding events. And there’s a definition, for how a flooding event is.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: it is captured, and then, if they model sea level, rise on top of that, they can predict. You know how many flooding events are expected in the coming decades. And so that is what that is speaking to.

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: Obviously, it’s very hard to. It’s only those projections, though, are only for the tag gauge locations. It’s it’s very hard to localize that, because it’s, you know, like flooding is so specific to a a very specific location and and shoreline. So that is what that is referring to. But

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: it the the sort of take away that the conditions that you see now, during storm events, you know, can be used as an analog. For what sea level rise will be expected in the future is is sort of a takeaway as well, but

Dr. Justine Kimball, Commissioner: in terms of just like projecting like numbers and intensities of storms. This this group didn’t didn’t do that.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: I don’t see any other hands or microphones.

Boardroom SX80: That concludes the matter, but I am sure we will be discussing it at future meetings. Thank you very, very much, Doctor Kimball.

Boardroom SX80: That brings us sorry.

Boardroom SX80: That brings us to item 11, a briefing on the regional shoreline adaptation, plan, progress. The briefing will be presented by senior climate adaptation. Planner Jackie Menduski.

Boardroom SX80: Okay. Hello and good afternoon. Chair. Wasserman Commissioners and Senator Laird, who I don’t, who may no longer be here, but it was a pleasure to have him join today, and I also wanna thank him for his important work which this project is advancing. As Commissioner Washerman said, my name is Jacqueline Mendoskey. I’m a senior climate adaptation planner at Bcd. C. And the project manager of the regional Shoreline adaptation plan

Boardroom SX80: last time I spoke to this group was back in October of last year, when we were in the middle of conducting outreach to create a regional vision for the bay shoreline, and I’m excited to share the results of that effort with all of you which we are now calling the one bay vision for a resilient future shoreline. This vision will serve as the foundation to shape our work on the Rsap throughout this year, and our broader regional work over the coming years

Boardroom SX80: for commissioners who attended the rising sea Level working group meeting 2 weeks ago. I want to thank you for your time and comments on the draft. One bay vision, as you’ll see. We made a few small adjustments to these statements to incorporate your comments and feedback

Boardroom SX80: the rsap. So regional. Sri Lankaptation Plan abbreviated is intended to serve the region, to reduce shared flood risk for the Bay area and ensure that adaptation. Plans, projects, and land use decisions are coordinated and consistent to protect the values we care about protecting people, particularly our most vulnerable populations, ensuring healthy environments over the long term and being strategic in how we prioritize and fund projects to help us achieve our goals.

Boardroom SX80: And through the Rsap. I want to reiterate that BCDC. Is meeting the requirements of Sb. 2, 72, and providing the necessary support to local jurisdictions to advance local adaptation plans and projects that work together to achieve our shared goals.

Boardroom SX80: So what are these shared goals? And what do we mean by achieving successful adaptation for the region? This is where the one bay vision comes into play.

Boardroom SX80: The Rsaf is implementing 4 actions in the bay, adapt joint platform, and the need for a regional vision was identified as the very first action which states collaborate on a one bay vision to adapt to rising sea levels. And the task below this States to create a long term regional vision rooted in communities, Bay habitats and the economy. There are also additional actions that the Rsap is advancing which you might recognize in our approach. But I won’t elaborate on today

Boardroom SX80: the foundations for the one bay vision were also laid in Bayadaf’s guiding principles, which remain the North Star for all projects being implemented through Bayadapt, including the Rsap.

Boardroom SX80: What you’ll see to day through the one bay vision is how these principles are applied across 8 key issue areas in ways that add targeted and concrete long term adaptation outcomes in the Bay Area.

Boardroom SX80: The one bay vision describes what successful adaptation should look like along our shorelines and reflects both our values today, while also acknowledging that future shorelines will look different, and that adaptation itself will be an iterative process. The one bay vision brings the guiding principles to life as it adds detail to where and how these principles apply across topic areas across society and guides the development of our remaining work.

Boardroom SX80: How does the vision flow throughout the aspects of the Rsap to inform real on the ground adaptation. The one bay vision sets the outcomes for the region and paints the picture of the future that we’re all working to achieve.

Boardroom SX80: The vision will guide the region’s strategic priorities which will identify key adaptation areas. The big regional moves that lay out where certain types of adaptation are most appropriate and beneficial for the region. This also informs the development of local plan guidelines which will lay out consistent regional standards for how local jurisdictions create subregional plans and develop adaptation strategies that meet minimum criteria and advance the region’s priorities.

Boardroom SX80: And within these plans will be specific projects and land use changes with an implementation strategy to get adaptation projects in the ground

Boardroom SX80: together. These individual projects across the region add up to our shared one bay vision.

Boardroom SX80: Now, how does this actually work? In practice? I’d like to provide an example. One of our vision statements includes the topic of ecosystem health and resilience, and this statement includes language about protecting, restoring, and enhancing valence. Ecosystems.

Boardroom SX80: An example strategic priority might include geographic identification of priority habitats around the region. An example. Guideline might require local jurisdictions to evaluate those habitats and plan for the long term health of those ecosystems.

Boardroom SX80: and an example project within a plan might be the identification of a strategy such as an ecotone levy and its associated land use and implementation next steps. This example of an ecolotone levy is a piece of the puzzle that helps us advance our regional vision for ecosystem health and resilience.

Boardroom SX80: This one bay vision that you are about to see was developed through a variety of inputs. In addition to building upon the guiding principles, we reviewed existing regional visions, such as planned Bay area to ensure our efforts are aligned and linked. We also conducted a series of outreach in the fall, which you heard from me back in October, where we spoke with over 500 people at local community events, a public workshop, online survey, and expert practitioners who shared their values and visions for the future of the shoreline.

Boardroom SX80: The one bay vision represents the distillation of that feedback, and reflects what we heard and learned from these stakeholders about what they want. The future of the bay to look like for themselves and for future generations, as sea levels rise.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, now we are here at the main part of the event, where I’ll be sharing the draft one bay vision for a resilient future shoreline.

Boardroom SX80: First, I want to acknowledge that the one bay vision is made up of multiple parts. There’s a statement for the region as a whole and statements for each of the 8 topic areas. These topic areas reflect the categories of key issues in society that are impacted by rising sea level, and will require adaptation, planning, and actions to support both local and regional long-term resilience.

Boardroom SX80: I will go through all of the vision statements and then open the floor to discussion. I ask that as I go through each of these slides, please keep the following questions in mind. What do you like most about the one bay vision? Is there anything missing or unclear? And are you in favor of using this draft? One bay vision as a basis for our next steps in the project.

Boardroom SX80: As you’re listening to these, please keep in mind that we’re hoping to get your support on the main concepts within this vision. We’re looking forward to getting your feedback today. And if you have specific comments on the wording, please let me know in a following email.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, I’ll go ahead and read out the regional vision statement which encapsulates all of the topic areas. Our one-day vision for a resilient future shoreline.

Boardroom SX80: As sea levels rise, the Bay area’s diverse communities come together to transform how we live, work, plan, and adapt along our changing shorelines. In this future communities are healthy, safe, and have greater access to the shoreline, where they can feel connected to the bay’s edge and experience the beauty and wonder of thriving habitats that sustain our quality of life.

Boardroom SX80: Our region remains connected so that networks of people and goods can move with ease and get to the places they need to go.

Boardroom SX80: The services we rely upon keep our communities and economies running, and are designed for the long term

Boardroom SX80: achieving. This future will require governments, the private sector and communities to make a commitment to equity, address past harms and take on complex interrelated challenges together a resilient future for the San Francisco Bay Area starts now and continues for generations to come

Boardroom SX80: for each of the 8 statements. I will skim through them. You have the full text in your meeting package. And these slides are also available on our website

Boardroom SX80: as part of our one bay vision for community health and well being, as sea levels rise, communities are healthy and vibrant. To achieve this, we will need to adapt our communities to safeguard them from the public health consequences of flooding and support healthy environments, safety and quality of life

Boardroom SX80: meaningfully engage and empower communities in adaptation, decision making address risks to essential community assets and prioritize economic development opportunities such as workforce development in disadvantaged communities

Boardroom SX80: for critical infrastructure and services as sea levels rise, critical services are reliable.

Boardroom SX80: To achieve this, we need to adapt local and regional critical infrastructure, to maintain service and minimize future vulnerabilities, to flooding. integrate flooding hazards into emergency management and prioritize adaptation that addresses service deficiencies in underserved communities.

Boardroom SX80: for ecosystem health and resilience. As sea levels rise, healthy Baland’s ecosystems thrive. To achieve this we need to protect, restore, and enhance balance ecosystems to improve their function, scale. Biodiversity and services

Boardroom SX80: prioritize nature based adaptation where possible and incorporate habitat connectivity, sediment, management, and whole watershed approaches

and identify and facilitate opportunities for ecosystem migration to support natural adaptation processes

Boardroom SX80: for governance, collaboration and finance. As sea levels rise, regional collaboration drives efficient and effective adaptation. To achieve this, we need to ensure local and regional governments collaborate to address, shared flood, risk, and identify multi benefit adaptation, opportunities, while avoiding harm to their neighbors, identify and engage with indigenous partners to plan, implement and manage adaptation projects.

Boardroom SX80: support the range of multi-stakeholder collaborations that are equipped to plan fund and adaptively manage adaptation over time and improve funding and regulatory processes to expedite innovative and transformative projects that provide regional benefits

Boardroom SX80: for housing, development and land use. As sea levels rise. Places are designed for a changing shoreline. To achieve this, we need to adapt existing development equitably and plan new and redevelopment for community safety, equity and bay ecological health.

Boardroom SX80: align land use, planning with risk mitigation that considers long term economic vitality for all. and support, affordable housing and state housing goals while preserving public trust uses of the bay and reducing populations at risk of flooding

Boardroom SX80: for public access and recreation. As sea levels rise, the bay shoreline is accessible to all. To achieve this, we need to expand and improve shoreline public access, including recreation, opportunities and other water dependent uses

Boardroom SX80: prioritize connecting disadvantaged neighborhoods to a healthy bay and balance the needs for human enjoyment, sustenance, and cultural connection to the bay with healthy ecosystems

Boardroom SX80: for shoreline contamination. As sea levels rise, people and ecosystems are safe from contamination risks to achieve this, we need to collaborate with communities, scientists, industries and government to identify and remediate shoreline contamination

Boardroom SX80: prioritize remediation in environmental justice communities while minimizing transfer and contamination, burden and integrate emerging science on shallow ground water rise with planning and adaptation decisions.

Boardroom SX80: and the last topic area for transportation and transit. As sea levels rise safe and reliable transportation connects the region. To achieve this, we need to adapt local and regional transportation systems to ensure safe and reliable connectivity.

Boardroom SX80: ensure continuity and equitable service in transit. Dependent communities identify and integrate multi benefit opportunities into transportation projects such as ecological health, green infrastructure, and public access and promote active low emissions, mobility options for environmental and economic benefit.

Boardroom SX80: In closing, I want to remind you all about how the one bay vision relates to our broader work on regional adaptation.

Boardroom SX80: Before the end of this year we will be coming back to this commission and asking asking you to adopt the final one bay vision strategic priorities and plan guidelines everything to the left of this dotted line. This timeline is in compliance with Sb. 2, 72. Throughout the spring and summer we will continue to come back to you with updates on our progress.

Boardroom SX80: Once this phase is complete, there are other components that we we will need to integrate to create a truly regional adaptation strategy as called for in your plan Bay plan, climate change policies. We’re still figuring this part out. But we know the big pieces. We’ll need an investment strategy to figure out how to pay for adaptation, to help close the 105 billion dollar funding gap which you’ll hear about more in the next presentation.

Boardroom SX80: We’ll need to make changes to our Bay plan policies and regulatory processes to facilitate the types of projects we need. We’ll need to support local adaptation, to develop and submit these plans to meet the guidelines. And we’re working closely with Opc. As you’ve just heard on their SB. One grants as well as working with other regional agencies.

Boardroom SX80: and all of this will help us develop land use changes and adaptation projects that help us strategically meet the challenges of our region in ways that provide the most benefit and make the one bay vision a reality.

Boardroom SX80: This work is organic and iterative, and will continue coming to the Commission with updates. As we continue on this journey

Boardroom SX80: in terms of our next steps to day, we are not asking for a formal vote on the one day vision. But instead, we’re asking for your support. That these should form the basis for our work ahead.

Boardroom SX80: We will then be transitioning into developing guidelines for local plans and strategic priorities that flow from this vision.

Boardroom SX80: And although we didn’t talk about it today, we’ve been hard at work to define subregional adaptation plans through meetings with stakeholders and practitioners. We’ll be holding a series of focus groups in the coming weeks to get additional feedback on what these plans should look like, and how they can best meet the needs of our region for adaptation. Please reach out if you’re interested in having you or your staff attend one of these.

Boardroom SX80: We’ll also be hosting a second public workshop in the spring to launch into the guidelines. Work with more stakeholders. And we’re underway in planning for a series of up to 5 local workshops centered in vulnerable shoreline communities and hosted in partnership with community based organizations. We’ll provide more information on that in the coming months. And lastly, as our executive director mentioned in his Ed report, we’ll be reaching out to commissioners who are currently supervisors.

Boardroom SX80: County supervisors to set up briefings in each of your counties about all of this work.

Boardroom SX80: With that I wanna thank you for your time, and I’ll pass it back over to Chair washerman to facilitate the conversation about the vision statements and the questions we posed earlier, and I’m happy to answer any questions you may have.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you, Jackie. Before turning to the Commission. Do we have any

Boardroom SX80: of virtual public speakers? We have 2

Boardroom SX80: virtual speakers.

Boardroom SX80: Mister Arthur Feinstein. Please go ahead and unmute yourself and stay to comment.

Michael.

Arthur Feinstein: Hi!

Arthur Feinstein: Chair was so many Commissioners. I’m Martha Feinstein. I’m chair of the Sierra Club, Sea Level Rise Committee. We call it Bay alive.

Arthur Feinstein: and I’m also on the Advisory Committee for the Rsap. Working with Jacqueline and Dana, your staff people.

Arthur Feinstein: and

Arthur Feinstein: somewhat unusually for me, but quite happily, I’m here to say Thank you to Staff. I’m often, you know, looking for more, and I am looking for a little more today. But Steph has really come along from where we began this process more a year ago.

Arthur Feinstein: And

Arthur Feinstein: we are pretty pleased with what’s come out from this process? Not totally. And myself. And did Deb was gonna follow, is going to. Also comment on this, we have a few

Arthur Feinstein: editorials amendments that we’d like to put into. I’m gonna do the vision statement.

Arthur Feinstein: And while the vision statement originally started out with just saying, people should experience the beauty and wonder of thriving habitats, wetlands, and others.

Arthur Feinstein: We’ve been pushing for them to recognize that wetlands aren’t just pretty, and people don’t go to the shoreline. Well, they do go the shoreline to get recreation and and a peaceful feeling from being in a wetland habitats. But

Arthur Feinstein: wetlands actually provide services that benefit us. Aside from that in our communities, they clean our water, they clean our air, they help influence the temperatures that we are

Arthur Feinstein: experiencing, keeping the air cooler than it would be. And with global warming, that’s gonna be real important. They help reduce storm surges. They perform, perform a lot of services

Arthur Feinstein: to our community, and we’ve been urging

Arthur Feinstein: Staff to recognize that in

Arthur Feinstein: all of the vision statements. And so we were quite

Arthur Feinstein: pleased to see them say. experience the beauty and wonder of thriving habitats to sustain our quality of life.

Arthur Feinstein: And so we’ve sent a letter. I guess you didn’t get a chance to see it. We sent it Monday.

Arthur Feinstein: we’re hoping that you would take one phrase and emphasize the services they provide by changing that one sentence to say.

Arthur Feinstein: experience the beauty and wonder of thriving habitats that we depend on to sustain our quality of life.

Arthur Feinstein: so that the average person reading this who’s not.

Arthur Feinstein: you know, invest in this whole process will realize that we actually do depend on our wetlands, not just for beauty and wonder, but for the services that they provide us.

Arthur Feinstein: That’s my statement. I want to again thank Staff for really making this a vision statement that’s getting us towards where we need to go. If we’re gonna have

Arthur Feinstein: a healthy bay as well as healthy communities, and our communities won’t be healthy if we don’t have a healthy bay.

Arthur Feinstein: So thank you very much.

Boardroom SX80: Our second speaker, Miss Janet S. Johnson, please unmute yourself and state your comment.

Janet S Johnson: Thank you. Can you hear me?

Janet S Johnson: Oh.

Janet S Johnson: can you hear me? Okay, great thanks.

Janet S Johnson: Good afternoon.

Janet S Johnson: I’ve lived in Richmond for 42 years, and I’m representing

Janet S Johnson: today the Richmond Shoreline Alliance and Sunflower Alliance. Both are environmental justice organizations based in the East Bay. We first want to support the comment submitted by this year Club. And then we want to take them a little bit further.

Janet S Johnson: Richmond has 32 miles of shoreline. The most of any Bay area city.

Janet S Johnson: Like many bay communities, much of our shoreline bears a heavy burden of toxic waste the legacy of more than a century of industrial contamination. We’re home to 2 superfund sites on the shoreline, plus an 86 acre Super fund qualified site that already is, seeing the effects of sea level rise.

Janet S Johnson: That site. The so-called Astrazeneca, or Campus Bay site is under the jurisdiction of the Dtsc.

Janet S Johnson: For over a century. The site was a chemical manufacturing complex that dumped its hazardous and radioactive waste out the back door, filling in the bay with more than a hundred lethal chemicals and heavy metal, the most abundant of which is arson

Janet S Johnson: because of redlining and other discriminatory housing policies.

Janet S Johnson: low income, vulnerable communities near sites like Campus Bay will be the first to suffer health effects from the spread of contamination resulting from sea level rise and groundwater intrusion.

Janet S Johnson: So we see an urgent need to focus

Janet S Johnson: on your in your focus on in your deliberations to prioritize and fully address shoreline contamination.

Janet S Johnson: we need you to oppose the present trajectory of partial clean ups and capping of unlined sites. followed by so-called mixed use housing developments on the shoreline.

Janet S Johnson: which is Dtsc. Solution for Campus Bay. We also hope that you will advocate on a State level for bonds to be posted by contaminating industry.

Janet S Johnson: So when and if they leave taxpayers and city governments are not left to cope with the message they’ve left behind.

Janet S Johnson: Thank you so much.

Boardroom SX80: Our next public comment is from Gita Day, from Sierra club. Please go ahead and unmute yourself.

Sure.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Wasserman, and the entire commission

Gita Dev SIerra Club: I’m following on Arthur Feinstein’s comments.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: I want to tell you the stuff that we are so appreciative and astounded at how well you’ve been able to integrate

Gita Dev SIerra Club: important comments from public comments. And we really appreciate that in talking about some of the things that we still

Gita Dev SIerra Club: hope too cheap

Gita Dev SIerra Club: in conversation with others. I’ve noticed that

Gita Dev SIerra Club: we all over here today are all very aware of

Gita Dev SIerra Club: using nature based adaptation. Putting nature first, however, as an architect, I can tell you that pragmatics overtake us when we are in the throes of projects

Gita Dev SIerra Club: as time goes by. And in 2030, when someone’s looking at this vision statement, if those ideas are not front and center.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: I’m afraid they will get put. Second, nature is put second so often

Gita Dev SIerra Club: when you look at flooding and say, Let’s put up a wall 7 feet tall. And then the second thought is, and and and how can we put something into it? So

Gita Dev SIerra Club: I ask you to ask Staff to humor us and ask you, as a commission to humor me as I go through

Gita Dev SIerra Club: a few very minor modifications that would bring thus ecosystem services that the bay provides into focus in all of the 8 items, and I recognize that Staff has put it into 4 of them already.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: So please humor me.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: And I will go to them

Gita Dev SIerra Club: in the community, health and well being

Gita Dev SIerra Club: in the port bullet, it says, address risks to essential community assets, services

Gita Dev SIerra Club: and cultural resources. And

Gita Dev SIerra Club: I suggest we include after the word services, including bay ecosystem services.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: because it’s so easy to forget that community health is based on ecosystem services as well in the critical infrastructure. Where people think of roads, culverts.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: sewer systems

Gita Dev SIerra Club: in the second one, where we adapt existing local and regional critical infrastructure systems.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: including natural infrastructure, would ask that you insert those words in the governance, one where we never think about nature.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: When in this first bullet, multi-benefit adaptation, app opportunities, putting nature first whenever possible. That’s wording from. They adapt

Gita Dev SIerra Club: putting nature first wherever possible. and in the last one the shoreline contamination in the last bullet. integrating emergence. integrate emerging science on shallow ground water rise.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: and I would insert prioritizing nature based solutions because a lot of the science is on chemistry

and

Gita Dev SIerra Club: prioritizing nature-based solutions

Gita Dev SIerra Club: brings that back into focus that there’s a lot that nature has to offer. I’m sorry I’ve run over time. I just wanted to add that the iterative processes that we’ve talked about, involve phased projects.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: and nature takes time to keep up with our changes. and therefore.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: first is a different way of thinking than most public workspeople are used to.

Gita Dev SIerra Club: That’s the reason why

Gita Dev SIerra Club: we’re taking your time to bring up these 4 items in these 4 issues. Thank you so much.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Our next commenter is Miss Karen High. Please go ahead and unmute yourself.

Carin High: Hi, good afternoon, Karen. High Citizens Committee to complete the Refuge. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Hope you’re all staying dry. I wanted to begin by, as others have already expressing my deep appreciation to BCD. C’s staff

Carin High: and to the Commission members on the sea Level Rise working group for providing the opportunity to the public to comment on the draft vision goals and objectives. During the January eighteenth working group meeting, and for incorporating some of the comments and suggestions into meaningful changes into the language we see to day. We have just a few others as Gita had mentioned, and we’ll hope that you take those into consideration.

Carin High: I wanted to echo the sentiment of others regarding the need to put nature first.

Carin High: But what does that mean? So I thought I’d share some select comments from an April the Twentieth, 23, April the twentieth, 23 scientific American staff editorial that reinforced why it is so important that this is reflected in all of the vision goals and objectives.

Carin High: Those of us who are here already know. Wetlands, coastal plains, sand, dunes, forests, and many other permeable surfaces, do cheaply, or even for free what engineered levee seawalls and pumps do at a cost of billions of dollars.

Carin High: They protect the land around them from storm surge, flooding, flooding rains, erosion and pollution. They are vital infrastructure

Carin High: that makes us more resilient against climate change, and the cost of destroying them or weakening their ability to function, must be factored into the decisions we make to build and grow.

Carin High: Another excerpt, failing to measure the benefits of ecosystem services in policy and management decisions is a major reason.

Carin High: Many of those ecosystems disappeared.

Carin High: and lastly, climate change makes the undervaluation of ecosystem services more dangerous. The example they provide is wetlands that mitigate flooding in a community during rare deluges will have far more economic value

Carin High: in 2,050, when damaging storms arrive more frequently, the same could be said for our tidal wetlands. The Rsap document that will be viewed and used by many.

Carin High: may those who view it may not have been exposed to the concept of ecosystem services and the important role natural infrastructure plays in providing climate change, resilience for the natural and built environments.

Carin High: It is therefore important that this crucial function of the bay’s habitats is clearly identified in beginning with the vision goals and objectives of the Rsap.

Carin High: Once again. Thank you very much. We look forward to continued participation in this very important complex regional process. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Our next public comment is from Mr. Paul Sager. Please go ahead and unmute yourself.

My name is Paul. See here, I’m also from Sierra Club and

paul seger: a member of the Bay live committee. And but I’m going to speaking from a position of basic contract pasta shoreline from straight to to Pittsburgh. And then possibly even for bay into this area.

paul seger: so

paul seger: regarding the regional overarching goal.

paul seger: As sea levels rise

paul seger: and the bay areas, diverse communities unite to transform how we live, work, plan, and adapt along our changing shore lines.

paul seger: In this, in this, in view, in this envisioned future communities, prioritize interconnectedness

paul seger: and recognize our dependence on the health and vitality of thriving habitats along the bay, Delta’s edge.

paul seger: In this future communities are not only healthy, safe, and equitable.

paul seger: but also actively acknowledge the interconnectedness that binds us to the intricate web of thriving habitats along the Bay delta.

paul seger: All residents have access to our shorelines

paul seger: where they can immerse themselves in beauty and wonder. There’s of these vital ecosystems, the pulse of indigenous communities within their deep understanding of interconnectedness, guides us in preserving and benefiting from the critical ecosystem services provided by base the deltas, natural habitats.

paul seger: When we speak of networks of people and goods, services and economies, we are essentially addressing the backbone of our infrastructure. This includes transportation systems, economic services, and essential goods that form the foundation of our communities.

paul seger: Let’s call it what it is, the vital infrastructure that sustains our way of life. Recognizing this, our future

paul seger: are recognizing this, our vision commits to

paul seger: addressing infrastructure, related items transparently.

paul seger: we will appropriately identify and tackle issues while honoring co equal goals of environmental sustainability and economic prosperity.

paul seger: This comprehensive approach ensures that our infrastructure not only facilitates the movement of people and goods, but does so in harmony with the environment. By embracing co equal goals. We safeguard the resilience of the San Francisco Bay Area and Delta

paul seger: for current generations. And thank you very much.

Boardroom SX80: Our final public commenter, Ms. Caroline. please go ahead and unmute yourself.

Boardroom SX80: Commenter. Ms. Carolyn, please go ahead and unmute yourself and state your public comment.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, I guess.

Boardroom SX80: we are moving on.

Boardroom SX80: That concludes our public speaking comments and questions from Commissioners. Commissioner Eklund.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: Thank you very much. I don’t have any questions but fantastic presentation.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: As I’m very much interested in being intimately involved in this when II was not only in charge of the for permitting program EPA, but also the oceans industry’s program I worked with

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: not only in California but Hawaii in the outer islands, America, small Guam and Cni

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: on developing guidelines and obviously regulatory

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: programs as well. And so I’m very much interested in being engaged in this and being a new Commissioner, I’m not exactly sure how to put my name in the

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: in in the

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: in the, in the in the list, but I just wanted to make sure that Staff knows that I’m very interested in would like to be it more intimately engaged.

Pat Eklund, Commissioner: So thank you. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: I Hi!

Boardroom SX80: Thank you for the great report. Thank you for the great report. I’m not sure if this is the right time to ask this particular question. But are there any guidance that’s coming out on how to work with the individuals that have property alongside the shoreline. There’s one in particular you might have heard about it. It’s pretty large oil company in Richmond.

Boardroom SX80: They. They may or may not believe in global warming, and they may or may not want to participate in trying to do something with our shoreline.

Boardroom SX80: So anything that we can do to help them out?

Boardroom SX80: Yeah, if you having the answer, I will love an answer. I want them to participate. Yeah, I mean, what I can say is that so? The intent of this vision is to really inform the guidelines that we create. And one of the vision statements on collaboration is really encouraging that informal to formal shoreline coalition work that needs to happen to both plan, build, and really maintain these types of projects over time.

And so the intent is that we’ll have guidelines that flow from that vision statement and plans that are, you know, reviewed and approved by Bcd. C. Are eligible for funding. So I think that there’s an incentive in that sense of following these guidelines and having approved plans, can hopefully encourage that type of work, and having the statement here allows us to then have guidelines that we really we can encourage or require that type of collaborative work

Boardroom SX80: so that we could do more on the require versus encouragement. I don’t think they’re going to be encouraged enough, because if they go along with it, from what I hear is, if they go along with Richmond

Boardroom SX80: to work on the shoreline, then they might be admitting to global warming that they potentially caused. So I think we need more than just a little nudge. We need to actually force them to participate.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Chair, can I? Can I venture an answer as well. I mean it. All I can think of is, is you described? The company is, you know, he who will not be named

Boardroom SX80: One of the things that happened at the first part of this meeting was that John Coleman announced his resignation in his retirement, which is, I think, and I think a lot of us think is a really

Boardroom SX80: as good as his staff is, gonna be? It’s a really, it’s a sad day, because John has really brought the Bay pund and coalition really forward with regard to climate change. And with regard to working with all of us, what I’m going to do is I want to make sure that John, before he leaves. Here’s what you said, because the Bay Planning coalition has been very active with us, with the regional shoreline, adaptation, plan, and bay adapt.

Boardroom SX80: They are very, you know, in addition to the building Industry Association and and and a number of other private sector concerns, and I want to make sure that we

Boardroom SX80: talk with John, so that he then ensures that whoever follows him understands the importance and connects those dots. I can’t promise you that they’re going to play ball. But I can promise you that we’ll make sure. Bpc. Knows of what you said, and they’re playing ball with us that. Okay.

Boardroom SX80: cool. Yes. Okay.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Kishimoto.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Yes. Hi, yes, I’m yodiko Kishimoto. Alternate to Supervisor elderly. But II also serve on the Board of Midpoints and open space, and I just wanted to support

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: express my support for the excellent one day vision for the resilient future shoreline and also to the comments made by Sierra Club. Obviously, II believe very strongly that nature is

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: the ultimate infrastructure. You know, it’s it’s gonna be here when we’re we’re we’re not, and and it’s always good to keep reminding ourselves of of that that priority. When push comes to stuff.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: To put put nature first.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you, Commissioner Gunther.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, so I just wanna Jackie, you and the staff. I want to congratulate you. The kinds of comments we’re hearing today shows that you guys have done a really great job of outreach and I

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: know that you’re gonna keep it up, which is good because the questions are, gonna get diceier and more difficult to deal with, including a couple. I’m gonna ask you now.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: I also really liked that. You didn’t just list goals. But you then said, to achieve this, we have to do the following things cause. That’s a real way of forwarding the conversation.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: First. My question. First question, I have 2 questions. First, one is about the sub regional plans. And I have been very

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: I’m persuaded by presentations that I have seen here and in other places and in listening to people talk about how valuable

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: the the regional plan that splits our region into what are called the currently operational landscape units. But the idea of removing the political boundaries from the landscape, putting down the physical ecological boundaries

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: and then and and that’s what we see. And then putting the political boundaries back down so that we can then see who needs to collaborate because you’re within this same sort of geophysical environment. So I wanted to first ask, you

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: are. The is the idea of operational landscape units being being included.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: or maybe even prioritized or championed, as we think about how to develop our sub regional plans.

Boardroom SX80: I can go ahead and start with the answer, and then I might pass off to Dana Breckwold, who is leading the work that we’re doing on developing sub-regional plans. I will say we are absolutely talking about operational landscape units and the value that they bring along with the some of those other jurisdictional lines. So it is absolutely part of the conversation in in many of the conversations that we’ve had.

Boardroom SX80: Yeah. The only thing I’ll add is, as as you correctly stated, operational landscape unit boundaries are not same as jurisdictional boundaries. Plans occur within jurisdictional boundaries. So we’re trying to reconcile the fact that. We have these scales of planning that we don’t want to create. We don’t need to, or want to create all new planning scales.

But we are also aware of the fact that operational landscape units bring a lot of value in analyzing sea level rise risk as well as identifying the appropriate adaptation strategies.

Boardroom SX80: So we’re trying to reconcile that at the moment we do plan to come back to you all with a proposal for what those sub regional adaptation. Plans are in March, ish or

Boardroom SX80: soonish in the next few months. And then we’ll get your feedback there to make sure that we’ve incorporated those concepts successfully

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: great. Yeah, I don’t mean to say that we need to get rid of counties in the Bay Area. But that that I’ve been very impressed with how, when you think about an operational landscape unit, who is then convened around that table.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: and and those people all need to talk to each other and share their experiences and their ideas. The second thing I just wanted to ask is about the investment strategy. And I remain convinced that our excellently developed estimate for the cost of adaptation is unfortunately it

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: painful underestimate, and it’s going to get more expensive, and I think that

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: the sooner we begin to engage in the discussion about

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: what gets funded first

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: the better off will be, and I don’t have an answer to that question. Obviously, I think we’re going to be trying to catch a lot of different balls as they appear. Maybe a little Federal money here, a little transportation money here a little, this a little that but I think that there is

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: going to be a need to understand that. If we’re gonna be opportunistic about obtaining funding that

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: some people are gonna get it and some people aren’t

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: and how that would then reverberate through our implementation of the plan. So it’s it is. These are the kind of things that I think we do much better on if we think about them

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: in advance, when the winners and losers are not yet

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: fully fully formed. And so I hope that that as we move forward with the investment strategy, you’ll be able to think about some of these tough questions, and it and just help tee up all the stakeholders to be aware that you know these. These are these are coming down the pipe, and we’re gonna have to deal with them as best we can.

Boardroom SX80: I will just say that we are. We are thinking about that right now. It’s definitely on our minds as we’re preparing for all of those other buckets of work ahead, and how we can kind of do the work. Now to make sure that we’re setting ourselves up to be able to have those conversations and make those decisions. And also note that the next presentation will talk a bit more about the investment strategy and the work happening there.

Boardroom SX80: I see no other. No, it’s Commissioner Kishimoto. Your hand is still up, but I assume it’s oh, it’s Pat show. Walter Pat’s hand is still up.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Hi, yeah, we’re sharing the screen now. Hopefully, we won’t get reverberation that way.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: Yeah, I just wanted to again compliment the staff on this work and this presentation. It’s just vital. To get this going and moving and and make sure that we include the right people. I would really like to be included in the sub regional plan development for the South Bay. So I’m putting my hand up for that

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: But also I wanted to. Just ditto. The comments that in particular Gita Dev made about the importance of nature based solutions.

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: I really think it is important to have that concept explicitly stated in the vision statement and sort of underlying

Commissioners Kishimoto and Burt: language here. So I just wanted to to support that as well. Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: I see no others. I have a request.

Boardroom SX80: It’s actually not a staff apologies. We just got an email from the public commenter who was unable to speak before. Maybe we could try again for her, Carolyn, she, the Star 6, I think, wasn’t working, but if she’s still on, she might be able to try that one more time.

Boardroom SX80: Okay.

Boardroom SX80: so public commenter, Ms. Carolyn, are you on the line?

Boardroom SX80: Are you able to hear us?

5102354562: Hi! Now, it just said it was unmuted. Can you hear me now? Okay, fantastic. Thank you so much. I appreciate you recognizing the email license. Since the chat is disabled.

I’ll start my public comment. Now then. I just wanted to point out that in the last week, with the NASA findings that about the hottest year on record being last year.

there have been a number of scientists revisiting Jim Hansen’s work on climate Change. A number of scientists had had previously discounted his work because his models were showing

much higher rate of climate change. And now that’s being revisited. And I just wanted to call out that the sea level rise

used by Opc. And which BC. DC. Also factors into their work probably need to greatly relook at their work as well because of this new. These new findings.

I also wanted to call out about the contaminated sites that are in the guidelines. I live in Richmond. Along the shoreline we have a 86 acre site that’s qualified very high as a super fun site.

It’s right on the shoreline. So sea level rise is a big concern. It’s there are already plumes affecting off site locations. The site is under Dts administration. It’s basically a test case, for what could go wrong with sea level rise. So I’ll leave it at that. I greatly appreciate you, giving me the opportunity to speak. Thank you.

5102354562: Thank you.

Boardroom SX80: So my request is for the Commissioners. I want to thank Staff for for the work and for this presentation. but my request is that you actually take a bit of time over this next

Boardroom SX80: week. I don’t want to interfere on your weekend too much. But

Boardroom SX80: please look at these slides. and if you have questions or comments. submit them to staff.

Boardroom SX80: because this has been worked on a lot, and I think it is good.

Boardroom SX80: but that doesn’t mean it can’t be improved. And as we move

Boardroom SX80: to what this is going to become some of these pieces of language may be very important, so if you can, please do that, send in. Comments

Boardroom SX80: could just be wonderful. I don’t think there are any changes needed. But if you do see some things that you’ve got questions about or suggestions, please do make those. Thank you very much for the presentation. There is no action on this that brings us to item 12, a briefing on Plan Bay area 2050

Boardroom SX80: sorry 2050 plus 2050 plus

Boardroom SX80: Jessica Fane, our planning director will introduce the briefing. Thank you. Chair Wasserman. So next, our last agenda item is on Plan Bay Area, and you’re probably wondering why are we talking about Plan Bay Area, of a Bcdc. Meeting? Well, with so many regional planning efforts going on, we think it’s pretty important for you to be aware about what’s going on with other agencies and to the extent we can, we really try to align our efforts to help move

Boardroom SX80: the region forward in a sustainable and cohesive manner. So while Plan Bay area covers a broad set of topic areas or a few key areas where those policy areas intersect with what we do at Bcdc. And sea level Rise adaptation and how to fund it is a major one of those.

Boardroom SX80: you might not know that our staff collaborate regularly with Mtc. And Abag. Staff on sea level rise adaptation work through biweekly meetings, joint projects, developing data and methodology and outreach. We’re grateful to have a long term funding agreement between our agencies that provide support for this work and our planning staff are now supporting Mtc. And Abag and integrating the work we’ve done together on the sea level rise funding and investment framework into Plan Bay Area 2050 plus.

Boardroom SX80: and we anticipate continuing to work closely after 2050 plus. And after the regional shoreline adaptation plan work that Jackie was describing

Boardroom SX80: to really think about how to develop a regional funding strategy. That grapples with key questions about how we are gonna fund the sizable adaptation needs. So with that, I’ll turn it over to Matt Maloney, director of regional Plans at Mtc. Aback.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioners, Jessica said a lot of what I was going to say.

Boardroom SX80: Which is fine. I will just say that we are also at Mtc. And abag very appreciative. Of all the collaboration with with BC. DC. Staff, and as the months. Go on. We just find ourselves working more and more closely. At a staff level with with Bcd C plan Bay Area, which I’ll talk about, and I’ll be brief. In in my comments.

Boardroom SX80: Is not a plan that is statutorily required. To do a lot of consideration with sea level rise. But part of what I wanted to get across today is that although it focuses a lot on transportation and and housing and has statutory requirements with Ghg mitigation.

Boardroom SX80: Sea level rise is definitely inter woven into how we think about the plan. And we just obviously we must have it as a high priority and consideration as we do all this work on on housing and transportation. Let’s go to the next slide, please.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, we call this the Galaxy slide or kind of a a, an ocean with waves? So II think what we wanna get across here is that we are

Boardroom SX80: interweaving all of these efforts together. The Bay adap joint platforms, of course, A, a product of BCDC. And you all just heard a a bit about the regional shoreline adaptation plan the estuary blueprint, which is focused on the health and resilience of the San Francisco estuary, is governed by abag.

Boardroom SX80: And then there in the middle is Plan Bay Area 2050 plus, which is led by Abag and Mtc. Together, and it’s quite comprehensive in scope dealing with housing, transportation, the environment and the economy, and and more and more, as these plans roll along, we’re doing more and more work on the climate adaptation space next slide, please.

Boardroom SX80: We at Mtc. And Abac have been doing regional plans for a very long time. But on the State level. Really kind of changed a lot of this dynamic back in the 2,008, 2,009 period.

Boardroom SX80: And essentially what Sb. 3, 75 did is it set a statutory requirement for these plans to reduce per capita. GHG. From cars and light duty vehicles.

Boardroom SX80: And the way that the plan accomplishes that is, via a land use pattern focused around high quality transit areas, places where people can not rely necessarily on single occupant vehicles, and we also develop a fiscally constrained set of transportation investments. As part of the plan. And that is essentially what we’re doing via the plan is required to be adopted every 4 years.

Boardroom SX80: We the the plan that we’re living under today is Plan Bay Area 2050. That was adopted in 2021, and we are now in the middle of Plan Bay area 2050 plus adopted in 2025. Why is it? Plus

Boardroom SX80: I think, what we’re trying to signal there is that it’s a limited and focused update Planbury 2050 has a lot in it. It was 4 straight years of pretty intense work and robust outreach

Boardroom SX80: and 2050 plus is meant to do a few things on the margins, but not be a. It’s not a dramatic redo of the plan

Boardroom SX80: next slide.

Boardroom SX80: So, as I mentioned, we do cover a lot of ground in the plan. This is sort of a snapshot of the 11 themes. It covers transportation and the transit network.

Boardroom SX80: They’re in yellow. Those are some of the themes. We deal a lot with the affordable housing conundrum that is facing the Bay area. That’s sort of the red themes.

Boardroom SX80: improving economic mobility and jobs in blue. And then the environmental strategies are the themes are shown there in green. So we have 11 themes and 35 strategies. Let’s go to the next slide.

Boardroom SX80: And what I wanted to focus on just briefly, today are some of the strategies in the so called environment elements. So we have 9 strategies in all

Boardroom SX80: in that part of the plan you’ll see adapt to sea level rise is number one on that list. I’ll also mention briefly, strategies 5 and 6 that have to do with conservation lands and urban greening. So next slide.

Boardroom SX80: okay, so after plan barrier 2050 Bcd. C. And Mtc. And a bag collaborated on this sea level rise, funding and investment framework. And I know the Commission has seen. This work recently. Where this work ended up is an estimated cost of sea level rise adaptation through 2050. The estimate we came up with is 110 1 billion dollars.

Boardroom SX80: There are some things known out there about the projects to adapt to sea level rise. So where we knew and sort of had good cost estimates, we used those

Boardroom SX80: but for some of these other areas which are shown in green these are really more placeholder costs. So these are places that really haven’t quite gone through all of the planning yet. So the staff work to create cost estimates for those

Boardroom SX80: the cost is high. But I think it always makes sense to couch it against the fact that we also estimate 230 billion in assets are at risk. If the Re region does not adapt to sea level rise next slide.

Boardroom SX80: So after that work. I wanna talk just briefly about what we’re doing in the current plan to sort of update the C-level rise, investment work that we’ve been doing and sort of where we’re going. And I think one of your previous one of your commissioners did allude to this ultimate regional funding strategy

Boardroom SX80: which is shown on the right hand of the slide so I mentioned the sea Level rise, editation funding and investment framework. I will note that it was based on an estimate of 4.9 feet of inundation by 2050

Boardroom SX80: that was using the best available work by the Ocean Protection Council. You heard from those folks earlier today? They are still updating. Those as the years go on we will continue in the DC. DC. Staff. I’m sure we’ll continue to use the best estimates.

Boardroom SX80: This includes sort of an estimate of the rise, but also a hundred year storm. So that’s all kind of built into the 4.9 number. In this current plan, cycle plan bary 2050 plus, II think the objective that we have at this point is to work on updating what we did in that funding and investment framework, working with local jurisdictions across the region. Making sure we get the best available information updating project costs where we can.

And hopefully beginning the process of what? Of what? On the slide. We mentioned sorting projects, as we call them, bins where we’re trying to work towards sort of an organizational structure.

Boardroom SX80: For some of these projects. Right now we have a fairly long list but they are not necessarily prioritized in any kind of way. So the staff are gonna begin to looking. We’re gonna begin looking at some things like project readiness.

Boardroom SX80: Obviously, the cost of the projects and what other kinds of funding might be committed to these types of projects just to sort of get us toward a bit of an organizational scheme, the idea being that when we get to a regional funding strategy. We could engage in a further categorization of those projects

Boardroom SX80: potentially updating the project inventory, looking at updating the future revenue sources and getting a little bit towards more of organizing these sort of by year, so that when funding opportunities do come our way we’re ready with sort of a near term list that we can draw from you know, to start funding these projects and sort of do that necessary work. To get this done. So that is where we are headed

Boardroom SX80: next slide.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, really, quickly, on the priority conservation areas. These are geographic areas. In the bay area. They they came about around the same time as the priority development areas or Pda’s. If you work in local government, you’re probably somewhat familiar with those

Boardroom SX80: Established back in 2,000 7. These are you know, lands around the region that are important to protect conservation lands, natural lands ag lands working lands.

Boardroom SX80: We we are engaged in a in an update or refresh of the Pca framework. And the reason why I wanted to talk to the Commission about this today is that we are adding integrating climate adaptation into the mix with the Pcas so we are the new type of Pca intended to be paired with the existing types that we’ve got

Boardroom SX80: already. Underway. So we’re not really reinventing the wheel with this. We are looking at sort of that same map that you saw before, with 110 billion looking at those areas. But sort of looking at these areas that are more tidal habitats and places like that. Those will also be part of the Pca geographies. It’s more than a map. We also do have a funding program associated with with Pcas that Mtc

Boardroom SX80: funds so historically, over the last 15 or 20 years.

Boardroom SX80: We do a call for projects for these and we do fund improvements and enhancements. To these lands either to provide better access or to work on conserving these areas.

Boardroom SX80: Next slide.

Boardroom SX80: Okay, final slide just next steps on the plan

Boardroom SX80: in in terms of the this strategy en one and adapting to to sea level rise staff is working to update this data. We are working with local staff. We’re putting on webinars

Boardroom SX80: and doing sort of robust engagement. There, in order to identify new projects and just sort of update the inventory that we currently have. You want more information on that? You can contact Rachel Hart and Phyllis. She’s here in the audience. You can contact her directly. Also, just in terms of where we’re going on the final blueprint. Looking into this summer, we will be doing more engagements. With the public

Boardroom SX80: and with local jurisdictions to kind of talk about all the strategies that are in the plan. Shrug Rabari is the guy that is the project manager. Of the plan. Ultimately we will approve a final blueprint later this year in the fall. We do have to do sequa on this plan that takes about a year.

Boardroom SX80: And so ultimately we would adopt this plan in the fall of 2025. So that concludes my presentation for today, and happy to take any questions from the Commissioners.

Boardroom SX80: Thank you. Any public comment on this matter. There are no public comments.

Boardroom SX80: questions, or comments from commissioners.

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner Gunther.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: yeah, very quickly. Thank you for the presentation.

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: I was critical about the

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: whether the number is correct. But I wanna make sure you know that I’m that’s offered just in the frame that we just need to keep. Go, keep, keep keep going as we iterate this to get get it more accurate. I really really appreciate that you and your colleagues are doing this, and I encourage you to keep doing it. If someone like me says you need to improve the number, then you can just ask me, how should we do it? And one of the ways that I think we need to do it is to

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: try and integrate as I. As I understand it, the the cost now does not have any. The the cost of dealing with the rising groundwater that will be part of sea level rise is not included in the 109 billion. Do I have that right?

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: Yes, you have that right? Okay? And is W. Will 2050 plus

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: make a stab at that? Is that part of the plan.

Boardroom SX80: II don’t believe that we’re gonna get there in this in this planning round. II don’t believe that we’re gonna be able to bring in the groundwater estimates into this. There’s also a lot of information out there with riverine flooding around the region that we don’t quite have the best data for we are working on that to do more comprehensive assessment. But I think in this period, what we’re mostly focused on

Boardroom SX80: are, is that existing project inventory we have, and and sort of seeing what kinds of updates are out there to the costs or to the scopes of those projects. To make sure we have the best information. That’s kind of where we

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: thanks. Yeah, II recognize this is a very difficult question I’m asking. But I think that it’s important, because

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: it could have a pretty significant influence on this number. And I and I I hope that that as soon as you guys are ready to throw a number out there just as a even as a placeholder. That you that, you make an effort to do it. Because, it’s going to be a really important addition

Dr. Andrew Gunther, Commissioner: to our future. Need

Boardroom SX80: any other

Boardroom SX80: comments for questions from commissioners

Boardroom SX80: again, thank you for the presentation and the work, we will continue the dialogue.

Boardroom SX80: There is no further action on this item.

Boardroom SX80: This brings us to adjournment, and I would ask for a motion to adjourn in

Boardroom SX80: recognition

Boardroom SX80: of Graciela Gomez. Recognizing that we’ve done 2 very lovely things at this meeting we’ve passed 2 resolutions,

Boardroom SX80: for people who are still with us. We don’t always do that. So I would entertain a motion.

Boardroom SX80: A Commissioner Gilmore makes the motion, and

Boardroom SX80: Commissioner on seconds the motion. Thank you. No opposition. no exemptions. We are adjourned. Thank you very much.

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.