June 20, 2024 Commission Meeting

1. 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. Report of the Chair
   5. Report of the Executive Director
   6. Consent Calendar
      1. Approval of Minutes for June 6, 2024 Meeting
         (Sierra Peterson) [415/352-3608; sierra.peterson@bcdc.ca.gov]
      2. Proposed Adoption of Revised Stipulated Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order No. 2022.001.01 (224 Sea Cliff Ave, SF)
         Section V.D of CCD No. 2022.001.00 requires the purchaser of 224 Sea Cliff Avenue in San Francisco to work with BCDC staff and present a stipulated CCD for Commission adoption without civil administrative liability. Staff proposes that the Commission adopt revised stipulated CCD No. 2022.001.01, the terms of which have been agreed to by the respondent (new owner) and BCDC staff.
         (Michael Ng) [415/352-3610; michael.ng@bcdc.ca.gov]
         Recommended Enforcement Decision  // Presentation
   7. Commission Consideration of Administrative Matters
      (Harriet Ross) [415/352-3615; harriet.ross@bcdc.ca.gov]
   8. Briefing on Bay Sand Budget, Transport, and Provenance Studies and Potential Effects of Sand Mining
      As required by Commission permits for sand mining in Central and Suisun Bay in 2015, the studies on the Bay’s sand budget, transport patterns, provenance, and potential effects of mining are complete. A Commission selected Independent Science Panel has reviewed the studies, deliberated on them, and made findings regarding this new information and the potential effects of mining on this part of the Bay sediment system. The sand mining companies, Martin-Marietta and Lind Marine will provide a short presentation on mining activities and staff will provide a presentation on the findings report. The report and several appendices were mailed to the Commission on June 7, 2024, for its review.
      (Brenda Goeden) [415/352-3623; brenda.goeden@bcdc.ca.gov]
      San Francisco Bay Sand Budget, Transport, Provenance, and Bathymetric Change Studies and Potential Physical Effects of Sand Mining Activities
      Appendix A // Appendix B // Appendix C // Appendix D // Appendix E // Appendix F // Appendix G // Appendix H
      Staff presentation // Presentation
   9. Briefing on Sediment Management Workshops and Action Plan
      Commission staff will provide a briefing on the Sediment for Wetland Adaptation Project, a coordination effort and potential Bay Plan Amendment, to increase the availability and use of Bay sediment, fluvial sediment, and construction soils to restore and adapt wetlands to rising sea levels. Working with its partners—US Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board, State Coastal Conservancy, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, and San Francisco Estuary Institute—the Commission hosted a two-day in-person workshop on January 23rd and February 13th, 2024, to review and discuss potential changes to sediment management and an implementation action plan with partners and stakeholders who investigate, collect, manage, use, dispose, and regulate sediment, and manage and restore wetlands around San Francisco Bay. The Commission will receive an update on the outcomes of the workshop and a preview of the action plan.
      (Maya McInerney) [415/352-3646; maya.mcinerney@bcdc.ca.gov]
      Presentation
   10. Briefing on Delta Adapts
       Delta Stewardship Council staff members Jeff Henderson, Planning Director, and Morgan Chow, Program Manager, will present on the Delta Adapts Adaptation Strategy. Delta Adapts is a climate change adaptation study for the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh the includes strategies to improve the resilience of the region to climate change hazards including sea level rise.
       (Cory Copeland) [415/352-3644; cory.copeland@bcdc.ca.gov]
       Presentation
   11. Adjournment

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

Administrative Permit Applications

There have been no administrative permit applications filed.

Regionwide Permits

The Executive Director has issued the following regionwide permits.

Draft minutes can be found on the meeting agenda.

Video transcript
COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.

WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE

SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION

AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. AND

WELCOME TO OUR HYBRID, BUT

TODAY, ALMOST FULLY VIRTUAL BCDC

COMMISSION MEETING. MY NAME IS

REBECCA EISEN, I AM THE VICE

CHAIR OF BCDC, I AM CHAIRING

THIS MEETING BECAUSE CHAIR

WASSERMAN IS, UNFORTUNATELY, BUT

NECESSARILY ABSENT TODAY.

I AM GRATEFUL TO SEE

COMMISSIONER MOULTON PETERS ON

MY SCREEN BECAUSE SHE HAS AGREED

TO BE OUR VICE CHAIR TODAY IN

THE EVENT WE HAVE AN INTERNET

PROBLEM. SO I’M HOPEFUL WILL

NOT HAPPEN. OUR FIRST ORDER IS

TO CALL THE ROLL AND SIERRA IS

GOING TO HELP ME OUT HERE

BECAUSE I CAN’T SEE ALL OF YOU

ON MY SCREEN AT ONCE SO SHE’S

GOING TO LET ME KNOW IF YOUR

HAND IS RAISED OR IF YOU WANT TO

SPEAK.

FOR NOW, PLEASE BE SURE YOUR

CAMERA IS ON THROUGHOUT THE

MEETING, AND UNMUTE YOURSELF FOR

THE ROLL CALL. AND THEN ONCE

YOU HAVE RESPONDED, MUTE

YOURSELVES ONCE AGAIN.

SIERRA?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER ADDIEGO?

>>SPEAKER: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

AMBUEHL? BUELL AHN?

>>EDDIE AHN: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

ECKERLY? COMMISSIONER ECKLUND?

>>PAT ECKLUND: PRESENT.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GILLMOR?

>>MARIE GILMORE: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GIOIA?

>>JOHN GIOIA: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GORIN?

>>SUSAN GORIN: PRESENT.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER?

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER HASZ?

>>KARL HASZ: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER JOHN-BAPTISTE?

>>ALICIA JOHN BAPTISTE: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

MOULTON-PETERS?

>>STEPHANIE MOULTON-PETERS:

HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER NELSON?

>>BARRY NELSON: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER PEMBERTON?

>>SHERI PEMBERTON: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER SHOWALTER?

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER ZEPEDA?

>>CESAR ZEPEDA: HERE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: HAVE

I MISSED ANYONE?

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

COMMISSIONER EISEN.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: OH,

APOLOGIES, VICE CHAIR EISEN.

[LAUGHTER]

I HAVE A TOTAL 16 PRESENT.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ALL

RIGHT. WE HAVE A QUORUM

PRESENT. SO WE ARE DULY CONS

CONSTITUTED TO CONDUCT

BUSINESS.

NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS PUBLIC

COMMENT. IF ANYONE WANTS TO

ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY

MATTER ON WHICH THE COMMISSION

EITHER HAS NOT YET HELD A PUBLIC

HEARING OR IS IN THE ON TODAY’S

AGENDA, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES

TO DO SO. SIERRA, ARE THERE ANY

INDIVIDUALS IN THE BUILDING WHO

WISH TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: THERE

IS NO ONE PRESENT IN THE

BUILDING, BUT THERE IS A HAND

RAISED ONLINE.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ALL

RIGHT. YOU MAY CALL ON THEM.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

MR. BRUCE BEYERT. YOU MAY

UNMUTE.

>>SPEAKER: GOOD AFTERNOON VICE

CHAIR EISEN. MEMBERS OF THE

COMMISSION. CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: YES

WE CAN.

>>SPEAKER: MY NAME IS BRUCE

BEYERT TRACK TRAILS RICHMOND

ACTION COMMITTEE I’M HERE TO

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS YOU ASKED

AFTER THE BRIEFING LAST MONTH ON

THE RICHMOND SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE

PILOT PROGRAM THE QUESTION ASKED

ABOUT HOW USAGE OF BAY TRAIL

ACROSS RICHMOND SAN RAFAEL

BRIDGE COMPARED WITH OTHER BAY

AREA BRIDGES. THE BAY TRAIL

TRAVERSETRAVERSES BENICIA

STRAITS RICHMOND CENTER FAIR

BRIDGE OF COURSE THE BAY BRIDGE

EAST SPAN AS WELL AS THE

DUMBARTON BRIDGE.

UC BERKELEY’S PARTNER FOR

ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION

TECHNOLOGY IN THE REPORT SAID

THE FOLLOWING IN THE MOST RECENT

PEAK SEASON BICYCLE TRAFFIC ON

THE BRIDGE WAS HIGHEST OF ALL

STATE OWNED TOLL PASS INCLUDING

SAN FRANCISCO OAKLAND BAY

BRIDGE. TO BE — END OF QUOTE

— TO BE MORE SPECIFIC, DURING

THE LAST 45 DAYS,

WEEKEND BICYCLE TRIPS ON THE

RICHMOND SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE WERE

324 PER DAY VERSUS 206 ON THE

BAY BRIDGE. ON WEEKDAYS,

BICYCLE TRIPS AVERAGE 132 ACROSS

THE RSR BRIDGE, VERSUS 128 ON

THE BAY BRIDGE. PEDESTRIAN

USAGE IS VERY LOW ON THE

RICHMOND SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE

BECAUSE THE PILOT WAS DESIGNED

FOR TRANSPORTATION, THAT IS

BICYCLISTS AND NOT FOR

RECREATION AND TO BE PEDESTRIAN

FRIENDLY. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE

ARE NO RESTROOMS ON EITHER END

OF THE BRIDGE AND THERE ARE ONLY

A HANDFUL OF PARKING SPACES.

THIS CONTRASTS DRAMATICALLY WITH

THE BAY BRIDGE WHICH HAS A VERY

LARGE USER FRIENDLY PARKING AREA

WITH RESTROOMS AT THE BRIDGE

YARD IN OAKLAND. OF COURSE,

NONE OF THE STATE OWNED BRIDGES

CAN COMPARE WITH THE ICONIC

GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE WHICH IS

INTERNATIONAL TOURIST

DESTINATION AND LITERALLY

CRAWLING WITH PEOPLE ON FOOT AND

BICYCLE. SO THE BAY BRIDGE IS

MOST HEAVILY USED BY BICYCLES OF

ALL STATE OWNED BRIDGES.

FINALLY CALTRANS LAST MONTH IN

APRIL ACTUALLY FILED REQUEST TO

EXTEND RICHMOND CENTERVILLE

BRIDGE PILOT AND TRACK SUPPORT

AND ASK TO BE EXTENDED

ADMINISTRATIVELY TO THE END OF

2025 AS THE BAY AREA TOLL

AUTHORITY HAS REQUESTED THIS

WILL CLEAR THE DECKS THE

EXTENSION WILL BE SETTLED AND

YOU WILL BE IN GOOD POSITION TO

ADDRESS THE PROPOSAL COMING

LATER TO SHUT DOWN THE BAY TRAIL

RICHMOND SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE FOUR

DAYS A WEEK TO PROVIDE FOR BREAK

DOWN LANE FOR AUTOMOBILES WHICH

OF COURSE I THINK IS A TERRIBLE

IDEA.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NO

FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: THAT

CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC COMMENT

PERIOD. WE WILL TAKE PUBLIC

COMMENT ABOUT ANY ITEM THAT IS

ON OUR AGENDA WHEN WE ARE

CONSIDERING THAT ITEM.

A FEW THINGS FOR THE CHAIR

REPORT, WE ARE ALMOST ENTIRELY

VIRTUAL TODAY BECAUSE OF THE

FIRST FLOOR CONSTRUCTION AT THE

METRO CENTER. BUT OUR STAFF

TELLS US THAT THAT CONSTRUCTION

IS ON SCHEDULE. AND IF THAT

REMAINS THE CASE, WE CAN HOPE

AND EXPECT THAT WE WILL REGAIN

USE OF BOTH THE BOARDROOM AND

THE YERBA BUENA ROOM FOR OUR

MEETING NEXT MONTH, WHICH WILL

BE ON JULY 18TH, AS ONE OF THE

COMMISSIONERS NOTED, WE WILL NOT

HAVE A MEETING ON JULY 4TH. OUR

STAFF WILL KEEP US INFORMED

REGARDING THE PROGRESS OF THE

CONSTRUCTION, AS THEY START

PLANNING FOR THAT MEETING.

TODAY IS THE FIRST MEETING WHERE

WE WILL CONSIDER A CONSENT

CALENDAR. AND I KNOW MOST OF

THE COMMISSIONERS ARE FAMILIAR

WITH CONSENT CALENDARS FROM THE

VARIOUS BOARDS THEY HAVE SAT

ON.

IDEALLY, A CONSENT CALENDAR

HELPS US TO CUT THROUGH RED TAPE

REGARDING NON-CONTROVERSIAL

MATTERS, AND GIVES US MORE TIME

TO ENTERTAIN PUBLIC COMMENT AND

TO HAVE OUR DISCUSSIONS AND OUR

PRESENTATIONS.

SO, WE’RE GOING TO GIVE IT A TRY

AND SEE HOW THAT GOES.

WE WILL ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT

ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR WHEN WE

GET TO IT, IN A MINUTE, AND WE

WILL ALSO NEED TO TAKE A ROLL

YOU CALL VOTE TO MAKE SURE WE

HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE APPROVING

THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE

RISING SEA LEVEL WORKING GROUP

IS GOING TO BE MEETING AT THE

SAME DAY AT OUR NEXT MEETING,

JULY 18TH, BUT IN THE MORNING.

SO WILL THE ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE WORKING GROUP. THOSE

MEETINGS ARE GOING TO BE

SCHEDULED BACK TO BACK, SO THAT

EVERYBODY CAN ATTEND ALL OF

THEM. AND THEY WILL BE LISTED

ON OUR BRAND-NEW

WEB SITE’S BRAND-NEW CALENDAR,

AND LARRY IS GOING TO TELL US

ABOUT THAT WHEN WE GET TO HIS

REPORT. FINALLY, AS I SAID, OUR

NEXT MEETING WILL BE JULY 18TH.

I DO HOPE THAT EVERYBODY HAS A

SAFE AND HAPPY 4TH OF JULY, IT

SOUNDS LIKE PAT HAS WONDERFUL

4TH OF JULY PLANS.

AT OUR MEETING ON MAY 18TH WE

MAY TAKE UP THE FOLLOWING

MATTERS, ONE, A PUBLIC HEARING

AND POSSIBLE VOTE ON THE

RESTORATION OF CHIPPS ISLAND,

WHICH IS IN THE DELTA. A

BRIEFING ON THE PROPOSED

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FOR OUR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

ADVISORS, AND, FINALLY, AN

UPDATE ON THE PROGRESS OF BCDC’S

ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE

PROGRAMS.

EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. IF A

COMMISSIONER HAS INADVERTENTLY

FORGOTTEN TO PROVIDE OUR STAFF

TO WITH EX PARTE WRITTEN OR ORAL

EXPERT COMMUNICATIONS YOU MAY

REPORT ON THEM AT THIS POINT BY

RAISING YOUR HAND. PLEASE

REMEMBER YOUR WRITTEN REPORT

SHOULD BE DETAILED ENOUGH FOR

THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THE

CONVERSATION’S MAIN TOPICS BUT

YOUR ORAL REPORT SHOULD NOT BE

LONGER THAN TWO MINUTES. SIERRA

IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER WHO

HAS RAISED HIS OR HER HAND?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NONE

IN-PERSON, OR VIRTUALLY.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

GREAT. THANK YOU. THAT BRINGS

US TO OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

REPORT. LARRY?

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: THANK YOU

CHAIR EISEN. SUMMER TIME AND AS

THE GEFSH WIN BROTHERS WROTE

LIVING IS EASY TODAY IS SUMMER

SOLSTICE LONGEST DAY OF THE YEAR

IF YOU PLAN TO GO TO THE BEACH

THIS WEEKEND JUST REMEMBER IN

JULY 1975 JAWS WAS RELEASED WITH

STAR WARS BELIEVING RELEASED

MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND THREE YEARS

LATER THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY WAS

FOREVER CHANGED. SUMMER TIME

ISN’T JUST A TIME TO HANG OWL

WE’RE WORKING HARD IN SHORELINE

PLAN GUIDELINES DISCUSSIONS

ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS AND PERMIT

REQUESTS AND BUDGET NEWS AFTER

ALL THAT HARD WORK WE’LL BE

READY FOR ICE CREAM. THERE IS

ONLY ONE STAFFING ANNOUNCEMENT

TO BE MADE TODAY. TODAY IS

STEVE GOLDBECK’S FINAL STAFF

MEETING AS A FULL-TIME PERMANENT

STATE EMPLOYEE. STEVE JOINED

BCDC AS A VOLUNTEER 38 YEARS AGO

AND WAS HIRED A YEAR LATER AS A

COASTAL PLANNER. AMONG HIS MANY

ROLES AT BCDC HE WROTE THE

COMMISSION’S FIRST WATER QUALITY

POLICIES AND A FEW YEARS LATER

WAS PRINCIPLE STAFF MEMBER IN

CHARGE OF FIRST CREATING AND

THEN IMPROVING BCDC’S DREDGING

AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT

PROGRAM.

INITIATED AND LED THE BENEFICIAL

REUSE STUDIES WHICH WAS START OF

THE REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT

PROGRAM IN THE BAY AREA AND

ESTABLISHED THE LONG-TERM

MANAGEMENT STRATEGY PROGRAM HOW

TO MANAGE DREDGE MATERIALS. HE

HAD A CENTRAL ROLE IN BCDC’S

EFFORTS TO RESTORE BAYLANDS

TIDAL WETLANDS HAMILTON TIDAL

ACTION AND WAS THE MOVE ERR

BEHIND CREATING DREDGED

MATERIALS MANAGEMENT OFFICE.

OTHER EFFORTS WAS AWARDED ROGER

JONES AWARD EXCELLENCE COASTAL

MANAGEMENT AND RECEIVED

COMMENDATION FROM PRESIDENT AL

GORE’S PART OF VP NATIONAL

AWARD FOR BETTERING GOVERNMENT

PROGRAM. WE HAVE ASKED STEVE TO

COME BACK AS A RETIRED

AFTER A RESTFUL PERIOD AWAY

FROM US.

CRUCIAL IN TRAINING AND

MENTORING STAFF TEN YEARS IN

2024 AND EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO HAS

STARTED WORKING ON CREATING

TRAINING PROGRAM FOR OUR STAFF.

HE HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS

PARTNER. HE AND BRAD McCRAY

BROUGHT ME UP DURING MY FIRST

YEARS WHEN I KNEW LITTLE ABOUT

COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS. HE

KNEW QUICKLY HOW I INTEND TO

WORK WHICH IS MOST DIFFICULT

TOING IF OUT WHEN YOU GET A NEW

BOSS. HE CREATED GREAT INTRO TO

ANY DISCUSSION THAT GOES LIKE

THIS, QUOTE, LARRY, WE HAVE AN

ISSUE, BUT DON’T DO ANYTHING

YET.” WE SHALL MISS STEVE

WANDERING AROUND THE OFFICE

SCOPING OUT PROJECTS

PROOFREADING REPORTS AND

EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HE DOES BUT

AT LEAVE THE WE’LL HAVE HIM AS A

RETIRED ANUITANT FOR A WHILE AND

I CAN ASSURE HIM WE KNOW HIS

TELEPHONE NUMBER WHEN WE NEED

ADVICE. STAFF HAD A BUR TOW

LUNCH WITH SOME GREAT CAKE

BEFORE TAO TODAY’S MEETING. WE

HOPE STEVE WILL CONTRIBUTE SOME

OF HIS GREAT RED WINE FOR THAT

OCCASION. STEVE I AM SURE YOU

WOULD LIKE TO SAY JUST A FEW

WORDS?

>>STEVEN GOLDBECK: THANK YOU,

LARRY. I HAVE A 20 MINUTE

POWERPOINT AND THEN A 10 MINUTE

MOVIE TO SHOW. NO. I CALL BCDC

THE JOB

THATLLED MY CAREER IT’S BEEN

INTERESTING AND NEVER GOT

BORING. WELL, MAYBE THERE WAS A

MEETING OR TWO THAT DIDN’T MEET

THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OVERALL

IT’S BEEN AN AMAZING TIME, AND I

HAVE ENJOYED ALL OF THE WORK

THAT THE BCDC DOES, AND WORKING

WITH ALL THE STAFF. I FEEL LIKE

I CAN RETIRE NOW HAVING ACHIEVED

SOME INTERESTING THINGS, IN

ADDITION TO WORKING ON THE

CLIMATE CHANGE POLICIES, AS THE

FIRST IN THE NATION, IT’S

SOMETHING I’LL ALWAYS TREASURE.

AND I’M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE BILL

TWO 72, AS WELL.

BUT IT’S REALLY BEEN

PARTNERSHIPS THAT HAVE ALWAYS

MADE ME ENJOY WORKING AT BCDC

WITH THE STAFF, AS I TOLD THEM

TODAY AT OUR LITTLE

LUNCH ON, BUT ALSO WORKING WITH

COMMISSIONERS. I HAVE BEEN

REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE

COMMISSIONERS WE HAVE HAD AT

BCDC, ALWAYS IMPRESSED WITH

COMMISSIONERS WHO COME TO BCDC

FROM WHARF BACKGROUND OR

APPOINTMENT, BUT ALWAYS TOOK ON

THE ROLE OF BEING A REGIONAL

BCDC COMMISSIONER. AND THAT’S

HOW BCDC HAS PROSPERED, SO, I

WANT TO SAY IT’S BEEN AN HONOR

AND A PLEASURE WORKING WITH BCDC

STAFF AND NEW COMMISSIONERS, AND

I LOOK FORWARD TO MY NEW ROLE.

SO, THANKS SO MUCH.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: TWO THINGS

TO FOLLOW THAT UP. FIRST WE

HAVE TO LOOK FOR A NEW MEMBER OF

SENIOR STAFF TO THIS DEPARTURE.

YOU RECEIVED TWO WEEKS AGO LINKS

TO THE JOB AND WILL GET IT AGAIN

TODAY IN THE COMMISSION SUMMARY

PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THEM TO

ANYBODY YOU BELIEVE SHOULD

RECEIVE THEM. PERHAPS LATE

BREAKING NEWS EVENT BCDC’S BOCCE

TEAM WHICH HISTORICALLY HAS BEEN

KNOWN AS THE MEAN HIGH TIDES,

HAS NOW CHANGED ITS NAME AT

LEAVE THE FOR THE NEXT SEASON TO

STEVIE G AND THE SHORELINE

BAND.

SO, WE DO THAT, BECAUSE STEVE

HAS BEEN A — I THINK, STEVE,

YOU WERE A CHARTER MEMBER OF THE

BOCCE GROUP, AND REMAINS A

STALWART, AND THE BYLAWS OF THE

BOCCE RULES LEAGUE SAY THAT

RETIRED ANNUITY ANTS CAN

PARTICIPATE IN BOCCE GAMES, JUST

SO YOU KNOW. WITH THAT, I HAVE

ONE MORE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT CHAIR

EISEN NOTED. THE MAJOR NEWS AT

BCDC DURING THE PAST TWO WEEKS

IS THE DEPLOYMENT OF OUR NEW WEB

SITE. THANKS TO A GREAT EFFORT

BY A NUMBER OF STAFF, MOST

ESPECIALLY REYLINA, ELSA, AND

ETHAN, AND VARIOUS OTHER STATE

STAFF AND A VERY GOOD CONSULTANT

TEAM, OUR NEW WEB SITE IS BOTH

EASIER TO USE, AND CAN BE

EXPANDED TO CREATE GREATER

FUNCTIONALITY. MOST IMPORTANT

FOR THE PUBLIC, IT IS MUCH

BETTER ORGANIZED, AND WE ARE

WORKING HARD TO FULFILL ONE OF

OUR STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVES BY

USING AS MUCH PLAIN LANGUAGE AS

POSSIBLE. PLEASE CHECK IT OUT.

LOOK AT THE NEW CALENDAR

FUNCTION, ESPECIALLY, THAT

CONTINUES TO MAKE ME SMILE. AND

WE’RE STILL TINKERING WITH IT

AND WILL BE FOR MANY MONTHS.

AND WE CERTAINLY LOOK FORWARD TO

YOUR COMMENTS. IF YOU FIND

SOMETHING OR DON’T FIND

SOMETHING THAT YOU EITHER LIKE

OR DON’T LIKE, PLEASE LET US

KNOW.

THAT COMPLETES MY REPORT, CHAIR

EISEN, I’M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ANY

QUESTIONS FOR LARRY?

WELL, LET ME SAY, STEVE, THAT

WAS UNBELIEVABLE AND STUNNING

LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS. AND ON

BEHALF OF A VERY GRATEFUL

COMMISSION, WE’RE GOING TO MISS

YOU, AND WE’RE LOOKING FORWARD

TO THE, I THINK LARRY CALLED IT

A SEND-OFF, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE

IT’S JUST A TRANSITION. ALL

RIGHT. WE’RE NOW AT THE

EXCITING GRAND NEW CONSENT

CALENDAR. AT THIS POINT IN

THE AGENDA, WE’RE GOING TO

CONSIDER THAT THERE ARE TWO

ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

ONE IS THE APPROVAL OF THE

MINUTES FOR OUR JUNE 6TH

MEETING, AND THE SECOND IS THE

PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A REVISED

STIPULATED CEASE AND DESIST AND

CIVIL PENALTY ORDER FROM THE

ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. AND THAT

REGARDS A PROPERTY IN SAN

FRANCISCO AT 224 SEA CLIFF

AVENUE. ENFORCEMENT COMMITTEE

CHAIR MARIE GILMORE HAS ALREADY

CONCURRED IN THE INCLUSION OF

THIS ORDER IN THE CONSENT

CALENDAR. SO, FIRST, SIERRA DO

WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT

REGARDING THE CONSENT CALENDAR?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NO

ONE IN PERSON, AND NO HANDS

RAISED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ALL

RIGHT. SO, THEN, AS INDICATED,

WE DO TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE WITH

RESPECT TO THE CONSENT

CALENDAR.

MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND

TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR?

SIERRA, LET ME KNOW WHO MOVES.

>>PAT ECKLUND: I’LL MOVE TO

APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: AND PAT

SHOWALTER.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: I’LL BE

GLAD TO SECOND THE CONSENT

CALENDAR.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: ECKLUND

MOVES SHOWALTER SECONDS.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

SIERRA PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER ADDIEGO? IS

.

>>SPEAKER: /*.

>>SPEAKER: YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER AHN? ANN AYE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER AMBUEHL?

[LAUGHTER]

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: I THINK THAT

COUNTS. WE SEE IT.

>>DAVID AMBUEHL: AYE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: THANK

YOU COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER

ECKERLY?

>>JENN ECKERLE: YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

ECKLUND?

>>PAT ECKLUND: AYE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

GILLMOR?

>>MARIE GILMORE: YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

GIOIA?

>>JOHN GIOIA: YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

GUNTHER?

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: YES .

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

HASZ?

>>KARL HASZ: AYE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER MOULTON-PETERS?

>>STEPHANIE MOULTON-PETERS:

YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER NELSON?

COMMISSIONER PEMBERTON?

>>SHERI PEMBERTON: AYE.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER SHOWALTER?

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER ZEPEDA?

>>CESAR ZEPEDA: YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: CHAIR

EISEN?

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

YES.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: HAVE

I MISSED ANYONE?

THE CONSENT CALENDAR PASSES WITH

16 YESES, ZERO NOS, AND ZERO

ABSTENTIONS.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU, SIERRA.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE DO NOT HAVE

AN ADMINISTRATIVE LISTING TODAY,

BUT COMMISSIONER GUNTHER ASKED

AT OUR LAST MEETING THAT OUR

STAFF EXPLAIN HOW THE

ADMINISTRATIVE LISTING PROCESS

WORKS AND HOW IT DIFFERS FROM

OTHER TYPES OF PERMITTING

APPROVALS. SO, HARRIET ROSS WHO

IS OUR REGULATORY DIRECTOR HAS

PREPARED A RESPONSE FOR THE

COMMISSION. BUT BEFORE WE GET

TO HARRIET’S RESPONSE, DO WE

HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS

REGARDING THIS AGENDA ITEM?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NONE

IN PERSON, AND NO HANDS RAISED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU. HARRIET, YOU CAN

PLEASE EXPLAIN TO US OUR

ADMINISTRATIVE LISTING PROCESS?

>>HARRIET ROSS: YES. GOOD

AFTERNOON CHAIR EISEN AND

COMMISSIONERS. AGAIN, I’M

HARRIET ROSS. FIRST OF ALL,

BCDC HAS SEVERAL CATEGORIES OF

PERMITS, AS YOU ALL HAVE

NOTICED, I’M SURE. WHEN THE

COMMISSION HEARS A PROJECT OR

VOTES SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID

LAST MONTH IN MAY, 505 BAYSHORE,

THAT’S CONSIDERED A MAJOR

PERMIT. BUT THE COMMISSION’S

RULES HAVE DEDICATED AUTHORITY

TO REVIEW AND ACT ON SOME OTHER

PERMITS TO ITS EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR. SO, THE PERMITS THAT

APPEAR IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE

LISTINGS ARE CONSIDERED MINOR

REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS AND

THAT’S DEFINED BY THE

COMMISSION’S REGULATIONS AND BY

THE COMMISSION ITSELF. THERE

ARE MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF

PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THIS

DEFINITION OF MINOR REPAIRS AND

IMPROVEMENTS. SOME EXAMPLES TO

GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT WE’RE

TALKING ABOUT CAN BE SINGLE BOAT

DOCKS LESS THAN 1500 SQUARE FEET

SHORELINE PROTECTION THAT WOULD

FILL LESS THAN 10,000 FEET OF

THE BAY ROUTINE REPAIRS THAT

DON’T INVOLVE SIGNIFICANT

ENLARGEMENT OR CHANGES. JUST TO

NAME A FEW.

DIRECTOR ASKED TO ISSUE OR

TO PERMIT REQUIRED ACTIONS TO

THE COMMISSION AND PUBLIC. THE

LIST IS SUMMARY OF PROJECTS AND

PROPOSED AGES BY STAFF. IF THE

COMMISSION AGREES WITH THE

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

CLASSIFICATION THAT A PROJECT IS

INDEED CONSIDERED A MINOR REPAIR

OR IMPROVEMENT, THEN NO ACTION

IS NEEDED AND THAT’S TYPICALLY

WHAT HAPPENS. I HAVE BEEN HERE

FOR NINE MONTHS NOW, AND I THINK

WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT

PROCESS EVERY MEETING WITHOUT

ANY FANFARE. THEN THE EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR WILL ACT ON PENDING

APPLICATIONS WITHIN THE MANDATED

DEADLINES. SO ADMINISTRATIVE

MATTERS OR PERMITS DON’T REQUIRE

A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAY BE

ISSUED WITHIN A SHORTER TIME

FRAME. NOW, HOWEVER, IF THE

COMMISSION — AND YOU ALL HAVE

THE RIGHT TO DISAGREE WITH THE

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

DETERMINATION THAT A PROJECT IS

INDEED A MINOR REPAIR OR

IMPROVEMENT AND IF THAT’S THE

CASE WE’LL HOLD A HEARING TO

DISCUSS IF THAT — IF THE

PROJECT DOESN’T FIT THE

DEFINITION OF THE COMMISSIONER’S

VOTE ON THIS TYPE OF PERMIT —

SORRY, IF IT DOESN’T MEET THE

DEFINITION OF THIS PERMIT THEN

WE VOTE AS A COMMISSION ON THE

TYPE OF PERMIT IT SHOULD BE. IF

THE COMMISSION VOTES THE TYPE

IS NOT THE RIGHT PERMIT THE

COMMISSION VOTES THEN

ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT WHICH

WOULD INCLUDE PUBLIC HEARING AND

COMMISSION VOTE.

SO THAT’S THE MAIN

ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT INCLUDED

IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE LISTING WE

ALSO LIST OTHER PERMITS SUCH AS

REGION-WIDE ON A REGULAR BASIS

AND I THINK THE PLAN IS TO GO

OVER THAT IN DETAIL AT FUTURE

TRAINING. THAT’S JUST THE

BASICS OF WHAT GOES ON IN THE

ADMINISTRATIVE LISTING AND HOW

THAT’S DIFFERENT FROM THE MAJOR

PERMITS THAT YOU ALL CONSIDER

FROM TIME TO TIME. ANY

QUESTIONS?

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ANY

QUESTIONS OF HARRIET?

COMMENTS?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NO

HANDS RAISED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU. THANK YOU HARRIET.

AND YOUR STATEMENT THAT WE COULD

REMOVE SOMETHING FROM THE

ADMINISTRATIVE LISTING IF WE

WISHED REMINDED ME THAT THAT IS

ALSO TRUE OF OUR CONSENT

CALENDAR. AND I FORGOT TO

MENTION THAT IF AT ANY POINT IN

TIME SOMEBODY WANTED TO LIFT

SOMETHING ALL THE COMMISSION —

I MEAN THE CONSENT CALENDAR, AND

HAVE A REGULAR, SORT OF, ITEM

FOR THAT MATTER, THAT CAN BE

DONE. SO, I NEGLECTED TO

MENTION THAT.

>>GREG SCHARFF: I WANTED TO ADD

TO THAT CHAIR EISEN IT TAKES TWO

COMMISSIONERS. IF ONE

COMMISSIONER WANTS TO DO IT, IT

TAKES TWO COMMISSIONERS TO SAY

WE’RE GOING TO REMOVE IT FROM

THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU GREG. FIND A PARTNER

IF YOU WANT TO REMOVE SOMETHING

FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

WE’RE GOING TO HAVE THREE

BRIEFINGS NOW. THE FIRST ONE IS

WITH RESPECT TO SAND MINING

ISSUES. IT’S A BRIEFING BY THE

BCDC STAFF AND REPRESENTATIVES

OF THE SAND MINING INDUSTRY.

IT’S GOING TO BE WITH REGARD TO

ISSUES THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED

BY THE COMMISSION’S TEMPORARY

SAND MINING COMMISSIONER WORKING

GROUP, WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED

RECENTLY. AND THEY’RE GOING TO

BE CONSIDERING THESE ISSUES

DURING THE REMAINDER OF THE

YEAR. LAST WEEK, BCDC

DISTRIBUTED RESEARCH STUDIES ON

ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED BY OUR

COMMISSION DURING THE SAND

MINING PERMIT PROCESS BACK IN

2015. THAT RESEARCH WAS

REVIEWED BY AN INDEPENDENT

SCIENCE PANEL. SO, TODAY, BCDC

STAFF IS GOING TO PROVIDE A

SHORT PRESENTATION ON THE

RESEARCH AND THE FINDINGS

PROCESS, AND REPRESENTATIVES OF

THE SANDS MINING COMPANIES ARE

GOING TO PROVIDE A SHORT

PRESENTATION ON MINING

ACTIVITIES. SO, THE PURPOSE

OF THIS BRIEFING IS TO HIGHLIGHT

THE TOPICS THAT THE WORKING

GROUP IS GOING TO CONSIDER. SO,

COMMISSIONERS SHOULD WAITE THAT

WORK BEFORE WE EXPRESS ANY

OPINIONS WE HAVE ON THE STUDIES

OR THE POSSIBILITY OF

CONSIDERING A PERMIT FOR FUTURE

SAND MINING ACTIVITIES.

TODAY WE’RE GOING TO HEAR THE

SHORT PRESENTATIONS. AND OF

COURSE, THERE WILL BE TIME FOR

ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS THAT

COMMISSIONERS HAVE. OKAY.

DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON

THIS ITEM BEFORE WE BEGIN? I’M

SORRY.

[LAUGHTER]

LET’S HAVE THE PRESENTATION

BEFORE WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

BRENDA IS GOING TO MAKE THE

PRESENTATION.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: THANK YOU VICE

CHAIR EISEN. YOU CAN ALL SEE MY

SCREEN?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: YES.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

YES.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: GOOD AFTERNOON

COMMISSIONERS I’M PLEASED TO

PRESENT FINDINGS ON THE NEW

SIGNS ON SAND IN SAN FRANCISCO

BAY AN OVERLOOKED AREA OF THE

SEDIMENT SYSTEM THIS NEW SCIENCE

IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE

COMMISSION’S REQUIREMENTS IN ITS

2015 SAND MINING PERMITS. MY

PRESENTATION AS CHAIR EYES

MENTIONED WILL BE TO REVIEW THE

HISTORY OF SAND MINING IN THE

BAY, THE COMMISSION’S PERMITTING

SAND ACTIVITIES IN 2015 PROCESS

AND ORGANIZATION FOR IDENTIFY

THE STUDIES AND RESEARCH AND

FINDINGS THEN INDEPENDENT

SCIENCE PANEL ON RESEARCH AND

FINALLY PATH FORWARD IN THE NEXT

SEVERAL MONTHS.

AND MY SCREEN IS NOT

FORWARDING.

SO, LET ME JUST DO IT THIS WAY.

OKAY. SO, AS SOME OF YOU ARE

AWARE, MINING IN SAN FRANCISCO

BAY HAS OCCURRED FOR ALMOST A

CENTURY, VIA SMALL COMPANIES

THAT BEGAN AROUND THE 1930S, AND

PERHAPS BEFORE THAT. THE

COMMISSION’S RECORDS OF THIS

ACTIVITIES ARE LIMITED TO THE

DOCUMENTED SAND MINING FROM

VARIOUS PERMITS OF THESE SMALL

COMPANIES THAT WERE PERMITTED IN

THE 1970S. OVER TIME, THE SMALL

COMPANIES WERE CONSOLIDATED.

AND ESPECIALLY IN THE LATE

1990S, SEVERAL OF THE SMALL

COMPANIES, ALONG WITH THE STATE

LAND LEASES, OR PRIVATE — OR

PRIVATE LEASES WERE CONSOLIDATED

UNDER HANSON AGGREGATES, WHICH

IS NOW MARTIN MARIETTA, AND,

ALSO, LIND MARINE. ALSO NOTE A

THIRD SAND MINING COMPANY,

SUISUN ASSOCIATES WHICH IS A

JOINT EFFORT — GIANT COMPANY OF

LIND MARINE AND MARTIN

MARIETTA.

IN THIS GRAPHIC, YOU SEE HERE,

IN THE UPPER RIGHT, THERE IS A

VERY SMALL MAP, BILL BUTLER WITH

LIND MARINE WILL SHOW YOU A

BETTER MAP SHORTLY BUT THE

SAND — CENTRAL

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND SUISUN

CHANNEL IN BAY AREA CALLED

MIDDLE GROUND SCHOELL SUISUN

CHANNEL ITSELF PERMITS REPORTED

BY MINING COMPANIES BETWEEN

1970S AND 2023 HAS BEEN

VARIABLE. SIGNALED MINING IS

DONE PARTICULARLY TO PROVIDE

AGGREGATE TO THE CONSTRUCTION

INDUSTRY IN THE BAY REGION.

IT’S NOT THE ONLY SAND THAT’S

PROVIDED TO THE CONSTRUCTION

INDUSTRY, THERE IS ALSO IMPORTED

SAND FROM BRITISH COLUMBIA AND

SAND TRUCKED IN FROM VARIOUS

QUARS IN THE REGION. BUT THE

MINERS WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT

THAT IN THE NEXT PRESENTATION.

BUT YOU WILL NOTE THAT DURING

THE EARLY 2000s WAS THE PEAK OF

THE SAND MINING AND THAT WAS

AROUND THE.COM PERIOD WHEN THERE

WAS A HUGE AMOUNT OF BUILDING

GONE ON IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY.

YOU WILL ALSO SEE A DIP AROUND

2018 AND 2014 WHICH MARKS A

SIGNIFICANT RECESSION IN THE

REGION AND ACKNOWLEDGE BACK THEN

DECLINING OVER TIME AND IT TENDS

TO TREND ALONG WITH THE

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY’S WORK AND

WE’LL SEE HOW IT CONTINUES IN

THE FUTURE.

IN 2015, THE COMMISSION HEARD

FOR THE FIRST TIME THREE MAJOR

PERMITS IN A PUBLIC HEARING AND

VOTE. AND THEY ISSUED THREE

PERMITS. THE FIRST PERMIT WAS

FOR CENTRAL BAY FOR 1.4 PER

CUBIC YARDS OF SAND OVER

MULTIPLE LEASE PARCELS ISSUED TO

HANSON AGGREGATES NOW MARTIN

MARIETTA. SUISUN BAY HAD A

PERMIT ISSUE FOR 185,000 CUBIC

YARDS ANNUALLY AND THAT WENT TO

SUISUN ASSOCIATES AND LIND

MARINE HAD A SPECIFIC PERMIT

ISSUED ON A PRIORITY LEASE FOR

100,000 CUBIC YARDS AROUND

MIDDLE GROUND SCHOELL. PERMITS

ARE FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD AND

THEY DIFFERENT STUDIES TO

MITIGATE AND BETTER UNDERSTAND

IMPACTS OF SAND MINING SO THE

COMMISSION ALONG WITH THE WATER

BOARD REQUIRED WATER QUALITY

MONITORING STUDY AND REQUIRED

BENTHIC HABITAT STUDY THEN MOST

RECENT WORK REQUIRED STUDY OF

SAND TRANSPORT AND SAND BUDGET

POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE MINING

OF THE SAND, AND PHYSICAL

PROCESS IN THE BAY AND IN THAT

ACTION THE COMMISSION REQUIRED

THE MINERS TO CONTRIBUTE $1.2

MILLION TO THESE EFFORTS.

THERE WAS MITIGATION REQUIRED AS

PART OF THESE PERMITS, INCLUDING

REMOVAL OF SOME BAY FILL WHICH

WAS PRIMARILY UNDERTAKEN AT

CROCKETT AND MARINA, A DEFUNCT

MARINA NEAR THE CITY OF

CROCKETT NEAR THE BENICIA BRIDGE

INSTALLATION OF FISH SCREENS ON

ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT ALL OF THE

PUMPING EQUIPMENT TO REDUCE

ENTERTAINMENT OF FISH FROM THE

WATER BEING PUMPED ON THE

DREDGES TO SLURRY THE SAND. AT

THAT TIME THERE WAS A LOT OF

CONCERN ISSUES RAISED AROUND

SAND MINING THIS WAS THE FIRST

TIME THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING

IN THAT REGARD AND THE

COMMISSION SPECIFICALLY HAD A

NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, INCLUDING

HOW MUCH SAND IS IN THE BAY

WHAT’S THE VOLUME AND WHERE IS

IT, WHAT AREAS ARE IN TRANSPORT

WHAT AREAS ARE RELIC SANDS IS

THE SAND BEING MIND AND

TRANSPORT FOR RELIC AND WHAT ARE

THE IMPACTS OF MINING RELIC SAND

AND IMPACTS TO ACTIVE SANDS, AND

CONSEQUENCES OF THAT MINING TO

BAY BEACHES AND TIDES THAT IT

FEEDS. QUESTIONS CAME UP WITH

WHETHER YOU DIG A BIG HOLE AND

SOME SEDIMENTS COME DOWN FROM

THE DELTA THAT FILL THE HOLE

RATHER THAN GOING TO BAY

BEACHES. THE QUESTION ASKED

WHETHER OR NOT THERE SHOULD BE

MODIFICATION OF MINING VOLUME AT

DIFFERENT SITES OR SITES

THEMSELVES UNDER WHAT CONDITION

SHOULD WE ALLOW MINING OR NOT

AND WHAT’S SUSTAINABLE VOLUME

FOR MINING AND SUBSTANTIAL

DEPLETION, COMMISSION AT THE

TIME SUGGESTED MONITORING FOR

IMPACTS OF EXTRACTION OF RELIC

SAND AND SAND TRANSPORT WAS

IMPORTANT ALSO WANTED TO

UNDERSTAND BETTER BCDC’S AUTHOR

AND JURISDICTION IN RELATIONSHIP

TO SAND MINING AND LASTLY THE

QUESTION CAME UP AROUND IMPACTS

TO BENTHIC LIFE IN THE BAY BUT

THAT’S NOT A SUBJECT OF TODAY’S

PRESENTATION SO THAT UPGRADE

WENT OUT. AFTER THE PERMIT’S

WERE ISSUED IN APRIL 2015 WE

WENT AWAY FROM THAT HEARING AND

BEGAN TO WORK WITH MINORS AND

THE COMMISSION REQUIRED $1.2

MILLION TO SUPPORT THE SAND

STUDIES THAT MONEY WAS DEPOSITED

INTO THE STATE COASTAL

CONSERVANCY’S COASTAL TRUST FUND

OVER FOUR YEARS SO WE ALLOWED A

PERIOD OF TIME FOR THAT MONEY TO

BUILD UP. ONCE THAT DEPOSIT WAS

COMPLETE THE STATE COASTAL

CONSERVANCY AND BCDC BEGAN TO

WORK TOGETHER WITH A SELECTED

SAND TECHNICAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE WHO DEVELOPED FURTHER

THE QUESTIONS AROUND HOW WE

MANAGE SAND MINING, WHAT THE

IMPACTS OF MINING ARE. THEY

WORKED TOGETHER TO DEVELOP

SCUDDY SCOPES WE REQUESTED

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WHICH WERE

LISTED AT THE STATE COASTAL

CONSERVANCY’S WEB SITE AND

PROPOSALS REVIEWED BY THE THE T

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN

ADDITION DURING THE LATTER PART

OF THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE’S MAIN WORK AND

INDEPENDENT SCIENCE PANEL

FORMALIZE THEY REVIEWED THE

SCOPES AND REVIEWED PROPOSALS

THAT CAME IN THEY IDENTIFIED AND

INTERVIEWED SAND SCIENCE TEAMS

AND WORKED WITH TEAMS TO CREATE

AND APPROPRIATE STUDIES TO BEST

ANSWER MANAGEMENT QUESTIONS AND

WHEN STUDIES WERE COMPLETED THEY

REVIEWED FINDINGS AND DEVELOPED

A FINDINGS REPORT WITH THE SAND

TECH CONSULTING FIRM. JUST SO

YOU KNOW WHO IS ON THESE

GROUPS.

THE SAND TECHNOLOGY

IMPLEMENTATION OFFICE STEERING

COMMITTEE CAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

INCLUDED CONSERVANCY, BCDC,

COASTAL COMMISSION, STATE LANDS

COMMISSION ARMY CORP OF

ENGINEERS WATER BOARD NATIONAL

MARINE FISHERIES AND COW FISH

AND WILDLIFE SAN FRANCISCO BAY

KEEPER NON-PROFIT HIGHLIGHT

INTERESTED IN WORKING AND MARIN

M REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL AS

CONSULTING FIRM ASSISTED IN THE

WORK, DEPENDENT SCIENCE PANEL

INCLUDED FIVE DISTINGUISHED

SCIENTISTS, BOB BA TAG LIA FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, DR.

CRAIG JONES FROM INTERVAL AND

SALT CONSULTING AND DR. JOHN

FROM UC DAVIS AND DAVID USGE

EMERITUS DISTINGUISHED GROUP OF

FOLKS WORKING ON DEVELOPING

THESE STUDIES AND REVIEWING

THEM. THERE WE GO. AS I

MENTIONED, THE SAND TECHNICAL

ADVISORY COMMITTEE WORKED TO

REFINE THE COMMISSION’S

QUESTIONS AND ADD SOME OF THEIR

OWN QUESTIONS ON WHAT KINDS OF

INFORMATION WE WANTED OUT OF

THESE SAND STUDIES. THE

QUESTIONS AS DEFINED INCLUDED

SAND MINING AT EXISTING AREAS AT

PRIMITIVE LEVELS HAVING

MEASURABLE DEMONSTRABLE IMPACT

ON SEDIMENT TRANSPORT AND SUPPLY

WITHIN SAN FRANCISCO BAY ASKED

WHAT’S THE SUSTAINABLE NUMBER

AND SUSTAINABLE DEPLETION MUCH

LIKE THE COMMISSION DID, THEY

ASKED WHAT IS THE ANTICIPATED

PHYSICAL EFFECTS OF SANDS MINING

AT PERMITTED LEVELS ON SAND —

AND SUPPLY WITHIN THE BAY AND

OUTER COAST AND ACTIVE SANDS

CONSEQUENCES TO BEACHES AND

TIDES IMPACT TO RELIC SANDS. SO

SIMILAR BUT MORE SPECIFIC THAN

THE QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION

ASKED DURING THE PUBLIC

HEARINGS. THE RESEARCH TEAMS

— I’M NOT GOING TO READ ALL

THESE FOLKS NAMES BUT I FELT IT

WAS IMPORTANT TO PUT THE

AGENCIES ORGANIZATIONS AND

SCIENTISTS UP FOR YOU TO SEE

BECAUSE AGAIN THIS IS A

DISTINGUISHED GROUP OF

SCIENTISTS WHO WORKED VERY HARD

ON A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT STUDIES

TO HELP THE COMMISSION

UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS OF SAND

MINING AND UNDERSTAND THE SAND

TRANSPORT SYSTEM A LOT BETTER

THAN WE DID TEN YEARS AGO. WE

LOOKED AT SAND BUDGET, SAND

SUPPLY, MORPHOLOGICAL CHAINS IN

TRANSPORT ANALYSIS. WE ALSO HAD

SOME SAND TRANSPORT MODELING

THAT WAS DONE, AND SAND

PROVIDENCE, OR ALSO KNOWN AS

FINGERPRINTING UNDERSTANDING THE

ORIGIN OF WHERE THE SAND CAME

FROM AND MULTIPLE DIFFERENT

FOLKS FROM DIFFERENT ENTITIES

WORKING TOGETHER ACROSS THESE

DIFFERENT STUDS TO INTEGRATE

THIS WORK.

SO, HERE IS THE KEY FINDINGS.

AND THIS IS ADDITIONAL FINDINGS

IN THE FINDINGS REPORT.. THESE

ARE THE OVERARCHING FINDINGS.

THERE ARE ALSO REGIONAL FINDINGS

THAT I’M NOT INCLUDING IN MY

PRESENTATION TODAY, AND THE

STUDIES THEMSELVES ARE ALSO

INCLUDED IN APPENDIX G WITH EVEN

MORE INFORMATION ARE IF YOU ARE

INTERESTED IN DIVING IN DEEP.

SO, THE KEY FINDINGS INCLUDE

THAT THE VOLUME OF MIND SAND IS

SIGNIFICANT RELATIVE TO THE

BAY’S SAND BUDGET IT REPRESENTS

LARGEST OUTFLOW OF SAND IN THE

BAY INCLUDING NET SAND DISCHARGE

TO THE OCEAN. ADDITIONALLY SAND

IS MIND FASTER THAN IT IS BEING

REFRESHED AND THEREFORE SAND IS

A NON-RENEWABLE RESOURCE OVER

THE LONG-TERM. SUISUN BAY SAND

IS NOT BEING REPLENISHED AND

THUS A FINITE RESOURCE AND THE

BED IS BEING LOWERED AND

SYMMETRIC MODELING AND BUDGET

STUDIES ALL SUPPORT FINDING SAND

MINING AFFECTS AND IN

HIGHLY LOCALIZED EFFECTS

DIMINISHING WITH DISTANCE AND

LOCATION, NEGLIGIBLE SAND

TRANSPORT SUCH AS SUISUN BAY

WHERE DEPRESSIONS CAUSED BY

MINING PERSIST IN THE BED OVER

TIME. NEXT FINDINGS, CENTRAL

BAY SAND IS RELIC MEANING IT WAS

DEPOSITED BETWEEN 20,060,000

YEARS AGO AS SEA LEVELS ROSE AND

THE RIVER DISCHARGE POINT

MIGRATED THROUGH THE BAY TO

PRESENT LOCATION IN THE DELTA

PART OF THE LARGE BAY OCEAN

RESERVOIR SANDS FROM THE

WATERSHED OF SACRAMENTO AND SAN

JOAQUIN RIVERS ARE NO LONGER

SIGNIFICANT SOURCE TO THE BAY

OCEAN AND LARGE VOLUMES OF SAND

DO NOT MOVE THROUGH THE SYSTEM

DURING TIMES OF HIGH FLOW IE WET

WINTERS AS WAS PREVIOUSLY

ASSUMED EFFECTS OF MINING TO

BEACHES ECOLOGICALLY IMPORTANT

REMAIN UNQUANTIFIED. IN EACH

TIDAL CYCLE SAND IS TRANCE

PORTED BETWEEN THE BAY AND THE

OCEAN EFFECTIVELY LINKING THE

TWO SAND DEPOSITS INTO A SHARED

POOL. THE SIZE OF THE SHARED

POOL OF SAND AND THUS THE

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REDUCTION

DUE TO MINING IS UNKNOWN.

SO, THAT IS THE HIGH-LEVEL

FINDINGS, OVERARCHING FINDINGS

OF THE IN THE SCIENCE

PANEL.

WE’LL FURTHER DIG INTO THIS

INFORMATION AND FURTHER CODIFY

WHAT IT MEANS FOR MINING

ACTIVITIES AND PERMITTING IN SAN

FRANCISCO BAY. GOING

FORWARD, WE HAVE TODAY’S

BRIEFING AND ALL THE SCIENCE

THAT HAS GONE INTO IT, INTO THAT

FINDINGS REPORT WHICH IS 35 TO

40 PAGES LONG. NOT TOO LONG OF

A READ. YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY

READ IT AND THESE ARE THE

INDEPENDENT SCIENCE PANEL

FINDINGS. WE’LL TAKE THE

INFORMATION AND DIG THROUGH IT

IN THE COMMISSION ARE WORKING

GROUP WHICH I’LL TALK ABOUT IN A

MINUTE. WE’LL USE THE

COMMISSIONER IDENTIFIED

QUESTIONS WE’LL STUDY IN REVIEW

AND HAVE PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT

WHAT THIS ALL MEANS. THE STATE

LANDS COMMISSION IS CURRENTLY IN

A CEQA REVIEW PROCESS SO WE’RE

ANTICIPATING OVER THE NEXT FEW

MONTHS THAT STATE LANDS WILL BE

REVIEWING DRAFT CEQA DOCUMENT.

AND BCDC’S ROLE IN THAT IS TO

REVIEW AND COMMENT ON IT ALONG

WITH OTHER RESPONSIBLE

AGENCIES.

LATE THIS YEAR, WE’RE

ANTICIPATING PERHAPS DECEMBER,

WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THE SAND

MINING COMPANIES SUBMITTING

THROUGH NEW APPLICATIONS FOR

ADDITIONAL SAND MINING IN THE

FUTURE. AND LASTLY, PROBABLY

AROUND EARLY SPRING, APRIL 2025,

WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THE

COMMISSION HEARING AND VOTING

ONCE AGAIN ON SAND MINING

ACTIVITIES IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY,

AS PROPOSED BY THE MINERS.

SO, THE SAND STUDIES

COMMISSIONER WORKING GROUP. WE

HAVE THREE COMMISSIONERS WHO

HAVE GRACIOUSLY, ONCE AGAIN,

AGREED TO SIT ON A COMMISSIONER

WORKING GROUP AND HELP STAFF DIG

THROUGH IMPORTANT INFORMATION

THAT WILL INFLUENCE HOW WE

PERMIT AND THINK ABOUT POLICY

APPLICATION WHEN WE GET THE

PERMIT APPLICATION. SO, IT WILL

BE CHAIRED BY PAT SHOWALTER, AND

ANDY GUNTHER, AND BARRY NELSON

WILL BE THE TWO COMMISSIONERS ON

THE WORKING GROUP. WE HAVE FOUR

MEETINGS PLANNED AND SCHEDULED.

AND PLEASE COME TO THESE

MEETINGS IF YOU ARE INTERESTED.

BECAUSE THEY WILL BE FASCINATING

AND WE’LL HAVE DIFFERENT

PRESENTERS HERE TO HELP EXPLAIN

SOME OF THE SCIENCE. SO, THE

FIRST ONE IS IN MID-JULY. IT’S

AN AFTERNOON MEETING.

AUGUST 21ST, AND SEPTEMBER AND

NOVEMBER ARE ALL MORNING

MEETINGS. THEY’RE GOING TO BE

TWO HOURS IN LENGTH, AND THEY

WILL BE VIRTUAL. SO EASY TO

ATTEND. AGAIN, THEY WILL BE

FULLY OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. AND I

THINK WITH THAT, THAT IS MY

PRESENTATION. WE CAN PROBABLY

HOLD QUESTIONS FOR MY

PRESENTATION UNTIL AFTER THE

MINERS — THE MINING

REPRESENTATIVES GIVE THEIR

PRESENTATION, UNLESS THERE ARE

SOME CLARIFYING QUESTIONS NOW.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: SO,

DO WE HAVE ANY CLARIFYING

QUESTIONS NOW BEFORE WE MOVE TO

THE MINERS PRESENTATIONS?

IT LOOKS LIKE COMMISSIONER

JOHN-BAPTISTE HAS HER HAND UP.

>>ALICIA JOHN BAPTISTE: I HAD A

CLARIFYING QUESTION YOU CAN

EXPLAIN WHAT YOU MEAN BY SAND

BUDGET, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: IF YOU THINK

ABOUT IT LIKE A BANK ACCOUNT

THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF

SAND WITHIN THE SAN FRANCISCO

BAY COMING IN AND OUT SOME OF

THAT IS HAPPENING IN A NATURAL

PROCESS ACCUMULATING OVER TIME

THEN THE SAND LEAVING THE OCEAN

THERE’S ALSO HUMAN EXTRACTION OF

SAND EITHER THROUGH NAVIGATING

DREDGING OR MINING ACTIVITIES.

SO, IT’S A SCIENTIFIC PROCESS IN

WHICH SCIENTISTS DO THE BEST

THEY CAN TO BOUND THE AMOUNT OF,

IN THIS CASE, SAND THAT IS

PRESENT, IN THE ACTIVE TRANSPORT

LAYERS, THEN BALANCE OUT WHAT

THEY BELIEVE IS COMING IN AND

OUT TO GET A MASS OF EQUILIBRIUM

IT’S NOT WEIGHT OF VOLUME OF EK

LIB RUM OR WEIGHT, IT’S ACTUALLY

MASS THAT IS DEFINITELY

SOMETHING WE WILL BE TALKING

MORE ABOUT AT THE COMMISSIONER

WORKING GROUP BECAUSE IT’S A

TECHNICAL BUT STANDARDIZED

SCIENTIFIC PROCESS.

>>ALICIA JOHN BAPTISTE: THANK

YOU.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ANY

ADDITIONAL CLARIFYING

QUESTIONS?

OR SHALL WE TURN TO THE MINERS

PRESENTATION? ALL RIGHT.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: OKAY. I HAVE

ING IF OUT. STOP SHARING.

PROUD TO INTRODUCE TO YOU TODAY

BILL BUTLER OF LIND MARINE,

ERICA GERA AND MICHAEL BISHOP OF

MARTIN MARIETTA WHOLE TELL YOU

MORE ABOUT SAND MINING AND THEIR

PERSPECTIVES. THANK YOU. AND

WELCOME, BILL, ERICA, AND

MICHAEL.

.

>>BILL BUTLER: THANK YOU I’M

NOT SURE WHO IS GOING TO SHARE

THE PRESENTATION. GOOD

AFTERNOON CHAIR EISEN MEMBERS OF

THE COMMISSION MY NAME IS BILL

BUTLER I AM VICE PRESIDENT WITH

LIND MARINE. PRESENTING THE

SAND MINING OVERVIEW ON BEHALF

OF BOTH LIND AND MARTIN MARIETTA

THIS AFTERNOON. JOINING ME

AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AS

BRENDA INDICATED, IS ERICA GERA

AND MIKE BISHOP FROM MARTIN

MARIETTA, WE ALSO HAVE AARON

HOLLOWAY AND NICK FROM GHG WHO

ARE COASTAL ENGINEERING

CONSULTANTS FOR THE SAND MINERS

AND ALSO CLEFTIAN MARSH FROM

COUNCIL DOWNEY BRAND THEY’RE

AVAILABLE TO HAVE QUESTIONS.

NEXT SLIDE. SOME OF YOU MAY

RECALL DETAILS ABOUT SAND MINING

FROM THE COMMISSION IN ACTIVITY

NINE YEARS AGO. I’LL TAKE THIS

MOMENT TO REFRESH OVERVIEW OF

BAY SAND MINING. I’M GOING TO

BRIEFLY COVER THESE TOPICS. WHY

SAND MINING HAPPENS, WHO IS

INVOLVED AND WHERE, WHEN, HOW,

AND HOW MUCH THAT IT HAPPENS.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO, THE PURPOSE OF SAND MINING

IS TO OBTAIN A COMMERCIAL GRADE

AGGREGATE THAT IS USED FOR

PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CONSTRUCTION,

GOING INTO CONCRETE, ASPHALT,

AND OTHER BUILDING MATERIALS

THAT ARE USED TO BUILD THE

HOMES, SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS,

ROADS, AND INFRASTRUCTURE

PROJECTS AROUND THE BAY. MARINE

SAND IS A KEY COMPONENT IN BAY

AREA RESTORATION AND RESILIENCE

PROJECTS, AS WELL. ALL OF THESE

THINGS WHICH HELPS SUPPORT THE

QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE ENJOY

HERE IN THE BAY AREA. UTILIZING

A LOCAL RESOURCE FOR OUR LOCAL

NEEDS IN THE REGION THAT’S

TRANSPORTED VIA WATERWAYS TO

SITES WHERE THE RESOURCE IS

UTILIZED AND IN LARGE LOADS THAT

EQUAL ROUGHLY 100 TO 140 TRUCK

LOADS OF MATERIAL, ALL HELP TO

REDUCE THE OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL

EFFECTS. AND ALSO PROVIDE

REGIONAL JOBS FOR OUR LOCAL

RESIDENTS.

NOW IT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE

THAT NOT ALL SAND IS COMMERCIAL

GRADE SAND. IT NEEDS TO BE

DURABLE, CLEAN, WELL

GRADED, AND OF THE RIGHT SIZE.

THE BAY SANDS WHERE MINING

OCCURS, MEET THESE CRITERIA.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO, HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF

LOCAL PROJECTS THAT ARE

UTILIZING BAY SANDS. AND THEY

RANGE FROM, AS I SAID,

CONSTRUCTING SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS,

AFFORDABLE HOUSING, REBUILDING

FROM WILDFIRE DAMAGE, TO

ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION

PROJECTS, LIKE AT HUNTERS POINT,

AND BEACH RESTORATION, FOR

EXAMPLE, AT CROWN BEACH IN

ALAMEDA, WHICH WAS DONE FOR

RESILIENCE AND SEA LEVEL RISE

DEFENSE.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO, AS BRENDA INDICATED EARLIER,

THERE ARE TWO ACTIVE SAND MINING

COMPANIES OPERATING IN THE BAY.

MARTIN MARIETTA, FORMERLY

HANSON, AND LIND MARINE, AS WELL

AS THE JOIN VENTURE ENTITY THAT

IS FORMED BY THESE TWO

COMPANIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THESE FIGURES ILLUSTRATE WHERE

SAND MINING TAKES PLACE IN THE

BAY. THING IF ON THE LEFT IS

THE CENTRAL BAY LEASES. THEY

SPAN 2600 ACRES CONSISTING OF

NINE PARCELS LEASED FROM THE

CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS

COMMISSION. MARTIN MARIETTA,

EXCLUSIVELY MINES THESE AREAS,

AND THIS IS WHERE THE BULK OF

SAND MINING TAKES PLACE.

THE MIDDLING IF IS, I GUESS,

FITTINGLY MIDDLE GROUND LEASE

AREA, A 367 ACRE PRIVATE PARCEL

IN SUISUN BAY, AND LIND MARINE

EXCLUSIVELY MINES THIS

LOCATION.

AND THEN FINALLY, ON THE RIGHT,

THE SUISUN ASSOCIATE’S LEASE,

WHICH CONSISTS OF TWO PARCELS IN

THE SUISUN CHANNEL AT THE EAST

END OF SUISUN BAY. AND THIS 938

ACRE LEASE AREA IS LEASED FROM

STATE LANDS TO THE SUISUN

ASSOCIATES JOINT VENTURE, MADE

UP OF MARTIN MARIETTA AND LIND.

AND LIND MARINE HAS CONDUCTED

THE MINING HERE OVER THE PAST

TEN YEARS. NEXT SLIDE.

SO, THE NEXT SEVERAL FIGURES ARE

GOING TO HELP DESCRIBE

HOW THE SAND IS MIND. THE TWO

COMPANIES EACH OPERATE A SAND

MINING BARGE THAT’S LIND

MARINE’S ON THE LEFT AND MARTIN

MARIETTA’S ON THE RIGHT. THESE

ARE SIMILAR IN HOW THEY OBTAIN

SAND FROM OUR

RESPECTIVE. THEY USE A TUGBOAT

TO MOVE THE LARGES TO THE MINING

LOCATIONS. NEXT SLIDE. AT

THE MINING LOCATIONS, THE BARGE

IS FILLED BY PUMPING A SAND

WATER SLURRY FROM THE BAY

FLOOR.

ON THE RIGHT IT SHOWS THE SAND

PIPE ON THE BARGE WHICH IS

LOWERED INTO THE SUBSTRATE, AND

A PUMP ON BOARD THE BARGE PUMPS

THE SAND WATER MIXTURE INTO A

LOADING CHUTE THAT RUNS THE

LENGTH OF THE BARGE, ILLUSTRATE

IN THING IF ON THE LEFT. THE

SHOOT IS EQUIPPED WITH SEVERAL

SCREENED GATES THAT ALLOW SAND

AND WATER TO FLOW INTO THE BARGE

HOPPER. ANY MATERIALS LARGER

THAN SIGNALED FLOW OVER THE

SCREENS AND THEN ARE DISCHARGED

BACK INTO THE BAY THROUGH A PIPE

AT THE END OF THE SHOOT THAT

EXTEND UNDER THE BARGE. NOW, AS

THE SAND AND WATER MIXTURE FILLS

THE BARGE, WATER, WHICH ALSO

CONTAINS SOME FINE MATERIAL,

DECANTS FROM THE TOP OF THE

HOPPER, AND IS ALSO DISCHARGED

BACK INTO THE BAY THROUGH PIPES

THAT EXTEND UNDER THE BARGE.

PUMPING CONTINUES UNTIL THE BARK

HOPPER IS FILLED WITH WET SAND

AND ONCE IT’S FILLED, THE BARGES

ARE TRANSPORTED TO A NUMBER OF

SITES AROUND THE BAY WHERE THE

SAND IS OFF-LOADED, STOCKPILED,

AND THEN DISTRIBUTED TO

CUSTOMERS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THESE FIGURES SHOW A COUPLE OF

THE DIFFERENCES IN THE SAND

MINING BARGES. AND THEY SHOW

THE END OF THE SAND MINING

PIPES. ON THE LEFT, MARTIN

MARIETTA’S BARGE IS EQUIPPED

WITH A SUCTION DRAG HEAD THAT IS

PLACED ABOUT TWO FEET INTO THE

BAY SUBSTRATE WHEN IT’S LOWER.

THE TUGBOAT KEEPS THE BARGE AS

STATIONARY AS POSSIBLE, BUT THEN

MOVES TO NEW LOCATIONS, AS

NECESSARY, TO CONTINUE THE

SLURRY. IN THE SUISUN BAY

LOCATIONS, LIND MARINE SUCTION

PIPE ILLUSTRATED THERE ON THE

RIGHT, IS PUSHED FIVE OR SIX

FEET INTO THE SUBSTRATE, AND THE

BARGE IS ANCHORED TO LIMIT

MOVEMENT DURING MINING.

BOTH BARGES ARE EQUIPPED WITH

THOSE CYLINDRICAL SCREENS THAT

YOU CAN SEE FOR THE SLURRY WATER

TO PREVENT ENTRAINMENT OF FISH

INTO THE PIPES. IN OF THE

CENTRAL BAY, MARTIN MARIETTA

MIND SAND FROM DEPTHS RANGING

BETWEEN 60 AND 90 FEET. IN

SUISUN BAY LIND MINES IN AREAS

THAT ARE ANYWHERE FROM 22 TO 40

FEET DEEP.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NOW THESE NEXT SEVERAL FIGURES

ILLUSTRATE THE LEVELS OF MINING

ACTIVITY OCCURRING IN THE THREE

AREAS OVER THE PAST SEVERAL

YEARS. BRENDA SHOWED A VERY

SIMILAR SLIDE TO THIS, WHICH WAS

THE SUMMATION OF ALL OF THESE

FIGURES. THIS PARTICULARING IF

SHOWS THE ACTIVITY ON THE

CENTRAL BAY LEASES FROM 2,000 TO

2023. AND IT ILLUSTRATES THE

VARIABILITY OF MINING TO MEET

THE DEMAND THAT BRENDA TALKED

ABOUT, THE HIGHER DEMAND FOR

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS OCCURS

GENERALLY WHEN THE ECONOMY IS

STRONG AND MANY CONSTRUCTION

PROJECTS ARE UNDERWAY. WHEN THE

ECONOMY SLOWS DOWN, CONSTRUCTION

ACTIVITY DECREASES AND SO DOES

THE DEMAND FOR CONSTRUCTION

MATERIALS. NOW THESE ECONOMIC

CYCLES CAN ALSO BE INFLUENCED BY

EXTERNAL FACTORS, YOU KNOW?

LIKE NATURAL DISASTERS OR EVEN

THE UPCOMING CLIMATE CHANGE

ADAPTATION THAT WE’RE DEALING

WITH. I’LL MENTION IT’S

IMPORTANT TO HAVE PERMIT LIMITS

THAT RECOGNIZE THIS VARIABLE AND

HIGH ENOUGH TO OFFER FLEXIBLE TO

MEET THESE CHANGES IN DEMAND.

NEXT SLIDE

PLEASE.

— AVAILABLE BY PERMITTED

VOLUMES IN THE LOW PERIODS THERE

IN 2012 AND 2014 THEN WHEN

MINING WAS REAUTHORIZED IN 2015,

THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN

PERMITTED VOLUMES THAT WERE

SHIFTED TO THIS LEASE FROM THE

MIDDLE GROUND LEASE. NEXT

SLIDE. HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT

REDUCED VOLUME THERE IN THE

LATER YEARS, IN THE LAST TEN

YEAR PERIOD, WHEN THESE VOLUMES

WERE SHIFTED TO THE SUISUN

ASSOCIATES LEASE AREA.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO, WHAT’S NEXT? BRENDA DID A

GOOD JOB OF DESCRIBING THIS

PROCESS EARLIER. AND WE’RE NOW

HERE AT AN IMPORTANT MILESTONE.

THIS REPORT IS THE LAST MAJOR

PERMIT CONDITION TO BE FULL FIT

IN OUR CURRENT PERMITS. AND

THIS REPORT REALLY BUILDS ON A

HOST OF OTHER STUDIES AND

INFORMATION COMPILED THROUGH THE

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESSES

THAT HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED OVER

THE LAST 20 YEARS IN THE PRIOR

ROUNDS OF CEQA ANALYSIS AND

PRIOR ROUNDS OF PERMITTING AND

STUDY.

AND MANY OF THE FINDINGS OF THIS

REPORT REAFFIRM THE FINDINGS

FROM THESE PAST STUDIES,

INCLUDING SOME OF THE

DEMONSTRABLE IMPACTS ON SEDIMENT

TRANSPORT AND SUPPLY BEYOND

LOCALIZED AREAS WITHIN THE

LEASES, WEREN’T REALLY

IDENTIFIED.

WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THE

OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE TO BE

PART OF THE SEDIMENT

ATTACK, AND STUDIES DEVELOPED

AND AT THE END ALSO APPRECIATE

THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE

RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS.

WE DO HAVE A FEW COMMENTS AND

ISSUES ON THESE REPORTS THAT

REMAIN OUTSTANDING.

AND THOSE COMMENTS ARE INCLUDED

IN THE REPORT’S APPENDICES WHICH

YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE A COPY OF,

AND WE ENCOURAGE TO YOU TAKE A

LOOK AT THOSE. YOU KNOW,

FINALLY, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO

TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SAY A

BIG THANK YOU TO THE SEDIMENT

TECH, MEMBERS, AND BCDC AND

COASTAL CONSERVANCY STAFF, THE

INDEPENDENT SCIENCE PANEL

MEMBERS AND THE STUDY AUTHORS

FOR ALL THEIR WORK ON THIS VERY

COMPLEX ISSUE. IT WAS A HUGE

TASK, AND THE WORK IS VERY MUCH

APPRECIATED. AND, SO, WITH

THAT, I — WE’RE AVAILABLE TO

ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT ANY OF THE

COMMISSIONERS MIGHT HAVE. THANK

YOU.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU, BILL.

BRENDA DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING

ADDITIONAL?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: NO. WE’RE

READY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND/OR

COMMISSION QUESTIONS AND

DISCUSSION. THANK YOU.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: OKAY

WHY DON’T WE TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT

FIRST. SIERRA, DO WE HAVE ANY

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH

TO COMMENT?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: WE

DO, CURRENTLY HAVE ONE HAND

RAISED. JIM McGRATH.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

OKAY.

>>SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING. MY

NAME IS JIM McGRATH. SOME OF

YOU KNOW WHO I AM. I JUST WANT

TO SAY, FIRST, THAT THIS IS A

STUNNINGLY GOOD BIT OF SCIENCE.

I DIDN’T READ EVERY SINGLE

WORD.

BUT I SKIMMED EACH ONE OF THE

REPORTS. THE KEY CONCLUSION

HERE IS THAT THE SEDIMENT THAT’S

IN MOTION AT THE MOUTH OF THE

BAY IS RELIC SEDIMENT. AND THAT

DOESN’T REALLY SURPRISE ME. I

CAME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION IN

MONTEREY BAY AT THE MOUTH OF THE

SALINAS RIVER. THAT MEANS IT’S

NOT REFRESHED IN THE SAME

NATURE. BUT UNLIKE MONTEREY

BAY, YOU FACE A VERY DIFFERENT

SITUATION HERE. WHILE THE LOSS

OF SEDIMENT TO MINING MAY BE

DIRECTLY INVOLVED, A LOSS OF

SEDIMENT THAT EVENTUALLY MAKES

IT TO THE SAN FRANCISCO AND

MARIN COUNTY BEACHES, THERE IS A

HUGE AMOUNT OF SEDIMENT INVOLVED

IN THAT TRANSPORT SYSTEM. AND

THE AMOUNT IS RELATIVELY SMALL,

SIGNIFICANT, I THINK, IS THE

CONCLUSION. BUT THE THING I

WANTED TO POINT OUT TO YOU IS

THAT, WELL, IT MAY BE THAT THIS

EXACERBATES FUTURE EROSION

STOPPING SAND MINING PROBABLY

NOT HAVE AN APPRECIABLE EFFECT

ON THE NEED FOR ADAPTATION ALONG

THE BEACHES SO IT’S A

COMPLICATED QUESTION THAT YOU’RE

GOING TO FACE IN THE FUTURE.

WITH THAT, I’LL STOP. I’LL TRY

TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETINGS

OF THE COMMITTEE, THE

SUBCOMMITTEE. JUST ONCE AGAIN

WANT TO SAY, JUST

REALLY EXCELLENT WORK BY THE

STAFF OF THE SCIENTIFIC

COMMUNITY.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU. ANY — I SEE AT

LEAVE THE ONE MORE HAND RAISED.

SIERRA, DO YOU SEE THAT?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: I

DO.

BRENDA I WANT TO CLARIFY, IS

NICK PART OF THE PRESENTATION,

BRENDA?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: SO, NICK IS

WITH THE CONSULTING FIRM HIRED

BY THE SAND MINERS. NICK, I

DON’T KNOW IF YOU MAYBING A

PUBLIC COMMENT OR IF YOU ARE

TRYING TO COMMENT AS PART OF THE

SAND MINING PRESENTATION? BUT

MAYBE

>>SPEAKER: YEAH. THE MINING

TEAM ASKED IF I COULD MAKE

PUBLIC COMMENT.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: GO

AHEAD.

>>SPEAKER: DEAR VICE CHAIR AND

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MY

NAME IS NICK S, SENIOR COASTAL

SCIENTIST WITH GHD ENGINEERING

CONSULTANTS TO THE MINING TEAM

EXPERTISE IN COASTAL SEDIMENT

AND TRANSPORT HERE TO PROVIDE

OBSERVATIONS OF THE SAND SCIENCE

STUDIES AND ISP PROCESS AND

APPRECIATION FOR THE PROCESS AND

CHALLENGE OF GENERATING

COMPILING RESEARCH ON A

COMPLICATED ISSUE, COMMEND THE

HARD WORK OF RESEARCH TEAMS AND

ISP STUDIES TECHNICAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE THE NEW RESEARCH

BUILDS ON SIGNIFICANT WORK ON

SAND TRANSPORT PATHWAYS

REAFFIRMING A NUMBER OF

FINDINGS, MINING HAS LOCALIZED

EFFECTS SHOULD BE EXAMINED AT

INDIVIDUAL LEASE AREA SCALE,

CONSISTENT WITH PRIOR RESEARCH

IN AREAS OF INACTIVE SAND

TRANSPORT. REPORT ALSO

CONSISTENT WITH THE STATES 2012

EIR ACKNOWLEDGING THAT RESOURCE

IS PREVIOUSLY RECOGNIZED BY BCDC

COMMISSIONERS ISP REPORT

ACKNOWLEDGES MIND SAND IS RELIC

DEPOSITED. IMPORTANTLY THE

STUDIES AND SUMMARY REPORT DO

NOT IDENTIFY ANY SPECIFIC

MEASURABLE OR IMPACT BEYOND

LEASE AREAS THEMSELVES INSTEAD

REPORT FINDINGS BEYOND LEASE

AREAS ARE UNKNOWN WE CONTINUE TO

HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING REPORTS

AND BUDGET ANALYSIS SHARED

CONCEPT MODEL CAPTURED AND

WRITTEN COMMENT LETTER SUBMITTED

BY LIND AND MARTIN MARIETTA.

DOUBLE COUNTING OUTFLOWS CAUSED

BY MINING AND DREDGING

ACTIVITIES BOTH DREDGE VOLUMES

AND SAND OUTFLOWS. RESULTING IN

DRAMATIC OVERESTIMATE OF SAND

OUTFLOWS FROM THE BAY

ADDITIONALLY SAND BUDGET STUDIES

ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE GOLDEN

GATE BRIDGE FLUX SAND FLOWS INTO

OR OUT OF THE BAY REMAINING

HIGHLY UNCERTAIN. THE ISP

REPORT PROVIDES SEVERAL

OVERGENERALIZES FOR EXAMPLE,

DETERMINATION THAT SAN FRANCISCO

BAY AND PACIFIC OCEAN SHARE A

COMMON POOL OF SAND IS OVER

GENERALIZED AS THESE ARE LARGE

BODIES OF WATER WITH COMPLEX

PROCESSES, TRANSPORTING AND

CLIMATE, AND I URGE STUDIES FOR

DETAILED NUANCED FINDINGS. WE

LOOK FORWARD TO COLLABORATING

WITH BCDC STAFF ON THE UPCOMING

WORKING GROUP PROCESS AND

BELIEVE THAT CONTINUED DIALOGUE

CAN BE ADDRESSED. THANK YOU FOR

YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL

PUBLIC COMMENT? I CAN SEE

COMMISSIONERS DO WANT TO ASK

QUESTIONS.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: I SEE

NO OTHER HANDS RAISED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: AS

WE SAID AT THE BEGINNING, THIS

IS A LONG PROCESS AND CLARIFYING

QUESTIONS NIPT TIME ARE

CERTAINLY WELCOME. SO, I THINK

PAT SHOWALTER, I SAW YOUR HAND

UP FIRST,

SIERRA WILL CALL ON FOLKS AS

THEY RAISE THEIR HAND.

>>SPEAKER: CHAIR EISEN IS IT IS

THIS TIME FOR COMMENTS AS WELL

AS QUESTIONS? OR SHOULD I JUST

ASK THE QUESTIONS?

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

WELL, I THINK YOU SHOULD JUST

ASK YOUR QUESTIONS AND WE’LL SEE

HOW IT GOES. OBVIOUSLY —

>>SPEAKER: OKAY. SURE. I WILL

JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I WAS

REALLY INTERESTED TO HEAR ABOUT

THE REDUCTION OF GHGS.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: BECAUSE

OF THE TRUCK TRAFFIC THAT

DOESN’T OCCUR BECAUSE OF THIS.

AND I REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO

LEARNING MUCH MORE ABOUT THAT.

I DO NOT REALLY EXPECT AN ANSWER

TO THAT. BUT I JUST DISH WANT

TO BRING THAT UP AS A REAL

QUESTION THAT I HOPE TO LEARN

MORE ABOUT. AND I’LL BE GLAD TO

MAKE A FEW COMMENTS LATER.

>>SPEAKER: PAT I’M NOT SURE

THAT’S REALLY WITHIN THE SCOPE

OF THIS MEETING.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: OKAY. I

DIDN’T KNOW.

>>GREG SCHARFF: THANK YOU,

GREG.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: SO,

I DO SEE —

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER MOULTON-PETERS, YOU

ARE NEXT.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU, SIERRA.

>>STEPHANIE MOULTON-PETERS:

THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR

THE REPORT. SO, I GUESS IT’S

CLEAR THAT SAND SUPPLIES ARE A

LIMITED RESOURCE. MY QUESTION

IS TO WHAT EXTENT OTHER

ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS FOR

CONSTRUCTION USE MIGHT BE

CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE WORK

FOR THIS TASK FORCE? AND AS AN

EXAMPLE, I USE THE FACT THAT

WE’RE USING RECYCLED

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS IN OUR

ROAD PROJECTS, AS ROAD BASE, SO

WE’RE REGRINDING CONCRETE AND

ASPHALT TO USE, AND THIS

WOULDN’T BE SUITABLE FOR

EVERYTHING. BUT I DO THINK WE

NEED TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES AND

OPTIONS TO A LIMITED SAND

SUPPLY. I JUST WONDER IF THAT’S

SOMETHING WE COULD ENTERTAIN.

THANK YOU.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: YES IT’S

CERTAINLY SOMETHING I THINK WE

COULD BRAIN IN THE COMMISSIONER

WORKING GROUP. THANK YOU FOR

THE QUESTION.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER?

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: THANK YOU. I

WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF SOMEONE CAN

TELL ME, WHAT IS THE —

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER —

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: — PERCENT OF

THE SAND USED WEEKLY IN

CONSTRUCTION. HOW MUCH OF THAT

SAND DOES THE SAND FROM THE MIND

BAY COMPOSE. WHAT PERCENT OF

THE OVERALL DEMAND FOR SAND?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: I DON’T THINK

WE’RE PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT

QUESTION TODAY. WE DID HAVE AN

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS PREPARED BY

THE SAND MINERS IN 2015, THAT I

THINK THOSE NUMBERS WOULD HAVE

TO BE REANALYZED. AND THE

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND

MINES AND GEOLOGY WOULD PROBABLY

BE A GOOD SOURCE TO HELP

UNDERSTAND THE AGGREGATE USE IN

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND

LOCALLY, BUT WE’RE NOT PREPARED

TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR YOU

TODAY, COMMISSIONER GUNTHER.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: SO WE CAN

JUST ADD IT TO THE AGENDA OF THE

WORKING GROUP?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: SURE.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: OKAY.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER GIOIA WE’LL GO TO

YOU NEXT THEN WE’LL MOVE TO

COMMISSIONER NELSON IN ROOM.

>>JOHN GIOIA: MY CLASSMATE

BARRY NELSON’S HAND WAS UP

FIRST.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: IT

WAS FIRST WE’RE TAKING VIRTUAL

FIRST THEN QUESTIONS IN THE

ROOM.

>>JOHN GIOIA: I THINK I HEARD

TO COMMISSIONER GUNTHER’S

QUESTION, BECAUSE IT’S THE SAME

AS MINE, I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT

TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THE SAND

THAT’S MIND FROM THE BAY WHERE

IS IT USED? IS IT USED ALL

AROUND THE BAY OR IS IT EXPORTED

TO AREAS OUTSIDE FOR USE SO END

USE OF THE SAND THAT’S MIND IN

THE BAY. I REALIZE YOU DON’T

HAVE THAT INFORMATION NOW BUT I

THINK THAT WOULD BE AN IMPORTANT

PART OF THE WORK GROUP

ANALYSIS.

AND SECOND, WHAT ARE THE

ALTERNATIVE SOURCES FOR SAND?

AND WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL

OR ECONOMIC RAMIFICATIONS OF

THOSE ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS?

SO, OTHER SOURCES, IN OTHER

WORDS.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: YEAH. I

BELIEVE YOUR QUESTION IS — YOUR

FIRST QUESTION IS SLIGHTLY

DIFFERENT THAN COMMISSIONER

GUNTHERS, WHICH IS, I THINK, THE

PERCENTAGE OF BAY SANDS IN

COMPARISON TO ALL SANDS USED IN

THE REGION. YOURS IS A LITTLE

DIFFERENT WHICH IS, IS THE BAY

SAND USED LOCALLY. I THINK THE

ANSWER TO THAT IS, YES, THE BAY

MIND SAND IS USED LOCALLY. I

BELIEVE BILL AND ERICA WILL

CONFIRM THAT. BUT IT IS A VERY

LOCAL RESOURCE OF CONSTRUCTION

MATERIALS.

>>JOHN GIOIA: IT WOULD BE

USEFUL TO KNOW WHAT PERCENT OF

IT, IF ANY, IS EXPORTED OUTSIDE

THE BAY AREA FOR USE.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: YES. WE CAN

GET YOU THAT NUMBER.

>>JOHN GIOIA: AND I AGREE WITH

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER’S QUESTION

OF, WHAT PERCENT OF MIND BAY

SAND IS USED IN THE AREA VERSUS

OTHER AREAS AND THE ALTERNATIVE

SOURCES OF SAND IF SAND WERE

LESS AVAILABLE FROM THE BAY AND

WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND

ECONOMIC FACTORS RELATED TO

IMPACTS OF THAT.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: YES THAT WOULD

BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO

RESEARCH AND PROVIDE AS PART OF

THE COMMISSIONER WORKING GROUP

AND WE’LL PUT THAT ON THE LIST

.

>>JOHN GIOIA: YOU SEEM TO BE

CLEAR THAT THERE IS SAND IS NOT

SUSTAINABLE HAVING DIVISION

QUANTITY, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO

FURTHER UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF

THIS SAND MINING ON BAYSHORE AND

BEACHES?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: SO IN EACH OF

THE — L IN THE FINDINGS REPORT

IN EACH OF THE STUDIES, THERE

ARE ADDITIONAL RESEARCH THAT CAN

HELP US GET AT THOSE QUESTIONS.

ONE OF THE MAIN ISSUES IN US

UNDERSTANDING THE QUANTITY OF

SAND THAT IS IN SAN FRANCISCO

BAY WAS THE MERE COST OF TAKING

THREE DEEP CORES TO UNDERSTAND

THE DEPTH OF THE SAND VOLUME

THAT WAS DEPOSITED BACK AT THE

TURN OF THE ICE AGE. SO, WE

COULD HAVE SPENT $1.2 MILLION

ON THAT ONE STUDY BUT WE CHOSE

NOT TO BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE

GOTTEN US FAR LESS INFORMATION

AND FRANKLY THE AMOUNT OF SAND

BEING MIND IS IN THE UPPER PART

OF THAT. THAT WAS AN APP

QUESTION. WE DID NOT HAVE

ENOUGH FUNDS TO GO AND TRY TO

MAKE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE

SAND IN THE SYSTEM AND IT

GETTING TO BEACH TRANSPORT.

THAT’S A FULLY DIDN’T

DIFFERENT STUDY SO THERE ARE A

NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL STUDIES

THAT WE COULD DO IF ADDITIONAL

FUNDS WERE PROVIDED, BUT $1.2

MILLION IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY

WHEN YOU ARE STUDYING DEEP WATER

SYSTEMS THAT ARE QUITE LARGE.

I’LL LEAVE IT AT. WE COULD GO

ON, BUT THAT’S THE SHORT ANSWER.

>>JOHN GIOIA: COMMISSIONER

MOULTON-PETERS MENTIONED

ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND IT

MAY BE FOR SOME KIND OF PROJECTS

THERE ARE, OTHERS THEY’RE NOT,

ARE YOU GOING TO BE LOOKING MORE

AT THAT?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: WE CERTAINLY

CAN. WE HAVE TO MEET WITH OUR

WORKING GROUP CHAIR TO DEFINE

BETTERA EXACTLY WHAT WE’RE GOING

TO BE LOOKING@EACH OF THE

WORKING GROUPS BUT WE CAN

REQUIRE THAT AS PART OF THE

INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE

FEASIBILITIES OF SAND MINING IN

THE BAY AND ALTERNATIVES TO SAND

MINING IN THE BAY. I SEE BILL’S

HAND UP MAYBE I’LL TURN IT OVER

TO HIM TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT

ALTERNATIVES.

>>JOHN GIOIA: THANK YOU.

>>BILL BUTLER: THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER GIOIA THANK YOU FOR

THOSE QUESTIONS. I CAN CONFIRM

THAT THE BAY SAND MIND FROM THE

BAY STAYS VERY REGIONAL WITHIN

THE BAY AREA. IT DOESN’T REALLY

GO FOR USES OUTSIDE OF THE BAY.

REGARDING ALTERNATE SOURCES OF

MATERIAL, ABSOLUTELY, I THINK

THAT’S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN

LOOK AT A LITTLE HARDER, GOING

FORWARD. AS I MENTIONED BRIEFLY

IN THE PRESENTATION, YOU KNOW,

WHEN I SAID THAT ALL SAND IS NOT

CONSTRUCTION GRADE SAND. AND

EVEN FOR CONSTRUCTION GRADE

SAND, ALL SAND IS NOT CREATED

EQUAL FOR THAT EITHER. SO

YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT FOR

DIFFERENT USES, ALTERNATIVE

MATERIALS, THERE IS DIFFERENT

ALTERNATE MATERIAL THAT CAN BE

SUITABLE FOR THAT. BUT THAT’S

CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN

ADDRESS AND GET YOU THE ANSWER

TO GOING FORWARD.

>>JOHN GIOIA: THANKS.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER NELSON?

>>BARRY NELSON:

THANKS. I’LL TURN THAT OFF NOW.

THAT IS NOT OFF.

OKAY. WE’RE WORKING?

>>SPEAKER: YES.

>>BARRY NELSON:

[LAUGHTER]

THANK YOU. SO, JUST A COUPLE OF

QUESTIONS. SOME COMMISSIONERS

HAVE ASKED SOME OF THE OTHER

QUESTIONS I WAS GOING TO ASK.

FIRST IS, IT’S PRETTY CLEAR FROM

THIS WORK THAT WE’RE MINING

RELIC SAND, WHICH MEANS THAT

THIS ONGOING EXTRACTION ISN’T

SUSTAINABLE. YOU CAN PUT A

LITTLE TIME FRAME AROUND THAT?

ARE WE TAKING A 10th OF A

PERCENT EVERY YEAR? TAKING A

20th PERCENT EVERY YEAR. I’M

TRYING TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT

THE TIME FRAME IS AROUND THE

NON-RENEWABILITY OF THAT

RESOURCE.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: I CAN’T

BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE TOTAL

VOLUME OF SAND. WE DON THAT

SAND IS NO LONGER COMING IN FROM

THE DELTA AND WE KNOW THAT THE

SAND FROM THE WATERSHEDS IS NOT

BEING SUPPLIED TO THE BEDS BEING

MIND. WE DO SEE AREAS WHERE THE

BED IS BEING LOWERED AND WE CAN

SHOW PICTURES OF THAT IN THE

COMMISSION WORKING GROUP. THE

OTHER THING IS WE DID VERY

SPECIFIC ANALYSIS OF VERY

LOCALIZED MINED AREAS, AND THERE

IS A LIMITED PORTION OF THOSE

MINED AREAS WHERE SAND IS IN

TRANSPORT. WHERE IT IS IN

TRANSPORT MAXIMUM AMOUNT

IN THOSE AREAS REFRESH I

BELIEVE WAS 55% AND THERE ARE

OTHER AREAS THAT ARE NOT BEING

REFRESHED. THERE IS VARIABLE

WITHIN THE SITES DETAILED

WITHIN SOME OF THE STUDIES WE

OPTED NOT TO GET INTO LOTS OF

DETAILS TODAY ABOUT THE STUDIES

WITH THE FULL COMMISSION.

>>BARRY NELSON: WE CAN TALK

ABOUT SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS

LATER THAT I HAVE QUESTIONS THAT

WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH ON THAT

LATER ON. THE OTHER QUESTION

WAS THE CONCLUSIONS ENACT THAT

THE IMPACTS ON BEACHES AND

SHORES AREN’T QUANTIFIED I WOULD

LOVE TO HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT IT

WOULD TAKE TO ANSWER THOSE

QUESTIONS BUT AGAIN MAYBE THAT

WAITS FOR OUR WORKING GROUP.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: DEFINITELY

SOME SCIENTISTS WHO HAVE IDEAS

WITH TALK ABOUT THAT FURTHER IN

THE WORKING GROUP.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: —

>>SPEAKER: I’M ASSUMING THE

BEACHES ARE GIVING SOME OF THAT

SAND BACK IN TO FILL THE HOLE.

>>CESAR ZEPEDA: IT’S ALREADY

BEEN ASKED. THANK YOU.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: THANK YOU.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER PEMBERTON.

>>SHERI PEMBERTON: THANK YOU.

I THINK ONE OF THE COMMENTS I

HEARD WAS REGARDING

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAND MINING

AND I THINK BRENDA MENTIONED

THAT WOULD BE PUT ON THE LIST

FOR DISCUSSION DURING ONE OF THE

WORKING GROUP MEETINGS. AND I

WANTED TO SEE IF I COULD GET

SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

WOULD THAT BE IN THE CONTEXT OF

WHAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE

RECOMMENDATIONS AS A RESPONSIBLE

AGENCY IN THE CONTEXT OF CEQA?

OR KIND OF LIKE WHAT’S BEING

ASKED AND WHAT WOULD BE ON THE

WORKING GROUP AGENDA AS IT

RELATES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPLICATIONS AND HOW DOES THAT

RECONCILE WITH CEQA?

>>SPEAKER: I DON’T THINK WE

HAVE FLUSHED OUT EXACTLY WHAT’S

GOING TO BE IN ALL OF THE

WORKING GROUPS YET I THINK WE’RE

STILL DECIDING AND LOOKING AT

THAT GETTING INPUT FROM

COMMISSIONERS AND FROM THE

WORKING GROUP THEMSELVES.

>>SHERI PEMBERTON: OKAY.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: COMMISSIONER

PEMBERTON I’LL NOTE FOR YOU THAT

CHRIS HEWITT WHO I UNDERSTAND IS

IN THE CEQA LEAD HAS BEEN

PARTICIPATING IN ALL OF THESE

MEETINGS AND HAS ALL OF THE

DOCUMENTS SO HE’S WELL AWARE OF

THE STUDIES AND FINDINGS.

>>SHERI PEMBERTON: THANK YOU

BRENDA. I APPRECIATE THAT.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER ECKLUND?

>>PAT ECKLUND: THANK YOU VERY

MUCH. I WASN’T SURE HOW TO

RAISE MY HAND, SINCE I’M

IN-PERSON. ACTUALLY, I HAVE A

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO THAT.

BECAUSE THE COMMENT THAT WAS

MADE IS THAT THE — I CALL IT,

LIKE, A VACUUM CLEANER, AND YOU

HAVE A SCREEN ON IT TO PREVENT

FISH FROM COMING IN, WHAT

ABOUT THE BENTHIC ORGANISMS

THAT ARE IN THE SAND? HAVE

THERE BEEN ANALYSIS OF THE

IMPACT TO THE ORGANISMS WHETHER

THEY’RE SUCKED UP WITH THE SAND?

DO YOU ACTUALLY SEE THEM? I’M

KIND OF CURIOUS ABOUT THE

PRACTICAL ASPECT OF THIS VACUUM

CLEANER, AND THIS SUCKING UP THE

SAND AT THE BOTTOM.

YOU CAN HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND

WHAT THAT MECHANISM IS?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: YES. SO,

THERE IS TWO MECHANISMS. ONE

IS, LIKE, THE VACUUM CLEANER

HAD THAT YOU SAW, BELIEVE IT

HAS A SIX BY SIX INCH OPENING

GREAT, AND SO ANYTHING — PLEASE

CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG BILL

ERIK OR MIKE, ANYTHING SMALLER

THAN SIX BY SIX

GREAT COULD GO THROUGH THE DRAG

HEAD ITSELF AND THE SCREEN IS ON

THE PUMP THAT BRINGS IN THE

WATER AND THE SCREEN WILL NOT

SCREEN SOUGHT NICHE BUT NOT

PLANK TON AND LARVAE. THE DRAG

HEAD ITSELF WOULD LIKE TAKE THE

MATERIAL, THE ANIMALS IN THE TOP

OF THE SAND INTO AND THE PUMP

THROUGH THE SYSTEM MANY OF THOSE

ANIMALS ARE SOFT-BODIED AND

WOULD NOT BE SEEN IN THE SAND

BECAUSE OF THE ROUGHNESS OF THE

SAND THROUGH THE PIPE. WE DID

DO A BENTHIC STUDY I CAN’T

REMEMBER THE YEAR, I FEEL LIKE

IT WAS 2017 OR 18, AND THERE ARE

SOME CONCLUSIONS THAT, LIKE, THE

CRITTERS THAT ARE LIVING IN THE

SAND ARE EARLY COLONIZERS

BECAUSE THE SAND ITSELF IS SUCH

A MOVING SYSTEM THAT YOU DON’T

GET, LIKE, SOLID BUILT UP

BENTHIC COMMUNITIES LIKE YOU

MIGHT FIND IN FINE SAND, BUT YOU

WOULD ASSUME THAT THE CRITTERS

ARE BEING SUCKED UP IN THAT

VACUUM-LIKE HEAD. AND THEN ON

THE OTHER TYPE, WHICH YOU SAW,

WHICH LIND MARINE USES, IT’S

MORE OF A — I EQUATE IT TO,

LIKE, A STRAW IN THE SAND.

AND, SO, IT IS DOWN DEEPER,

POTENTIALLY IN AN AREA WHERE YOU

DON’T HAVE INVERTEBRATES

LIVING.

BECAUSE IT’S DEEP UNDER THE

SAND. SO, THERE MAY BE SOME

DIFFERENCES. BUT WE DO NOT HAVE

A STUD BETWEEN THE TWO TYPES OF

MINING, TO THE BEST OF MY

KNOWLEDGE, AGAIN, PLEASE CORRECT

ME IF I’M WRONG. THAT GETS TO

BE A VERY CONCLUSIVE STUDY. BUT

THERE HAS NOT BEEN A LOT OF WORK

AMONG THE BENTHIC COMMUNITY

SIMPLY BECAUSE IT’S DEEP AND

VERY DIFFICULT TO PLACE A

MONITOR ASIDE FROM TWO STUDIES.

>>PAT ECKLUND: SO, ARE WE GOING

TO BE DOING ANY FUTURE WORK ON

THE IMPACT OF THE BENTHIC

ORGANISMS?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: THERE MAY BE

SOME AS PART OF THE CEQA

DOCUMENT, BUT HONESTLY I DO NOT

KNOW WE DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE

ANY REQUIREMENTS IN THE EXISTING

PERMIT FOR ADDITIONAL IMPACTS TO

THE BIIOTA.

>>PAT ECKLUND: THE OTHER

QUESTION I HAD IS THERE WAS

MENTION OF A PRIVATE PARCEL. I

THINK IT WAS IN THE MIDDLE

GROUND. CAN SOMEONE HELP ME TO

UNDERSTAND WHY IS THERE A

PRIVATE PARCEL IN THE BAY? AND

ARE THERE OTHER PRIVATE PARCELS

THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN TOLD

ABOUT YET?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: YES. SO THAT

PARCEL WAS ORIGINALLY OWNED BY

THE NAVY. IT IS NOW THE

GROSSLY

FAMILIES IT’S A PRIVATE PARCEL

I WAS LUCKY TO BE ABLE TO

PARTICIPATE IN THE SUBTIDAL

HABITAT GOALS PROJECT IN 2010 AS

PART OF THAT PROJECT WE LOOKED

AT THE OWNERSHIP OF SAN

FRANCISCO BAY BOTTOM WHICH IS A

LOT OF IT OWNED BY THE STATE,

THERE ARE SOME OWNED BY PRIVATE

IMPORTANT OWNERS AND IF YOU WANT

TO SEE THE OWNERSHIP OF THE

BOTTOM OF THE BAY, YOU CAN GO TO

THE SUBTIDAL GOALS HABITAT

PROJECT ON THE WEB AND LOOK AT

BAYLAND OWNERSHIP MAP. AND IT

WILL SHOW YOU THE PRIVATE PUBLIC

OWNERSHIP OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY.

IT’S QUITE FASCINATING.

>>PAT ECKLUND: YEAH. I’M VERY

INTERESTED IN THAT PART OF IT.

THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS

THAT IT WAS MENTIONED THAT SOME

OF THE SAND IS USED FOR

RESTORATION OF BEACHES. SO,

WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE SAND THAT

IS ACTUALLY USED IN THE

CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES VERSUS

RESTORATION PROJECTS. DO WE

KNOW WHAT THAT IS?

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: WELL, I CAN

TELL YOU WHAT I KNOW AND BILL

CAN ADD. SO, ONE PROJECT,

ALAMEDA CROWN BEACH, THERE IS

ACTUALLY A FLOOD PROTECTION

PROJECT THAT WAS BUILT MANY,

MANY YEARS AGO TO REDUCE EROSION

ON THAT FRONT, AND APPROXIMATELY

EVERY 20 YEARS, ABOUT 80,000

CUBIC YARDS OF SAND IS PLACE ON

THAT BEACH TO REFRESH THE BEACH

SAND THAT’S ERODED OVER THAT 20

YEAR PERIOD. AND I BELIEVE THE

LAST TIME WE PLACED THAT AMOUNT

OF SAND ON THAT BEACH WAS

2013.

THE RAMBREW ISLAND TOOK SOME

SAND DOLLAR’S A SMALL

RESTORATION PROJECT AT

RAMBRU ISLAND THAT TOOK MAYBE

2,000 CUBIC YARDS OF SAND AND

THAT CAME OUT OF SAN FRANCISCO

MARINA WEST SOME OF THE LARGER

PIECES OF SAND MATERIAL I THINK

FROM HANSON, CORRECT ME IF I AM

WRONG, MARTIN MARIETTA, FROM

THEIR YARD WHERE THEY HAVE A,

SORT OF, TAILINGS SAND THAT

THEY’RE NOT USING FOR THE

CONCRETE MATERIALS AND THEN

THERE IS ANOTHER SMALL

RESTORATION PROJECT I BELIEVE

AROUND PEER 94 THAT SAN

FRANCISCO IS USING MOSTLY

TAILINGS FROM THE HANSON MARTIN

MARIETTA I DON’T KNOW THE VOLUME

THOSE ARE PRIMARY SAND FROM THE

MINING FOR RESTORATION AND I’M

HAPPY TO HEAR FROM

MINERS FOR

MORE.

>>PAT ECKLUND: ACKNOWLEDGED

WRITTEN IN THE REPORT RELEASED

THURSDAY.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: SPECIFICALLY

THAT IS NOT ON THE RESTORATION

OF THE SAND BUT COULD QUANTIFY

THAT FOR YOU.

>>PAT ECKLUND: WHAT PERCENTAGE

CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR FUTURE

REFRESHED AND WHAT THE NEED IS.

THANK YOU. INTERESTING

PRESENTATION. HAVING BEEN ON

THE HOPPER DREDGE DECADES AGO, I

SEE A LOT OF RELATIONSHIP TO

THIS ACTIVITY. SO, THANK YOU.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: THANK YOU.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: VICE

CHAIR EISEN. THERE ARE NO MORE

HANDS RAISED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ALL

RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I

WANT TO THANK YOU, BRENDA FOR

YOUR WONDERFUL PRESENTATION.

AND FOR THE MINER’S

PRESENTATION. AND I

SPECIFICALLY WANT TO THANK PAT,

ANDY, AND BARRY, WHO CAN SEE

MAYBE NOT REGRETTING THAT THEY

VOLUNTEERED FOR THIS WORKING

GROUP COMMITTEE. BUT CAN SEE

THAT THIS IS QUITE A TASK. AND

I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE

COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. BECAUSE

I THINK THAT REALLY HELPS OUR

WORKING GROUP WHO IS GOING TO BE

DOING SO MUCH HEAVY LIFTING ON

THIS TO, SORT OF, SEE WHAT THE

COMMISSION IS GOING TO BE

INTERESTED IN KNOWING AND

UNDERSTANDING BEFORE WE GET DO

THIS PERMIT PROCESS. SO, THANKS

TO ALL OF YOU.

WE NOW HAVE —

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: VICE CHAIR

EISEN, YOU CAN ASK ONE THING?

WE MAY BE LOSING A PERSON OR

TWO, DEPENDING ON PHONE CALLS,

ET CETERA, WHO MAYBE COMING

BACK, ET CETERA AND SO O IT

MIGHT BE GOOD FOR YOU TO SAY THE

COMMISSION WILL GO INTO

COMMITTEE IF THAT HAPPENS, AND

JUST IN THE FUTURE, JUST TO MAKE

SURE THAT THAT’S ON THE RECORD.

THERE ARE NO VOTES SCHEDULED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

OKAY. YES. WE DON’T HAVE

ANYTHING THAT WE NEED TO VOTE O

BUT IF WE LOSE OUR QUORUM, WE

WILL GO INTO COMMITTEE, AS YOU

PUT IT. IS THAT — DOES THAT DO

IT, LARRY?

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: AWESOME.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

OKAY. SO, THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR

AGENDA IS AN UPDATE ON THE

PROGRESS MADE BY THE SEDIMENT

FOR WETLAND ADAPTATION PROJECT.

AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT PROJECT

IS TO INCREASE THE AVAILABILITY

AND USE OF SEDIMENTS AND SOILS

TO RESTORE AND ADAPT WETLANDS TO

RISING SEA LEVELS.

OUR SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT WORKING

GROUP WAS CREATED SPECIFICALLY

TO MEET THIS CHALLENGE. AND

BCDC HOSTED A TWO-DAY IN-PERSON

PUBLIC WORKSHOP ON THIS TOPIC IN

JANUARY AND IN FEBRUARY. SO,

MAYA MCLERNEY OF OUR STAFF IS

GOING TO BEGIN THE BRIEFING ON

THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU, MAYA.

>>MAYA MCLERNEY: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON VICE

CHAIR EISEN AND COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS MAYA MCLERNEY, AND I

AM A PROJECT MANAGER FOR

SEDIMENT FOR WETLAND ADAPTATION

PROJECT I WORKED CLOSELY WITH

BRENDA GODEN AND ERIK BEE MAN ON

THIS PROJECT. I’LL PROVIDE A

BRIEFING ON SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT

WORKSHOPS THAT WE HELD EARLIER

THIS YEAR AND BENEFICIAL REUSE

ACTION PLAN THAT WE’RE

DEVELOPING RIGHT NOW. BEFORE I

GET INTO THAT I WANT TO TALK

ABOUT WETLANDS AND SEDIMENT FOR

WETLAND ADAPTING A PROJECT MORE

GENERALLY. YOU LIKELY ALREADY

KNOW THIS BUT WETLAND WILL NOT

BE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH SEA

LEVEL RISE WITHOUT OUR HELP WE

NEED TO ACT NOW TO HELP WETLAND

BE ABLE TO ADAPT BY RAISING

ELEVATIONS AND SUPPORTING THE

ESTABLISHMENT OF PLANS AND

ECOSYSTEMS. THERE HAS BEEN A

LOT OF WORK DONE IN THE AREA OF

SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT IN OUR

REGION SPECIFICALLY AND WE’RE

BRINGING ALL OF THAT TOGETHER

THROUGH OUR SEDIMENT FOR WETLAND

ADAPTATION PROJECT. OUR PROJECT

GOAL IS TO INCREASE THE

BENEFICIAL REUSE OF SEDIMENT AND

SOIL FOR WETLAND HABITAT

RESTORATION RESILIENCE SEA LEVEL

RISE ADAPTATION IN THE SAN

FRANCISCO BAY AREA. PART OF

THIS PROJECT, AS PART OF THAT

PROJECT, BCDC IS DEVELOPING A

BENEFICIAL REUSE ACTION PLAN

BASED ON STAKEHOLDER PROCESS

THAT WE CONDUCTED EARLIER THIS

YEAR. THIS IS A REGIONAL CALL

TO ACTION WITH TASKS THAT WILL

BE UNDERTAKEN THROUGH INCREASED

COLLABORATION WITH AND AMONG

STAKEHOLDERS AND ENTITY NOT ONLY

BCDC WHO WILL SHARE IN THE GOAL

OF INCREASING BENEFICIAL REUSE

IN WETLAND TO HELP ADAPT TO

RISING SEAS. BCDC WILL

UNDERTAKE POLICY CHANGES LATER

THIS YEAR AND DEVELOP FINANCIAL

STRATEGY TO SUPPORT BENEFICIAL

REUSE. WHAT EXACTLY IS

BENEFICIAL REUSE YOU MAY BE

ASKING. WE’RE TALKING ABOUT

RECOGNIZING SEDIMENT AND SOIL AS

A VALUABLE NATURAL RESOURCE

NECESSARY FOR SEA LEVEL RISE

ADAPTING A AND SHIFTING MINDSET

FROM TREATING IT AS A WASTE

PRODUCT TO BE DISPOSED OF TO

SEEING AS A RESOURCE THAT CAN BE

OFFICIALLY REUSED TO SUPPORT

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND

NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS LIKE

MARSH RESTORATION AND HABITAT

REHABILITATION AND ENHANCEMENT

ALONG THE EDGE OF THE BAY.

WE’RE TALKING ABOUT SEDIMENT AND

SOIL FROM DREDGED NAVIGATION

CHANNELS, STREAMS AND FLOOD

PROTECTION CHANNEL MAINTENANCE

MATERIALS AND EXCESS

CONSTRUCTION SOILS. SO SEDIMENT

WETLAND ADAPTATION PROJECT SWAP

FOR SHORT FOCUSED ON ENSURING

THAT THESE MATERIALS ARE REUSED

FOR BENEFICIAL PURPOSE

SPECIFICALLY TO SUPPORT WETLAND

SO THE TIMELINE FOR THE SWAP IS

SHOWN HERE ON THE NEXT SLIDE.

WE’RE IN PHASE ONE CURRENTLY OF

THE THREE FACE, THREE YEAR

PROJECT. THIS PHASE IS ALL

ABOUT STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AT

THE END OF THE FIRST PHASE WE’LL

HAVE BENEFICIAL REUSE ACTION

PLAN FOR THE REGION AND WILL

INCLUDE TASKS FOR ALL

STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN

SEDIMENT NOT JUST BCDC AND WE’LL

HAVE A COALITION OF STAKEHOLDERS

TO SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF

THIS ACTION PLAN. PHASE ONE

WILL WRAP UP IN 2024 PRETTY SOON

IN 2024, AND WITH PHASE 2 AND 3

TAKING PLACE FROM THE END OF

2024 THROUGH 2025. AND THIS

PHASES 2 AND 3 WILL INCLUDE A

POTENTIAL BAY PLAN AMENDMENT AND

FINANCING STRATEGY TO ASSESS

COSTS AND FEASIBILITY AND

FUNDING FOR BENEFICIAL REUSE AND

PART OF THE PROJECT DESIGN

INCLUDES MEETINGS WITH OUR

SEDIMENT BENEFICIAL REUSE

COMMISSIONER WORKING GROUP SOME

OF WHOM ARE IN THE ROOM. AND WE

ARE ALSO MEETING WITH — YEAH

WE’RE GOING TO BE MEETING ALSO

WITH OUR CORE TEAM. MEETING

WITH A BENEFICIAL REUSE WORKING

GROUP WHO IS GOING TO BE GUIDING

OUR STAFF WORK ON THE PROJECT

AND IS GOING TO BE INCREASINGLY

IMPORTANT ROLE TO PLAY AS WE GET

INTO THE BAY PLAN AMENDMENT PART

OF THIS PROCESS.

AND COLLABORATION IS AT THE

HEART OF THIS. YOU KNOW, AS WE

MEET REGULARLY WITH OUR CORE

TEAM, WE’RE GOING TO BE GOING

THROUGH THE —

[LAUGHTER]

SO, ALONG WITH BCDC, OUR CORE

TEAM IS MADE UP OF THE REGIONAL

WATER BOARD, THE STATE COASTAL

CONSERVANCY, THE SF ESTUARY

INSTITUTE, SF JOINT VENTURE AND

US EPA, THESE GROUPS ARE

ASSISTING IN CONCEPT AND CONTENT

DEVELOPMENT. WE’RE GRATEFUL TO

THESE AND ALL PARTNERS IN THE

PROJECT. TOGETHER WITH THE CORE

TEAM AND OUR SEDIMENT AND

BENEFICIAL REUSE WORKING GROUP

WE DESIGNED AN INFORMATIONAL

BRIEFING SERIES THAT WAS ROLLED

OUT AT THE WORKING GROUP

MEETINGS IN 2023.

SO, THE COMMISSIONER WORKING

GROUP INVITED EXPERTS TO COME

AND PRESENT TO THE COMMISSIONERS

ON THE WORKING GROUP AND

INTERESTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

TO DESCRIBE THE SEDIMENT

PROCESSES AND CHALLENGES AND

BRING EVERYONE UP TO SPEED ON

THE ISSUES. THESE INFORMATIONAL

BRIEFINGS WERE INTENDED TO

PREPARE COMMISSIONERS FOR THE

BAY PLAN AMENDMENT CONVERSATIONS

TO COME AND TO PREPARE

STAKEHOLDERS AND THE PUBLIC FOR

CONVERSATIONS HELD AT THE

WORKSHOP EARLIER THIS YEAR. THE

BRIEFINGS COVERED SF BAY

SEDIMENT TRANSPORT SYSTEM, THE

PROCESS OF NATURAL SEDIMENT

SUPPLY TO BAY MARSHES, SEDIMENT

CONSIDERATIONS AND CHALLENGES

AND WETLAND RESTORATION

PROJECTS, NAVIGATION DREDGING AS

A SOURCE OF SEDIMENT AS WELL AS

FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS AS A

SOURCE OF SAID AMOUNTED AND

CONSTRUCTION AND UPLAND SOURCES

OF SEDIMENT AND SOILS. WE

WRAPPED UP THE SERIES OF

BRIEFINGS IN NOVEMBER LAST YEAR

ALL PRESENTATIONS ARE AVAILABLE

ON THE COMMISSION’S WEB SITE.

AND THEN IN JANUARY WE TURNED

OUR ATTENTION TO THE SEDIMENT

MANAGEMENT STAKEHOLDER

WORKSHOP.

THIS WAS A TWO-DAY WORKSHOP THAT

WAS HELD EARLIER THIS YEAR AND

IT WAS A CHANCE FOR STAKEHOLDERS

TO COME TOGETHER AS A

COMMUNITY.

WE HAD OVER 50 AGENCIES AND

ORGANIZATIONS IN ATTENDANCE TO

SUPPORT CHANGES IN HOW SEDIMENT

IS MANAGED IN THE BAY AREA.

THIS WORK BUILDS ON AND WIDENS

THE COALITION OF INTERESTED

PARTIES IN THIS ARENA A WE

BELIEVE THIS GROUP CAN AND WILL

MAKE REAL CHANGES OVER THE

YEARS TO COME. THE WORKSHOP HAD

BREAKOUT SESSIONS TO DISCUSS

ISSUES AND PERCEIVED BARRIERS

AND WE PRESENTED POTENTIAL

SOLUTIONS. NOW, THE ISSUE OF

HOW INCREASED BENEFICIAL — OR

INCREASING BENEFICIAL REUSE AND

POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS THIS HAS

ALREADY BEEN PREVIOUSLY

DISCUSSED IN A NUMBER OF FORUMS

BY MOST STAKEHOLDERS WHO

ATTENDED THE WORKSHOP BUT WE

NEVER COLLECTED EVERYONE

TOGETHER TO REACH CONSENSUS AND

FORMALIZE INFORMATION UNTIL NOW,

OPPORTUNITIES FOR BARRIERS

SEDIMENT AND SOIL REUSE AND

GAINED CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF

IDEAS RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING

ACTIONS AND POTENTIAL PARTNERS

TO HELP GET THE PROPOSED WORK

DONE THE ACTIONS IDENTIFIED MAKE

UP SUBSTANCE OF BENEFICIAL REUSE

ACTION PLAN THAT IS CURRENTLY

BEING DRAFTED WITH AND WILL BE

RELEASED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT

SOON. THE ACTION PLAN

STRUCTURED IN A STRAIGHT FORWARD

WAY WE BELIEVE A STATEMENT OF

PURPOSE SECTION THAT INTRODUCES

ISSUES AND NEEDS TO INCREASE

BENEFICIAL REUSE, BACKGROUND,

GOALS, PRINCIPLES GOALS ARE

PRIMARILY TO HELP ORGANIZE

ACTIONS AND PRINCIPLES FIND HOW

THE COALITION WILL WORK TOGETHER

TO IMPLEMENT ACTION PLAN TASKS.

SEDIMENT WETLAND SECTION COVERS

THREE MAIN SOURCES OF SEDIMENT

SOIL CONSTRUCTION NAVIGATION

FLOOD CONTROL DREDGING SECTION

DETAILS ISSUES IN EACH SECTOR TO

GET MATERIAL FROM THE SOURCE TO

THE PLACEMENT OF THE SITE.

LASTLY THE FOCUS WHERE THE MEAT

OF THIS DOCUMENT LIES WHERE WE

PRESENT THE APPROXIMATELY 80

TASKS TO ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN THE

REGION BUT BEFORE I WANT TO

PRESENT GOALS AND PRINCIPLES OF

THE ACTION PLAN FIRST GOAL IS TO

STRENGTHEN THE EXISTING REGIONAL

PARTNERSHIP TO SUPPORT INCREASED

SOIL REUSE AND EXPAND AND

IMPROVE COORDINATION AMONG

GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY

STAKEHOLDERS TO FILL

COLLABORATION GAPS AMONG SECTORS

INVOLVED IN SEDIMENT AND SOIL

MANAGEMENT SECOND GOAL IDENTIFY

AND PREPARE SITES FOR BENEFICIAL

REUSE BY SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT

OF NEW EXISTING RESTORATION

SITES TO PREPARE TO RECEIVE

SEDIMENT AND THIRD GOAL

COORDINATE SEDIMENT AND SOIL

SUPPLY RESTORATION NEEDS TO

FACILITATE TIMELY DELIVER OF

SEDIMENT AND SOIL. FOURTH GOAL

IMPROVE POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

IDENTIFYING AND SUPPORTING

POLICY AND REGULATORY

IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS AGENCIES AND

ENCOURAGE MORE BENEFICIAL

REUSE.

FINAL GOAL OF THE ACTION PLAN TO

DEVELOP FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

EXPAND AND SECURE FEDERAL,

STATE, REGIONAL AND PRIVATE

FUNDING FOR BENEFICIAL REUSE.

PRINCIPLES LISTED IN THE ACTION

PLAN HELP DEFINE HOW BCDC AND

THE CORE TEAM INTEND TO WORK

TOGETHER AND WITH THE COALITION

TO IMPLEMENT THIS ACTION PLAN

THIS WILL BE DONE WITH FOCUS ON

COORDINATION, COMMUNICATION AND

COLLABORATION TO ORGANIZE THE

MANY ENTITIES WORKING IN THIS

SPACE. AND THROUGH EQUITY TO

ENSURE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF

SEDIMENT IN THE REGION AND TO

PRIORITIZE COMMUNITY INPUTS, AS

WELL AS ENVIRONMENTAL

STEWARDSHIP TO SUPPORT EXISTING

WETLANDS AND SEA LEVEL RISE

RESILIENCY. AND IT CAN’T BE

DONE WITHOUT TRANSPARENCY TO

ENSURE THAT ALL ARE ABLE TO

TRACK PROGRESS AND GIVE INPUT,

AND SPEED AND AGILITY IS A

CRITICAL PRINCIPLE DUE TO

LIMITED TIME WE HAVE TO MAKE

CHANGES OUTLINED IN THE ACTION

PLAN AND TO GET AHEAD OF SEA

LEVEL RISE. WE ACKNOWLEDGE

THANKFULLY THERE ARE MANY OTHER

GROUPS DOING GREAT WORK IN THE

SPACE AND THE COALITION SHOULD

BE CAPITALIZING ON EXISTING WORK

AND BUILDING OFF OF IT. EIGHT

FOCUS AREAS OF BENEFICIAL REUSE

ACTION PLAN ARE GOVERNANCE,

REGIONAL COORDINATION, REGIONAL

PLANNING RESEARCH, FEDERAL AND

STATE REGIONAL POLICIES AND

COMMUNICATION, REGULATIONS AND

PERMITTING PILOT PROJECTS,

SEDIMENT AND SOIL QUALITY AND

TIMING AND AVAILABILITY OF

MATERIALS AND PLACEMENT AND

COSTS OF FUNDING. WITHIN EACH

OF THESE FOCUS AREAS THERE ARE

SPECIFIC ACTIONABLE TASKS THAT

WILL NEED LEAD ORGANIZATIONS

THAT WILL CARRY OUT SOME OF THE

WORK PRESCRIBED IN THE TASKS.

SPECIFIC TASKS DEVELOPED THROUGH

CONVERSATIONS AND INTERVIEWS

WITH PARTICIPANTS, BRAINSTORMING

INTERNALLY, CORRELATED ACTIONS

AND TASKS INTO A MATRIX WE HAD

140 POTENTIAL TASKS LISTED IN

THE MATRIX, TWO WORKSHOP DAYS

WERE A GREAT WAY TO EXPLORE THEM

TASKS FURTHER, AND PHOTOS FROM

THE WORKSHOPS, WE TOOK COMMENTS

GATHERED THROUGH THOSE

BREAKOUT SESSIONS AND SIFTED

AND SORTED CONSOLIDATED TASKS

FURTHER TO GET OUR 80 OR SO

TASKS. TO BE IN THE FINAL

ACTION PLAN THE TASK HAD TO BE

FOCUSED ON INCREASING BENEFICIAL

REUSE OF SEDIMENT SOIL,

ACHIEVABLE IN 1 TO 5 YEARS, HAVE

AN IDENTIFIABLE CHAMPION AND

HAVE REGIONAL SUPPORT MOST OF

THE WINNING PROCESS INVOLVED

CONSOLIDATING THESE IDEAS WE

CREATED A LOT FOR TASKS AND

THINGS THAT CAME UP DURING THE

PROCESS WHY THEY DIDN’T MAKE THE

CUT. WHAT’S NEXT? WE’RE

WORKING TO RELEASE THE

BENEFICIAL REUSE ACTION PLAN IN

THE NEXT FEW WEEKS AND BE POSTED

TO THE WEB SITE COLLECTING

COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC FOR

ABOUT A MONTH LOOK OUT FOR THAT

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN

REVIEWING TASKS AND POTENTIALLY

COMMENTING ON THE ACTION PLAN

AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT WE’LL

FINALIZE THE DOCUMENT AND POST

TO OUR WEB SITE WE’LL SWITCH

GEARS ONCE THAT’S WRAPPED UP AND

COME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION

WHEN WE ARE READY TO INITIATE

THE BAY PLAN AMENDMENT PROSLATER

THIS YEAR TO ADDRESS NECESSARY

UPDATES REGARDING SEDIMENT AND

BENEFICIAL REUSE RAMPING UP

DISCUSSIONS WITH THE FINANCING

FUTURE WORKING GROUP DEVELOPING

SUPPORT FOR BENEFICIAL REUSE

WE’RE EXCITED ABOUT THIS WORK,

SUPPORTING WETLAND AND ENSURING

THEY ARE STILL HERE PROVIDING

MANY BENEFITS FOR 50 TO 100

YEARS AND BEYOND. THANK YOU FOR

YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION AND I

WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS

ABOUT THE PROJECT

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU, MAYA, DON’T GO AWAY.

FIRST WE’LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT

THEN GET TO COMMISSIONER

QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY

SIERRA?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: WE

HAVE NO ONE IN THE ROOM AND NO

HANDS RAISED.

>>SPEAKER: I HAVE SOME.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: WE’LL

HAVE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS,

OBVIOUSLY, BUT NO PUBLIC

COMMENT.

>>SPEAKER: I’M SORRY.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NO

WORRIES.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: SO

WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT,

RIGHT, SIERRA?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

RIGHT. NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

WE’RE READY FOR COMMISSIONER

QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

CORRECT.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

LOOKS LIKE —

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: WE

CAN START WITH COMMISSIONER

ECKLUND.

>>PAT ECKLUND: START WITH ME?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: YES.

>>PAT ECKLUND: THANK YOU VERY

MUCH. I’M VERY HONORED THAT I

GET TO GO FIRST HERE. I HAVE

BEEN INVOLVED IN REUSE OF

SEDIMENT, OBVIOUSLY, FOR WETLAND

RESTORATION. ALSO, IN SOME

WETLAND RESTORATION, I DON’T

KNOW IF IT’S STILL BE DONE OR

NOT, SOMETIMES DEMOLITION DEBRIS

HAS ALSO BEEN USED. IS THAT

STILL HAPPENING? OR IS IT

PRIMARILY JUST SEDIMENT AND

SOIL?

>>SPEAKER: FOR THIS ONE WE’RE

LOOKING AT EXCAVATED SOILS FROM

PROJECTS SUCH AS PARKING,

SUBGRADE PARK LOTS AND WHAT

NOT.

YEAH. I THINK THAT’S ANOTHER

TOPIC OF A POTENTIAL USE.

>>PAT ECKLUND: OH OKAY. REUSE

OF DEMOLITION DEBRIS?

>>SPEAKER: YES. SPECIFICALLY,

I DON’T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THAT IS

USED, OR REGULATED.

>>PAT ECKLUND: OKAY. I KNOW

THAT’S BEEN USED IN THE PAST FOR

SOME WETLANDS RESTORATION.

>>SPEAKER: >>BRENDA GOEDIN:

COMMISSIONER ECKLUND, THIS IS

BRENDA AGAIN. WE’RE NOT

SPECIFICALLY TARGETING

CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS. WE’RE

LOOKING AT UPLAND ACCESS

CONSTRUCTION SOILS LIKE WHAT’S

BEING DUG UP FOR BASEMENTS. I

DON’T BELIEVE THERE IS A

PROHIBITION OF USING CLEAN

CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS. I KNOW

HAMILTON WAS ONE THAT USED

CONCRETE IN THE DEEP PARTS OF

THE BAY OR SITES THAT DIDN’T

INHIBIT DEVELOPMENT OF WETLAND.

WE’RE JUST NOT TRYING RIGHT NOW

TO SOURCE THAT MATERIAL. IT

WOULD BE, SORT OF, A WHOLE OTHER

WORLD OF ISSUES THAT WE WOULD

HAVE TO ADDRESS. SO IT’S NOT

CURRENTLY IN THE PLAN.

>>PAT ECKLUND: YEAH. THAT’S

—

I WAS VERY INVOLVED WITH THE

HAMILTON WETLAND RESTORATION

PROJECT. NOT ONLY AS AN EPA

EMPLOYEE, BUT ALSO AS A RESIDENT

AT THAT TIME. THE DREDGE

MATERIAL THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING

DREDGED IN THE BAY BY THE ARMY

CORP OF ENGINEERS AND OTHER

DREDGING OPERATIONS HAVE WE

QUANTIFIED WHAT THAT IS AND DO

WE NEED MORE THAN WHAT’S

CURRENTLY BEING DREDGE IN ORDER

TO KEEP OUR SHIPPING INDUSTRY

STILL ACTIVE? OR ARE WE GOING

TO NEED MORE SOIL ELSEWHERE

IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT.

>>SPEAKER: SO ARE YOU ASKING

ABOUT IF THERE IS ENOUGH

SEDIMENT SUPPLY ON THE

NAVIGATION DREDGE.

>>PAT ECKLUND: RIGHT. FROM THE

NATURAL — FROM THE DREDGE

THAT’S OCCURRING IN THE SAN

FRANCISCO BAY AREA, TOTAL, AND

IF IT ISN’T SUFFICIENT, ARE WE

LOOKING ALSO FOR REUSE OF SOIL

FROM THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, AS

WELL?

>>SPEAKER: YEAH. SO, WE ARE

—

THERE IS THE LTMS MANAGES YOU

KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT

DREDGE MATERIAL, AND THERE IS A

GOAL TO 40% OF IT BENEFICIALLY.

AND THAT HAS BEEN MET, I THINK

IN THE LAST — I’M LOOKING AT

BRENDA ON THE SCREEN, SHE IS OUR

LTMS REP BUT I’LL LET HER JUMP

IN.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: COMMISSIONER

ECKLUND, THE COMMISSION FOR

SEDIMENT REPORT ESTIMATED WE

NEED 50 MILLION CUBIC YARDS OF

SOIL SEDIMENT SPECIFICALLY TO

HELP SEA LEVEL RISE. WE DREDGE

BETWEEN 2 AND 3 MILLION ‘S

ANNUALLY, ARMY CORP, PRIVATE

PORTS, MARINAS REFINERIES, ET

CETERA. THAT IS NOT ENOUGH THEY

THINK IT REPRESENTS 50 TO 60%

OVER TIME. SO WE ARE LOOKING AT

THE UPLAND CONSTRUCTION SOILS,

SOUTH BAY SALT PONDS SHORELINE

ARE CURRENTLY IMPORTING

CONSTRUCTION SOILS CLEAN SOILS

TO HELP WITH SOME OF THAT

RESTORATION. THERE IS

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL, ALTHOUGH

MUCH SMALLER AMOUNT IN THE LOCAL

FLOOD PROTECTION AND STREAM BED

MAINTENANCE MATERIALS. BUT THE

GENERAL CONSENSUS IS WE DO NOT

HAVE ENOUGH TO DO EVERYTHING

THAT WE’RE HOPING TO DO AND KEEP

UP WITH SEA LEVEL RISE WHICH IS

ONE OF THE REASONS WE’RE PUSHING

VERY HARD TO GET AS MUCH OF IT

GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AS

POSSIBLE. THEN THERE IS A

FURTHER FIELD OF SOURCES SUCH AS

RESERVOIRS WHICH ARE A DIFFERENT

SUPPLY MUCH MORE CHALLENGING TO

GET INTO BUT WE’RE STARTING HERE

WITH THIS ONE TO A FIVE-YEAR

PROJECT TO TRY TO FREE UP AS

MUCH OF THE MATERIAL GETTING IT

TO THE RIGHT PLACE AS POSSIBLE

TO GET RID OF SOME OF THE

BARRIERS.

>>PAT ECKLUND: RIGHT. I GUESS

THE ISSUE THERE IS THAT SINCE IT

ISN’T GOING TO BE ENOUGH THEN

WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE

OUT HOW WE’RE GOING TO BE ABLE

TO COLLECT SOME OF THE SOIL THAT

IS EXCAVATED NOT ONLY FOR MAJOR

CONSTRUCTION, BUT ALSO MAYBE

EVEN FOR RESIDENTIAL, AS WELL.

I KNOW THAT THERE’S A LOT OF

CHANGING OF THE BUILDINGS, FOR

AN EXAMPLE, FROM OFFICE TO

RESIDENTIAL. AND, SO, A LOT OF

THAT — SOME OF THE BUILDINGS

WILL HAVE TO BE TAKEN DOWN.

AND, SO THAT’S GOING TO BE A LOT

OF DEMOLITION DEBRIS THAT MAY

BE AVAILABLE IF WE’RE GOING TO

FIGURE OUT HOW TO COLLECT IT AS

A SOCIETY OR HERE IN CALIFORNIA

OR EVEN IN THE BAY AREA SAME

WITH SOIL FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS

TOO. JUST HAVING A RECENT

EXPERIENCE OF HAVING SOME SOIL

WE NEEDED TO GET RID OF, I WAS

SHOCKED THAT THERE WASN’T A

PLACE THAT I COULD TAKE IT TO.

AND FOR IT TO BE REUSED, BECAUSE

IT WAS CLEAN, AND SO IT HAD

TO BE THROWN AWAY IN THE

GARBAGE, WHICH YOU DO NOT WANT

TO FILL UP THE LANDFILL WITH

GOOD SOIL OR GOOD DEMOLITION

DEBRIS WHEN IT COULD BE USED

ELSEWHERE. SO, THIS IS MAYBE

SOMETHING WE MAY WANT TO GET

SOME OF THE STATE AGENCIES

INVOLVED IN THAT REALLY PROMOTE

RECYCLING OF A LOT OF DIFFERENT

MATERIALS. ANYWAY, I JUST

REMEMBER FROM MY DAYS WITH THE

ARMY CORP AND WITH EPA THAT WE

DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH DREDGE

MATERIAL. AND I JUST WANT TO

SEE IF THAT WAS STILL THE CASE.

WHICH IT IS. AND I’M JUST

REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE

POSSIBILITY OF EVEN MAYBE

CHANGING HOW WE DEAL WITH

CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES, AS WELL

AS INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS AND HOW

WE CAN REUSE THAT MATERIAL

THAT’S SO VALUABLE.

THANK YOU.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER SHOWALTER.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: YEAH. I

JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO

THANK THE STAFF FOR THE WORK

THAT THEY HAVE DONE HERE. I,

SORT OF, VIEWED THIS AS THEM

SUPPLYING US WITH A CLASS OF

SEDIMENT 101. WE HAVE REALLY

HAD AMAZING SPEAKERS COME TALK

TO US ABOUT THE SCIENCE AND,

SORT OF, THE OPERATION OF

SEDIMENT REMOVAL IN SAN

FRANCISCO BAY. AND IT’S JUST

GIVING US, WE GOT A GREAT

FOUNDATION, AND THEN WE HAD THE

WORKSHOPS. SO, I THINK IT WAS

KIND OF THE BEST WAY WE COULD

POSSIBLY GET A STAKEHOLDER GROUP

TOGETHER, GET THEM ALL ON THE

SAME PAGE, AND THEN HAVE THEM

BRAINSTORM. SO, I REALLY ENJOY

TAKING PART IN THIS. AND I LOOK

FORWARD TO, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT

FEW STEPS YOU COME UP WITH, AND

I’M REALLY GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE

LIST IS NEAR 80 NOW. SO, THANK

YOU VERY MUCH.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

COMMISSIONER MOULTON-PETERS?

>>STEPHANIE MOULTON-PETERS:

THANK YOU. I ALSO WANT TO ADD

MY THANKS TO THE STAFF AND OUR

COMMITTEE FOR THE WORK YOU HAVE

DONE. AND JUST TO SAY THAT I’M

REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO, YOU

KNOW, BRINGING ALL THE AGENCIES

ON BOARD WITH THIS BENEFICIAL

REUSE. JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, I

HAVE A PROJECT AT McGINNIS MARSH

WHERE WE HAVE GALENA’S CREEK

RIGHT NEXT DOOR THAT WE ARE

GOING TO DREDGE AND WE ARE

AWAITING TO GET APPROVAL FROM

NUMEROUS AGENCIES TO PUT THEM ON

THE MARSH AND IT’S TAKING AN

AGONIZING LONG TIME SO I LOOK

FORWARD TO THE PROCESS WHEN IT

THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THANK

YOU.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: ANY

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM

COMMISSIONERS?

>>PAT ECKLUND: REBECCA, I HAD

HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE COST.

IF THE SEDIMENT ITSELF IS THAT

OF THE QUALITY THAT WE NEED FOR

PARTICULAR WETLAND, HAS IT BEEN

DISCUSSED ABOUT WHO PAYS FOR THE

CLEAN UP OF THAT MATERIAL? OR

WHETHER IT’S NOT EVEN JUST USED

THEN? THANK YOU.

>>BRENDA GOEDIN: SURE. THAT

ONE WE HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH ALL

OF THE COSTS AND FUNDING

SITUATIONS AND SCENARIOS YET.

SO WE’LL PROBABLY SUBJECT KIND

OF LEAVING THAT ONE TO TALK

ABOUT LATER ON.

>>MAYA MCLERNEY: —

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

GREAT. THANK YOU MAYA. THANK

YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU TO ALL THE

COMMISSIONERS AND ESPECIALLY

THOSE WHO ARE ON THE WORKING

GROUP WHO ARE DEALING WITH ALL

OF THESE ISSUES ON OUR BEHALF.

I APPRECIATE IT.

WE HAVE ONE MORE PRESENTATION ON

DELTA ADAPT. THAT IS A CLIMATE

CHANGE ADAPTATION STUDY, WHICH

HAS BEEN CREATED AND MANAGED BY

THE DELTA STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL.

AND IT’S DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE

DELTA’S RESILIENCE TO CLIMATE

CHANGE HAZARDS, INCLUDING, OF

COURSE, SEA LEVEL RISE. THE

BRIEFING WILL BE PROVIDED BY

CORY COPELAND WHO IS BCDC’S

CHIEF SCIENTIST AND ALSO A

FORMER DELTA STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL

STAFF MEMBER. SO, THANK YOU,

CORY FOR THE PRESENTATION YOU’RE

ABOUT TO GIVE US.

>>CORY COPELAND: YEAH. I

ACTUALLY WON’T BE GIVING T I’LL

BE INTRODUCING THE STEWARDSHIP

COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANK YOU SO

MUCH CHAIR EISEN AND

COMMISSIONERS. I’M REALLY

PLEASED TO BE INTRODUCING THIS

ITEM. AS CHAIR EISEN MENTIONED,

I HAD OPPORTUNITY TO WORK ON

THIS DURING MY TIME AT THE DELTA

STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL BEFORE

JOINING BCDC AS THE ADAPTING TO

RISING TIDESRISING TIDES IN

SCIENCE MANAGER.

DELTA ADAPTS IS THE STATE

CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTING A PLAN

FOR SACRAMENTO SAN JOAQUIN AND

UPPER ESTUARY OF SAN FRANCISCO

BAY DELTA I HAVE BEEN ON BOTH

SIDES OF THE COLLABORATION BCDC

AND DELTA STEWARDSHIP WORK

AROUND CLIMATE ADAPTATION. FOR

CONTEXT THE FUNDING INVESTMENT

FRAMEWORK THAT HELPED US

IDENTIFY A $110 BILLION NEED FOR

INVESTMENT IN SEA LEVEL RISE

ADAPTATION IN THE BAY AREA FOR

CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE

ANALYSIS, USED HYDROLOFICIC WORK

THAT WAS DONE FOR DELTA ADAPT

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT. WITH

THAT INNER RELATIONSHIP IN MIND,

I’M REALLY GLAD TO HAVE A COUPLE

OF FOLKS FROM THE DELTA

STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL HERE TO

PRESENT ON THEIR ADAPTATION PLAN

THAT IS COMING OUT SOON. SO,

HERE TO SPEAK ON THAT ARE JEFF

HENDERSON, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR

FOR THE STEWARDSHIP ARE COUNCIL,

AND MORGAN C, FORMER BCDC

EMPLOYEE WHO IS NOW THE MANAGER

OF CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AT THE

DELTA STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL WHO

WILL GIVING A PRESENTATION THAT

I WILL BE SHARING.

ˆ >>JEFF LEVIN:

ˆ >>JEFFREY TUMLIN:

ˆ >>JEFFREY LEVIN:

ˆ >>JEFF MCKAY:

>>JEFF HENDERSON: THANK YOU

CORY. LET’S GO TO THE NEXT

SLIDE.

>>SPEAKER: DOES THAT LOOK

CORRECT?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: IT

LOOKS GOOD IN THE BOARDROOM.

>>SPEAKER: THAT LOOKS GOOD

CORY.

>>SPEAKER: IT LOOKS GOOD

ONLINE.

>>JEFF HENDERSON: ALL RIGHT.

GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

IT’S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE ON

BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL TO PRESENT

ON OUR DELTA ADAPT CLIMATE

CHANGE INITIATIVE. THIS

INITIATIVE IS SOMETHING THAT WE

HAVE BEEN LEADING SINCE 2018,

WITH A GOAL TO BETTER UNDERSTAND

SPECIFIC RISKS FACED BY THE

DELTA AND PROPOSED STRATEGIES TO

PREPARE ACCORDINGLY.

TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, IT’S THE FIRST

OF ITS KIND FOR THE ENTIRE DELTA

REGION THAT CUTS ACROSS MULTIPLE

TOPICS. THERE HAVE BEEN

ADAPTATION PLANS PREPARED AT THE

LOCAL LEVEL, OR ADAPTATION PLANS

PREPARED TO ADDRESS A SINGLE

TOPIC SUCH AS WATER SUPPLY OR

ECOSYSTEM OR FLOODING OR

AGRICULTURE. TO OUR KNOWLEDGE,

THIS IS THE FIRST AT SCALE THAT

ADDRESSES MULTIPLE SECTORS AND

TOPICS ACROSS THE FULL REGION OF

THE DELTA ITSELF. WE’RE ABOUT

TO RELEASE OUR ADAPTATION PLAN,

JUST PUTTING FINAL TOUCHES ON IT

AND COMPLETING SOME FINAL

REVIEWS AND WE’RE EXCITED TO

RELEASE THAT. BECAUSE IT SHOWS

HOW FAR WE HAVE COME THROUGHOUT

THE PROJECT’S PROCESS. HOW MUCH

WE HAVE LEARNED, AND IT SETS A

FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING A LOT OF

MUCH NEEDED ADAPTATION ACTIONS

HAPPEN WITHIN THE REGION. IT’S

THE RESULT OF MANY YEARS OF

CONVERSATIONS ACROSS PROBABLY

THE MOST DIVERSE GROUP OF

INTERESTS AND EXPERTISE THAT THE

COUNCIL HAS ENGAGED TO DATE.

THE WORK RECOGNIZES A LOT OF

GREAT PROGRESS IN PROTECTING THE

DELTA THUS FAR. BUT, ALSO,

POINTS OUT ALL THE AREAS WE

STILL NEED TO AMPLIFY OUR WORK

TO BE MORE INNOVATIVE, TO

PROVIDE AND PRIORITIZE

ADAPTATION STRATEGIES TO KEEP UP

WITH THE IMPACTS THAT WE’RE

ALREADY SEEING. THE WORK IS

BEING LED BY THE COUNCIL WHICH

WAS CREATED TO HELP SAFEGUARD

DELTA ASSETS. AND

CRITICAL CONSIDERATIONS TO

ACHIEVING OUR MISSION, WE HAVE

IDENTIFIED NEEDS RESOURCES

PARTNERSHIPS AND IMPORTANTLY

LEADERS THAT ARE NEEDED AS MUCH

OF THE PLAN RELIES ON A

COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AMONG A

NUMBER OF AGENCIES. OUR

PRESENTATION TODAY MORGAN IS

GOING TO PROVIDE A PREVIEW OF

SOME OF OUR APPLICATION

STRATEGIES. WE’RE INTERESTED TO

HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK AROUND

CLARITY OF STRATEGIES AND ANY

PRIORITIES OR APPLICATIONS

OUTLINED FOR BCDC TO HELP INFORM

THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE PLAN.

NEXT SLIDE. AGAIN JUST TO

ORIENT THIS IS A MATCH DELTA

WHICH IS ON THE RIGHT WITH THE

SAN WAN KEEN RIVER DARK BLUE AND

WHAT’S BEEN MARKED IN THE

CENTER, IDENTIFIED AS OUR

OVERLAPPING JURISDICTIONS BCDC

THAT’S THE MIDDLE AND SAN

FRANCISCO BAY ON THE LEFT THIS

IS IN THE SPIRIT OF MANAGING THE

ONE BAY DELTA ESTUARY WHERE

ACTIVITIES TAKE PLACE IN THE BAY

AFFECT THE DELTA AND THOSE THAT

TAKE PLACE IN THE DELTA AFFECT

THE BAY. NEXT SLIDE, CORY.

THE FIRST PHASE OF OUR PROJECT

BEGAN IN 2018, IT WAS A

VULNERABLE ASSESSMENT IN WHICH

WE IDENTIFIED AT RISK SYSTEMS

FROM CLIMATE CHANGE HEAVILY

RELY ON NATURAL AND PHYSICAL

SCIENCES AND PRIMARY AND

SECONDARY RESEARCH. WE FOUND

THE FOLLOWING, FLOOD RISK IS ONE

OF THE MOST PRESSING THREATS TO

THE DELTA AND IT’S GOING TO

CONTINUE TO WORSEN IN THE FUTURE

WITH CHANGES IN SEA LEVEL,

PRECIPITATION, HYDROLOGY AND

TEMPERATURE THESE ARE NOT ALL

GOING TO IMPACT THE DELTA

RESIDENTS IN THE SAME WAY OR IN

AN EQUITABLE WAY AND WILL AFFECT

THE CENTRAL SOUTHERN DELTA MOST,

CONCENTRATION IN THE STOCKTON

AREA THIS MEANS MANY OF THE

RESIDENTS EXPOSED TO FLOODING

MAY HAVE HIGHER SENSITIVITY TO

FLOOD IMPACTS AND LOWER CAPACITY

TO ADAPT. WE’LL TALK MORE ABOUT

HOW FLOOD RISK IS DIFFERENT IN

THE DELTA THAN IN THE BAY WHEN

WE COVER OUR STRATEGIES.

PARTICULARLY THOSE RELATED TO

FLOOD RISK REDUCTION. TWO,

DELTA WATER EXPORTS WILL BE LESS

RELIABLE IN THE FUTURE DUE TO

CLIMATE CHANGE. DELTA’S

EXISTING WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM

DOES NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH STORAGE

TO CAPTURE ANTICIPATED INCREASES

IN RUNOFF DUE TO MORE VARIABLE

PRECIPITATION. IT’S WORTH

PAUSING TO NOTE THAT IN THE

DELTA, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE

HAVE FOUND OUT FROM THE

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT IS THAT

THE DELTA SYSTEM IS MUCH MORE

AFFECTED BY ANTICIPATED CHANGES

IN RIVERING FLOWS, FROM THE

SACRAMENTO AND SAN JOAQUIN,

BASED ON ADJUSTED, OR — THE

SITUATION OF MORE PRECIPITATION

AND FALLING AS RAIN AND LESS AS

SNOW, THEN THE REGION IS

AFFECTED BY SEA LEVEL RISE. SO,

SEA LEVEL RISE AND RIVERING

INFLOW ARE BOTH COMPONENTS OF

THE VULNERABILITY, THE RIVERING

AND THE FLOW ASPECT SEEMS TO BE

MUCH MORE DIRECTING THE OUTCOMES

IN THE DELTA.

IN TERMS OF WATER QUALITY, IN

DELTA WATER USERS MAY BE

THREATENED BY WATER QUALITY

DECLINES, FUTURE DROUGHTS, AND

ALL OF THAT EXPOSING MORE ACRES

OF DELTA AGRICULTURE, TO MORE

SALINE WATER THAN HAS

HISTORICALLY OCCURRED. DELTA

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION TRENDS

WILL SHIFT DUE TO CLIMATE

CHANGE, INCREASING TEMPERATURES

AND THE NUMBER OF EXTREME HEAT

DAYS, ARE BOTH PROJECTED TO

REDUCE YIELDS FOR MANY DELTA

CROPS. AND THE NUMBER OF

EXTREME HEAT DAYS WILL INCREASE

THROUGHOUT THE DELTA AND

COMMUNITIES IDENTIFIED AS MOST

VULNERABLE TO THAT EXTREME HEAT

ARE LOCATED PREDOMINANTLY IN THE

CITIES OF STOCKTON AND TRACY.

AND I’LL ASK MORGAN TO JUMP IN

AND GIVE THE PRESENTATION ON OUR

UPCOMING ADAPTATION PLAN. THANK

YOU.

>>MORGAN CHAU: THANKS, JEFF.

AND GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR EISEN

AND COMMISSIONERS. I’M HAPPY TO

BE HERE PRESENTING TO YOU. AS

CORY MENTIONED, I USED TO WORK

AT BCDC, I WAS IN PERMITS,

ANALYST IN SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT

UNIT. SO IT’S NICE TO BE BACK.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO, PHASE TWO IS REALLY THE

DEVELOPMENT OF THE ADAPTATION

PLAN THAT WE’RE SPEAKING ABOUT

TODAY, WHICH IT INCLUDES A RANGE

OF ACTIONS TO IMPROVE REGIONAL

RESILIENCE TO CLIMATE CHANGE FOR

THE DELTA. SO, THIS GRAPHIC

REALLY JUST SHOWS OUR PROCESS

AND HOW WE LEANED ON, REALLY, AS

JEFF MENTIONED, PROBABLY THE

MOST DIVERSE SET OF INTERESTS

THAT’S ON HAVE ENGAGED WITH AT

THE COUNCIL, AS WELL AS OUR

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

FINDINGS TO EXPLORE ADAPTATION

NEEDS, PRIORITIES, AND DEVELOP

STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS THOSE. WE

WORKED ACROSS FOUR FOCUS AREAS

FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE

PLAN.

AGRICULTURE, FLOOD RISK

REDUCTION, ECOSYSTEM, AND WATER

SUPPLY RELIABILITY OVER THE LAST

TWO AND A HALF YEARS, WORKING TO

INTEGRATE EQUITY THROUGH THE.

WE ALSO WORKED ACROSS

INTERDISCIPLINARY GROUP WHERE WE

BROUGHT TOGETHER THOSE FOCUS

GROUPS SEVERAL TIMES. OUR

ENGAGEMENT FOR SCOPING THE PLAN

REALLY BEGAN IN 2021, AND WE

COHOSTED A WORKSHOP SERIES WITH

SEVERAL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS

IN STOCKTON WHICH IS A HIGHLY

SOCIALLY VULNERABLE CITY IN THE

DELTA, AND THIS ENGAGEMENT WITH

THIS GROUP OF COMMUNITY

ORGANIZATIONS CONTINUED. AND

THEY HAVE SEVERAL OF THOSE HAVE

INFORMED OTHER COMPONENTS OF OUR

WORK INCLUDING OUR TRIBAL AND

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE WORK. WE

HAVE ALSO INCORPORATED SEVERAL

TRIBAL CONSULTATIONS INTO THE

PLAN, AT INFORMAL MEETINGS WITH

OTHER AGENCIES AT THE STATE,

LOCAL, AND FLOOD AND WATER

AGENCIES. COUNCIL HOLDS MANY

COLLABORATIVE FORUMS THAT HAVE

BEEN TOPICALLY RELEVANT FOR

ADAPTATION THAT HAVE BEEN

INCORPORATED INTO THE PLAN. AND

ANOTHER CRITICAL COMPONENT IS

FOR THE FIRST TIME, FOR THE

COUNCIL, REALLY REACHING AND

HEARING DIRECTLY FROM DELTA

FARMERS AND GROWERS WE’RE

HEARING FIRSTHAND ABOUT

CHALLENGES THEY’RE CURRENTLY

GRAPPLING WITH, HOW THEY’RE

ADAPTING AND WHAT THEY NEED TO

FURTHER ADAPT. LASTLY, WE HEARD

A LOT FROM INTERVIEWS, BOTH

THROUGH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE WORK AND ALSO RESULTS

FROM THE REGION’S FIRST

REPRESENTATIVE SURVEY OF DELTA

RESIDENTS THAT HAS INFORMED OUR

WORK. AS WE APPROACH HAVING

PUBLIC DRAFT OF THE PLAN WE HAVE

BEEN SPENDING A LOT OF CONCERTED

EFFORT IN THREE CITIES IN THE

DELTA THAT HAVE SCORED

PARTICULARLY HIGH IN TERMS OF

SOCIAL VULNERABLE CLIMATE

IMPACTS FROM INDEX DEVELOPED IN

PHASE ONE, THOSE ARE FRO

ANTIOCH, PITTSBURG, AND

STOCKTON, ANTIOCH AND PITTSBURG

HAVE OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION

REALLY OVER THE EDGE OF BCDC’S

JURISDICTION AND OURS. NEXT

SLIDE.

SO, WE’RE NOW AT THE POINT WHERE

WE ARE PROPOSING OUR SET OF

STRATEGIES IN OUR PLAN, THEY’RE

BOTH PHYSICAL AND MANAGEMENT

LEVEL STRATEGIES THAT WILL

REALLY BE REALIZED DIFFERENTLY

ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFIC

LOCATION IN THE DELTA. AND OUR

FOCUS REALLY WITH THE

STRATEGIES, IS TO MAINTAIN

FLEXIBILITY AND TO BE ABLE TO

INCORPORATE NEW CLIMATE DATA AS

IT BECOMES AVAILABLE, REALLY

PRIORITIZING PROJECTS THAT OFFER

MULTIPLE BENEFITS IN AN

EQUITABLE MANNER. SO, JEFF

TOUCHED ON THIS, BUT EACH

STRATEGY BEFORE I GET INTO THEM,

HAS A RECOMMENDED LEAD ACCORDING

TO THE AGENCY THAT MAKES THE

MOST SENSE TO LEAD. NOT

NECESSARY LEANLY BY REGULATORY

AUTHORITY, AND SEVERAL PROPOSED

PARTNERS. WE ALSO WORKED TO

HIGHLIGHT STRATEGIES THAT WE

FEEL, ACCORDING TO COST, AND

ORDER OF OPERATIONS, THAT REALLY

SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED FIRST OR

NEAR-TERM. WE HAVE DONE, CORE

MENTIONED SOME OF OUR ANALYSIS

PREVIOUSLY, BUT WE HAVE

WORKED TO DEVELOP ADAPTATION

COSTS FOR THESE BIG PROJECTS

COMPARE THOSE TO VALUE OF ASSETS

AT RISK WHICH WAS PART OF OUR

PHASE ONE, STRATEGIES AND

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OUR

EXISTING DELTA PLAN WHICH IS OUR

LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

DELTA RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER

STATE REGIONAL RESOURCE SPECIFIC

PLANS AS WELL AS CASE STUDIES

THAT EXEMPLIFY TYPES OF

STRATEGIES WE WANT TO SEE MOVING

FORWARD.

OKAY. NEXT SLIDE.

TOUCH BRIEFLY ON HOW WE ARE

INCLUDING EQUITY THROUGH THE ALL

OF OUR STRATEGIES. IT REALLY,

EQUITY IS A COMPONENT IN, I

THINK, THREE MAIN WAYS. FIRST

IN TERMS OF REPRESENTATIONAL

JUSTICE. SO, IN A LOT OF THE

PROPOSED ACTIONS IN OUR PLAN, WE

ARE REALLY WORKING AND RECOGNIZE

IT’S INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT TO

HAVE DECISIONS AND THE

DECISION-MAKING BODIES THAT

REPRESENT COMMUNITIES THAT ARE

SERVED SO THAT COMMUNITIES ARE

BOTH INFORMED REPRESENTED AND

INVOLVED IN THESE PLANNING

PROCESSES. ANOTHER IS THROUGH

PRIORITIZATION OF INVESTMENTS

THAT’S CONTINUING TO WORK TO

UNDERSTAND WHO FACES MOST RISK

AND WHO NEEDS INVESTMENT FOR

ADAPTATION THE MOST. LASTLY

HEARD ACROSS THE BOARD IN OUR

DISCUSSIONS WAS NEED TO CONTINUE

TO IMPROVE AND AMPLIFY RISK

COMMUNICATION AND EDUCATION, AND

REALLY PRESENT WHAT WERE OUR

FINDINGS FROM PHASE 1 AND 2, TO

THE MOST SOCIALLY VULNERABLE

COMMUNITIES IN OUR REGION. NEXT

SLIDE.

SO, NOW TO THE STRATEGIES. THIS

IS OUR FIRST OF OUR FOUR FOCUS

AREAS IS FLOOD RISK REDUCTION,

WHICH HAS A LOT OF INTEREST IN

THE DELTA, AS JEFF MENTIONED.

WE HAVE SEEN SUBSTANTIAL

PROGRESS, BUT A LOT MORE NEEDS

TO BE DONE TO ADAPT TO CLIMATE

CHANGE. THESE GRAPHICS WE’LL

HAVE FOR EACH FOCUS AREA FROM

LEFT TO RIGHT SHOWS SUMMARY OF

VULNERABILITIES, AN ILLUSTRATIVE

SUMMARY OF OUR TYPES OF

STRATEGIES WE’RE PROPOSING, AND

EXAMPLE ACTIONS. SO, ON THE

LEFT, IN TERMS OF WHAT WE FOUND

RELATED TO FLOOD VULNERABLE, WE

KNOW THAT CLIMATE CHANGE REALLY

— WILL REALLY AFFECT THE ENTIRE

SYSTEM FROM ALL DIRECTIONS IN

THE DELTA. SO THAT’S

RIVERING INFLOWS, FLOOD CONTROL

WATER SUPPLY OPERATIONS. AS

JEFF MENTIONED, BRIEFLY

DISTINCTION FROM HOW BCDC

APPROACHES FLOOD RISK WHICH IS

MORE FOCUSED ON SEA LEVEL RISE,

WE’RE LOOKING AT FLOOD RISK AND

RIVERING, AND LEVEES

OVERTOPPING. WHILE THERE IS

SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT IN OUR

LEVEES IN PAST DECADES THERE IS

STILL A LOT OF WORK TO DO IN OUR

STRATEGY OUTLINING WHAT’S NEEDED

THROUGH A WELL ROUNDED APPROACH

TO ADDRESSING BOTH HYDROLOGICAL

VARIABILITY, AND CHALLENGES

POSED BY CLIMATE OUR DELTA PLAN

DOES LAY FOUNDATION FOR

ADDRESSING A LOT OF THESE

STRATEGIES FOR FLOOD RISK WE

HAVE POLICIES RELATED TO HOW WE

INVEST IN LEVEES AND SUPPORT

FLOOD MANAGEMENT AND PLANNED USE

DECISIONS. THE STRATEGIES GO

BEYOND AND WE HAVE A FEW

EXAMPLES, STRATEGIES THAT

TOUCHES ON SPECIFIC FLOOD

MODELING NEEDS AND COLLABORATION

AND COMMUNICATION ON THAT

TOPIC.

AND, REALLY, CONTINUING TO WORK

ON OUR DELTA LEVEE INVESTMENT

STRATEGY. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A

MORE NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURE IS

TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE

IMPORTANCE OF FLOOD INSURANCE,

IN THE DELTA REGION THERE, IS A

VERY LOW, DESPITE THE FLOOD

RISK, THERE IS A VERY LOW

PERCENTAGE OF FOLKS THAT

ACTUALLY HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE.

NEXT SLIDE.

THE SECOND FOCUS AREA IS

ECOSYSTEM. SO, THE DELTA

ECOSYSTEM REALLY PROVIDES

HABITAT FOR FUNERALING A

MIGRATORY PATHWAYS, WE ALSO

KNOW THE VALUE OF ECOSYSTEM AS A

BUFFER FROM IMPACTS FROM CLIMATE

CHANGE WE KNOW FROM

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT THAT

THE ECOSYSTEMS AND DELTA WILL

CONTINUE TO BE STRESSED AND HAVE

LIMITED ROOM TO MIGRATE. AGAIN

THE DELTA PLAN WE HAVE POLICIES

AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO

PROTECTING THE DELTA ECOSYSTEM

WE HAVE ACTUAL SPECIFIC TARGETS

FOR THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE WE

WANT TO RESTORE AND OUR

STRATEGIES HERE ALIGN WITH AND

GO BEYOND WHAT IS IN OUR DELTA

PLAN. IN A FEW THINGS WE CALL

OUT CO-BENEFITS RELATED TO

RESTORATION, THAT’S RECOGNIZING

REDUCED FLOOD RISK THAT CAN BE

BROUGHT FROM PROJECTS, AND THE

IMPORTANCE OF IMPROVING ACCESS

TO GREEN SPACE AND OPEN SPACES,

AND THE CULTURAL VALUE AND THE

NEED TO WORK ALONGSIDE TRIBES

IN THESE RESTORATION PROJECTS.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE FROM OUR

STRATEGIES IS THE IMPORTANCE OF

HALTING AND REVERSING SUBSIZE

SIDANCE, DONE IN SEVERAL WAYS

DEPENDING ON THE LAND OWNERSHIP,

AND FEASIBILITY SO IT COULD BE

THROUGH DIFFERENT TYPES OF

RESTORATION BUT ALSO THROUGH

PLANTING CROPS SUCH AS RICE.

NEXT SLIDE.

NEXT IS OUR AGRICULTURE FOCUS

AREA AND,

REALLY, AGRICULTURE IN THE DELTA

IS A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THE

DELTA’S CULTURE, HISTORY, AND

ECONOMY, IT’S REALLY THE

ECONOMIC ENGINE OF THE REGION IT

PROVIDES JOBS AND SIGNIFICANT

ANNUAL ECONOMIC OUTPUT HOWEVER

AGRICULTURE WE KNOW FROM OUR

PHASE ONE REALLY FACES A LOT OF

CHALLENGES WITH CLIMATE,

INCLUDING VARIABLE

PRECIPITATION, SALT WATER

INTRUSION, WATER QUALITY

DECLINE, FLOODING, EXTREME HEAT,

AND REDUCED CHILL HOURS WHICH

ALL COMPOUND TO IMPACT BOTH CROP

YIELD AND QUALITY. SO, AGAIN

OUR DELTA PLAN DOES LAY

FOUNDATION FOR ADDRESSING

AGRICULTURE AND NEEDS FOR

ADAPTATION. WE HAVE SEVERAL

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STATE

AGENCIES TO REALLY ADAPTIVELY

MANAGE AGRICULTURE LANDS AND

ALSO TO PROVIDE HABITAT

CONDITIONS FOR FEASIBLE NATIVE

SPECIES. OUR STRATEGIES ARE

DIVERSE HERE. WE HAVE

STRATEGIES RELATED TO

ACKNOWLEDGING THE NEED FOR AN

EQUITABLE REGIONAL FOOD SYSTEM.

SO THIS INCLUDES THINGS LIKE

LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

FOR FARMS. WE HAVE QUITE A FEW

ACTIONS THAT SUPPORT CLIMATE

SMART FARMING PRACTICES. SO,

THESE ARE ACTIONS SUCH AS

IRRIGATION, EFFICIENCY, BUILDING

SOIL HEALTH, PEST MANAGEMENT,

OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT,

RECOGNIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF

DIVERSIFYING INCOME AND REVENUE

FOR FARMS. SO, SUPPORT FOR AGRO

TOURISM, CULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES,

FUNDING AND ENVIRONMENTAL

CREDITS, LIKE CARBON CREDITS AND

THEN WILDLIFE FRIENDLY FARMING.

AND THEN WHERE FEASIBLE IDENTIFY

WHERE LAND MIGHT NEED TO BE

RETIRED OF THERE ARE OTHER USES

THAT WOULD BE OF HIGH VALUE.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO, THIS IS OUR LAST. FOCUS

AREA, WATER SUPPLY,

RELIABILITY.

THE DELTA WATERSHED PROVIDES A

PORTION OF WATER SUPPLY FOR

APPROXIMATELY 27 MILLION

CALIFORNIANS. AND WE KNOW FROM

CLIMATE CHANGE FROM OUR PHASE

ONE THAT OUR WATER SUPPLY WILL

LIKELY DECREASE WITH DEMAND AND

INCREASED — SORRY — WITH, AS

DEMAND INCREASES, AND WE

EXPERIENCE MORE VARIABLE PE

SIPTATION AND DECREASED SNOWPACK

AS JEFF ALREADY MENTIONED, OUR

INFRASTRUCTURE WILL ALSO BE AT

RISK TO SEVERAL CLIMATE

IMPACTS.

SO, AGAIN, THE STRATEGIES HERE

REALLY GO BEYOND THE

FOUNDATIONAL POLICIES IN THE

DELTA PLAN WHICH DOES REQUIRE

SUPPLIERS TO REDUCE RELIANCE ON

THE DELTA. AND OUR STRATEGIES,

WE HAVE FIVE STRATEGIES. AND

THE FIRST IS REDUCING RELIANCE

ON THE DELTA. SO THERE ARE

SEVERAL ACTIONS HERE, SUCH AS

FUNDING PROJECTS THAT REALLY

PROMOTE URBAN AND AGRICULTURAL

WATER CONSERVATION, OR RECYCLED

WATER. WE HAVE A STRATEGY

RELATED TO INCREASING LOCAL

STORAGE OF SURFACE AND

GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES, BOTH NORTH

AND SOUTH OF THE DELTA. A

STRATEGY RELATED TO MODIFYING

RESERVOIR OPERATIONS TO BE

ADAPTABLE TO CHANGING CLIMATE

CONTINUES. AND THEN, LASTLY, A

STRATEGY TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER

MODIFYING WATER QUALITY

STANDARDS SO THAT THERE ARE

OBJECTIVES THAT PROVIDE FOR

SEVERAL BENEFICIAL USES OF

WATER, SUCH AS AGRICULTURAL,

FISHING, RECREATIONAL TRIBAL AND

OTHER HUMAN BENEFICIAL USES OF

WATER. SORRY. OUR LAST ONE IS

TO REALLY IMPROVE OR MODIFY

INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE DELTA TO

MINIMIZE IMPACTS OF THROUGH

DELTA CONVEYANCE. NEXT SLIDE.

OUR PLAN HAS A GOVERNANCE

CHAPTER THAT REALLY ADDRESSES

THE UNIQUE HISTORY, CHALLENGES,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

ADAPTATION GOVERNANCE IN THE

DELTA. AS REALLY GOVERNANCE

DOES DETERMINE THE PROCESS FOR

FUNDING, PLANNING AND

IMPLEMENTING ALL OF THESE

ACTIVITIES THAT WE’RE TALKING

ABOUT THIS GRAPHIC THAT IS ON

THIS SLIDE WAS DEVELOPED BY A

DELTA SCIENCE FELLOW, TARA

POSEY, AND UC DAVIS PH.D.

CANDIDATE WHO IS DOING NETWORK

MAPPING TO UNDERSTAND HOW

CLIMATE COLLABORATIVES ARE

CONNECTED AND JUST TO SHOW OUR

PROJECT CONNECT MAPS AND

UNDERSTANDING HOW CLIMATE

COLLABORATIVE ARE CONNECTED AND

SHOWS IN OUR PROJECT COMPARATIVE

EFFECTIVENESS IN THE REGION.

THIS IS JUST AS IMPORTANT

WORKING TO HAVE PROCEDURAL

JUSTICE, ACROSS DECISIONS TO

PRESENT COMMUNITIES THAT WE

SERVE WE INCLUDE PRACTICES

PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE

ADAPTADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WE HAVE

WORKING DOUBLE ON CONDITIONAL

KNOWLEDGE THAT CAN HAVE A BETTER

ROLE IN DECISION-MAKING. JUST

TO WRAP UP, WE WANTED TO SHARE A

LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR ROLE MOVING

FORWARD ALREADY TOUCHED ON THESE

COMPONENTS WHAT’S IMPORTANT FOR

US IS CONTINUE TO ADVANCE

REPRESENTAL JUSTICE ADAPTATION

DECISIONS THROUGH INCREASED

COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND

RELATIONSHIPS, TO CONTINUE TO

USE RESOURCES WITH OUR PARTNERS

TO AMPLIFY BETTER

COMMUNICATIONS. WE HAVE A

SCIENCE PROGRAM THAT FUND A LOT

OF RESEARCH IN THE REGION

WORKING CLOSELY WITH THEM TO

ADDRESS A LOT OF THE RESEARCH

GAPS THAT CAME OUT OF THESE

CONVERSATIONS. I TOUCHED ON THE

TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE WORK AND

THEN REALLY THINKING ABOUT HOW

TO FUND ALL OF THIS. IF THIS IS

AN AREA WHERE WE REALLY LEARN

AND TO COLLABORATE WITH THE

PLANNING STAFF IS JUST THINKING

ABOUT REGIONAL FUNDING FOR

ADAPTING A AND LASTLY WORKING

THROUGH EXISTING REGULATORY

AUTHORITY FOR OUR COVERED ACTION

AUTHORITY, JUST CONTINUING TO

PROMOTE LAND USES THAT ENHANCE

DELTA RESILIENCE HALTING REVERSE

SUBSIDENCE AND REDUCE RISK

OVERALL.

NEXT SLIDE. THAT’S ALL FOR ME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING

US HERE. AS WE’RE GETTING VERY

CLOSE TO HAVING A DRAFT OUT FOR

PUBLIC REVIEW. WE APPRECIATE

YOUR TIME FOR LETTING

US PRESENT TODAY.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU, MORGAN. BEFORE WE

GET TO QUESTIONS FROM

COMMISSIONERS. DO WE HAVE ANY

PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THIS

AGENDA ITEM?

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NONE

IN-PERSON. AND NO HANDS

RAISED.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

OKAY. SO, THANK YOU, CORY,

JEFF, AND MORGAN FOR THAT VERY

IN-DEPTH PRESENTATION. AND I’M

GOING TO LOOK — OR SIERRA IS

GOING LOOK FOR ME TO TELL ME IF

THERE ARE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT

WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS OR COMMENT

ON YOUR PRESENTATION.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON: NO

HANDS RAISED VIRTUALLY. BUT YOU

DO HAVE COMMISSIONER ECKLUND

HERE IN-PERSON.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

OKAY.

>>PAT ECKLUND: THANK YOU VERY

MUCH FOR ALLOWING HE TO ASK AND

QUESTIONS. YOU HAVE COME A LONG

WAYS, OBVIOUSLY, IN ADDRESSING A

LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE

CONFRONTING THE DELTA. A COUPLE

OF TECHNICAL QUESTIONS. HAS THE

RATE OF SUBSIDENCE INCREASED

OVER TIME?

OR DO WE KNOW?

>>MORGAN CHAU: I DON’T ACTUALLY

KNOW THE DETAILS OF THE RATE OF

SUBSIDENCE. I THINK IT

MIGHT —

YEAH IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE

WHOLE DELTA, IT MIGHT

INTERESTING, IS A LOT ACTIVE

WORK TO ADDRESS THOSE EXPOSED

PEAT SOILS. WE CAN GET BACK TO

YOU.

>>SPEAKER: YEAH.

>>PAT ECKLUND: GO AHEAD.

>>SPEAKER: I WAS GOING TO SAY

FOR MOST OF THE DELTA, THE

PEAT SOIL IS SO DEEP SO

THAT ANYWHERE THERE IS

TRADITIONAL LAND MANAGEMENT IT’S

KIND OF SUBSIDING AT A FAIRLY

CONSISTENT RATE THROUGH THE TIME

THERE ARE CERTAIN LOCATIONS TO

DO SUBSIDENCE HALTING OR EVEN

SUBSIDENCE REVERSE ACTIVITIES I

KNOW THOSE ARE ENCOURAGED IN THE

DELTA, AN EXAMPLE,

WETLANDS, AND CARBON

SEQUESTRATION AT THOSE SITES,

THEY HAVE USED ICE TO MANAGE

SUBSIDENCE. IT’S A MAJOR TOPIC

BUT IT HASN’T BEEN VERY —

AT THIS POINT IT’S ALL

UNIVERSALLY TAKEN AS LAND

MANAGEMENT IN THE REGION BUT I

KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF EFFORT TO

PROMOTE IT MORE.

>>CORY COPELAND: >>PAT

ECKLUND:

SO THE RATE MAY HAVE SLOWED DOWN

IN SOME AREAS BECAUSE OF THE

REVERSAL THAT PEOPLE ARE WORKING

SO HARD TO TRY TO EMBRACE,

CORRECT?

>>CORY COPELAND: YEAH, THOUGH,

I WILL SAY THOSE ARE RELATIVELY

LIMITED.

>>PAT ECKLUND: LIMITED?

>>CORY COPELAND: — PROJECTS.

>>PAT ECKLUND: YEAH. I THINK

THE RATE OF SUBSIDENCE, FROM

WHAT I KNEW YEARS AGO, WAS

INCREASING QUITE A BIT. AND

THERE WAS A LOT OF EFFORT TO TRY

TO REDUCE IT. BUT I KNOW THAT

THAT’S STILL A MAJOR ISSUE. THE

COMMENT WAS MADE ABOUT FLOOD

INSURANCE. FLOOD INSURANCE, I

KNOW, IS REALLY SUPER EXPENSIVE,

A LOT OF FOLKS THAT I KNOW IN

THE DELTA THAT MANAGE A LOT OF

THOSE ISLANDS, OR WHATEVER, THEY

MAY NOT NECESSARILY HAVE THE

FUNDS. IS THERE ANY FINANCIAL

SUPPORT FROM THE FEDERAL OR

STATE GOVERNMENT TO HELP

SUBSIDIZE THE COST OF THAT

INSURANCE FOR THEM? ESPECIALLY

IF THEY’RE DOING MORE PUBLIC

WORK OR WHATEVER ON THEIR LAND

MANAGEMENT. ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE ON THAT?

IT’S A POOR REGION.

>>MORGAN CHAU: YEAH. THAT’S A

REALLY GOOD QUESTION AND POINT.

AND I WILL — SO, WE KNOW — I

THINK IT’S A LITTLE BIT AROUND

20% OF RESIDENTS HAVE FLOOD

INSURANCE. SO IT IS REALLY

LOW.

AND IT’S EXPENSIVE. WE TRACK

FEMA’S PROGRAMS. I KNOW FEMA

DOES HAVE THE COMMUNITY RATING

SYSTEM. SO THAT’S AT A

COMMUNITY SCALE. YOU CAN

UNDERGO A LOT OF DIFFERENT

ACTIVITIES TO GET LOWER RATES.

I DON’T KNOW ABOUT A LOT OF

OTHER PROGRAMS AT THE FEDERAL

LEVEL. BUT WE ARE ALSO — WE

ARE ALSO TRACKING SOME OTHER

SMALLER SCALE EFFORTS TO GET

COMMUNITIES MORE PROTECTED.

KATHY SHAFER, WHO I THINK SHE IS

A POST DOC, MAY BE A PH.D. AT

UC DAVIS, DOES A LOT OF RESEARCH

RELATED TO FLOOD INSURANCE AND,

LIKE, FLOOD PREPAREDNESS IN THE

DELTA, AND SHE HAS BEEN WORKING

WITH THE COMMUNITY ISLETON THEY

CREATED A GEOLOGIC HAZARD

ABATEMENT DISTRICT WHICH IS A

WAY YOU CAN ACCESS MORE FUNDS TO

HELP WITH PREPAREDNESS SO IT’S

NOT JUST INSURANCE BUT INSURANCE

COULD BE A COMPONENT OF THAT.

>>PAT ECKLUND: ARE THERE

RESTORATION OF THE LEVEES ACTIVE

EFFORTS TO HELP STRENGTHEN AND

RESTORE THOSE LEVEES AS THERE

WAS IN THE PAST? OR HAS IT

DIMINISHED?

>>MORGAN CHAU: I’LL LET JEFF

>>JEFF HENDERSON: THERE ARE

ONGOING EFFORTS THAT CONTINUE,

THE STATE IS CONTINUING TO FUND

WHAT’S KNOWN AS THIS SUBVENTIONS

PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES MECHANISM

FOR MAINTENANCE AND

REHABILITATION OF THE LEVEES.

>>PAT ECKLUND: THAT’S GREAT.

I’M GLAD TO HEAR THAT.

THE CANAL S THERE AN EFFORT TO

LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT

GOES DOWN THE CANCEL TO SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA? SORE IS THAT

SOMETHING THAT’S PRETTY MUCH SET

IN STONE? OR DO YOU KNOW?

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: WHO

WANTS TO TAKE THAT QUESTION?

>>CORY COPELAND: WELL, DO YOU

WANT ME TO HOP IN? I SUSPECT

THEY DON’T WANT TO COMMENT ON IT

BECAUSE IT’S LIKELY TO COME

THROUGH THERE OFFICE AS

>>JEFF HENDERSON: CORY, GO

AHEAD.

>>PAT ECKLUND: I IMAGINE IT’S A

CONFLICTING QUESTION.

>>CORY COPELAND: THE CANAL IS

NOW THE DELTA BAY PROJECT BEING

PROPOSED BY DWR AND AS I

UNDERSTAND IT IS AROUND

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW RIGHT NOW.

I SUSPECT AT SOME POINT THAT

WILL GO BEFORE THE STEWARDSHIP

COUNCIL TO BE REVIEWED. AT THIS

POINT IT’S TO BE REVIEWED

PHASE.

SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE

OPERATIONS ARE, LIKE, HOW MUCH

WATER WOULD BE YIELD — I DON’T

THINK WE CAN COMMENT —

>>PAT ECKLUND: PROBABLY SHOWS

MY AGE. THANK YOU FOR

ADDRESSING THAT. MY LAST

QUESTION YOU TALK ABOUT THE

CHANGE OF LAND USE, I KNOW THAT

GIVEN MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IN

THE DELTA IS THAT THERE IS A LOT

OF FAMILIES THAT, YOU KNOW, SORT

OF, PASS ON THE PROPERTY DOWN

THROUGH THE DIFFERENT

GENERATIONS. HOW IS THAT BEING

ENCOURAGED? IS INCENTIVES OF

BUYING THEIR PROPERTY ONE OF THE

ISSUES? OR YOU HAVE REALLY

IDENTIFIED OTHER MECHANISMS

WHERE YOU CAN REALLY ENCOURAGE

THE — CHANGING THE USE WHICH IS

GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR A

LOT OF HOMEOWNER — LANDOWNERS?

>>MORGAN CHAU: YEAH I CAN START

MAYBE JEFF AND CORY CAN ADD.

THE DELTA’S AN INTERESTING PLACE

ESPECIALLY COMPARED TO THE BAY,

WHICH IS URBAN. PRIMARILY THE

DELTA HAS A LOT OF STRONG

DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS A LOT

OF THE LAND USE CHANGES THAT WE

EXPLORE FOR DELTA ADAPTS IS

LOOKING AT WHERE THERE IS

POTENTIALLY FARMLAND OR

ABANDONED FARMLAND THAT IS NOT

ACTIVE ANYMORE. LIKE YEAH IS

THERE LAND USE INCENTIVES FOR IT

TO BECOME SOMETHING ELSE. SO

LIKE PEAT SOILS THAT ARE EXPOSED

AND OXIDIZING, SUBSIDING, LIKE

IS IT FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE AN

OPTION TO WET THAT LAND, CAN IT

BE MANAGED, LIKE, COULD YOU GROW

RICE THERE. I THINK THOSE ARE

SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE

BEEN EXPLORED FROM THE

CONVERSATIONS WE HAD WITH

FARMERS THROUGHOUT THE DELTA

EVEN YOU KNOW DIFFERENT PARTS OF

THE DELTA HAVE THEIR DIFFERENT

CHALLENGES, SPECIFICALLY WITH

FARMING, FARMERS — SOME FARMERS

ARE OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, EXPLORING

DIFFERENT LAND USES. IT REALLY

IS A QUESTION OF FINANCIAL

FEASIBLE AND SOMETIMES WANTING

MORE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE. WE

PARTNERED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE IN THE

INTERVIEWS THAT WE CONDUCTED

BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF THESE

INCENTIVE PROGRAMS THEY PROVIDE

TO GROWERS, TO HELP THEM BE MORE

FINANCIALLY PROFITABLE. YEAH

THAT’S SOME OF THE TOPICS WE

HAVE EXPLORED.

>>PAT ECKLUND: GREAT. THANKS.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE

PRESENTATION, AND REALLY

APPRECIATE WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN

ABLE TO DO IN THE DELTA P THE

DELTA, FOR PEOPLE WHO DO NOT

KNOW, THE DELTA IS A VERY

SPECIAL PLACE. AND, REALLY

ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GET TO KNOW

IT. BECAUSE IT DOES DEFINITELY

HAS A TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON THE

WHOLE SAN FRANCISCO BAY. AND,

SO, JUST REALLY WANT TO

COMPLIMENT EVERYBODY WHO HAS

BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS. AND MY

HAT’S OFF TO ACCOMPLISHMENTS

THAT YOU HAVE BEEN ABLE TO

MAKE.

THANK YOU.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THANK YOU.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: CHAIR EISEN,

CAN I ASK A QUESTION? THIS IS

LARRY.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: OF

COURSE.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: MORGAN AND

JEFF GREAT TO SEE YOU, OF

COURSE. THE PROGRESS YOU ALL

HAVE MADE ON DELTA ADAPT IS

MARVELOUS. WE ALL LOOK AT IT

FROM THE WEST SIDE AND YOU’RE

FROM THE EAST SIDE, AND

THANKFULLY BETWEEN, WE HAVE

GRAPPLED WITH OVER THE LAST

COUPLE OF YEARS HOW YOU TAKE THE

STRATEGY AND START GETTING

TRACTION ON THE GROUND. WE HAVE

BAY ADAPT AND WE NOW HAVE THIS

THING CALLED SB272 WHICH REALLY

GIVES US A REAL PUSH TO ENSURE

WHAT BAY ADAPT DOES REALLY HAS

SOME REAL MAJOR IMPACT AND CAN

GET TRACTION. HOW HAVE YOU ALL

STARTED LOOKING AT IMPLEMENTING

THIS AND WORKING THROUGH THE

PROCESS OF HAVING TO WORK WITH

THE HEAVY WEIGHTS LIKE DWR AND

FOOD AND AG, AS WELL AS THE

INCREDIBLY WELL ENTRENCHED AND

WELL MEANING FOLKS WHO HAVE

OWNED LAND IN THE DELTA SINCE,

YOU KNOW, THE MID-1800’S, FOR

HEAVEN’S SAKE, AND THE LIKE. I

MEAN, THE NUMBER OF INTERESTS

THAT YOU ALL HAVE TO DEAL WITH

IS CERTAINLY AT LEAVE THE AS

LONG AS OURS.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN:

THAT’S A BIG QUESTION,

>>JEFF HENDERSON: YEAH. I’M

STILL THINKING. NO. THANK YOU,

LARRY. WE’RE JUST AT THE

INITIAL STAGES OF BEGINNING TO

THINK ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION, AND

ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING TO LEARN AS

MUCH AS POSSIBLE FROM THE

PATHWAYS THAT YOU ALL HAVE

CHARTED. I THINK ONE OF THE

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE

HAVE DISCUSSED IS REALLY

ENLISTING THE DELTA PLAN

INTER-AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION

COMMITTEE OR DPIIC WHICH IS

ESSENTIALLY A COMMITTEE FORMED

AND LARRY SITS ON THIS

COMMITTEE, ON BEHALF OF BCDC, AS

WELL. IT’S A COMMITTEE FORMED

AT THE AGENCIES THAT ARE CHARGED

IN THE DELTA PLAN WITH VARIOUS

DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES FOR

IMPLEMENTATION. AND WE’RE

REALLY LOOKING TO USE THE DPIIC

AS A PLACE TO BRING AND OF THESE

RECOMMENDATIONS AND START

UNPACKING THEM. AND LOOKING TO

WORK WITH ALL THE INDIVIDUAL

AGENCIES TO IDENTIFY WHAT

RESOURCES THEY MAY BE ABLE TO

BRING TO THE TABLE, WHAT LESSONS

LEARNED THAT THEY HAVE FROM

VARIOUS DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES,

AND REALLY TO USE THAT AS A

PLACE TO CONSOLIDATE THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF DELTA ADAPT.

THAT’S SOME OF OUR EARLY

THINKING, IN COMBINATION WITH,

THEN, MOVING TOWARD A BIT MORE

OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

STRUCTURE THAT REALLY HELPS TO

SOLIDIFY THE ROLES AND

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE VARIOUS

AGENCIES, AS THEY RELATE TO THE

SPECIFIC STRATEGIES. MORGAN, IS

THERE MORE YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD

TO THAT?

>>MORGAN CHAU: NO. YEAH. I

THINK OUR REGULAR CHECK-INS WITH

BCDC, SINCE WE’RE DOING SIMILAR

N A LOT OF WAYS, ADAPTING A WORK

WE’RE OPERATING WITH DIFFERENT

ACTORS AND DIFFERENT SETTINGS

BUT WE CAN LEARN A LOT FROM EACH

OTHER, JUST I THINK THE OTHER

THING ABOUT THE DELTA WE HAVE

IDEAS FOR THE

MOU STRUCTURE AT THE DPIIC LEVEL

BUT ALSO THERE ARE THINGS LIKE

ISLETON MODEL FOR FLOOD RISK AND

PREPAREDNESS THAT CANNOT BE DONE

YOU KNOW AROUND ISLETON IDEAS

THAT CORE MENTIONED SHERMAN I

LAND EXPERIMENTS AND

EXPERIENCE AROUND SOMETHING

LIKE THAT WE REPLICATE THINGS

THAT ARE ALREADY HAPPENING IN

OTHER LEVEL AS YOU KNOW AT THE

HIGHER LEVEL.

>>CLERK, SIERRA PETERSON:

>>SPEAKER: WANTED TO FOLLOW UP

ON A COMMENT THAT I APPRECIATED

I ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN

THE BAY A COUPLE OF WAYS THAT

ARE CLEAR TO ME WITH DELTA

PLANNING AND DIFFERENT

ADAPTATION IN THE BAY PLAN THE

TWO ARE DIFFERENT FIRST IS THE

DELTA IS A DIFFERENT WATER

SUPPLY SOURCE FROM OTHER PARTS

OF THE STATE THAT MEANS THAT

WATER CONSERVATION IN SAN DIEGO

CAN BE CONSIDERED PART OF A

DELTA ADAPTATION STRATEGY.

THAT’S NOT EASY. IT’S ALSO TRUE

THAT THE FLOOD RISK IN THE DELTA

IS DRIVEN TO A SUBSTANTIAL PART

BY FLOOD COMING IN FROM AND

WATER MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES,

UPSTREAM FROM THE DELTA. THE SO

FLOOD MANAGEMENT UPSTREAM FROM

THE DELTA IS AN IMPORTANT PART

OF PROTECTING COMMUNITIES LIKE

STOCKTON. I WANT TO ASK HOW

YOU’RE THINKING ABOUT THOSE

BOUNDARY CHALLENGES. ON THE ONE

HAND ARE YOU INCLUDING UPSTREAM

FLOOD MANAGEMENT MULTI-BENEFIT

PROJECTS UPSTREAM AS A FLOOD

ADAPTATION STRATEGY IN THE DELTA

AND TO WHAT EXTENT ARE YOU GOING

TO BE FOCUSING ON THE PHYSICAL

SAFETY OF THE DELTA, DELTA

AGRICULTURE AND SO FORTH

COMPARED TO WATER MANAGEMENT

BENEFITS WHERE THE DELTA COUNCIL

MAY HAVE A HARD TIME MOVING THE

NEEDLE? IT’S A DIFFERENT

PICTURE AND MORE COMPLICATED IN

SOME WAYS THAN THE WORK WE’RE

DOING IN THE BAY.

MORTGAGE.

>>SPEAKER: GOOD POINT

ESPECIALLY FOR FLOOD RISK

REDUCTION PROPOSED STRATEGIES

AND AROUND WATER SUPPLY

RELIABILITY A LOT OF WHAT NEEDS

TO HAPPEN IN THE DELTA TOUCH ON

YOU KNOW UPSTREAM DON STREAM

ACTIVITIES IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY

HEALTH SAFETY AND WELL-BEING

THAT’S A LITTLE BIT FOCUSED TO

COMMUNITIES THAT LIVE WITHIN OR

ADJACENT TO OUR DELTA BOUNDARIES

YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT AND IT’S

INCLUDED IN OUR STRATEGIES.

RIGHT NOW THE DRAFT PLAN IT DOES

IN SOME WAYS LOOK LIKE IT

MASSIVE MENU OF STRATEGIES. WE

HAVE DONE SOME — INITIAL

PRIORITIZATION IN TERMS OF, LIKE

I SAID, LIKE WHAT WE REALLY FEEL

NEEDS TO HAPPEN FIRST, WHAT

COULD HAPPEN WITH EXISTING FUNDS

THEN THERE IS ALSO THAT FILTER

WHERE IT COMES IN AND GOES WELL

WHEN’S FEASIBLE WITHIN OUR

CONTROL WHAT CAN WE LEAD WHAT

ARE OUR PARTNERS WILLING TO

LEAD, WHAT ARE WE TRACKING THAT

IS ALREADY KIND OF HAPPENING BUT

WE WANT TO HAPPEN MORE. SO, I

THINK THERE IS A LOT OF

DIFFERENT LEVELS AT WHICH WE CAN

ENGAGE ESPECIALLY WHEN WE

TALKING ABOUT STRATEGIES OUTSIDE

OF THE DELTA. BUT, YEAH, SO

IT’S CHALLENGING IT MAKE GOOD

POINT AND WE’RE TRYING TO THINK

ABOUT IT TO THE BEST OF OUR

ABILITIES. JEFF DID YOU WANT TO

ADD?

>>JEFF HENDERSON: COMMISSIONER

NELSON, YOUR QUESTION ABOUT

BOUNDARY ISSUES MADE ME — AS DO

A NUMBER OF THINGS, REMINDED ME

THAT THE DELTA STEWARDSHIP

COUNCIL IS ACTUALLY A STATEWIDE

AGENCY THAT REPRESENTS STATEWIDE

INTERESTS AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE

DELTA. SO, YES, WE DO NEED TO

BE CONSIDERING THINGS LIKE WATER

CONSERVATION IN SAN DIEGO, AND

HOW THAT AFFECTS, IN TURN, THE

AMOUNT OF WATER PUMPED THROUGH

THE DELTA, AND IN TURN, THE

AMOUNT OF WATER STORED IN A

RESERVOIR UPSTREAM. SO, THESE

ARE THINGS THAT WE ARE VERY

AWARE OF. I THINK, DELTA

ADAPT ITSELF DOES PAY A

CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ATTENTION

TO THE DELTA ITSELF, AND IF WE

HAD ONE OF OUR OWN

SELF-CRITIQUES OF THE WEEK IS

PROBABLY THAT IT DOESN’T DO AS

MUCH AS IT COULD TO ADDRESS SOME

OF THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE

HAPPENING OUTSIDE OF DELTA TO

AFFECT THE HEALTH IN THE DELTA.

I DO, THOUGH, UNDERSTAND THAT

THE STRATEGIES, AS MORGAN

MENTIONED, THE STRATEGIES, WHERE

POSSIBLE, DO RECOMMEND

ACTIVITIES THAT OCCUR UPSTREAM

OR DOWNSTREAM FROM THE DELTA,

THAT ARE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE

CLIMATE BENEFITS THAT WE’RE

SEEKING IN THE DELTA.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND:

>>SPEAKER: JUST ONE LAST

THOUGHT GIVEN THE BREADTH OF

ADAPTATION ACTIONS THAT ARE

RELEVANT TO THE DELTA IT’S GOING

TO BE IMPORTANT FOR THE CAN ONLY

TO THINK THROUGH THE AREAS WHERE

YOU FOLKS REALLY ARE GOING TO

DRIVE THE DEBATE FORWARD AND

REALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE THAT

YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE A REALLY

BIG BROAD ADAPTATION LIST.

OR QUESTIONS REGARDING THE

DELTA ADAPT PRESENTATION? ALL

RIGHT.

THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO HELPED

ME GET THROUGH THIS ALMOST

ENTIRELY VIRTUAL PRESENTATION.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: AND

COMMISSION MEETING. WE ONE

OTHER ITEM. AND THAT IS

ADJOURNMENT. DO I HAVE A MOTION

TO ADJOURN? BARRY, THANK YOU.

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.