HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07131993 - WC.1 WCA
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
FROM: WATER COMMITTEE Costa
SUPERVISOR SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK �ur"' ty
SUPERVISOR TOM TORLAKSON
DATE: JULY 13, 1993
SUBJECT: REPORTS ON THE SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PROJECT COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION
AND MANAGEMENT PLAN; SHELL OIL SPILL LITIGATION TRUSTEE COMMITTEE
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Endorse the overall goals and process established for the San
Francisco Estuary Project Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan for the Bay-Delta Estuary, by adoption of the
Resolution of Support.
2 . Authorize the Chair to sign a letter to William Travis, Chair
of the Shell Oil Spill Litigation Trustee Committee,
indicating the Board's preference for remaining oil spill
mitigation funds to be spent within the County, and requesting
his presence at a future Water Committee meeting.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): xx -�� OR lsk��
Supervisor Sunne W. McPeak, Chair Supervisor Tom Torlakson
ACTION OF BOARD ON 13 4 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _ OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY :THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Roberta Goulart (510/646-2071) ATTESTED Q,4 3 y9.3
cc: Community Development Dept. (CDD) PHI BA 'HELOR, CLERK OF
County Administrator's office THEVBOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY �`� , DEPUTY
RG:rw
wa2Abo\7-13-93.wc1
Reports on SF Estuary Project
Shell Oil Spill Litigation
Continued - Page Two
BACKGROUNDJREASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
1. On May 26, 1993, the San Francisco Estuary Project (SFEP)
requested a general endorsement from the Board on the recently
completed Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
(COMP) for the Bay-Delta Estuary. The culmination of 5 years
of effort, the Plan lists approximately 150 proposed actions
in categories such as aquatic resources, wildlife, wetlands,
water use, pollution prevention and reduction, dredging and
waterway modification, land use, public involvement and
education, and research and monitoring. The CCMP recognizes
the import of a healthy resource to a healthy economy,
recommending plans and programs to address threats to
estuarine resources.
As indicated, the SFEP is requesting support for the overall
goals and established process, not full agreement with each
and every recommendation. This Plan will go to the Governor,
then to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency for their concurrence, prior to an implementation
phase.
Generally, the CCMP is consistent with established County
policy, although some CCMP programs go beyond the scope of
current County recommendations or requirements. The Water
Committee recommends CCMP endorsement, with amendment of the
Resolution to reflect the ability of the County to debate
relative merit of specific recommendations as implementation
strategies go forward. The resolution has been amended to
reflect this consideration.
2 . The Community Development Department provided to the Water
Committee at the June 28, 1993 meeting, an article detailing
the recent purchase of Cargill, Inc. lands in the north San
Pablo Bay area by resource management agencies. The purchase
was significant, primarily because of the large acreage
involved which will be converted to tidal wetlands, and the
extremely low cost of this acreage. Approximately 16 square
miles of area has been sold for $10 million (recent appraisal
of $35 million) . The Shell Oil Spill Litigation Trustee
Committee has committed substantial funds to this purchase.
Although the purchase of Cargill lands seems to be ideal in
many. aspects, the Water Committee has questions regarding
this, as well as other purchases with which the Oil Spill
Committee has been involved. For this reason, the Water
Committee will invite William Travis to a regular (or special)
meeting of the Water Committee. The Water Committee also
wishes to communicate the long-standing County position and
once again request that the remainder of the oil spill funds
be spent within the County, as the bulk of the spill impacts
occurred here.
RG:rw
wa2:\bo\7-13-93.wc1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order On July 13, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION NO. 93/ 441
ABSTAIN: None
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA ESTUARY
Whereas, The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County recognizes the importance of a clean San Francisco
Estuary to the region's health,the commercial and recreational value of the San Francisco Estuary and its economic
vitality;and
Whereas, The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County recognizes the serious threat to its cherished Bay and
Delta from environmental degradation; and
Whereas, After more than five years of in-depth study by the San Francisco Estuary Project, a cooperative effort
that has involved the active participation of diverse environmental, social and economic interests, a Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP)has been written and thoroughly reviewed which contains nearly 150
recommended actions to protect and enhance the water quality and living resources of the Estuary; and
Whereas, The members of the San Francisco Estuary Project's Management Committee, the primary decision-
making body,unanimously approved the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan at their final meeting
on March 31, 1993; and
Whereas, The members of the San Francisco Estuary Project,recognizing that the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary
is one of the nation's greatest resources, have adopted the following vision statement for the CCMP:
"We, the people of California and the San Francisco Bay-Delta region, believe the
San Francisco Estuary is an international treasure and that our ongoing stewardship
is critical to its preservation, restoration and enhancement. Acknowledging the importance
of the Estuary to our environmental and economic well-being, we pledge to achieve and
maintain an ecologically diverse and productive natural estuarine system;" and
Whereas, The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County supports the Plan as a guide to development of refined
actions for implementation, and reserves the right and opportunity to debate specific recommendations; now,
therefore be it
Resolved, That the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County requests that the Honorable Pete Wilson,
Governor of the State of California, concur with and that Ms. Carol Browner, Director of the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, approve the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan as soon as
possible.
I hereby certify that this is a true and cor;act
an action taken and entered on the minu',es of the
Board of Supervisors o the date shown.
ATTESTED: _ /.I /S y3
PHIL BATCHE R,C k of the Board t
Of Supervisors and County Administrator
1
RG:evs
c:roberta.est .Denuty
Orig. Dept.: Community Development Department
Contact: Roberta Goulart 646-2071
RESOLUTION NO. 93/441
JU N — i G — V :3 W E D 1 0 3 7 S u r v S u n n M o P c a k P 0 2
Matting Address:
P.O.Box 2050
an Francisco Estuary Project Oakland,CA
50
04604.2050
(510)484-7990
Fax. (510)464-7970
RECEIVED
street address:
MAY 2 7199 MB rocente
` 101 ern Sveet
.Oakland,CA 04607-4756
May 26, 1993
Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak
Attn. Valerie Brandt
2301 Stanwell Ct .
Concord, CA 94520
Dear Sunne:
Subsequent to my visit to your Board last year our Management
Committee has given final approval to a Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan. This plan now must go to the
Governor for his concurrence, before submittal to the EPA
Administrator in Washington. We hope your Board will support our
effort, in the form of a resolution asking Governor Wilson and
Administrator Browner to concur in the plan.
Concurrence indicates support for the overall goals and unique
process we have established, not necessarily approval of all the
nearly 150 proposed actions. Our next step will be the
Implementation phase that begins once adoption is complete. (To
Indicate the breadth of support on our Management Committee, I
have attached a list of members who endorsed the plat} on March
31, 1993. No one dissented. )
We hope for your Board 's endorsement, and to this end have
attached a draft resolution. Should you so request, we could
send a representative when this matter is on your agenda.
Thank you for your continuing interest and support.
Very truly yours,
William S. Tuohir
Public Information officer
Tel. (510) 848-6620
Attachments: Draft resolution
List of signatories
An Environmental Management Program of:
U.S. Envirorunentat Protection Agency- Region ix State of Cafitomia Association of Bay Area Oovernrnents
-TU'N — 1 6 - 93 WED 1 0 : 36 Sur- v Smnne McP %-- aak P - 03
is
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA ESTUARY
Whereas, The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County recog-
nizes the importance of a clean San Francisco Estuary to the
region's health, the commercial and recreational value of the San
Francisco Estuary and its economic vitality; and
Whereas, The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County recog-
nizes the serious threat to its cherished Say and Delta from
environmental degradation; and
Whereas, After more than five years of in-depth study by the San........:.
: ;i* Francisco.. Estuary Project, a cooperative effort- that has involve - '
the active participation of diverse environmental, social and
economic interests, a Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plan (CCMP) has been written and thoroughly reviewed which con-
tains nearly 150 recommended actions to protect and enhance the
water quality and living resources of the Estuary; and
Whereas, The members of the San Francisco Estuary Project's
Management Committee, the primary decision-making body, unani-
mously approved the Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plan at their final meeting on March 31, 1993; and
Whereas, The members of the- San Francisco Estuary Project, recog-
nizing that the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary is one of the
nation's greatest resources, have adopted the following vision
statement for the CCMP:
"We, the people of California and the San Francisco
Bay-Delta region, believe the San Francisco Estuary is an
international treasure and that our ongoing stewardship is
critical to its preservation, restoration and enhancement.
Acknowledging the importance of the Estuary to our
environmental and economic well-being, we pledge .to
r achieve and maintain an ecologically diverse and
productive natural estuarine system;" and
Whereas, The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County supports
the Plan as a guide to development of refined actions for ample-
mentation; now, therefore be it
Resolved, That the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County
requests that the Honorable Pete Wilson, Governor of the State of
California, concur with and that -Ms. Carol Browner, Director of
the United States Environmental Protection Agency, approve the
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan as soon as possi-
ble.
i
JUN - 161 - 93 WED 19 : 39 Sunnae MaPecxk P . 04
SIGNATORIES APPROVING THE COMPREHENSIVE
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Bill DuBois (CA Farm Bureau); John Fraser (Association of CA Water
Agencies); Kassandra Fletcher (Building Industry Association); Roger
James.(Santa Clara Valley.Water District); Ellen Johnck (Bay Planning
Coalition); Herb Stone (BALIA); Pete Williams (Bay Area Council); Pal
Hegedus (Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce); Greg Karras
(CBE); Richard Oba (United Anglers); Arthur Feinstein (Citizens
{+ Committee to Complete the Refuge); Doug Sobey (Marin Audubon);.Zeke
Grader (Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association); Herb Von
Colditz (Pacific Interclub Yachting Association); Totton Heffelfinger
(Sierra Club); Marc Holmes (Save S.F. Bay Association); Bill Gaines (CA
Waterfowl Assn.); Dave Fleming (ABAG); Arliss Ungar (League of
Women Voters); Terri Williamson (Contra Costa Cities); Michele Pla'
(City and County of SF); Lori Griggs (Committee for Water Policy
Consensus); Dave Brent (City of Sacramento); Adele Della Santina (San
Mateo County Council of Cities); Steve Shaffer (CA Dept. of Food &
Agriculture); Pete Chadwick (CA Dept. of Fish and Game); Bob Potter
(CA Dept. of Water Resources); Bill Crooks (Central Valley Regional
Water Quality Control Board); Ed Anton (State Water Resources Control
Board); Ron Kukulka (CA Coastal Conservancy); Steve Ritchie (S.F. Bay
Regional Water Quality Control Board); Steve McAdam (S.F. Bay
Conservation & Development Commission); Lt. Col. Cardoza (Army Corps
of Engineers); Ken Lentz (US Bureau of Reclamation);Jim McKevitt (US
Fish & Wildlife Service); Harry Seraydarian (US EPA); Jim Haussener
(Public Advisory Committee Chair); and Tom Wakeman (Technical
Advisory Committee Chair).
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: September 23, 1992
TO: Water Committee
Supervisor Tom Torlakson, Chair
Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak
FROM: Roberta Goulart, Staff.
SUBJECT: SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PROJECT COMPREHENSIVE
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
In 1988 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency established the San Francisco
Estuary Project as part of their National Estuary Program. The Program is a five-year
effort to address Management of the Bay-Delta Estuary, addressing difficult problems
such as water quality, biological resources, pollutants,freshwater diversion and flows,
dredging and land use issues.
The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan summarizes significant study
which has taken place by the estuary project and other entities. The public draft
document is summarized below, and comments will be received by the estuary project
through September 29, 1992. Areas of concern are broken down in the Report as
follows; aquatic resources, wildlife, wetlands, water use, pollution prevention and
reduction, dredging and waterway modification, land use management, public
involvement and education, and research and monitoring. The program further
specifies an action plan, implementation strategies. Funding issues are outlined, with
additional information to be provided in later reports.
Aauatic Resources
This project calls for a Comprehensive Plan for management of aquatic resources, and
related environmental documentation of this Plan. The Plan would address long-term
water quality and flow standards, implementation and regional monitoring.
Development regulations are suggested which would prohibit introduction of new
species into the estuary, control existing non-native species, control poaching and
mud harvesting regulations, in addition to monitoring of rare, endangered and other
status species, and implementation of recovery plans. The report suggests the
possibility of a habitat conservation plan, and advocates methods to control fish
entrainment via increased screen efficiency and other means. The report actions
detail the protection of marshes and stream habitat, the reduction of dredging
activities, the provision of in-stream flows and temperatures to enhance fish
SF Estuary Project CCIVu- -Page 2-
populations, completion of the San Joaquin River Management Plan, and the need to
seek damages from impacts on trust resources from spills and other discharges.
A minority report on aquatic resources indicates that above and beyond actions
specified, the need for additional freshwater flows is indicated. Minority members
advocate inclusion of an additional item which calls for immediate implementation of
flow standards that assure adequate flows in spring and early summer to achieve
goals previously mentioned.
Agencies responsible and funding provisions for the above-mentioned
recommendations are not included in this Draft Report.
Wildlife Program
Recommended actions include the preservation, creation, and/or restoration of large
contiguous expanses of tidal marsh and adjacent upland areas for endangered species
such as the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and the California Clapper Rail. Completion
of the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge and a Comprehensive Management
Plan for this refuge is suggested. The acquisition of degraded or destroyed wetlands
is recommended, with an increase of 50% by the year 2010. The identification and
conversion of non-wetland areas to riparian or wildlife habitat is encouraged. In
addition, bio-diversity enhancement, a wildlife habitation restoration plan, predator
control programs, as well as management plans for listed species are encouraged.
Also, continued hunting regulations for the Aleutian Canada Goose and
implementation of a captive breeding program for the Clapper Rail are recommended.
Agencies listed for responsibility as regards wildlife recommendations include Federal
and State agencies as well as the East Bay Regional Park District, Bay Conservation
and Development Commission (BCDC), other public land management agencies, and
other environmental groups. Local government participation is recommended for the
predator control program recommendation.
Wetlands Management Program
Wetlands recommendations include a regional wetlands plan for the estuary, with
focused cooperative preservation for specific areas as part of the first phase.
Improvements to the wetlands regulatory system as part of a comprehensive state '
program are proposed. Regulations would include a no net loss policy, a consistent
wetlands definition (USF &WS or modified Corps),wetland alteration policies, and the
establishment of sufficient buffer areas. The investigation into State assumption of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is proposed, and if determined to be feasible and
advantageous,facilitation toward that end is recommended. Implementation methods
would include filling gaps in achieving consistency within regional programs. Regional
SF Estuary Project CCI, -Page 3- .
Water Quality Control Board Basin plans could include policy affirming wetlands as
waters of the State, and consistent wetlands definition for permit authority language,
as well as wetlands anti-degradation policy. In addition, amendment to the
McAteer/Petris Act to give BCDC a mandate for wetland and wildlife habitat
protection is suggested. Also proposed are real estate point of sale disclosures.
This program is consistent with County General Plan language as it regards no net loss
policy, as well as the avoidance, minimization, and/or compensatory mitigation
requirements, although policy contained as part of this report goes above and beyond
policy contained the County General Plan. Compensatory mitigation is recommended
to be uniform and consistent, and a memorandum of agreement between agencies in
the Estuary area is recommended. Preferred on-site mitigation, with the same value
and function and greater acreage,which includes adjacent upland habitat is proposed.
Mitigation should occur prior to or concurrent with wetland fill activities. Mitigation
for destruction of wetlands should be implemented on currently non-wetland areas.
Mitigation sites should permanently guarantee open space and wildlife habitat.
Mitigation banking for small fills is recommended; mitigation should include the
following: mitigation in the same segment of the Estuary, the mitigation bank is
authorized only after it is functioning successfully, and only if it meets criteria in the
Clean Water Act, Section 404.
Amendments to the Clean Water Act during reauthorization are proposed,and include
adding wetlands to water language, regulating dredge, draining, destruction or
removal of vegetation, as well as placement of piles and floating structures. Permit
applications would follow biological recommendations from the Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Marine Fishery Service, unless findings are made.
Nationwide Permit 26 for wetland filling in areas less than 10 acres would be
eliminated, and Nationwide Permit 13 for bank stabilization would be changed so the
lineal limit would be significantly less than 500 feet. Regulation of vernal pools would
be done via individual permits rather than Nationwide Permits. Corps recognition of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act jurisdiction would require automatic review
of Section 404. Additional parameters for specific guidance when NEPA and/or CEQA
Is required would be included as well.
Wetland acquisition programs would be expanded and/or created. Prbgrams would
Include Federal funding, purchases through land exchanges, expansion of refuges,
conservation easements, life estate programs, and inheritance trusts. Benefits of salt
pond operations would be supported. In addition, encouragement of wetland
protection bylaws (i.e., model language) would be researched.
A great number of State, Federal, regional (including a Delta regional authority), as
well as local government, would be required to implement these provisions.
I
SF Estuary Project CCI -Page 4-
Water
Water Use Program
Recommendations include reclamation and reuse feasibility studies, adoption of water
reclamation ordinances, public education programs, state water quality standards and
basin plans would encouraging reclamation and reuse, and use of existing and new
facilities for delivery of recycled water are recommended. Other issues addressed
impacts of brine discharge, and water conservation methods and facilities, (including
agricultural, conservation, and conjunctive use). Feasibility studies for water
conservation are outlined, including study of island reservoirs. New groundwater
management mechanisms, as well as legal and regulatory mechanisms, to increase
available freshwater for instream use and water supply are outlined. Further
negotiations with the Federal government for CVP control is also recommended.
Pollution Prevention
Included in this section are recommendations for establishment of a Pollution
Prevention Program, including specific goals to reduced discharges,reduced toxic use,
and other source reduction mechanisms. Requirements of local government include
institutional and financial changes to focus on pollution, a comprehensive strategy to
reduce pesticides, and improvements to point and non-point program regulatory
systems. Other programs recommended to be handled via the California Legislature
as well as State, Federal, regional agencies, and water districts include: (1)
environmental audits; (2) improvement of agricultural practices; (3) reduction in
selenium agricultural discharge; (4) control of sources of accumylated selenium and
mercury; (5) better water quality objectives; and (6) other methods to control and
reduce pollutant loadings. Improved management control of agricultural sources of
toxics could include legally responsible drainage entities. Instream toxicity programs,
reduction in toxic loadings from mines, model environmental compliance programs,
and expediting clean-up of hot spots and existing contamination which threatens fish
and wildlife as well as our food supply.
Dredging and Waterway Modification
This program would primarily be handled through the long-term management strategy
(LTMS) program and the Army Corps of Engineers. Included are recommendations for
studies, research and modeling of sediment dynamics, sediment quality objectives,
and a dredging program which is comprehensive in nature. Included, as part of this
plan, would be development of land use procedures to promote reuse of dredged
materials for wetland restoration or creation of private programs; included is potential
use for levee restoration and landfill cover, as well as upland building material. The
identification of disposal options, cost, cost estimates and other options as well as
evaluation for retention and removal of old structures is addressed. Additionally,
modeling and field studies to determine saltwater intrusion is included, with
SF Estuary Project CC• -Page 5- • ,
determination of areas subject to flooding and erosion, implementation of waterway
modification to protect shoreline areas from flooding and erosion, and a program to
acquire diked historic baylands as buffer areas for the coastal flooding and sea level
rise.
Land Use
A variety of programs are suggested which outline local government responsibility.
These programs include watershed protection plans, an integrated framework to
protect the estuary (identification and development of consistent policy), promotion
of compact, contiguous development, comprehensive watershed planning, and
development and implementation of guidelines for site planning and best management
practices (i.e., erosion control, pollution prevention, buffer areas, construction and
design standards, etc.). Other programs include amendment of CEQA guidelines
which would require criteria in evaluation of cumulative impacts, public education,
training workshops, economic incentives and funding mechanisms for restoration and
a program to improve communication among interests groups.
Public Involvement and Education Program
Recommended for implementation by Friends of the San Francisco Estuary, several -
recommended actions are listed as follows: opportunity for citizen involvement in
Implementation and support of CCMP programs, use as a resource to government
agencies, central collection and distribution of information regarding the estuary,
model projects,support programs,multi-cultural understanding,organization of a state
of the estuary conference, increased public opportunities, citizen monitoring programs
and hands on restoration activities. Also included is the evaluation of the potential
of an estuary conservation corps, an organization framework supported by public and
private funds for public involvement and education, and to ensure research continues.
Research/Monitoring Program
An Estuary Research Institute for coordination and reporting of monitoring and
research is proposed to be established by the Aquatic Habitat Institute, Regional
Water Quality Control Board, etc. In addition, other actions include funding requests
for a continuing program of regional research enhancement.
Iml2lementation of Program
Many recommendations made as part of this report also designate an agency, or
agencies, to oversee various actions. Implementation would also occur through an
SF Estuary Project CCh.. -Page 6-
oversight entity, detailed through five different options discussed further in the Report.
Legislation was proposed to help implement the CCMP, introduced by Nancy Pelosi
(HR 5546) in July, 1992.
Flindin
Financing was not described in detail as part of this report, but several categories of
funding to be explored are included. Included as potential funding sources are water
diversion fees, real estate transfer surcharges, and an urban water users surcharge.
In addition, consideration of bond measures where funding has not been utilized will
be considered. An estuary investment fund for coordination and pooling of funds is
discussed.
RG:gms
ws2:SFwtwy.P1n
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: June 15, 1993
TO: Water Committee
FROM: Harvey E. Bragdo
Director of Com ity D opment
SUBJECT: Shell Oil Spill itigation Trustee Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the County send the attached letter to the Shell Oil Litigation Settlement Trustee Committee
supporting their recent Cargill Inc. lands acquisition but asldng that all additional trust funds be
reserved for use in this County.
BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION
As a result of the Shell Oil oil spill in 1988, nearly eleven million dollars was placed into a fund
to restore damaged lands from the spill and to provide acquisition of wetlands or potential
wetlands. This money is administered by the Shell Oil Spill Litigation Settlement Trustee
Committee which is made of regulatory or local agencies that were affected by the spill.
The County has previously urged that these funds be expended within this County since these
are mitigation funds to offset impacts from the oil spill in the Martinez area.
The opportunity to acquire sixteen square miles of Cargill Inc. lands in Napa and Solano
Counties is an opportunity acquisition which couldn't be passed up and it is understandable that
available monies including a portion of the Shell Oil Spill Mitigation funds were utilized to
assure this opportunity was not lost.
The remaining funds should, however, be committed to use within Contra Costa County. It is
recommended that the attached letter should be sent to the Shell Oil Spill Mitigation Trustee
Committee expressing these views.
Attachment
HEB:JWC:aw
MSir,CWtM=.meM
The Board of Supervisors Contra CPh
lerkoahehBoard
Costa and
County Administration Building County Administrator
651 Pine St., Room 106 c51o�646-2371
Martinez, California 94553-1290 County
Tom Powers,1st District
Jeff Smith,2nd District ce L
Gayle Bishop.3rd District j 1.
� \
Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District
Tom Torlakson,5th District o - ;s
(510) 646-2035u,,;,;�,
'4 (OUNr
June 9, 1993
Mr. William Travis
Shell Marsh Litigation Fund Committee
c/o San Francisco Bay Conservation &
Development Commission
30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 2011
San Francisco, CA 94102-8080
Dear Mr. Travis:
We read in the newspaper about the significant acquisition of approximately 10,000 acres of
Cargill Inc. landholdings in Napa and Solano Counties. The acquisition of such a significant
acreage of open space is something which we all can support. It was, however, somewhat
surprising to note that the majority of the local financing was the Shell Marsh Mitigation monies
which were generated due to legal settlements for the oil spill which occurred in the Martinez
area of Contra Costa County.
t
As you will recall, our Board has consistently urged use of these funds to be expended in
proximity to the spill location.
We strongly urge that the remainder of the Shell Oil Spill Mitigation funds be reserved for
improvements and land acquisition located along the Contra Costa County shoreline. We also
hope that the agencies on the Shell Marsh Mitigation Fund Committee will remember that this
acquisition was accomplished with funds from Contra Costa County and when other grant
monies become available this County will be in line for additional funding consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Tom Torlakson, Chairman
Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors
TTUWC:aw
aasvnaYVis.hr
. p � eo o4pm �`c~ p i
oo
o p' o ee c "dm M °�° m b0
01• � p' p •'"m p On p dC
goo aSolORMVC,
s r m r'' ft
a l7!
OR rKrza ape 60
OGrpO •�
R.l�C m
m R .m A arr 7 _ -f
mn
SAY. Salt Firm Agrees to Dead � ��I alg os!v a � 1111111111,6
From Page A1S -.. .. . , n p .
Corgill aoozed from Shell's Martinez refin- 3
be sold ! 1 to
ery into Suisun and San Pablo
bays o�2 j j �'+ 6 /■�
"When the fund was establish-
MILES
ed, 1,000 acres looked like a very ,j e H
ambitious target," Travis said. Napa
CD
" o
But through this public-private a.
partnership with Cargill Salt, we
have the potential to exceed our zq ou�i a o
goal by almost tenfold. I don't - ISS . >~ o n•
think we'll have another chance
like this for another half-century." - O
37 ■ �° :404 fie' ft
The natural-resources fund I io p,o F
will provide a substantial part of t r'M p g m
the purchase price for the land, It, g °°aee d.
with more money expected from Detai)area 12 c •e F. : Olimp
the California Wildlife Conserva- Vallejo 2 p,',o d°
tion Board, the California State A a Web
«.
Lands Commission and the Califor-
nia State Coastal Conservancy, ;
The site,about 10,000 acres,In- :: �
eludes more than 85 percent of Creek o �o Pis �, O
eo Wain Antioch
Cargill's solar salt-makng opera- ocisco' 24 MILES
titins in the North Bay. Cargill; $°�' oa� 680 « c c
which has harvested salt shut sontheg • . 880 R a p ° .
North Bay since the1950s, franc o' seo &I. E, n O O
down its plant in 1990 when the 101 µAl, 'u �Flayward P
company lost its sole customer, .t
Dow Chemical.The North Bay site erueoweiF cRnoruc
�� O
Gem
represents about a fourth of Car-
gill salt-harvesting operations in �,it as a breeding ground or ati a
the bay,most of which are in Red-
stopover,Johnson said. a,
wood City and Newark. � , ��� -. ' � � p.�� � - �
After searching for new busi- After the sale is complete the 3{ «. .» LA
land will be turned over to a allte F
ness for three years without sue- 1. * m o e Q CL
cess,Cargill apparently was eager .agency to b named later, which � O 1 p'°° ��� � a; _`3
to sell the land for wildlife uses. manag
-"Part of what appealed to us "In 10 years I would hope we 1 _ Cr
about this sale to the Shell Trustee . will see a lot more intertidal wet —� _ o, y g O
Committee is that this is'a.huge lands up there," Travis said:
piece of property," said Cargill's "There will still be some salt
Johnson. "We thought it made ponds, but also a lot more wild- Eiji more sense to turn it over to an fowl.To put it in a personal way,I
organization that will eventually have a 2-year-old daughter. My o .
manage it as wildlife habitat." dream is she can take her grand-.
The property is unique for the child there and find it a wild , t= a -- » ata••
wide variety of fish and birds that place,"
:;;i
TJ m � AO � Z /
' ppb
tog
fl goo
oSn
Ck
>r
P m � From CL