Next week’s MCSD meeting

Next week’s meeting of the McKinleyville Community Services District Board of Directors looks like it could be a sleepy one, but you never know.

A full meeting packet is available for download at the MCSD’s website at: http://www.mckinleyvillecsd.com/

Among the items on the agenda is a new “right of entry” agreement with the McKinleyville Skate Park Committee. This would give the non-profit two more years to come up with the money and build the skate park at Pierson Park near the Sheriff’s Office.

The MCSD will also consider hiring a consultant for as much as $36,000 to study ways to bring the district in compliance with new standards for copper in its treated wastewater.

The meeting starts at 7 p.m. Wednesday, June 16 at Azalea Hall, 1620 Pickett Road, McKinleyville.

Decrease in our fog?

From Troy Nicolini of the NWS:

You may recall the media flurry when Dr. Johnstone published his work back in January. Well, he is coming to the North Coast to present his findings. This is a great opportunity to ask questions about how this impacts the region.

When: Wednesday, June 16 between 3:00 and 4:00 p.m.
Where: National Weather Service office. 300 Startare Drive, Woodley Island, Eureka
POC: Troy Nicolini 707-443-0574 ex223

Background information:
Dr. James Johnstone’s work is titled “Climatic context and ecological implications of summer fog decline in the coast redwood region.” The work was published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science in January 2010. Dr. Johnstone is a climate analyst with the Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean, with the Climate Impacts Group at the University of Washington. His work has several important implications for the ecology of the Redwood region and the food web dynamics for this portion of the Pacific ocean. Several species of fish, birds, and mammals managed by local agencies are influenced by the climate connections described by Dr. Johnstone. The abstract and a link to Dr. Johnstone’s website are listed below.

http://www.jajstone.com/

Ceremony Saturday, June 12, on Hammond Trail

CCTmap61010

The raw press release:

ANNOUNCEMENT

The Event: A ceremony to celebrate the formal designation of the Hammond Trail as a portion of the California Coastal Trail

1. Remarks by community leaders and trail supporters

2. Ceremonial installation of California Coastal Trail insignia

3. Food and drinks

4. A chance to view some of the Hammond Trail’s new interpretive signs (developed by RCAA and local artist Gary Bloomfield), enjoy time on the trail, and share ideas for trail expansion

Location: North end of the Hammond Trail near the south Clam Beach parking lot

(near intersection of Highway 101 and Central Avenue in McKinleyville)

Time and Date: 10:00 to 10:45 a.m., Saturday, June 12, 2010

Sponsors: County of Humboldt

Coastwalk

California Coastal Conservancy

Redwood Community Action Agency (RCAA)

Dog owners don’t want a fenced dog park

From the 6.09.10 issue

By Elaine Weinreb

Press Staff Writer

Trying to balance the conflicting needs of dogs and pedestrians at Hiller Park has not been easy.

Dog owners treasure the open spaces of the Hiller Park, which gives their animals a chance to romp and run off leash.

But pedestrians, especially parents with small children, and the elderly, don’t always appreciate being approached by strange dogs that occasionally jump on them, bark, and growl, or worse.

McKinleyville Community Services District Parks and Recreation Director Jason Sehon thought he had a solution – create an official dog park.

Sehon thought that if he fenced in a large two-acre area at Hiller Park as a playground for dogs it would make everybody happy. He was wrong.

At the May 25 meeting of the MCSD’s Recreation Advisory Committee (RAC), Sehon presented his plans for the dog park. 

The fenced area would consist of the entire two-acre meadow that is commonly referred to as “the dog meadow.”  

Running water would be piped in, so that pooches, and their owners, could get a cool drink.

A shade structure would be built in the middle, and more picnic tables would be added.

He had even figured out a way to build it for minimal cost, using free labor from the California Conservation Corps, and re-cycled fencing materials from Dow’s Prairie School.

Moreover, Sehon said, having a structure on the meadow dedicated to dog-owners would make it less likely that MCSD’s Sewer Department would decide to use the meadow as a site for an expanded wastewater pond.  

The Sewer Department owns the land; the Parks and Recreation Department does not, and although the two departments are both under MCSD’s umbrella, they have different missions and  separate funding sources.

Most important, no changes would be made to the park’s existing policy of allowing dogs off-leash everywhere except near the parking lot and in the playground.

Dogs do not have to be leashed on the loop trail, or in any of the nearby meadows.  They do not have to be leashed on the maze of forest trails, most of which is the property of the North Coast Land Trust. 

They do have to be leashed on the Hammond Trail, which is owned by the County, and not by MCSD.

None of this would change under Sehon’s proposal.

However, to his surprise, the 14 dog-owners who showed up at the meeting all said they were adamantly opposed to building the fence. 

One of the speakers presented a petition signed by other dog-owners, expressing similar opinions. Some of those opposed to the plan lived in other towns, such as Arcata and Eureka. 

There seemed to be some confusion in the audience about park regulations and ownership of the land.  

Many erroneously believed that if the fence were built, dogs would be excluded from other areas of the park, or required to stay on leash.

Several asked for a formal dog park without any kind of barrier around it. Others said that the fence would destroy the natural look of the meadow, or make it harder for owners to retrieve their dogs if they got out.

Some speakers said that having the dogs in an enclosed area would encourage the dogs to form packs, even though the enclosed area would be almost exactly the same size as the area where the dogs now play.

Sehon said that he had received many phone calls and letters from McKinleyville residents who did want a fence.

“There are a lot of people in this community, who were not represented here tonight,” remarked RAC member Mary Kay, “who have dogs that don’t stay put, and want an enclosed play area for their dogs.”

Some people, Sehon said, have asked for two fenced areas – one for big dogs, and the other for small or old dogs.

Jim Fritz, a RAC member, said that parents and seniors had told him they didn’t want to have to deal with other people’s dogs, and hoped that having a fenced dog park would minimize that problem.

    The RAC decided that more community dialog was needed, and tabled the dog park issue until its July meeting.

General Plan schedule met with doubt

From the June 2, 2010 issue

By Daniel Mintz
Press Staff Writer

The Board of Supervisors has unanimously approved a new timeline for work on the General Plan Update and an oft-split Planning Commission has been able to reach consensus on the schedule’s infeasibility.
The Commission’s pace of work on the Update was discussed at the May 25 supervisors meeting and the May 27 commission meeting. At the supervisors meeting, there some doubt about whether the new schedule – which has commission completing its Update work on Nov. 18 – is doable.
Supervisor Jill Duffy said there’s “no room for error” with the revised timeline, as it would oblige the commission to meet every week. “I’m sorry, I don’t think it’s reasonable,” she continued.
Acknowledging the new schedule as being “very aggressive,” Supervisor Mark Lovelace, who agendized it, said it’s also “reflective of the Planning Commission has already been doing over the course of the last year.” He added that the intent is to “clarify what it is that we’re expecting of them.”
Lovelace said the commission’s role should be better defined. The intent is to “clarify that the role is to make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors and not to write the General Plan on the fly,” Lovelace continued.
Supervisors approved the new schedule but agreed to define it as a goal, not a mandate.
A subcommittee comprised of the chairs and vice-chairs of the board and the commission met two days before the supervisors meeting to talk about revising the schedule. It will meet periodically to discuss the pace of work.
During a public comment session, representatives of the Northern California Association of Home Builders, the Humboldt Coalition of Property Rights and the Humboldt Association of Realtors all expressed doubts or opposition to the new timeline. And two days later, so did members of the Planning Commission.
At their meeting, commissioners upheld their work as being valuable and worth the extra time. “Why the hell are we busting our butts trying to do this job,” said Commissioner Dennis Mayo. “If you do a half-assed job, you get a half-assed product.”
Newly-appointed Commissioner Denver Nelson was just as blunt. “I think this schedule’s ridiculous,” he said, explaining that it doesn’t allow the commission enough time for permit hearings. Referring to the commissioners’ status as volunteers, he added, “What are they going to do, fire us all?”
Girard had said that supervisors modified their language to define the schedule as their intent, not their directive. Either way, commissioners believe the timeline is difficult.
Commissioner Mel Kreb said he’d expected a two meeting per month responsibility and the new timeline would require meeting every week. “It does cause a personal hardship for me,” he continued.
Commission Vice Chairman Ralph Faust, a member of the board/commission subcommittee, said that if the commission continues at its current pace, it will be at least 2012 before it completes it work on the Update. He told his colleagues that if supervisors want things to be quicker, the commission should respond but it will mean that the work will have to be done differently.
Faust later added, “I would have to report, as a member of this subcommittee … that looking at this schedule, a majority of this commission does not think that this schedule can reasonably be met – and so if the Board wants the commission to meet this schedule, they need to say so.”
Commission Chairman Jeffrey C. Smith, who’s also on the subcommittee, said he’s “willing to give (the new schedule) a shot.” He added that the commission’s thorough work will allow supervisors to do theirs “in short order.”
“I want to see a good product,” said Smith.
Another subcommittee meeting will be set up to further discuss the scheduling issue.

Consultant says there’s support for school bond

From the June 2, 2010 issue.

By Elaine Weinreb
Press Staff Writer

At a special meeting held on May 26, the Northern High School Union School District (NHUHSD) came one step closer to having a $25 million school bond measure placed on the November ballot.
The board listened to a presentation by Greg Isom, of Isom Advisors, on a survey conducted by his Walnut Creek firm asking some local residents about the bond.
Isom said that the survey results proved that local voters were willing to pass the $25 million general obligation bond. He passed out a booklet of colored graphs, which he said backed up his statements.
No members of the public were present at the meeting, and board member Robin Marks was absent.
If the bond measure passes, each property owner in the large district will pay a minimum of $19 or a maximum of $30 per $100,000 in property value for the next 20 or 30 years. The amount that would be brought in by the bond is estimated at $19-25 million.
Isom Advisors will be paid $70,000 for each bond series sold, $20,000 for each bond program, thousands more in disclosure documents, and an unspecified fee for consulting services.
The interest cost of the bond is unknown. The remainder of the bond funds can be used for school improvements.
The district is expected to foot the bill for the survey, which cost between $6,000 to $8,000.
Many of the survey questions were very general, asking if voters agreed that “good schools improve property values” or that “local voters need to do more to protect the quality of education in their local public schools.”
Only about 30 percent of those surveyed said that the Board of Trustees was doing a good or excellent job, and the same number said that the district’s finances were being handled well.
Only half the voters approved of the direction in which education at local high schools was headed.
Of those surveyed, 53 percent said they would support a “school improvement bond measure… on the November ballot.” Another 3 percent said they were leaning toward support, but not committed to it.
At least 55 percent of the voters must approve the measure for it to pass.
The same question was asked later in the survey, and garnished one more percentage point, bringing the “yes” vote up to 54 percent.
“The survey says you have the support of the average voter,” said Isom. He urged the school board to go forward with the measure, and start a “public information program,” which would “educate” the public.
About 50 percent of those surveyed said that they would be likely to support “construction of physical education facilities,” but only about 40 percent would support “constructing athletic facilities” or “constructing an all-weather track.”
Isom noted that voters would respond positively to the term “physical education” but not to the term “athletics” even though the two terms refer to the same facilities being proposed.
“It’s the same exact thing, but that’s what voters want to hear,” he said.
The school district cannot lobby the voters directly to pass the bond, but it can help set up a committee of volunteers to do this. Isom said that his company will be involved in the campaign to get voters to approve the bond, if that is the wish of the campaign committee.
Isom said he would prepare a list of answers for questions that voters might most frequently ask. He also said he was preparing a “road show” with pictures for the voters.
“What is a bond? How long can it go for? How much is it going to cost? What projects are going to be fixed? Is now the right time? We have answers for all of these,” he said.
He recommended placing the measure on the November ballot, because in November, conservative voters, who might vote against the bond, are outnumbered by the large number of students who usually vote.
Almost no young people were included in the survey, which questioned 400 residents in the district. Nearly all those surveyed were over 45. No people at all under the age of 25 were surveyed, and only about 11 percent were in their 20s, 30s, or early 40s.
Isom said this was because young people don’t have landlines, and therefore are harder to reach.
The type of school bond being proposed cannot be used to pay teacher’s salaries. It must be used for buildings or improvements. This disturbed board member Dana Silvernale.
“Voters are more concerned with keeping teachers employed, and keeping the teacher-to-student ratio low,” she said.
Silvernale and board member Sarie Toste were the only two people present who expressed concern over the issues being raised. Toste said that she was worried over the increasing tax burden to local residents.
Silvernale said that she was disturbed that there was no definite list of projects. She wondered how she could answer questions from the community, if she herself didn’t know what was involved.
“People support anything that is green or energy efficient,” Isom said. “If we want an all-weather track, do we phrase it as an all-weather track, or do we call it physical education?”
“But people are going to ask me what that means,” objected Silvernale.
“You have to tailor your messages to each specific group,” he said. “Your group might be more concerned about energy efficiency; Brian’s group might care more about sports.” He referred to the campaign process as “education.”
Silvernale said that she did not know what all the projects were, and felt uncomfortable trying to promote something to the public if she did not know the details.
“Trust the process,” replied Superintendent Kenny Richards.
“I need more information,” she insisted. “We’re getting more information at the next board meeting, but I need more than that.”
”Just go home and write out your questions,” replied Isom.
Silvernale asked the board to hold a workshop, at which the details of which project would be included could be worked out.

Bruce Buel passes away (updated)

Bruce Steven Buel, who served as the manager of the McKinleyville Community Services District from 1990 to 1999, died Friday, May 28 after a long battle with cancer. A resident of Los Osos, he was 60 years old.
According to current MCSD Manager Norman Shopay, Buel’s family was in contact with MCSD staff and said that Bruce considered his time working for the MCSD as the best job of his career and had hoped to retire to McKinleyville.
Buel was the manager of the MCSD during a time of rapid growth, during which the town became known as “the fastest growing community on the North Coast.”

Buel oversaw a major expansion of the town’s sewer system and the creation of the McKinleyville Parks and Recreation Department. Pierson Park, Azalea Hall and the McKinleyville Recreation Center were all developed under Buel’s tenure.
Buel was also active in the Mad River Rotary and helped raise money for the construction of the Sheriff’s Office at Pierson Park.
Buel was born to the late Dr. Walter and Glada Buel in January 1950 in Big Bear, Calif.
He earned his BA in economics, his Masters of Ecology from UC Davis, and a Masters of Public Administration from Golden Gate University.
Bruce married Susan Elizabeth Greig in 1972 and they lived in McKinleyville before relocating to Los Osos in 1999.
He was public servant until he retired in January – he was passionate about improving peoples’ lives and will be remembered for his humor, optimism, and devotion to family and friends.
The family would like to thank everyone whose prayers and good wishes have supported them in this difficult time.
Bruce is survived by his wife, Susan; children James Gabriel and Sarah-Marie; and sister, Cathy. His ashes have been interred at a private ceremony in Plantation, Calif.