Send this letter Clean up the Toxic Waste at Marinwood Plaza

Send this letter Clean up the Toxic Waste 

at Marinwood Plaza

Send this letter to  Lambert, Ralph@Waterboards [mailto:ralph.lambert@waterboards.ca.gov]

before the end on business on Monday, February 22, 2016 to save our community from an inadequate toxic waste cleanup.  It is important that every concerned citizen participate.  It sends a clear message that we will only accept a full remediation solution rather than allow toxic waste to remain in the soil for decades.

Feel free to leave a message if you have questions.  Thank you for supporting our community.

=================================================================

Ralph Lambert

Regional Water Quality Control Board                                               re: (#SL0604185908)

San Francisco Bay Region

1515 Clay St., Suite 1400

Oakland, CA 94612

 Lambert, Ralph@Waterboards [mailto:ralph.lambert@waterboards.ca.gov]

Dear Directors of the Regional Water Quality Control Board & Mr Lambert:

We are depending on you to do the right thing for our community and the environment.

I urge the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB)  to reject in entirety the Remedial Action Plan (RAP) put forth by Marinwood Plaza II , LLC and Geologica  for Prosperity Cleaners, 187 Marinwood Ave, San Rafael, CA 94903 (#SL0604185908) on December 29, 2015.   The Remedial Investigation is incomplete,  the proposed action plan is technically and scientifically inadequate and the plan does not meet EPA’s own CERCLA guideline or meet the terms of the RWQCB Executive order of February 14, 2015.  The action plan has no start date and is only contingent up on redevelopment.  This is clearly not consistent with the terms or intent of the Executive Order.   The RAP should be rejected until it complies with the Order and describes complete remediation of the Site to include Marinwood Plaza, Silviera Ranch, Casa Marinwood.and the eastern & western boundaries of Marinwood Ave. 

We strongly urge an Interim Remediation Plan to commence at the earliest possible date or by April 1, 2016 to aggressively remove the two or more toxic hotspots on the site to a depth of 35’ and a diameter that encompasses all known contaminated soil of at least 75’ or more. 

No active remediation has occurred since 2011.  We demand full, aggressive remediation of the toxic hotspots  at the Marinwood Plaza site immediately while methods for remediating offsite contamination, whether soil vapor or groundwater, are identified for timely implementation in an approved RAP.  Partial solutions are unacceptable.

We concerned citizens of Marin demand a full remediation of Marinwood Plaza (#SL0604185908) that will not imperial the environment and community health for decades to come.

Please respond to the following questions:

Soil:

1.    Previously it’s been disclosed that contamination at the source areas extends to a depth of at least 35 feet.  The RAP proposes excavating soil to a depth of only 12 feet beneath the building and leaving the remaining contamination in place. 

What happens to the deeper contamination that you propose to leave?  Won’t that continue to contaminate groundwater, as it’s doing now, and as noted in the Board Order?

2.    Soil was sampled at only a few locations at the Eastern Hot Spot to verify soil contamination after treatment in 2011.  Why are you not proposing to excavate in this area to verify that soil contamination above cleanup standards is not present?

3.    The RAP estimates that approximately 45 cubic yards of soil will be excavated  based on very limited information.  What will happen if the soil contamination turns out to be much more extensive? 

Soil Vapor:

1.    We understand that contaminated soil vapor is moving preferential pathways  along buried utility lines.  When you tested for soil vapor in the Casa Marinwood  neighborhood you located the underground utilities but avoided them during your testing.  If you were concerned about damaging utility lines as you claimed, why didn’t you use passive soil vapor sampling that has commonly been used for investigations at other sites?

2.    Absolutely no contaminated soil vapor was reported at Casa Marinwood, which is not surprising because you did not sample the contaminant pathways where the vapor is moving.  When will you conduct a valid soil vapor investigation at Casa Marinwood?

3.    Once you’ve blocked the pathways for soil vapor at the Site, where will the contaminated soil vapor that is present adjacent to Casa Marinwood go; into the houses?

Groundwater:

1.    Why did you submit a feasibility study that does not follow EPA guidance as required by the Board Order?

2.    Why do you think it’s reasonable to develop a remedial action plan when you haven’t yet completed the remedial investigation?

3.    Why haven’t you installed any monitoring wells east of Hwy 101?

4.    Why have you not conducted any groundwater monitoring east of Hwy 101?

5.    Why was MNA the only remedial approach considered in the feasibility study?

6.    How can NMA be seriously considered when the extent of groundwater  contamination is unknown?

7.    How can you possibly evaluate whether the groundwater plume is stable or shrinking if you don’t know how far it goes?

8.    Given that dry cleaning fluid (PCE) is present a considerable distance east of Hwy 101, what evidence exists that supports the complete breakdown of PCE to non-toxic compounds?

9.    Why were remedial approaches that are commonly used to cleanup VOC contamination in groundwater at sites in Silicon Valley not evaluated in the feasibility study?

10.  Why do you think it’s OK to contaminate millions of gallons of valuable drinking water and then walk away without cleaning it up?

Please send your responses to Bill McNicholas, Chairman of the “Cleanup Marinwood Plaza Now ,” Citizen Oversight Committee : billmcn@pacbell.net ,  murphy1978y@comcast.net , stephennestel@gmail.com

The Lie Tech Affordable Housing Scam

The Lie Tech  Affordable Housing Scam!

Comment from "Marin Voter" on the Marin IJ editorial, "Marinwood Plaza needs a new Shared Vision" HERE

================================================================
Marin Voter

At the time, that plan was seen as a model coming together of environmentalists, affordable housing activists and neighbors."

What 'neighbors' were in favor of low income housing there? what's really driving the building of low-income housing? Is it corporate tax avoidance?

http://neweconomicperspectives...

Here's how the scam works: [Bottom line:20-30% annual return.] Full version follows:

"For a long time, the federal government has been trying to help low income citizens be housed. The predominant current strategy is called “Low Income Housing Tax Credits” (affectionately referred to as “Lie-Techs.”)

Each year the federal government declares a certain dollar value of tax credits (a dollar for dollar cancellation of taxes due) and distributes them to the states. The state housing authorities make these federal tax credits available to regional housing developers who bid for the tax credits by submitting proposals to build specific multi-family rental housing projects. To obtain the tax credits, the developers have to agree, basically, to rent the housing units they create to citizens below stipulated income thresholds—and further agree to charge them a maximum rent that is below a stipulated percentage of their income.

Next, the developers form an LLC partnership with investors—usually corporations with significant federal tax burdens. The structure of the LLC is that the corporate investors make a “capital contribution” to the partnership (cash—which is used to pay for the building of the housing project) and receive, in return, 99.9% of the tax credits allocated to the project, plus profits and depreciation write-offs. The capital contribution investors make is typically 75-85% of the value of the tax credits, which are then distributed to the investors over a 10 year period.

Consequently, in each of those years the investor extinguishes
a dollars’ worth of federal taxes for only 75-85 cents, putting him
ahead of where he otherwise would have been. In addition, the investor is able to take a depreciation write-off of the housing facility itself, reducing tax burdens further. Overall, as an investment, this amounts to a 20-30% annual return.

Editor's Note :Exactly! This is the housing bubble all over again where investors get rich on the taxpayer dime. It is all smoke and mirrors built on the promise of "affordable" , "social equity", and "environmental benefits". Sorry to burst some bubbles folks. This is really about power and money. Surprise surprise.

The Marinwood Plaza Toxic Waste meeting in 4 parts. 2/10/2016

This is the same as the full meeting but broken up by speakers for easy viewing.  The Marinwood Oversight Committee presentations will be added later.

San Diego's enlightened Leash Optional parks.

San Diego County has "off leash" areas in their parks everywhere.

Your Dogs and City Parks

• Dog Parks and Facilities
  • Approved Leash-Free Locations
  • Map of Leash-Free Locations (PDF)
  • About Dogs at Beaches and Mission Bay

All dogs shall be maintained on a leash not to exceed eight feet, including trails and canyons in all parks. For those parks that have been designated dog off-leash areas, dogs must be leashed until inside the posted boundary for the off-leash area.

Dogs benefit by being protected from rattlesnakes, ticks, traffic and various other hazards and distractions. Also, poison oak is spread from dogs to humans.

View Larger Image (PDF)

We understand that people love their dogs and want a place for them to run free, play fetch and socialize with other dogs. The City of San Diego has designated off-leash dog areas for just this reason. It is necessary to keep your pets within the boundaries of the posted "Designated Dog Off-Leash" areas. The perimeters may be unsafe for your dog (ex. traffic, sharp objects that can injure them).

Please adhere to the posted park rules and also:

• always pick up after your pet;
• do not bring a puppy to the dog park until all required vaccinations are complete;
• be sure that your dog's required vaccinations are up to date for the health of all dogs on site; and
• be sure that your dog is wearing a current license from the County Department of Animal Services.

The real liability issue for Marinwood's Leash Law

The real liability issue for Marinwood's Leash Law

From www.dogbitelaw.com an Attorney specializing in victims compensation from dog bites:

Suits Against Local Governments 

The victim of a personal injury or injury to the victim's dog probably will not prevail on a claim against the local government entity that established the dog park. Generally, there are immunities that protect government entities from many claims; if the entity believed that it was doing something beneficial for the community, it is hard to get around the immunity.

However, failure to enforce its own rules and regulations may result in governmental liability. Dog parks frequently are governed by special rules that are either posted or part of the local municipal code. If an irresponsible dog owner has a habit of breaking those rules, and the local animal control officers do nothing despite being informed, a person who sustains personal injuries or injuries to his or her dog may prevail against the municipality."

Assumption of the Risk

Adults and mature children who voluntarily encounter a known risk are usually deemed to have consented to the injuries they receive as a result of that particular risk.

If you go to a no-leash dog park and you are injured by a dog, under circumstances other than a bite where the dog would not have injured you if it was leashed, then there is a very good argument that you assumed the risk. After all, you knew that leashes were optional at the park, but you went there anyway to take advantage of the same leash-optional law that resulted in your own injuries.

However, the assumption of risk doctrine will not be used against a responsible dog owner who goes to a dog park that is frequented by an irresponsible dog owner who fails to follow the rules of the dog park. The law states that every person can assume that others will abide by the law. Therefore, one does not assume the risk that another user of a dog park will violate the rules of the park. For that reason, courts will not permit this doctrine to be used as a shield for unreasonable or unlawful conduct.

Similarly, the assumption of the risk doctrine will not be used to permit a dog owner to evade responsibility when he brings a dangerous dog into a dog park. 

Petition Marinwood CSD directors Izabela Perry, Justin Kai and Leah Kleinman-Green to revisit the ban on all "leash optional" areas in Marinwood for the first time in sixty years.

Victoria commonsense Leash Optional Park Rules.

http://www.vacs.ca/leash-optional-areas

Site Specific Regulations:

• LIMIT ► Time of day / day of week / months / seasons > When off leash activity can occur
• RESTRICT ► Off leash activity to a specific area within a park (usually not the whole park)
• GIVE PRIORITY ► Sporting and community events will have priority over off leash activity
• PROHIBIT ► Any activity (including off leash dogs) during field closures

General Regulations:

• Dogs must be within the owner's control and vision at all times
  • if you cannot see your dog - you don't have control
  • if your dog doesn't respond within 3 calls - you don't have control
• Dogs must be well-mannered
  • if your dog jumps on people - you don't have control
  • if your dog interferes with other park users - you don't have control
  • if your dog digs holes or damages property - you don't have control
  • if your dog attacks other dogs or chases wildlife - you don't have control

• Dogs in heat are prohibited
• Dangerous Dogs must be leashed & muzzled

Signs are usually posted where off leash opportunities exist.

Public school grounds are NOT Leash Optional Areas at anytime.

Please be respectful of people living next to any leash optional area, if your dog is a 'barker' please keep your dog well away from any residence and/or consider staying away from LOAs before 9 am.

Keeping you Safe from this website. Bruce Anderson's censorship policy.

A message from Bruce Anderson, NextDoor Moderator and former politician on his Censorship policy
Bruce Anderson

Drink cool, fresh Marinwood Plaza spring water.
Don't worry it's safe and has the government seal of approval
I guarantee it!

"Please don't post your web site or you tube account again. You have already been informed that you have used your allocations of one such posting a quarter. After March 31 you may make another such posting. Until that time all posts that contain your web site or you tube channel will be removed."- private message to me on NextDoor
_________________
Do you need this man telling you what is acceptable to read? He has banned posting of health information on the toxic waste, important community meetings, informative videos all because he considers me politically "dangerous". It is pretty sick but he likes his soft tyranny and censorship power. Sticks and stones.
There have been many complaints to NextDoor.com to have him removed. They refuse to get involved.
Editor's note: Moments after posting this he banned me from Nextdoor.  

It's local and fresh from the Springs under Marinwood Plaza!

Nation Finally Breaks Down And Begs Its Smart People To Just Fix Everything

Nation Finally Breaks Down And Begs Its Smart People To Just Fix Everything
Americans everywhere are asking the country's smart people to please, please just take the reins from here.


NEWSOctober 27, 2011
VOL 47 ISSUE 43 Cooperation



WASHINGTON—Overwhelmed by the frustration of being utterly unable to solve any of the numerous difficult problems it faces, a worn-out nation finally broke down Thursday morning and begged its smart people to please just fix everything now.

Admitting they had "absolutely no idea what the fuck [they were] doing," millions of Americans immediately ceased trying to manage the country's large-scale, ongoing disasters and pleaded with U.S. scientists, economists, educators, philosophers, and inventors to intervene and make things better again.

"You are good at doing things, and we are bad, okay? We admit it," said Cincinnati-area executive Robert Everhart, who belongs to the growing consortium of citizens desperately asking America's qualified people to take it from here. "So we're begging you, please grab hold of the reins. We know we said we didn't need to read any books or have a lot of expertise to do this stuff, but we were wrong. We need your help, and we need it bad."

"Obviously we've messed things up pretty severely, but we're fairly certain you can fix them back up," Everhart added. "You guys are really smart."




Acknowledging they lacked the know-how to put anything together without it all falling apart again in a matter of seconds, millions of ordinary Americans implored the nation's skilled individuals to just use their knowledge to end the financial crisis, manage the health care industry, determine which human beings are actually fit to hold political office, teach the nation's children, and enact overarching policy decisions that serve the greater good.

Citizens across the nation also promised to stay completely out of the way while those people who actually have some idea what they're doing roll up their sleeves and get down to the bottom of all this. In addition, the competent have been issued assurances they will not be hindered by irrelevant, totally uninformed opinions while they are getting things done.

"You won't hear a single word out of us, we swear," said Chicago real-estate broker Paul Linder, mentioning that smart people can have all the time and resources they need to make the necessary repairs to society. "We're going to keep our attention where it's best suited by watching some T.V., surfing the Internet, or maybe trying to mend that fence of mine that's been falling down for so long. That kind of thing is really more our speed."

"Although, actually, if you guys could help out with the fence, that would be great," Linder added.

According to Beltway insiders, the phenomenon has spread to the highest levels of the U.S. government, with hundreds of lawmakers crumpling up all bills currently under debate and claiming that pervasive problems related to unemployment, a crumbling infrastructure, and energy crises should probably be left to people who know some things about that stuff.

In the hours following the country's desperate pleas, the 2012 Republican presidential candidates issued statements agreeing that the United States was in pretty bad shape right now and that it would indeed be best to start letting people with a track record of accomplishment act on the nation's behalf.

"As anyone who listens to me for even two seconds can tell you, I'm no expert when it comes to pretty much anything," Gov. Rick Perry of Texas said. "That's why I promise voters that as president, I will make it my top priority to just hang back and let smart people take care of everything."

"Come to think of it, though, I'm not really qualified to give an opinion on this or any other issue," Perry continued. "I should probably just shut the fuck up now and go away."

Point Reyes cattle ranches targeted in environmentalists’ lawsuit

A cattle crossing sign stands along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard at Point Reyes National Seashore. Environmentalists have sued the National Park Service, challenging the agency’s plan to give ranchers 20-year leases without comprehensive environmental studies. Gary Reyes — Bay Area News Group

By Paul Rogers, Bay Area News Group

POSTED: 02/11/16, 3:01 AM PST | UPDATED: 2 DAYS AGO

53 COMMENTS

Cattle graze on the grounds of Point Reyes National Seashore. Groups filing a suit object that park officials are moving to renew leases to the ranchers without conducting adequate environmental studies,.Gary Reyes — Bay Area News Group

A year after an oyster farm was forced to shut down at Point Reyes National Seashore, sparking a bitter controversy over the role of farming in national parks, a coalition of environmentalists on Wednesday filed a lawsuit over a bigger and more explosive target: thousands of dairy and beef cattle in the park.

Many of the cattle ranches in the iconic park have been operated by the same families since the 1860s. And park service officials say they have no plans to remove them.

The suit against the National Park Service, filed by three groups in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, claims that the cattle are causing erosion, polluting waterways with manure, harming endangered salmon and other species and blocking public access.

The groups say park service officials are violating federal law because they are moving forward with a plan to renew 20-year leases to the ranchers without conducting adequate environmental studies on how the thousands of cows are affecting the seashore’s scenic resources, including its tule elk. Nor have officials updated their 36-year-old park management plan to consider other options, like reducing the number of ranches in the park or the size of the cattle herds, the lawsuit contends.

“There are pastures out there that don’t have any green thing on them, just mud and manure,” said Huey Johnson of Mill Valley, who served as state resources secretary under Gov. Jerry Brown from 1978 to 1982. “The cows have eaten up a lot of the wildflowers. We the public bought those lands.”

Johnson is president of the Resource Renewal Institute, a Mill Valley group that filed the lawsuit with the Center for Biological Diversity and the Western Watersheds Project, based in Idaho.

Johnson said the number of cattle in Point Reyes National Seashore, now about 6,000, should be reduced by at least half. If the lawsuit is successful, he added, the coalition plans to try to reduce or remove livestock from some of the roughly 30 other national parks that allow grazing, a list that includes Death Valley, Pinnacles in San Benito County and Mojave National Preserve.

“You’ve got welfare ranching going on public lands all over the West,” he said.

PART OF HISTORY

Ranchers at the national seashore say their operations are a beloved part of Northern California’s coastal history. They note that when developers were threatening to build subdivisions on the Point Reyes Peninsula in the 1950s, ranchers formed an alliance with the Sierra Club and other environmental groups to convince Congress and President John F. Kennedy to establish the park in 1962.

“When Congress made a deal to buy the park, the ranchers said we will commit to going into the park as long as you guys write into law that we can stay here,” said Ted McIsaac, who grazes black Angus cattle on 2,800 acres inside the national seashore. “It’s 50 years later, and the generation today has no idea how this all got started. That’s been lost over time.” See the full Story in the Marin IJ HERE

Dick Spotswood make excellent points about this HERE

Marinwood Plaza housing-retail development application expires

A plan for an 82-unit residential and commercial complex at Marinwood Plaza drew community opposition.Robert Tong — Marin Independent Journal

By Nels Johnson, Marin Independent Journal

POSTED: 02/13/16, 3:42 PM PST | UPDATED: 9 HRS AGO

4 COMMENTS

A nonprofit developer’s application to build an 82-unit residential and commercial complex at Marinwood Plaza has expired, leaving the future of the shopping center site in limbo.

“There is no current application for the Marinwood site,” said Jeremy Tejirian, a county planning manager, adding the Bridge Housing allowed its project application to die this week after failing to comply with a request for more information.  See the full story in the Marin IJ HERE

Driving Vs. Public Transportation

To Fall in Love With Anyone, Do This

To Fall in Love With Anyone, Do This

By Mandy Len Catron /nytimes.com


More than 20 years ago, the psychologist Arthur Aron succeeded in making two strangers fall in love in his laboratory. Last summer, I applied his technique in my own life, which is how I found myself standing on a bridge at midnight, staring into a man’s eyes for exactly four minutes.

Let me explain. Earlier in the evening, that man had said: “I suspect, given a few commonalities, you could fall in love with anyone. If so, how do you choose someone?”

He was a university acquaintance I occasionally ran into at the climbing gym and had thought, “What if?” I had gotten a glimpse into his days on Instagram. But this was the first time we had hung out one-on-one.

“Actually, psychologists have tried making people fall in love,” I said, remembering Dr. Aron’s study. “It’s fascinating. I’ve always wanted to try it.”

I first read about the study when I was in the midst of a breakup. Each time I thought of leaving, my heart overruled my brain. I felt stuck. So, like a good academic, I turned to science, hoping there was a way to love smarter.

I explained the study to my university acquaintance. A heterosexual man and woman enter the lab through separate doors. They sit face to face and answer a series of increasingly personal questions. Then they stare silently into each other’s eyes for four minutes. The most tantalizing detail: Six months later, two participants were married. They invited the entire lab to the ceremony.

“Let’s try it,” he said.

Let me acknowledge the ways our experiment already fails to line up with the study. First, we were in a bar, not a lab. Second, we weren’t strangers. Not only that, but I see now that one neither suggests nor agrees to try an experiment designed to create romantic love if one isn’t open to this happening.


I Googled Dr. Aron’s questions; there are 36. We spent the next two hours passing my iPhone across the table, alternately posing each question.

To Fall Out of Love, Do This

To Fall Out of Love, Do This

BY SUSANNA WOLFF


CREDITILLUSTRATION BY GARY TAXALI


In Mandy Len Catron’s Modern Love essay, “To Fall in Love With Anyone, Do This,” she refers to a study by the psychologist Arthur Aron (and others) that explores whether intimacy between two strangers can be accelerated by having them ask each other a specific series of personal questions. The 36 questions in the study are broken up into three sets, with each set intended to be more probing than the previous one.

—The Times.

The following questions are part of a follow-up study to see whether the intimacy between two committed partners can be broken down by forcing them to ask each other thirty-six questions no one in a relationship should actually ask.



Set I

1. Given the choice of anyone in the world, whom would you like to punch in the face?

2. On average, how long do you spend composing tweets before you post them? Do you realize that they don’t matter?

3. Before responding to a text, do you wait a few minutes to make it seem like you’re doing something more important? Why? Answer me now.

4. What would constitute a “perfect” day for you? Why do we always just go home and watch Netflix instead of doing any of that stuff?