Friday, July 6, 2018

How Erik Dreikosen, Marinwood CSD Manager FOOLED me to conceal the Maintenance Shed Environmental Review

Eric Dreikosen, Marinwood CSD manager on June 12, 2018 when he denied the existence of a pending application for Marinwood Maintenance facility on June 15, 2018.  His deliberately misleading statement was continued in this email exchange below.  Even at the June 26, 2018 Parks and Recreation meeting, the application was kept secret.  Finally, it was revealed on Friday, June 30, 2018 at 5 pm before a major holiday. A legal notice was published on Saturday, July 1, 2018.
Clearly the Marinwood CSD will go to great lengths to keep their activities secret.

At the June 12th Marinwood CSD meeting, I asked Eric Dreikosen about the pending application for the Marinwood Maintenance shed. He answered evasively to imply no actions with the permission of the board .  

Several days later on June 15th, he signed and submitted a 109 page "Neg Dec for Environmental Review that will allow the Marinwood CSD to build WITHOUT CUSTOMARY ENVIRONMENTAL OVERSIGHT.

This particularly upsetting since the current Hansell design calls for a massive 4400 square foot compound that is 100% within the stream conservation setback of 120 feet.  However, since Marinwood CSD is their own oversight "lead agency", of course they will approve their own work. 

Here is an email exchange I had several days later :


Jun 18

Stephen Nestel to Eric Dreikosen, Marinwood CSD Manager


What day will you submit your application for the Marinwood Maintenance Facility? Previously, you mentioned that you hoped to have an application to submit in late June 2018.

What day will you submit and meet with the planners? Who is the county planner for this project who is assigned to your project?

Thank you in advance.

Editor's note: Notice that I did not specify which application.  An honest answer would have been that a 109 page NEG DEC EIR document had been submitted three days earlier.


Jun 19

Eric Dreikosen  to me

Dear Stephen,

The District does not have a set date as to when the Site Plan Review Application will be submitted. As no such application has yet been submitted, there has been no planner assigned on behalf of the County.


Editor's note: Dreikosen is purposely evasive but changing the subject.  He intentionally is trying to confuse Site Plan Review Application with Neg Dec EIR 
UPDATE 7/7/2018: Eric Dreikosens own May 2018 memo indicates that a Site Plan Review Application will be submitted at the end of June  (see the last paragraph).  Suddenly, Eric Dreikosen is having amnesia and calling the document something else.  This is a deliberate attempt to deceive the public. We deserve to have employees worthy of trust.


Jun 19

Stephen Nestel to Eric Dreikosen

Approximately, when do you think the submission will occur? Is it still the end of June or has their been a delay? Will you please notify upon submission?


Jun 20 

Eric Dreikosen  
to me

Dear Stephen,

The District continues in its due diligence with the pre-planning process. With that, I do not have an approximate date as to when the Site Plan Review Application will be submitted. All proper notices will go out at the appropriate times as we move forward with this initiative.



Editor's Note: Dreikosen continues to mislead me. He knows that I want to engage in productive dialogue but still conceals his actions.

Jun 20

Stephen Nestel to Eric

Thanks for your prompt reply. There was a promise of a public meeting prior to submitting the application at the last impromptu presentation. Is this part of the due diligence that you are referring too? I know the public wishes to engage with this topic and the best way is to be transparent. I hope to minimize the unnecessary misunderstandings prior to submitting so the district can save time and money on the project.

The current iteration of the Maintenance Shed project has many challenges. The first challeng is establishing a policy of what activities can take place on the site. The current landscaping waste, materials depot and haphazard storage of materials and equipment is a relatively recent phenomena. 1.) Will this be allowed in the future? 2.) Does the structure serve the practical applications envisioned? I don't see how the current large, long narrow building could practically accommodate the practical needs for tools, vehicle and materials storage plus a workshop and office. The workflow access is severely constricted by design. A conventional long garage such as one used in virtually every other government facility in Marin County will overcome this obstacle. The current design is definitely more attractive but due to its inefficient design, it will encourage the use OUTSIDE the building which defeats the purpose of a self contained facility. Of course a budget should be established too.

I believe the first two questions should be answered PRIOR to submitting a plan since changes will significantly alter the site plan and could cause delays.

The environmental issues will still need to be addressed but at least we can get the first important questions answered first.

I have long lobbied for a new maintenance facility and glad it is finally being addressed. Let's do something great.

(Eric Dreikosen does not respond to this email)

Leah Green, Marinwood CSD Board President approved of the deception of the public at the June 12, 2018 meeting.  Izabella Perry, Bill Shea, Jeff Naylor and Irv Schwartz also were aware of the pending "Neg Dec EIR " document and did nothing to make the public aware of the 109 page document found HERE

No comments:

Post a Comment