Huffman's Henchman: Friends of Petaluma River Continually Awarded Congressional Funds to Follow Marching Orders From Jared Huffman
Congressman Jared Huffman's District Fundraising Director Elizabeth Howland is the Treasurer for Friends of the Petaluma River, a 'nonprofit' reshaping Petaluma under the guise of conservation
Friends of the Petaluma River is a non-profit organization dedicated to celebrating and conserving the Petaluma River, its wetlands, and wildlife. They play a key role in promoting stewardship of the Petaluma River by working throughout its watershed supporting educational and recreational activities, creating and providing celebrations of the cultural and natural history of the River, promoting a community voice for the River, and enhancing public access.
Ms. Elizabeth Howland currently serves as the Treasurer, Board of Directors for Friends of the Petaluma River.
Simultaneously, Ms. Howland has served as the District Fundraising Director for Congressman Jared Huffman.
Open Secrets indicates Congressman Huffman has spent $90,195 in expenditures for Ms. Howland’s services during the campaign period of 2023-2024.
Petaluma Planning Commissioner Blake Hooper is currently running for Petaluma City Council. Per his campaign website, he served as a caseworker and field representative for Congressman Jared Huffman, starting in 2016.
Mr. Hooper’s spouse, Ms. Iliana Madrigal-Hooper, served as the District Scheduler/Office Manager for Congressman Huffman through August 2019. She later took a role as Communications Intern/Communications Director with Friends of the Petaluma River beginning in October 2021. In May 2023, she became the Research & Policy Associate for the North Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO while simultaneously holding employment with Friends of the Petaluma River through December 2023. Additionally, she has served on the City of Petaluma’s General Plan Advisory Committee since January 2021.
On August 2, 2019, The Press Democrat published the following article:
Sitting at the end of a pontoon boat Friday morning, three government officials huddled around a map of the Petaluma River, pointing to the sites that could play a role in a long-awaited dredging project for the tidal waterway, now 12 years behind schedule.
Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, and Petaluma Mayor Teresa Barrett did most of the talking, schooling Lt. Col. John Cunningham of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the federal agency that for decades has overseen maintenance of the once booming commercial route.
It was Cunningham’s first visit to Petaluma as the new commander of the Corps’ San Francisco District. Friends of the Petaluma River, the local nonprofit, hosted a tour for him and Huffman at low tide, traveling through silt-choked waters that were no more than a few feet deep.
The visit gave federal representatives a first-hand look at the increasingly dire navigation conditions on the 18-mile river, with local officials hoping to convince Cunningham to list the project for the Corps’ 2020 work plan.
The request is for one final federally-funded cleanup. After that, the city could take maintenance, part of a now-nationwide trend as smaller ports pass out of federal hands to local control.
“They have a euphemistic name for places like the Petaluma River in the lexicon of the Army Corps of Engineers,” Huffman said. “They call them emerging ports, which is really a joke because ports like the Petaluma River have been effectively abandoned.
“I don’t think there’s a community in America that’s done a better job indicating the need - doing it in a positive, constructive and patient way - and yet had to wait so long on something that’s so urgent.”
Nearly 100 residents rallied Friday above the Petaluma Yacht Club dock where the tour departed, a show of support that capped a monthlong campaign by Barrett to collect signatures and emphasize the community’s desire for the project.
Additional “Dredge Pledge” supporters lined numerous docks along the river, holding signs and cheering as the boat passed on its journey to the Petaluma Marina.
Before departing, Barrett gave Cunningham a binder with nearly 3,700 signatures. The handoff took place as both stood on a tilted dock, one end raised by the growing mud bank beneath it.
“With the current state of siltation, boats have not been able to navigate the river into our turning basin for the last five years,” Barrett said. “This has dealt a heavy blow to our downtown economy and poses a flood danger to our riverside neighborhoods and businesses, and threatens the health of our wetlands.”
The main river channel is supposed to be dredged every four years, while the terminal end that links to the San Pablo Bay is supposed to be cleaned every three years. Both are overdue by more than that, the former last dredged in 2003 and the latter in 1998.
According to a press release, the Army Corps selects projects for study, design or construction each year based primarily on use for commercial navigation, flood and storm damage reduction and ecosystem restoration. Last year’s work plan totaled nearly $7 billion.
Even though small ports like the Petaluma River are allocated a 10% share of funding each cycle, such ports still must compete with harbors across the country, Cunningham said. The district lobbies for the needs and capabilities of the area, but the final determination is based on the best investment for the dollars available, he said.
A decision on the 2020 work plan is expected by December.
“I’ve heard a lot about this project, and had great communication from the city here and local stakeholders,” Cunningham said after the tour. “It was great to see the project and what the current conditions are. I really do appreciate the engagement and the level of participation from the public here. They’ve been phenomenal.”
Over the years, $43 million has been poured into curbing flood control risks along the river. The Army Corps has also invested $600,000 in preliminary work tied to dredging, commissioning a hydrographic survey, performing sediment testing, and pursuing the necessary permits.
The city has prepared for its share of the project, prepping the local deposit site at Shollenberger Park.
Federal officials estimate the dredging project would cost $10 million. If funding is approved, the district has all the pieces in place to execute, Cunningham said.
In the absence of dredging, commercial traffic on the river has dropped sharply - harming the waterway’s standing among ports competing for federal dollars.
Companies including Lind Marine and Shamrock Materials have brought barges into the river with increasingly smaller loads and only at high tide, creating a greater reliance on truck transport as a means to stay viable.
River tourism has also declined dramatically in recent years, compounding revenue losses for waterfront businesses and impacting several downtown organizations with longstanding events tied to the river.
“Our decreasing ability to move tonnage in and out of this river is killing us,” said Huffman, who serves on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that oversees the Army Corps. “It puts us further behind in competition for priority. If we can break that cycle, I think we can bring more tonnage back.”
On February 11, 2020, Mr. Huffman’s Office issued the following press release:
PETALUMA, CA — Federal funding to the tune of $9.7 million has been allotted for the long-awaited dredging of the Petaluma River, U.S. Rep. Jared Huffman announced this week. The Democratic congressman from San Rafael also said Monday that $1.3 million has been set aside for preparation of the San Rafael Canal for dredging.
"Local economies depend on 'forgotten harbors', like the Petaluma River and San Rafael Canal," Huffman said. "I am thrilled that we will finally be able to address the recreational, commercial, and public safety problems that come from delayed dredging. The safety and viability of commercial and recreational traffic is the highest priority, and I thank the Army Corps for taking action on this urgent infrastructure need."
Federal appropriations bills directed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to prioritize funding for both river-maintenance projects, so the funding for both is included in the agency's Fiscal Year 2020 budget.
Huffman is a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and said he helped lead the congressional effort to secure this funding. Last fall, Huffman took the Corps Commander, Lt. Col. John Cunningham and a district engineer on a tour of the river and the canal.
The last time the Petaluma River was dredged was some 17 years ago, in 2003, so this is welcome news for local officials.
"To say I am over the moon with this news is an understatement," Petaluma Mayor Teresa Barrett said. "It comes at such a critical time for our river which has suffered so much from neglect that has driven away river-dependent businesses, interrupted civic centered celebrations, halted recreational boating tourism and caused economic and environmental blight at the very heart of our town."
The dredging project protects the downtown from flooding and provides for revitalization along the river and turning basin, she said.
"Soon we will be able to smile as we face our river whether it is from the reinvigorated downtown and the soon to be constructed Adobe Road Winery, or from the newly constructed Float House on the turning basin or the proposed river adjacent apartments."
To be exact, the Army Corps expects to spend $9,745,000 on dredging activities in the Petaluma River, and $1,378,000 on the San Rafael Canal for environmental coordination and compliance, plans and specifications, and dredge surveys.
"The canal is a vital artery of San Rafael allowing for flood control, public safety, transportation, and commerce," said Nadine Urciuoli, president of The San Rafael Channel Association. "With the last full dredging taking place in 2003, we have been growing fearful that our waterway would soon silt in past the point of no return. We are thankful for the continued efforts and are eager to have a navigable canal in the near future."
On October 9, 2020, Congressman Huffman’s Office published the following press release:
Please join Congressman Jared Huffman (CA-02), project delivery team members from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Petaluma Mayor Teresa Barrett, and others as they commemorate the completion of the long-awaited Petaluma River Dredging Project. Following the ceremony and a group photo, media are invited to go down to the Petaluma River dock for filming and to do individual interviews with members of the event.
Event Details
WHAT:
Petaluma River Dredging Ribbon Cutting
WHEN:
Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2020 at 12-1:30 p.m. PT
WHERE:
Waterfront Area Next to the Petaluma Yacht Club
10 C St #3025, Petaluma, CA 94952
WHO:
Congressman Jared Huffman
Lt. Col. John Cunningham, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Sonoma County Supervisor David Rabbitt
Teresa Barrett, Mayor of Petaluma
Marie McCusker, Executive Director at Petaluma Downtown Association & Visitors Program
Stephanie Bastianon, Executive Director, Friends of the Petaluma River
CLOTHING:
Casual (recommend wearing active-style footwear)
Members of the press should send their RSVP to Mary Hurrell (mary.hurrell@mail.house.gov).
About the Project
The river, which is actually a 13-mile tidal slough that empties into San Pablo Bay and historically served as a vital artery for Petaluma commerce, was normally dredged every four years, but the Corps of Engineers had not completed a proper dredging since 2003 due to lack of funding. In February of this year, $9.7 million in long-awaited federal funding was allocated for river maintenance in the Fiscal Year 2020 Army Corps of Engineers Work Plan for the North Bay. Congressman Jared Huffman, a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, helped lead the congressional effort to secure this funding.
Dredging officially began in the River Channel on Saturday, Sept. 5, and will wrap up on or around Thursday, Oct. 15. Around-the-clock dredging is being done by the Sandpiper, an all-electric cutter-head suction dredge owned and operated by San Diego-based Pacific Dredge & Construction. More than 150,000 cubic yards of mud and silt will be removed from the channel clearing the way for increased commercial and recreational vessel traffic. Following their work in the River Channel, the crew will move its operations south of Highway 37 to begin dredging the Across-the-Flats portion of the project.
Dredging is the removal of sediments and debris from the bottom of lakes, rivers, harbors, and other water bodies. It is a routine necessity in waterways around the world because sedimentation—the natural process of sand and silt washing downstream—gradually fills channels and harbors.
Per Oxford Academic: ‘dredging impacts marine organisms negatively through entrainment, habitat degradation, noise, remobilization of contaminants, sedimentation, and increases in suspended sediment concentrations’.
The sediment that is safe for continued use in the water can be compressed along the shoreline, preventing the shoreline of waterfront homes from eroding. The lack of dredging leaves your property exposed to shoreline erosion. A diminishing shoreline makes it more difficult for you to access the water at your dock. It exposes your home to potential water damage because the natural flow of water off the property has been disrupted. It reduces the amount of usable land you have on your property. Because dredging often affects more than one property owner, the cost of the service is often covered by a mix of waterfront property taxes, neighborhood association dues, and city funds.
Pacific Dredge & Construction completed the hydraulic and mechanical dredging project on the Petaluma River.
On July 2, 2015, San Francisco Baykeeper issued the following press release:
Baykeeper recently filed a lawsuit to stop methods of dredging in San Francisco Bay that contribute to shoreline erosion and harm endangered fish. Our lawsuit challenges the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s approval of the next decade of dredging of San Francisco Bay ship channels by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
“Dredging of ship channels in San Francisco Bay is necessary, but it needs to be done in a way that doesn’t harm endangered fish, the Bay, or the coast,” said George Torgun, Baykeeper Managing Attorney.
San Francisco Bay is a dynamic and shallow water body that rapidly fills shipping lanes, marinas and harbors with sand, silt and mud. Each year, three to four million cubic yards of sand and mud—or enough to fill the Transamerica Building ten times—is removed from the Bay floor.
The Army Corps of Engineers does approximately 70% of this dredging, to keep shipping channels and harbors deep enough to accommodate large ocean-going ships traveling to and from ports and shipping terminals around the Bay and farther up the Delta.
Our lawsuit’s goals include compelling the Regional Board to require improvements in dredging to protect endangered species of fish. One dredging method frequently used by the Army Corps, hydraulic hopper suction dredging, should be immediately phased out.
Hydraulic dredging kills large numbers of two Bay fish species that are on the brink of extinction, delta smelt and longfin smelt. According to the Army Corps’ own analysis, in 2011, their dredging killed up to 29% of the delta smelt population and 8% of the longfin smelt population. Using another dredging method, where clamshell buckets scoop up mud and sand the way a backhoe would dig a pit, is safer for fish.
Baykeeper’s lawsuit is also aimed at requiring sand and mud dredged from the Bay to be used to restore wetlands and protect shorelines from sea level rise. In addition, whenever possible, dredged materials should not be dumped deep in the ocean—an outdated and wasteful disposal method.
Over the last decade, scientists from the United Stated Geological Survey and elsewhere have correlated Bay dredging and sand mining with coastal erosion at Ocean Beach and other areas just outside of the Golden Gate, which are experiencing the fastest rates of erosion on the West Coast.
Scientists have also found that dredging and sand mining are removing more sediment each year from the Bay than is entering from the Delta and all local rivers and creeks. If this sand and mud instead remains in the Bay, it can help maintain existing wetlands and restore expansive salt ponds and other lands that have been opened to tidal action in recent years. By dumping clean sediment far off in the open ocean, our region also loses the ability to build up natural flood defenses and protect wetlands and communities from sea level rise.
In addition to our lawsuit to require improved dredging methods in San Francisco Bay, Baykeeper is working to reduce sand mining in the Bay, which also contributes to erosion of Ocean Beach and the Bay.
While advocating for dredging, Congressman Huffman did not appear to be concerned with the long-term impact on the river ecosystem. This contradicts the narrative supporting his advocacy for the Potter Valley Project’s dam removal to create a clear fish passageway.
As of November 17, 2023, his office issued a press release regarding the removal of the Eel River Dams:
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Jared Huffman (CA-02) released a statement praising Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) initial draft plan to remove two dams on the Eel River. The plan also sets the stage for negotiating a new diversion from the Eel to the Russian river.
“PG&E’s draft surrender application is a major step forward to achieving the Two-Basin Solution I’ve advocated for years. The plan includes full and expedited removal of two dams that harm salmon on the Eel River while allowing for a modern fish-friendly diversion to provide water to Mendocino, Sonoma, and Marin counties. I’ll be working to ensure that both elements are completed in a way that best protects communities, tribes, and natural resources in the Eel and Russian river watersheds,” said Rep. Huffman.
Congressman Huffman has played an active role in this matter, having facilitated initial discussions to create a Two-Basin Solution for the project and establishing the Potter Valley Project Ad Hoc Committee in 2018 when they learned that PG&E was surrendering the license. The committee, made up of a wide range of tribes, stakeholders, agencies, local governments, and PG&E, formed the basis for negotiations surrounding dam removal and water supply in the two watersheds.
Additional Details of PG&E’s Plan
The utility must provide a plan to federal regulators as part of the license surrender process triggered by PG&E’s decision to divest from the financially inviable Project, which has not generated power since 2021. PG&E must submit a final Draft License Surrender Application (LSA) and Decommissioning Plan to federal regulators in May, 2024, and a Final LSA in January, 2025.
PG&E’s draft also includes, as an alternative for evaluation, a revised framework proposal from a regional group to negotiate terms for a new diversion facility that could support ongoing limited water diversions into the Russian River watershed after removing the dams, provided such diversions are consistent with the full recovery of the Eel River ecosystem to self-sustaining, harvestable populations.
Potter Valley Project Background
The Potter Valley Project includes two Eel River dams, a diversion tunnel that moves water out of the Eel River watershed and into the East Branch of the Russian River, and a powerhouse. The Project’s owner, PG&E, has allowed its license for the operation to expire and is currently working with federal regulators to develop a license surrender and decommissioning plan for the facilities.
Located on the Eel River 20 miles northeast of Ukiah, Scott and Cape Horn Dam are over 100 years old. Equipment failures in 2021 caused Project owner PG&E to permanently suspend hydropower operations. Water storage levels in Lake Pillsbury, the reservoir created by Scott Dam, have been reduced by more than 25% due to increased seismic safety concerns with the dam. Scott Dam completely blocks fish passage to high-quality cold-water habitat in the Eel River headwaters. The smaller Cape Horn diversion dam has a faulty fish ladder that needs to be revised to meet current environmental standards.
Removing the Eel River dams would make the Eel California’s longest free-flowing river and reconnect salmon and steelhead with almost 300 miles of cold-water habitat.
Tribes, conservation and commercial fishing groups have long advocated for a free-flowing Eel River. In 2023, American Rivers named the Eel one of America’s Most Endangered Rivers, citing the Potter Valley Project dams as major factors driving Chinook salmon, steelhead, and Pacific lamprey toward extinction.
In March, Huffman’s congressional opponent, Chris Coulombe, published an article in The California Globe which shed light on the forthcoming issues regarding the removal of the Potter Valley dams:
On Feb. 6, Pacific Gas and Electric dropped a bomb on residents of California’s North Coast: the company announced it will request the decommissioning and destruction of Scott Dam and Cape Horn Dam, removing a major water source for the iconic wine country and 600,000 residents of Sonoma, Marin, and Mendocino counties.
Mendocino County 1st District Supervisor Glenn McGourty summed it up: “It is a shock, and we are still kind of reeling from it,” he said.
By submitting its plans to destroy Scott Dam and the Cape Horn diversion facility, PG&E, a quasi-state agency, has shown us three valuable data points:
They have no further interest in the dams
It is up to North Coast residents to protect our water supply, quality of life, and cost of Living
They use elected officials to increase their topline
Sadly, our region’s Congressional representative, Jared Huffman, is ready to help move the story along for PG&E’s benefit without a fight. He is dutifully “critical” of PG&E – always an easy target. Yet, he supports removing Scott and Cape Horn Dam and is silent on an inevitable truth: Water will become scarcer and thus more expensive for his constituents to the benefit of his donors. Current studies place the destruction project alone at almost $400M.
Incredibly, in an article posted to his website, Huffman said he intends to make PG&E’s destruction of Scott Dam slow and expensive.
“I urge people not to get overly excited,” said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) Wednesday when asked to respond to the decision by PG&E, explaining that “PG&E is trying to get out from under the project as quickly and as cheaply as possible … but it’s not going to be fast and it’s not going to be cheap.”
Who does Huffman think will pay for PG&E’s decommission-and-destruction project?
Translation for all PG&E customers: Expect even higher rates for a long time. And once these dams are gone, by all official accounts, they are gone for good.
Thanks to Gov. Gavin Newsom and Rep. Huffman.
Power Disconnected
This line of reasoning perfectly demonstrates the supreme disconnect many of our elected officials in California have when engaging in their political theater. Given the status of the region, state, and nation, ideology cannot outweigh our reality; at this point, it is causing dire consequences in California and America. And Californians are paying for it dearly.
PG&E’s decision and Huffman’s complicity puts the region on a perilous path if we allow it to continue; more importantly, I believe it presents an opportunity for North Coast residents to discuss our water security and political environment honestly.
It is plainly evident that we cannot count on current politicians or executives of faux corporations. The ultimate stakeholders in this matter are the residents, families, business owners, farmers, fishers, foresters, vintners, and restaurateurs whose lives and livelihoods depend on access to cheap, plentiful, clean water.
If our current representative in Congress will not lead the effort to save this region and our existential resources, then we will.
Jared Huffman continues to demonstrate his disconnect from the interests of this district. While he strives to impose higher costs on PG&E, which PG&E customers will ultimately bear, the company donates tens of thousands of dollars to his political committee every year and millions to Newsom. PG&E feeds them money; they feed PG&E justifications for further rate hikes to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Rate hikes equal more of your money, and for what? Hint: Taxes are in percentages. The more you pay for an item, the more the government receives via tax receipts, including corporate taxes. Thus, the moral hazard of government.
If further justification of true alignment is needed, ask yourself if you have heard Huffman or Newsom speak out against PG&E’s continued delays in paying the fire victims – or pushing back on discussions that PG&E’s fire victim trust will not have sufficient funds to compensate victims fully. That was seven years ago, and residents still have not been made whole – even after PG&E posted significant profits last quarter. Where are our leaders calling for justice?
Robert De Niro, as Sam Rothstein, taught us in the movie “Casino:” “Either he was in on it, or forgive me for saying this, he was too dumb to see what was going on. Either way, I cannot have a man like that working here.”
Power Supply
I do not believe the problem is that Huffman is a Democrat. After all, his fellow Democrat and Sonoma County Rep. Mike Thompson wrote a formal memorandum to PG&E on Dec. 6,, 2023, highlighting his concerns about removing Scott Dam.
Unsurprisingly, Rep. Thompson’s concerns match my Oct. 15, 2023, Marin IJ article. Namely, removing significant water storage will impose unacceptable costs upon North Coast residents, including higher prices and higher regional fire risk.
Another Democrat congressman, Lake County’s John Garamendi, raised similar concerns in his Oct. 16, 2020, memorandum to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC): “I strongly oppose draining Lake Pillsbury reservoir by removing Scott Dam,” Garamendi wrote. “The planning process will not be adequate until every community impacted by this project has a voice in the process.”
Once PG&E’s May 2023 Flow Variance Request is approved – which is already in review and can occur within months – Mendocino, Sonoma, and Marin counties will need to replace that water source lost from reduced diversion into the Russian River.
In June 2022, the Marin County civil grand jury called into question Marin Municipal Water District’s (MMDW) ability to meet water needs stated in their Water Resource Plan 2040. The grand jury report further calls for MMWD to increase current water supplies by 10,000 acre-feet (AF) annually for four years. That is with the 60,000 AF presently in Lake Pillsbury, which flows to the Russian River and is available for transfer to Marin County.
MMWD is currently carrying $139 million in bond debts; two years ago, they discussed putting forward another bond of approximately $111 million to send a pipeline across the Richmond Bridge to access more water sources because “Marin almost ran out of water” in 2021.
This bridge pipeline is the least expensive of the options available to solve the present water shortage. MMWD scuttled the proposal after political winds told them there was little appetite from the already overwhelmed taxpayers. But we can rest assured the proposal will return.
Presently approved rate hikes will increase MMWD ratepayers’ water costs for a family of 4 using 55 gallons daily from $115 a month to $130 a month this summer. Then, it will go to $145 next summer and $160 in summer 2026. It is important to note that this increase is solely to rebuild financial reserves, account for inflation, and increase the current capital improvement/ maintenance budget.
None of these cost increases account for funding any projects to increase water storage capacity, nor does it address the loss of water supply from the voluntary destruction of Scott Dam at Lake Pillsbury. A destruction project slated to cost ratepayers or taxpayers $400 million to remove – not including interest and ever-likely overruns.
The Plug
Huffman has suggested a desalination (desal) plant on the Petaluma River to solve MMWD’s pending water shortage. The water district’s viability study determined the project would cost ratepayers between $121 million to $194 million to build and produce approximately 5,325 acre-feet at a price of $1,800 to $2,900 per acre-foot. Compare this to the current cost per acre-foot of $300-$450.
Note that the water produced by this desal plant would only cover 13% of the civil grand jury’s total recommended increase. We should also note that the water produced will be split between Novato’s water district and MMWD, reducing its shortage offset to MMWD.
Let us set aside that an “environmentalist” is pushing a solution that will severely impact the local ecosystem through brine discharge and salinity increases to either the Petaluma River or aquifer, likely both.
Let us focus on how PG&E is playing Huffman to pad their topline numbers at the expense of the citizens: Desal plants are widely known to have massive energy demands. Energy demands that would be fulfilled by … PG&E.
This region already has power grid shortfalls, experiencing brownouts, blackouts, and public safety power shutoff events frequently, particularly during summer months – otherwise known as the “please do not charge your EVs so we do not crash the grid” season in California.
If we plug a massively energy-intensive water source into a grid that regularly fails during the hottest times of the year while we have the least amount of water in supply, which one gets energy priority in the scenario we all can see happening?
Do we stop producing water so that people receive power to their air conditioning units so they do not die of heat exhaustion in their homes or lose their food to spoilage? Or do we produce sufficient water when our reservoirs are at their lowest, and people need it most?
How much will you be willing to pay for water when it is not readily available? What “flex pricing” will we face for access to the existential resource? This is not a choice an advanced nation should have to make in 2024. We should remember that the community that would lose or keep its power access (Petaluma) is not the same community that would lose or keep the water access (Marin).
So, PG&E creates dire conditions for the region, forcing us to make unsustainable financial choices to “guarantee water and power for all” to justify ever more rate hike approvals from the CPUC.
Power Play
In addition to PG&E’s recent announcement regarding its intent to destroy existing power generation and water storage facilities in the North Coast, its poorly timed earnings report shows a staggering profit surge of almost 25% in the fourth quarter of last year, totaling $2.24 billion.
Be sure to note that this earnings report was for the period prior to its most recently approved requested rate hike of 13%, which took effect Jan. 1, 2024. Even with outrageous profits flowing in and a rate hike that went into effect last month, PG&E has already requested yet another rate hike in 2024. What will it do when it comes time to take down Scott and Cape Horn Dams? Or upgrade the power plants? And improve the grid necessary to supply the new desal plant?
This scenario is analogous to the scene in “Yellowstone’s” 1893 series where the Dutton son remarks that the refrigerator salesman is not selling refrigerators; he is selling electricity and the subsequent continual reliance on the power company.
It should be evident that those currently in elected office do not represent our interests, and our monopoly water and power provider can proceed in its interest carte blanche. PG&E is taking blatant advantage of the voters of northern California, causing substantial financial harm to the residents and our future.
Californians face an affordability and leadership crisis, and the continuing increases in costs have become unaffordable and untenable for most.
We can see that we cannot continue down this path.
Powering Up
All of the congressmen from adjoining districts oppose the removal of dams in the region because it is an unsustainable and catastrophic path. Most citizens aware of the project are adamantly opposed to this path; unfortunately, most are unaware.
Ultimately, it is up to the people to improve our quality of life and increase our natural resource security. The fastest path to a better future is through the ballot if we choose to do so.
I encourage you to overcome the air of malaise exacted upon us by underperforming political troupes and take hold of our future by voting with your head. Ask yourself about the definition of insanity: doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. Critically assess the situation you exist in today – do you want change? Vote for your future, not against the fears expressed to you by those trying to maintain their power.
Please take what you read here and apply it to your region; the North Bay is not PG&E’s only playground. Either way, following the March election, I will announce a symposium of leaders to chart a path for the North Coast’s water security.
It is time to stand. Our residents deserve no less.
“The power is in the People and politics We address. Always do your best.”
– Tupac
Presently, early-phase construction has begun on the new Oyster Cove housing development at the front of the River Park, off of D Street in Petaluma, CA. Petaluma River Park continues to work closely with the developers behind the project and with the City of Petaluma to ensure that the new river trail and Park entrance meet our community's needs and the highest standards of environmental restoration.
Per UrbanMix Development’s website:
Set in the vibrant heart of downtown Petaluma, this unique and underutilized property is strategically located within steps of Petaluma’s Historic Commercial District, Theater District, the Sonoma Marin Rapid Transit (“SMART”) Petaluma Downtown Station, and immediately adjacent to the Steamer Landing Park. The site boasts over 2,000 linear feet of prime waterfront on both the Petaluma River and the McNear Channel with beautiful views of both the river and the iconic Sonoma hills that surround Petaluma.
On Tuesday, June 28, 2022, the City of Petaluma Planning Commission held a study session for Oyster Cove – Informational presentation to solicit feedback on a proposed project to develop 132 dwelling units on a 6.13 acre former industrial site. Required discretionary Planning entitlements include a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Map Amendment, a Tentative Subdivision Map for Condominium Purposes, and SmartCode Warrants. Subsequent entitlements will include Site Plan and Architectural Review.
Staff: Andrew Trippel, Planning Manager
Address: 100 East D Street, 0 East D Street, 0 Copeland Street
File #s: PLGP-2022-0003, PLSM-2022-0002, and PLZA-2022-0004
The approved meeting minutes made the following mention of Mr. Hooper during the Study Session discussion:
Commissioner Hooper asked questions of the applicant team.
Commissioner Hooper asked additional questions of staff.
Commissioner Hooper provided his comments.
A Motion to Approve Zoning Text Amendment to modify commercial land use Tables 4.3 and 4.4 in the Implementing Zoning Ordinance to require discretionary review for general retail, grocery/specialty foods, and building/landscape material sales land uses over 25,000 square feet was made by Blake Hooper, seconded by Amy Rider.
As of July 6, 2022, the City The Petaluma Argus Courier published an article titled: Mix of support, concern for Oyster Cove development at Petaluma Planning Commission session. The Oyster Cove mixed-use development calls for 132 townhomes and other retail and commercial space to be built near the McNear Canal on D Street.
“Planning commissioners heard a wave of support blended with concerns over traffic and environmental impacts during a study session for a mixed-use condominium project planned to be built near the Petaluma River.
While no vote has been taken yet on the proposed Oyster Cove development, the Petaluma Planning Commission held the June 28 study session to gather feedback for the project, which was proposed in mid-April by UrbanMix Development. If approved, the project would be located at 100 E. D Street and Copeland Street near the McNear Canal, across from the site of a former homeless encampment at Steamer Landing Park.
“There’s a lot about this project that Petaluma typically needs,” said commissioner Blake Hooper, who appeared to express overall satisfaction with the project’s outlook, while also calling for some additions such as neighborhood playgrounds.
Oyster Cove would include a 132-unit residential community with other commercial and open spaces folded in. There would be 121 attached town homes built, ranging from 1,345 to 1,995 square feet, with 2 to 3 bedrooms, plus a home office that could be converted into an additional bedroom. Plan outlines by UrbanMix Development show all units will have 2 to 3.5 baths, some having a roof deck. Each will have either a patio, balcony, or a roof terrace and garage.”
The development would also include about 20 affordable housing units to meet the needs of low-income residents, as well as up to 12 granny units on the ground level roughly 300 to 450 square feet in size.
Because this is a former industrial area with three vacant steel buildings, the project calls for a zoning amendment. With a mixed-use designation, the project would be able to include live/work units to invite a variety of retail possibilities. A boathouse, covered public plaza and an outdoor dining patio are also in the works.
On September 13, 2022, the Planning Commission was tasked with approving the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) Housing Working Group Recommendations during the Study Session. The GPAC is comprised of community representatives who serve as advisors and project ambassadors throughout the General Plan renewal process. The committee works collaboratively with the consultant team, led by Raimi + Associates, and City staff to provide input on General Plan issues and offer feedback on draft materials.
In addition, the Commission reviewed Attachment G - Public Participation. The attachment stated the following:
“Community input on housing issues is critical to developing policies and programs that reflect Petaluma’s specific housing needs. This Chapter describes the various events, activities, and outreach methods used to ensure community members and other stakeholders could share their opinions and participate in the Housing Element process. Because the Housing Element was updated as part of a comprehensive General Plan Update, the Chapter includes all outreach and engagement that informed the Housing Element. The feedback received throughout the planning process to date has shaped the development and refinement of the Housing Site Inventory and the Housing Programs and Policies.”
Per the approved minutes regarding the Study Session:
“Vice Chair Hooper asked clarifying questions.”
“Vice Chair Hooper provided his comments.”
The GPAC roster included Mr. Hooper’s wife, Ms. Iliana Madrigal-Hooper throughout this process. Friends of the Petaluma River was utilized as a community engagement group when drafting the general plan.
As new ‘affordable housing’ units spring up around the City of Petaluma, North Bay Labor Council is presumably delighted that their affiliates will receive contracts for the builds.
Throughout the years, the Labor Council has repeatedly endorsed Congressman Huffman.
Because of Mr. Huffman’s perceived hypocrisies, is congressional funding representing the American people or corporate interests?
“Truth does not change, only our awareness of it.”
-Attallah Shabazz, Malcolm X's daughter