Assault on Democracy: Novato Provides No Facts to Justify ‘Urgency Ordinance’

Nikki Silverstein
-
11
Assault on Democracy: Novato Provides No Facts to Justify ‘Urgency Ordinance’

The Novato City Council called a special meeting and passed an urgency ordinance last week. With the wild weather warnings in Marin lately, one might think it had to do with a tsunami, tornado or atmospheric river. 

Good guesses based on the purpose of an urgency ordinance: California law states a city may enact such an ordinance for “the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety.” In other words, Novato had a critical situation and needed to act right away.

Or maybe not. 

At the meeting, the council voted unanimously to ban camping and camping gear on public property, clearly targeting the homeless community. Many people fail to see the urgency, especially when Novato first unveiled the anti-camping ordinance in September, only to have the city attorney promptly remove it from the meeting agenda. 

By asserting an urgent need, Novato bypassed the lengthier process required by state law to introduce, approve and enact an ordinance, which takes more than a month. An urgency ordinance moves through that entire process in 24 hours.

Novato resident and homeless advocate Robbie Powelson, troubled by what he deems as the abuse of the urgency ordinance, has filed a legal action against Novato for allegedly violating several state laws. He’s also seeking a temporary restraining order to halt the implementation of the urgency ordinance.

“If we don’t nullify it right now, the public is harmed because an illegal ordinance is on the books,” Powelson said in an interview. 

What happened to spur the city’s swift prohibition on camping? Well, that’s an excellent question and one I posed to each of the five city council members. They remain mum on the subject, although state law requires that a city’s urgency ordinance contain a “declaration of the facts constituting the urgency.”

Novato declared that camping on public property “has created an immediate threat to public peace, health, and safety.”  With such a strong statement, one might expect facts supported by data and evidence. The city did not deliver. 

Rather, the city said camping creates unsanitary conditions. True. But providing trash cans and porta potties near homeless encampments goes a long way to remedy that issue. 

Next up, camping brings the presence of unlawful activities, according to the city. News flash—crime happens everywhere, even inside homes. Perhaps the council members should check the Novato police log for a better idea of the goings-on in their lovely city. Those 60 sworn officers aren’t hanging out at homeless camps all day and night.

Finally, the city claims camping damages public property and natural resources. Again, Novato could get ahead of these problems by providing garbage bins and porta potties, as well as fire extinguishers and a security guard. As for the impact of camping on natural resources, the council is barking up the wrong tree. Homes and vehicles powered by fossil fuels cause far greater harm than homeless campers. 

The simple solution to the listed problems is a city-sanctioned homeless camp with sanitation gear and security, just like the one that Novato established in Lee Gerner Park two years ago as part of a legal settlement with the Marin Homeless Union. For now, a federal judge’s order has thwarted the city’s plans to shut down the camp, at least until the court decides on a motion filed by the union.

Lucie Hollingsworth, a Novato resident and senior housing attorney for Legal Aid of Marin, says the city’s new ordinance creates more obstacles for homeless people trying to get housing. At least 25 former Lee Gerner Park campers received housing while living at the camp, in large part because they remained connected to case managers guiding them through the process.

“Novato is saying, ‘We have the right to push you along and throw you in jail and take all of your things because you’re poor and can’t afford a home,’” Hollingsworth said. “It is far cheaper to solve homelessness than to perpetuate it and make it worse. An ordinance like this will only inspire more litigation and more money being thrown at attorneys instead of at the problem itself. As a taxpayer, that frustrates me as well.”

The city is currently fending off two legal actions for its homelessness policies, with the Marin Homeless Union promising to fight the new city-wide camping ban. Like its other lawsuits against municipalities, the union will base its claims on the 14th Amendment’s state-created danger doctrine.

Meanwhile, the elephant in the room remains. Did the City of Novato pull a fast one with the urgency ordinance? 

“It is disingenuous to call it an urgency ordinance,” said attorney Hollingsworth. “There was no event immediately preceding this special meeting. If it was really urgent, they would have done it in July, after the Supreme Court ruled in Grants Pass that it’s not cruel and unusual punishment to criminalize sleeping.”

Powelson believes Novato expected challenges to the ordinance, and its efforts were calculated to gain a legal advantage. 

“I think the city intended it as a way to get around an injunction stopping the enactment of the ordinance,” Powelson said. “They’re going to claim the status quo is in place. They think they’re being clever, but I don’t think it’s going to work.”

Marin Homeless Union attorney Anthony Prince says this is now a question of democracy, citing that officials chose to announce the special meeting on a Sunday afternoon, not a common time for residents to look for updates on the city’s website. The meeting occurred the following day at 2pm—in the middle of the workday—when most city council meetings are scheduled in the evening. 

“Novato is interfering with the public’s right to give input by providing a false depiction of the ordinance being urgent,” Prince said. “The meeting wasn’t online, and it wasn’t recorded. This is not the way city government should operate. It cut the public off.”

Still, about 30 people managed to attend the special meeting to voice their opposition to a city-wide camping ban. The city council offered no justification. In fact, they didn’t speak.

“I imagine it must have been pretty hard to sit up there as a politician and be told you’re inhumane, and then vote with no questions or discussion,” Hollingsworth said. “I don’t really understand the silence after doing something that is so inhumane.”

At least two council members had police escorts from the meeting room to their cars. Were they worried about their safety or simply scared to be asked questions by the people who elected them?

Prince chalks it up to Novato “bungling badly” and stepping up efforts to keep the public in the dark. 

The chairperson of the Novato Housing and Homeless Committee, Jason Sarris, twice tried to call a special meeting in recent weeks to discuss the city’s plans to ban camping and close the camp at Lee Gerner Park. Although the committee is tasked with advising the city council on housing and homelessness in Novato, staff refused to schedule the meeting, using a variety of excuses, none of which seem to meet the requirements set forth in the City of Novato’s Board, Commission and Committee Members Handbook.

“Novato has made it clear that they don’t want people without homes living in their city,” Sarris said. “Homeless people can now be arrested and charged with a misdemeanor for using a sleeping bag on public property—even if the shelters are full.”

This month, the city canceled the regularly scheduled meeting of the Housing and Homeless Committee because of staff shortages and the holidays. Interesting timing—even as the city felt compelled to pass an urgency ordinance impacting the homeless community, it willfully ignored the committee appointed to provide information to the city council.

Mike Little, a Novato resident, feels frustrated and angry. The day after the city council passed the ordinance, he visited Novato’s administration building in the hopes of speaking with city manager Amy Cunningham. In a video that he provided to me, Little is seen asking a staffer where to find Cunningham’s office. The man asked Little to wait while he tried to locate the city manager, but he never returned. However, three Novato police officers entered the building, with two questioning Little about his presence in the public area of a public building paid for by taxpayers.

Novato’s city council and city manager hiding behind police and refusing to speak to their constituents is cause for concern.  

“Those city council members lack gumption,” Powelson said. “They’re well trained by the city manager to follow certain rules. They’re not leaders; they’re elected bureaucrats getting managed by Amy Cunningham, who decides what information the council receives. This is not democracy in the way that we know it.”

Fenced In: Federal Judge to Decide Future of Tomales Point Tule Elk Herd

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Fenced In: Federal Judge to Decide Future of Tomales Point Tule Elk Herd

After confining a herd of tule elk behind a fence at Tomales Point in Point Reyes National Seashore for 46 years, the park began removing the enclosure on Dec. 3 to allow the animals to roam free. 

A restraining order forced the park to cease its efforts three days later.

The whiplash chronology of last week’s events started Monday with Point Reyes National Seashore, part of the National Park Service (NPS), announcing the release of a new management plan for the Tomales Point area, which includes removing the eight-foot-high tule elk fencing that spans two miles. On Tuesday, while workers started taking down the enclosure, the Cattlemen’s Association filed a lawsuit against the NPS and the U.S. Department of Interior, seeking a temporary restraining order and injunction to restore the removed portions and prevent further fence demolition.

A hearing in federal court on Friday resulted in Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley issuing an order for the park not to dismantle additional fencing or take actions to move tule elk out of Tomales Point. In February, the court will hear a motion for a preliminary injunction to continue the order through the lawsuit proceedings. 

Yet, the opening in the fence remains, and the mammals may move out of the enclosure on their own. 

The Point Reyes National Seashore leases land to a number of beef cattle ranches and dairies, which keep about 5,000 cattle. The Cattlemen’s Association lawsuit alleges that tule elk from the Tomales Point enclosure will migrate to the “Pastoral Zone” and cause harm. The claims include that tule elk will compete with cattle for forage, force cattle away from feed provided by the ranchers and spread disease.

“Once outside the elk preserve fence, there is no stopping the elk migration across the entire Pastoral Zone,” the lawsuit states. “They can simply walk in.”

Tule elk, Cervus canadensis nannodes, is a special subspecies, only found in California. Historically inhabiting areas of Marin County, including Point Reyes, the animals were extirpated in the 1850s by market, tallow and hide hunters, as well as habitat loss when people settled in the area.

However, in 1978, the NPS reintroduced 10 tule elk to a 2,600-acre fenced area in Tomales Point. Later, the park another 300 acres to the reserve. The herd eventually grew to as many as 585 in 2007, but changing environmental conditions, such as drought, cause fluctuations in the population. 

Two free-ranging herds also inhabit the Point Reyes National Seashore, with almost 400 tule elk in the Drakes Beach and Limantour areas.

Animal advocates battled the park service for years to free the Tomales Point tule elk. The fight reached a crescendo during the drought that began in 2020. Behind the fence, food and water were scarce, and the animals were starving and dying. More than 150 in the herd died that year.

In June 2021, the Animal Legal Defense Fund—represented by the Harvard Animal Law and Policy Clinic—sued the NPS to require it to update the 1980 General Management Plan for the Tomales Point area and immediately provide the tule elk with food and water. 

The park installed water troughs in the enclosure days before the Animal Legal Defense Fund filed its lawsuit. The following year, it provided mineral licks containing key nutrients for the tule elk. Fortunately, the drought ended in 2023, and the tule elk population increased from 222 in 2021 to 315 in 2024, according to annual census data from the Point Reyes National Seashore. 

Although the court ruled in favor of the NPS in 2023, the Animal Legal Defense Fund has filed an appeal. Still, the park conducted an environmental assessment and revised the management plan for Tomales Point. Concern for the tule elk and public comment prompted the decision to remove the fence.

“We analyzed three alternatives and incorporated feedback from over 35,000 public comment letters gathered during three comment periods,” Point Reyes National Seashore superintendent Anne Altman said in a press release issued last week. “The benefit of removing this enclosure is to allow elk to access additional habitat, increase the species’ population resilience during drought, and promote a more natural population cycle.”

The Cattlemen’s Association lawsuit says it finds the new plan astonishing. Indeed, it departs from the 2021 general management plan amendment for Point Reyes National Seashore that determined the park would “not change the status of the elk fence at Tomales Point.” The 2021 plan also allows ranch leases to extend for up to 20 years.

It’s somewhat ironic that the lawsuit’s basis is what the Cattlemen’s Association calls a “flawed environmental review process” that ignored the ranching zone outside Tomales Point. Environmentalists maintain that cattle waste has contaminated the park’s water.

A 2021 study by a geoenvironmental engineer monitored several creeks, a lagoon and tributary within the dairy and beef cattle drainage areas at Point Reyes National Seashore and found “imminent human health risks exist” from bacterial contamination in the water. 

“Reductions in the localized abundance of cattle waste will likely be necessary to adequately protect surface water quality,” according to the engineer’s report prepared for the Western Watersheds Project.

Three environmental groups sued the NPS in 2022 for its decision to expand beef and dairy ranching on public lands in the Point Reyes National Seashore and Golden Gate National Recreation Area. They assert that the park prioritized ranchers’ needs at the expense of the environment. The ongoing case also names the Point Reyes Seashore Ranchers Association as a defendant.

Many moving parts may affect the cattle and dairy ranchers and the beloved tule elk. Nevertheless, the Animal Legal Defense Fund feels cautiously optimistic. 

“As a result of our taking legal action, it drew a lot of national attention to the issue,” said Chris Green, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund. “All that attention helped the park service realize just how important the elk were to folks and that what was happening to them was just a travesty. It’s heartening to see the federal government actually updated the plan and took public sentiment into account. They did the right thing.”

According to Green, now that the park has updated its management plan, the animal rights organization is evaluating whether to dismiss its lawsuit.

It remains to be seen whether the decision to allow the Tomales Point tule elk to roam the park will stand. The next hearing in the case of the Cattlemen’s Association lawsuit to reverse that policy is on Feb. 13.

Meditation Mess: Spirit Rock Sued for Discrimination

Nikki Silverstein
-
8
Meditation Mess: Spirit Rock Sued for Discrimination

The former executive director of Spirit Rock Meditation Center filed a lawsuit against the renowned Marin nonprofit in June. Spirit Rock fired back two months later by filing a counter lawsuit.

Allegations in the two lawsuits don’t seem to align with the spiritual organization’s mission of providing its flock with “teachings to manifest wisdom and compassion in all aspects of their lives, for the benefit of all beings.” Some might even argue that Spirit Rock’s counterclaim represents the antithesis of its stated mission.

Both sides make some damning accusations in their lawsuits filed in federal court. Richard Aubry, hired as the executive director in December 2022 and terminated in March 2024, asserts that Spirit Rock ended his employment without notice, refused to pay wages and severance, made defamatory statements and discriminated against him, among other charges.

But Spirit Rock has a much different narrative in its lawsuit against Aubry, accusing the former director of fraud, theft and more. According to the counterclaim, Aubry’s theft involved submitting non-business items on his expense reports.

Not surprisingly, Spirit Rock denies Aubry’s claims, and he rejects those of his former employer. So, what in the name of Buddha is going on?

Neither party responded to requests for an interview before the print deadline. Still, a quick review of the center’s history and future plans may hold some answers.

Located on 411 acres in Marin’s unincorporated community of Woodacre, Spirit Rock was founded in 1988 by a small group from the Insight Meditation Society in Massachusetts. Jack Kornfield, who trained as a Buddhist monk, and Sylvia Boorstein were among them. Both became internationally known teachers and have published numerous books on spiritualism.

For years, Spirit Rock consisted of several portable trailers for the meditation center and staff living quarters. A few buildings followed in the late ’90s. Then, in 2015, a new administration building and housing for teachers and staff opened. The following year, Spirit Rock unveiled a beautiful new 11,850 square foot meditation center building.

Practitioners can participate in drop-in meditation groups, retreats, class series, trainings and family programs, most focused on the Buddha’s teachings. Depending upon the source, it is estimated that 4,000 people attend programs at the facility annually, with another 40,000-50,000 joining online.

And the center has plans for a major expansion with more new buildings. A recruitment firm’s recent job listing for the now-filled Spirit Rock executive director position states the anticipated project costs will range from $25-$35 million, and the current annual operating budget for the institute is $9 million.

Aubry’s lawsuit against Spirit Rock doesn’t provide the operating budget or the planned costs of the expansion he describes as “a second retreat campus” on the property. However, he states the organization has financial issues, despite Spirit Rock’s initial presentation to him that it was “fiscally and financially successful.”

“Rather than the positive financial state he was told during his interviews, the budget actually projected a significant loss for the fiscal year that began October 2022,” according to the lawsuit. “Revenues from fund-raising activities were grossly overstated, without any input from the Development Director who had grave concerns about being able to meet such fund-raising numbers.”

The former executive director also claims he discovered during his first month on the job that the budget for the second campus project had tripled or quadrupled, and Spirit Rock had previously given him figures that were “aspirational.” Clearly, Spirit Rock and Aubry didn’t get off to a great start, and it went downhill from there, according to the lawsuits filed by both parties. 

Yet Aubry’s education and professional experience seemed a good match for Spirit Rock, a California nonprofit religious corporation. As a trained psychologist, former Stanford University professor, assistant provost at Tulane University and a leader of nonprofits for decades, he checked the boxes to run the meditation center’s operations. 

While declaring that he performed his Spirit Rock duties in “exemplary fashion,” Aubry recounts bumps in the road. He details in the lawsuit that when he suggested ways to cut costs for the planned second campus, some members of the Spirit Rock board of directors began “viewing him negatively and labelling him as not believing in the ‘power of the Dharma [the teachings of Buddha].’”

The board declined to follow Aubry’s advice to cancel a retreat that he believed would result in the loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars. “The huge loss was sustained,” the lawsuit says.

In March 2024, the continuing rifts reached a climax. A woman named in the lawsuit as “Employee A” led the short-staffed finance department. Consequently, it took months for her to prepare the monthly reports for October and November 2023 showing the comparison between the budget and the actual revenue and expenses, according to the lawsuit. 

There was a large difference, indicating that Spirit Rock was over its budget, caused by Employee A making a mistake in her revenue projection formula, the lawsuit asserts. Aubry said he immediately informed the board of directors.

For the next two weeks, the executive director worked with staff and a board member to find solutions. On March 27, he made a presentation to the board, which included suggestions for reducing staff to address the budget issues. 

The board promptly terminated him after the meeting. Based on Aubry’s contract with Spirit Rock, his salary was $250,000 annually, and it called for three months severance pay, unless the center terminated for a short list of serious offenses. 

Aubry’s lawsuit states that Spirit Rock informed him that he was being terminated with cause for “violating his fiduciary duties.” The employment contract provided that he should have been given 30 days to “cure” that issue, which he was not. Still, Spirit Rock refused to pay him severance, he claims.

Later that evening, an email was sent to all Spirit Rock employees stating that “a significant error was made in the preparation of the current year budget” and Rick Aubry was no longer employed by the center. The email indicated that Employee A was not terminated. Rather, she was put on a transition plan to leave Spirit Rock. 

Because Employee A is a 50+ Black woman and Aubry is a 71-year-old, white Jewish man, his lawsuit claims that he was discriminated against.

Spirit Rock filed a counter suit against Aubry two months later. The former executive director, according to the filing, submitted and was reimbursed for non-business expenses, including a trip to Davos, Switzerland, to the tune of almost $5,000. Additionally, Spirit Rock alleged that it reimbursed him for Uber rides and subscriptions to The New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle and the Marin Independent Journal, also not work expenses. 

In Aubry’s response to the counterclaim, he disputes these accusations, although admits that he unintentionally submitted for reimbursement a few Uber rides for personal use. And he denies Spirit Rock’s assertion that the Switzerland trip wasn’t approved by the board.

“This is so disillusioning to me,” a longtime Spirit Rock participant who spoke under the condition of anonymity told the Pacific Sun. “Jack Kornfield speaks about forgiveness. I’m concerned that they’re comfortable being so petty and vindictive.”

The participant, a retired school teacher, has been going to Spirit Rock for many years. She said that she has found great comfort there, especially with the teachings of Kornfield and Mark Coleman after her mother died. Her intent is to continue participating in Spirit Rock’s programs, adding that “the talks confirm my own sense of what is true, and not any adherence to any one philosophy, religion or teacher.”

A little forgiveness might go a long way when Aubry and Spirit Rock try to resolve their disputes outside of the courtroom. Last week, both parties agreed to mediation. Let’s meditate on that.

Officials in Marin Consider Camping Bans for Homeless People

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Officials in Marin Consider Camping Bans for Homeless People

Sausalito banned camping on public property in 2022 after it closed the only homeless encampment in the city. Fairfax and Novato are considering similar measures.

Advocates for the homeless fear that if Fairfax and Novato adopt anti-camping policies, it could create a domino effect throughout Marin’s municipalities. In a county where shelters remain perpetually full, these bans could leave no place for the unhoused people to rest their heads legally.

“A camping ban forces everybody out of that town,” advocate Robbie Powelson said. “Then the other towns will get an influx of people, and those towns will want to pass a law. But in the end, nobody has anywhere to go. You’ll have law enforcement sweeping camps and seizing people’s survival gear and belongings. And that makes the living situations of people on the streets horrible and dangerous. That’s the race to the bottom, basically.”

To evade sweeps and citations, some homeless people hide in remote areas, far from food, water and shelter. Powelson notes that research shows their mortality rate is significantly higher than that of housed individuals.

A large-scale study using data from 21,000 deceased homeless people in the United States determined the average age of death was 51, while the average life expectancy of the general population is 78 years, according to an article published this year in Health Affairs, a health policy journal. 

Fairfax unveiled its proposed anti-homeless ordinance last week. The document states six times that “sleep” or “sleeping” is prohibited on public property. To be clear, the law isn’t aimed at a dad napping during a family picnic in the park. It targets homeless people, who need sleep just like housed people.

Why did the left-leaning Fairfax Town Council introduce the ordinance? Currently, a total of five homeless people live at Peri Park, causing many townsfolk to fret and demand the council take action.

Some Fairfax residents have voiced typical concerns about encampments, such as trash, drug use and mental health issues. A key worry raised at town council meetings is the safety of children playing in Peri Park, particularly with the upcoming West Marin Little League season at nearby Contratti Park. However, some parents report no problems when bringing their children to Peri Park.

Gary Naja-Riese, director of Marin County’s Homelessness & Coordinated Care department, spoke at the Fairfax Town Council meeting on Nov. 19 to answer council members’ questions and provide perspective on “the most humane and successful pathway to resolving encampments.”

He recommended evidence-based practices to close the encampment, including outreach workers and case managers who assess campers and help them enter the county’s coordinated care system. Naja-Riese stressed the need to allow enough time to connect individuals with permanent housing.

“Currently, there are no [Section 8 housing] vouchers available for individuals,” Naja-Riese said. “The Marin Housing Authority is in something that’s called ‘voucher shortfall,’ which happens occasionally. It means that all available vouchers and funds have been expended. We don’t expect there to be additional vouchers available until at least the beginning of the new year.”

Lack of shelter beds, just 161 in the county, also remains an issue. Marin’s 2024 homelessness point-in-time count indicated 1,090 homeless people live here, leaving many with no choice but to stay on the street.

Naja-Riese suggests that Fairfax allow current residents to stay, while preventing new individuals from joining the encampment. The campers would then work with case managers on their permanent housing path, which may start with a temporary stay in a local shelter.

He proposed that local funding and resources from Fairfax or other sources would make the program possible. Despite the quick action demanded by some residents, Naja-Reise said it’s unlikely that it would be successful in 90 days. 

The county runs a similar program at a vehicle encampment on Binford Road in Novato, funded by a state grant. In a year, the population went from 132 individuals to 60. 

Outreach workers also need time to build trust with traumatized campers. Unfortunately, visitors to the Peri Park encampment have slowed efforts to resolve the encampment.

“I can confidently say I’ve received at least two to three complaints from individuals in the encampment who have said that they’re confused as to why members of the public have approached them, promising services and support,” Naja-Riese said. “They are not sure what to do. And when clients get put in that position, that hesitation can cause them to not take advantage of opportunities that are actually in front of them.”

A review of social media posts from Fairfax residents bears this out. One woman wrote that she tried to convince campers to leave, offered them a ride and encouraged them to go to San Rafael, where she said more services are available.

After a contentious round of public comments and discussion among the Fairfax council members, they voted unanimously to continue consideration of the ordinance at the Dec. 4 meeting. 

Meanwhile, the Marin County Homeless Union and the City of Novato will meet in federal court on Dec. 3. The union claims the city violated a 2022 settlement agreement by trying to close the sanctioned encampment in Lee Gerner Park without a needs assessment and proper notice. The city denies these allegations in its court filing.

Novato officials expect a final ruling in the case in December, after which “the City Council will address the ongoing status of the camp at a public meeting,” Sherrin Olivero, a Novato spokesperson, told the Pacific Sun in an email.

It appears the writing is on the wall. Even if the homeless union prevails in enforcing the settlement agreement terms, Novato seems determined to close the camp, despite 25 campers receiving permanent housing during the past two years. The agreement states that the closure is at the city’s discretion after it complies with specific requirements. 

And then there’s the city-wide camping ban that Novato is considering. Olivero said last month that the city is evaluating its current camping ordinances based on the recent Supreme Court ruling in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson. The ruling held that regulating camping on public property does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

In September, the Novato City Council, with staff reports recommending approval, had the encampment closure and camping ban on its meeting agenda. However, the city attorney withdrew the items after the Marin County Homeless Union argued that placing them on the agenda violated the settlement agreement and requested a meet and confer.

The union’s attorney, Anthony Prince, vows to file another lawsuit if Novato closes the camp or passes the anti-camping ordinance. The legal action would be based on the 14th Amendment’s state-created danger doctrine.

It will be interesting to see whether Fairfax or Novato wins this race to the bottom. Stay tuned.

Mining Minutiae: Marin’s Trivia Master Celebrates 40 Years

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Mining Minutiae: Marin’s Trivia Master Celebrates 40 Years

Pop the Champagne cork and raise a glass to Marin’s most learned man, Howard Rachelson. The brain behind the Pacific Sun’s “Trivia Café” and quizzes around the county celebrates his 40th year in the miscellaneous facts biz.

Even after four decades, Rachelson effusively expresses his passion for trivia contests. Not only does he research and write all the questions for the competitions he hosts, but he also likes participating as a contestant when another trivia master runs the show. 

I cry foul, saying that makes him a ringer. Sure, Rachelson admits, he has retained a wealth of knowledge from gathering thousands of pages of trivial material, yet he often gets stumped. 

Well, I still want to play on his team. 

Rachelson’s first trivia experience occurred when he worked as a math teacher at the American International School in Israel. A neighborhood organization for English speakers held a “quiz supper.” Neither he nor his wife knew what a quiz supper entailed, but the young couple was game. 

The quiz master got up on stage and said that each dinner table was a team in competition with all the other tables. Contestants were instructed that questions would be read out to the room, and each team would work to come up with one answer.

“This quiz supper, I enjoyed it so much,” Rachelson said. “I had never participated in an event where people were exchanging ideas about Mozart, history and other interesting subjects.”

For the next event, Rachelson helped write questions for the trivia master. The math teacher became hooked. Soon, he was holding quiz bowls for his students.

In 1984, about a year after he and his family moved to Marin, Rachelson walked into the Mayflower Inn, a traditional English pub in downtown San Rafael, and pitched then-owner Barry Oldham on a trivia event. Oldham gave him Tuesday nights, also the bar’s dart night. 

“This was exactly 40 years ago, the end of October, and I walked in with some questions that I’d written,” Rachelson said. “There were 8, 10, maybe 12 people sitting there. And I said, ‘It’s trivia night.’ But once I started reading questions, they got into it. The questions were accessible. That’s the idea, coming up with questions that people have some knowledge of or find interesting.”

Rachelson set up the competitions the same way that he had experienced trivia—teams pitted against teams. Each week, more and more folks attended until 100 people were crowded into the small pub. Oldham decided that darts and trivia didn’t mix, moving the more cerebral competition to Thursday nights. 

At the time, Rachelson was hosting the first and only trivia contest in Marin and the second in the Bay Area, he said. His Mayflower Inn competitions lasted for more than 20 years, ending in 2005.

Researching and writing trivia questions has always been a labor of love, especially before the internet existed. Rachelson used to drive to a library every week, ask the librarian for a few reference books and take out a sharpened pencil and pad of paper.

“I started opening the references randomly,” Rachelson said. “And then I’d find the fact that would be interesting for a group of people. That was hard—interesting for a group of people.”

Until Rachelson and I got together for a cup of coffee a couple of weeks ago, I hadn’t given much thought to the intricacies of putting together a trivia game. Don’t you just open Google, copy, then paste? Hmm. Let’s just say that this lack of nuanced thinking is the reason I am not a trivia master.

There are bad questions and good questions, Rachelson explained. And many factors go into weeding out the good from the bad.

“Some people say, ‘Here’s a great question; nobody will know this,’” Rachelson said. “That’s a terrible question. You want at least some of the people to know the answer; otherwise, it’s frustrating. The worst thing is when nobody knows the answer and nobody has heard of the answer. That’s the worst. Any question whose answer is Benjamin Franklin, it’s a good question.”

Crediting his many years as a teacher, Rachelson knows how to read the room. Even in a bar full of strangers playing his trivia game, he understands how questions will land for contestants.

“One instinct I developed over the years is the ability to determine how easy or hard the question is,” he said. “And how interesting or not. I can also tell by the people in the room what percentage of them will be able to figure out the answer.”

When he writes competition questions, Rachelson’s goal is for more than half the people to get more than half the questions right. They display their knowledge, he says, which is satisfying in and of itself. And they don’t feel frustrated, another essential component of a good trivia game. But he still needs to make the questions difficult enough that there’s room to separate the scores. 

The satisfaction of correctly answering a question, however, is just part of a trivia contest’s allure. And a master like Rachelson understands the science and art behind it.

“It’s not that people want to be right all the time,” he said. “Curiosity is the number one reason a person likes trivia. They enjoy learning new material. Enjoy the thrill of getting an answer correct in a competitive environment. There’s an endorphin rush when you get an answer.”

Camaraderie, too, plays an important role in a trivia competition. When a team gets an answer right, the high-fiving begins. There’s also a social aspect that comes from being with friends, eating and drinking together.

Phil Lesh, the Grateful Dead co-founder who died last month, was a trivia fan, hiring Rachelson to host contests at his San Rafael restaurant, Terrapin Crossroads, and even between concerts in Las Vegas.

As Rachelson recalls, writing the competition questions for Lesh’s 75th birthday at Terrapin Crossroads turned out to be his hardest trivia gig ever. Sure, he had to research questions that diehard Deadheads would know, but some folks were casual fans.

“I felt like I had to write a trivia contest for medical school students and high school students at the same time,” Rachelson said. “I remember buying books and pulling books out of the library to do research and making page after page of questions.”

Like all of Rachelson’s trivia endeavors, Lesh’s birthday trivia bash was a success. Folks left the event with smiles on their faces, he recalled. 

“The key idea is the pleasure people derive from the social experience,” Rachelson said. “The research and the execution of the event, that’s what I really enjoy. How often do people stand, high-five each other and cheer at an intellectual endeavor? It makes me happy to see the satisfaction that people get from it. And the proof is in the pudding—they keep coming back for more.”


Join Howard Rachelson for a trivia competition at the Sweetwater Music Hall in Mill Valley on Sunday, Jan. 5, at 5pm. Email ho*****@********fe.com to sign up for Tuesday Night Trivia Night, on Zoom at 6pm, or receive future event notifications.

Marin Provides Support for Survivors of Suicide Loss

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Marin Provides Support for Survivors of Suicide Loss

Sophia Balestreri lost her son to suicide in 2009. 

“It’s unlike any other type of death,” she said. “It’s sudden. It’s shocking. People want to know why, and especially when it’s somebody young.”

While Balestreri and her family struggled with the devastating loss, she sought out personal health and wellness resources. Services existed yet were difficult to find. Balestreri realized she needed to advocate for her family.

Today, Balestreri advocates for others impacted by suicide, serving as program coordinator for the Felton Institute’s Local Outreach to Suicide Survivors (LOSS). Through a contract with Marin County, LOSS provides a variety of vital “postvention” services, including peer support teams that reach out to families directly after a suicide loss. 

“Our team of peer volunteers brings resources to survivors,” Balestreri said. “We’ve been through the same type of loss, and we show people it is possible to live through this.”

Unfortunately, Marin needs these resources—the county has one of the highest suicide rates in the Bay Area. Over the last 11 years, 399 Marin residents died by suicide, the county reported on its suicide prevention data dashboard.

When three Marin high school students died by suicide in December 2017, it raised awareness among residents of the complexity of suicide and became a catalyst for change. Still, from 2018 to 2020, Marin’s suicide rate reached 14.6 per 100,000, compared with California’s rate of 10.5, according to the California Department of Public Health. 

There are spikes and dips from year to year. In 2023, there were 25 suicides in the county, compared with 40 the previous year.

Kara Connors, the county’s senior program coordinator for suicide prevention, attributes a portion of the high rate to Marin’s proximity to the Golden Gate Bridge. The completion of the suicide deterrent net early this year has already significantly reduced attempts and suicides from the iconic structure, the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District reported in July.

The Marin County Suicide Prevention Collaborative also aims to reduce the high incidence of local suicides. Launched in 2020 by the Marin County Behavioral Health and Recovery Services, the collaborative implemented a strategic plan for suicide prevention though partnerships with public and private agencies, individuals and community action teams. 

LOSS, the program managed by Balestreri, is part of the collaborative. Other partners include the Golden Gate Bridge Patrol, Buckelew Programs, North Marin Community Services and the Marin County Office of Education.

“Our whole charge is a collaborative to help build the competency of members of our community, to talk about suicide and learn about the resources,” said Connors. “It’s not a topic that people want to talk about. But when there’s a very public suicide, people say, ‘We’ve got to do something.’ Well, we are doing something. We’ve got our collaborative, we’ve got resources, and we’ve got a whole community behind this.”

Trauma and stigma make it difficult for people to discuss suicide, yet talking is the only way to reduce the shame surrounding it. An essential aspect of suicide prevention involves normalizing the conversation, enabling people who are struggling, isolated and feeling alone to ask for help.

Men and boys tend not to talk about their feelings, putting them at a higher risk. In Marin, males account for approximately three-quarters of deaths by suicide. The Marin County Suicide Prevention Collaborative has a Men and Boys Action Team, where participants meet to talk about substance use, suicidality and other topics in a safe space.

“We’ve heard from suicide survivors that there is shame right when they are having suicidal thoughts,” Balestreri said. “They don’t want to share that with anyone, so being with others in a supportive environment or just being with one person who can stand there in that very scary moment—the shame goes away, because now they’ve shared that with someone.”

Suicide warning signs include words, actions and feelings. Increased substance use, changes in appearance, withdrawing, not answering the phone or texts, acting recklessly, and having conflicts in relationships should be taken seriously. Some people become overwhelmed when they’re bullied, rejected or struggling with gender or sexual identity.

A person may not look depressed, Balestreri noted. The change in behavior could manifest as a feeling of peace or happiness. Trust your gut instinct, she suggested. 

“You can use those signs as a door opener to a conversation in a non-judgmental way—‘I’m worried about you,’” Connors said.

Connors recommends asking directly whether the person is thinking about suicide. The next steps include listening, validating and getting help. Always follow up with, “I’m staying with you.” 

And then connect to resources, such as 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, a mobile crisis team or therapist.

Holding public meetings every other month, the Marin County Suicide Prevention Collaborative provides a wealth of information and a supportive setting for anyone touched by suicide. In addition to the Men and Boys Action Team, the collaborative has six other community teams open to the public. 

LOSS also hosts two support groups, one for youth who have lost a loved one to suicide and an adult group for those who have attempted suicide. The ripple effect of suicide is far-reaching. 

“Some research indicates that for every suicide, 135 people are impacted,” Connors said. 

On Saturday, Nov. 23, LOSS and other partners of the Marin County Suicide Prevention Collaborative will host International Survivors of Suicide Loss Day. The event offers suicide loss survivors a time to connect with each other and honor the loved ones they’ve lost. It takes place from 1 to 3:30pm at the Marin County Office of Education.

While Marin is making strides, both Connors and Balestreri emphasize that an important element to preventing suicide is removing the stigma. Talking, getting involved and learning about the county’s resources will reduce the risk. 

“For survivors of suicide loss, it’s important not to hold yourself responsible for things that you didn’t say or do based on what you learn,” Balestreri said.

No shame, no guilt, no stigma.

“Suicide can be prevented,” Connors said. “We can treat suicide as a health issue, create a caring culture and make it OK to ask for help. If we don’t make it OK to talk about, then how do we honor our loved ones?”

If you are worried about yourself or someone you know, there is help. Contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by texting or calling 988. Chat available at 988lifeline.org.

Long-Awaited Sheriff’s Oversight Ordinance Approved

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Long-Awaited Sheriff’s Oversight Ordinance Approved

The Marin County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a controversial and long-awaited ordinance last week to initiate independent civilian oversight of the sheriff’s office.

On Nov. 5, the supervisors gave a final nod to the ordinance and adopted it, which seemed a fait accompli despite some members of the public urging the board to reject it.

The ordinance establishes a nine-member civilian oversight commission that will work with an inspector general employed by the county to oversee the sheriff’s office with the “goal of cultivating trust, transparency, and accountability.” The ordinance provides mechanisms that allow the commission and inspector general to keep tabs on the law enforcement agency.

The oversight entities will develop a process for the public to submit complaints about the sheriff’s office, including privacy protections and a way to handle anonymous complaints. 

Additionally, the ordinance allows the commission and inspector general the authority to issue subpoenas to produce documents and testimony. When the commission believes that an internal affairs investigation completed by the sheriff’s office is deficient, they can authorize the inspector general to launch an independent investigation, under certain circumstances. 

While Assembly Bill 1185, state legislation enacted in January 2021, allows counties to establish an oversight commission, an inspector general position or both, the sheriff, an elected official, has no obligation to implement any of their recommendations.

Those who spoke during the public comment period when the ordinance was introduced at the Oct. 29 meeting were split on whether the board should pass it. Most who opposed it are in favor of oversight, but say this ordinance is flawed. They pointed to the county’s concessions to appease two labor unions representing sheriff’s office employees. 

Indeed, Marin’s county counsel spent about six months with the unions in a confidential “meet and confer” process. While it is required by state law, critics say the county had far too many meetings with the unions, resulting in an ordinance that replaced robust oversight with a watered-down version.

“The devil is in the details and the draft ordinance in front of you. It contains four provisions that aim to put law enforcement in the driver’s seat and allow the sheriff’s office to disempower the civilian oversight commission,” Tammy Edmonson, a retired attorney and member of Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment (MVFREE), said in the supervisors meeting.

Several members of the county-appointed civilian working group that developed the oversight structure encouraged a yes vote by the supervisors. However, they admitted the ordinance does not include all the elements in their recommendation. 

“Let not the wish for a perfect ordinance get in the way of one that will get us started,” Heidi Merchen, a working group member, said at the board meeting. “We are just getting to the starting line. It is all of our jobs to make sure that we have accountable oversight in our county.”

One of the few people attending the meeting who didn’t voice an opinion was Marin County Sheriff Jamie Scardina. Earlier this year, Scardina told the Pacific Sun that the ordinance is “a step in the right direction” for the community and sheriff’s office.

After the board approved the ordinance, Edmonson explained why she believes it won’t provide true oversight of the sheriff’s office in an interview with the Pacific Sun. The ordinance, she said, keeps the oversight commission from having access to the complaints about the sheriff’s office. 

Worse yet, under the ordinance, the commission and inspector general are potentially prevented from ordering an independent investigation because of time constraints, according to Edmonson. 

The sheriff’s office must first complete an internal investigation before the oversight commission can order an independent investigation, as provided in the ordinance. But there’s another impediment, too. The ordinance states an independent investigation can’t be launched if “doing so would violate the time limits set forth in the Public Safety Officers’ Procedural Bill of Rights Act [POBR].”

A review of POBR, state legislation enacted to protect the rights of sworn law enforcement officers, reveals that it contains only one time limit. It precludes punitive action from being taken against an officer unless the investigation is completed within one year of the discovery of alleged misconduct.

“Obviously, if the sheriff’s office just dragged its feet on the initial investigation, that can prevent an independent investigation from ever happening,” Edmonson said. “Sheriff’s oversight is not about giving the sheriff the benefit of the doubt. It is for the worst-case scenario.”

Edmonson cites that of about 60 complaints filed with the sheriff’s office over the last eight years, only one was partially substantiated. And the public has no information about that one complaint because the sheriff’s office is “secretive,” she said.

A working group member, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they fear public backlash, has a different perspective of the ordinance.

“I would say there is consensus among the working group that we achieved what we wanted to achieve,” they said. “We wanted independent investigations and to ensure that there was subpoena power built into the ordinance. We wanted funding to have an inspector general and staff. The things that we were able to move the needle on are all the building blocks for an effective ordinance.” 

Acknowledging that the group had an uphill battle getting to this point, the member said they believe sheriff’s oversight will evolve over time. An operating agreement between the inspector general and the sheriff’s office must still be developed, and the member sees this as an opportunity for the oversight commission to help identify some of those policies and procedures.

But Edmonson argues that the current ordinance does not actually provide the necessary foundation to be effective.

“The only power that civilian oversight ever has is to bring transparency for the purpose of building trust,” Edmonson said. “The ordinance should allow the oversight bodies to oversee the law enforcement investigation. They need to be aware. What are the complaints? Tell us what’s going on. Who are you? Who are you interviewing? What does the investigation look like? Well, in our system, the commission doesn’t have the right to do any of that.”

At the end of the lengthy process to pass this sheriff’s oversight ordinance, not everyone is pleased with the outcome. Others remain hopeful. 

The county’s schedule has the oversight commission seated and meeting by spring of 2025. By the summer, the county will have appointed an inspector general, and the operating agreement with the sheriff’s office is expected by early 2026. 

Time will tell if the sheriff’s oversight ordinance brings transparency and trust or if Marin residents will still be looking at the sheriff’s procedures through opaque glass.

Tenants v. Landlords, Marin Rent Control Measures on the Ballot

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Tenants v. Landlords, Marin Rent Control Measures on the Ballot

With the election less than a week away, rent control and just cause eviction protections remain hot topics for Fairfax, San Anselmo and Larkspur voters. All three municipalities have ballot measures to decide on the two issues.

Rent control sets the amount a landlord can raise rents, often tied to the local Consumer Price Index increase. However, not all rentals in California are currently subject to rent control. The state’s Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act exempts single-family homes, condos and units built after 1995.

Just cause eviction regulations prevent landlords from arbitrarily evicting tenants. Typically, when the landlord wants the tenant to vacate for a reason covered under just cause policies, the landlord must provide a relocation payment to the tenant.

The only thing proponents and opponents of the measures agree on is that the stakes are high. Rent control supporters point to extremely high rents driving low- and middle-income earners out of Marin. While California’s Tenant Protection Act—AB 1482—caps rent increases, rents could rise up to 10% annually based on the Consumer Price Index.

The opposition believes AB 1482 is sufficient. “Extra” rent control deters landlords from maintaining and improving their properties.

“Renter protections allow ordinary working people to live in Marin,” said Curt Ries, co-chair of Marin’s Democratic Socialists of America chapter. “These are the people who make our communities run, like our teachers, maintenance workers, healthcare workers and service workers. It’s not right that only the very, very affluent can live here and enjoy the wonderful communities that these workers build and maintain.”

Michael Sexton, a Fairfax resident who rents out half of his duplex, has led the charge against rent control and just cause eviction protections in Marin. As the director of Marin Residents, a nonprofit opposing the two issues, Sexton helped place the Fairfax measure on the ballot.

“Right now, in my perspective, extra rent control, this onerous thing, is a disincentive for small landlords to rent out their space,” Sexton said. “The biggest issue I have with just cause is when it comes to an owner having to sell. Realtors say it’s cleaner if there’s no tenant. But the only way that a tenant will leave is they die, or you buy them out.”

Marin renters, mom and pop landlords, corporate landlords, realtors, local politicians, labor unions and a variety of associations have debated the pros and cons of the two issues, sometimes resulting in chaotic town and city council meetings.

Big money has flowed into the small-town campaigns, especially from opponents of Larkspur’s Measure K, which, if passed, would strengthen existing rent control and just cause eviction protections. The corporate owners of Larkspur’s two largest apartment complexes helped form Marin Residents for Protecting Larkspur’s Future, a committee opposing Measure K, and then made considerable contributions. 

As of Oct. 7, Prime Administration and affiliated entities, owner of Skylark Apartments in Larkspur, contributed $49,000 this year. Hummingbird Hill contributed $49,000 in 2024. A little digging traces Hummingbird Hill back to Andrea Schultz, owner of Bon Air Apartments in Larkspur. The other large donor, California Apartment Association, wrote a check for $15,000.

In contrast, Keep Larkspur Fair and Affordable, a committee supporting rent control and just cause eviction policies, received two sizable donations—$5,000 each from the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 and the California Nurses Association.

Let’s review other information that may help voters in Fairfax, San Anselmo and Larkspur determine whether rent control and just cause eviction policies would benefit their communities.

Marin County ranks as the country’s fourth most expensive housing market, with a median home price of almost $1.6 million, according to the National Association of Realtors. Mortgage company JVM Lending estimates that a household must earn at least $282,000 annually to afford that home.

The expensive housing market forces most low- and middle-income individuals and families to rent. In a 2024 Rental Affordability report by ATTOM, a real estate data firm, Marin ranks as the country’s third most expensive rental market.

The California Housing Partnership calculated that a Marin renter needs to earn $54 an hour—3.5 times the state’s minimum wage—to afford the average monthly rent of $2,806. 

When households spend more than 30% of their income on rent, they are considered rent-burdened. According to the County of Marin, 44% of the county’s renters spend more than 35% of their income on rent.

Since the mid-1940’s economists have studied the impact of rent control, finding benefits and consequences.

“Economists generally have found that, while rent-control policies do restrict rents at more affordable rates, they can also lead to a reduction of rental stock and maintenance, thereby exacerbating affordable housing shortages,” said a 2024 article by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “At the same time, the tenants of controlled units can benefit from lower costs and greater neighborhood stability—as long as they don’t move.”

However, last year, 32 economists from top universities wrote a letter to the Biden Administration supporting tenant protections.

“High rents and a lack of tenant protections negatively impact tenants and their families, as well as the larger economy,” the economists said. “At the household level, high rents lead to housing insecurity, homelessness, health challenges, and economic precarity for already-struggling renters.”

Whichever side you support, it’s important to know what a yay or nay vote means on each of the ballot measures.

Fairfax – Measure I

Yes—Opponents of rent control and just cause evictions gathered enough petition signatures to place a measure on the ballot asking voters to repeal the existing rent control ordinance and replace it with a weaker policy that includes no local cap on rent increases. The current just cause eviction ordinance would be replaced with state law and a 2019 Fairfax ordinance, which has fewer tenant protections. In the future, the town council would not be allowed to pass new ordinances on these two issues without voters’ approval during an election.

No—Rent control supporters should cast a “no” vote, leaving the two current ordinances in effect. The town council could change the ordinances, giving it greater flexibility to consider residents’ ongoing needs.

San Anselmo – Measure N and Measure O

Yes on N—In April 2024, the San Anselmo Town Council approved a rent stabilization ordinance for triplexes and larger rental properties. Those opposing the ordinance gathered the required number of signatures on a referendum petition to essentially freeze and challenge it. Voting “Yes” on Measure N allows San Anselmo to enact the rent stabilization ordinance already approved by the town council.

No on N—The rent stabilization ordinance would not be enacted.

Yes on O—The San Anselmo Town Council placed this measure on the ballot. A “Yes” vote will enact an ordinance with just cause eviction policies and other tenant protections. 

No on O—The town would not enact an ordinance with tenant protections.

Larkspur – Measure K

Yes on K—Marin’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, along with the tenant associations from Skylark Apartments, Bon Air Apartments, and other rent control and just cause eviction policy supporters, gathered enough signatures to place Measure K on the ballot. If passed, Larkspur’s current rent control and just cause eviction ordinances would be replaced with the strongest renter protections in the county, including capping annual rent increases at 3%.

No on K—Larkspur would keep its current ordinances, permitting up to a 7% annual rent increase and limited just cause eviction protections.

Editor’s Note: Prime Administration’s contribution was corrected to reflect the accurate amount.

$40 Million Gone After Judge Rules Against Marin City Housing Project Developer

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
$40 Million Gone After Judge Rules Against Marin City Housing Project Developer

A Marin County Superior Court judge dealt a blow to the developer of a planned affordable housing project in Marin City, invalidating $40 million in tax-free bond revenue for the development.

After a tentative ruling on Oct. 8, Judge Stephen Freccero issued the final order on Oct. 16, both times siding with Save Our City, a Marin City group that filed a petition with the court to reverse two resolutions approving the bonds—one by the Marin County Board of Supervisors and the other by the California Municipal Finance Authority, which issues the bonds.

Save Our City hopes the ruling helps derail the Marin City project; however, the developer says he will build affordable housing at 825 Drake Ave., with or without revenue from tax-free bonds.

“The ruling doesn’t deal with land use, and it doesn’t deal with the ability to build or anything else of that matter,” said developer Caleb Roope, CEO of The Pacific Companies. “So, we’re under construction, and we’re going to stay under construction.”

The Case

The crux of Save Our City’s petition involved whether the county supervisors understood they had discretion to deny tax-exempt bond financing for the project during the board’s March 2023 hearing required by the Internal Revenue Service.

“There are definitely parts of that hearing that are very confusing,” Freccero said to Roope’s attorney, Daniel Cucchi, during a court proceeding on Oct. 8.

The supervisors’ apparent confusion stemmed from the county’s 2020 approval of the Marin City project, under Senate Bill 35. The 2018 state law restricts local governments from rejecting multi-family residential developments that satisfy specific affordable housing criteria when the municipality has not built enough new housing to meet state-mandates aimed at reducing the housing shortage. 

SB 35 should have held no sway over the supervisors’ approval or denial of the tax-free bond funding for the project, according to the judge. Yet, before the board approved the bonds in a 3-2 decision, discussion ensued about SB 35 limiting the board’s discretion.

In his ruling, Freccero cited statements by Brian Washington, county counsel, at the 2023 bond hearing as one source of the “convoluted and confusing” description of the supervisors’ duties.

“County Counsel stated that the board also had discretion in not approving the bond,” Freccero wrote in his ruling. “However, he followed up his broad statement regarding discretion with specific statements describing a narrower range of discretion due to SB 35.”

Although the judge reversed the county’s and bond issuer’s approvals of the bonds, developer Roope told the Pacific Sun in May that all the bonds had already been issued for the project.

The Consequences

Jack Chen, an expert in structured finance, stated in a declaration to the court on behalf of Save Our City that if the bond issuance is invalid, in his opinion, Citibank and bond investors would “terminate those agreements, unwind the structure and seek a return of their capital.”

Roope admits that the ruling has placed him in a challenging position but insists that it won’t stop the Marin City project.

“We were ready for this,” Roope said. “And we, you know, had a plan of action already established. And we’re just staying on that course.”

According to Roope, his company has other financing options, including appealing Freccero’s decision to invalidate the bond approval, reapplying for the tax-free municipal bonds, finding other funding or putting its own money into the project.

Just as Roope has back-up plans, so does Save Our City. Anticipating that The Pacific Companies would reapply for the $40 million in tax-free bonds, the group has met with individual supervisors, trying to persuade them to vote against the financing for the project if it comes before the board again.

“I can’t comment on how I will vote in the future; however, I can say I voted against the issuance of the bonds last year,” Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters, who represents Marin City and the rest of Southern Marin’s district, told the Pacific Sun.

Since the board’s approval of the bonds in 2023, the scope of the affordable housing project in Marin City has changed significantly because of public pressure, including Save Our City’s legal challenge to the financing. The county announced in August 2024 that Roope bought a second property at 150 Shoreline Hwy., near Tam Junction, and plans to put 32 of the 74 Marin City units at the new location. With the reduced number of units, Roope also committed to providing one-to-one parking at 825 Drake, although SB 35 requires no parking spaces with the nearby public transit.

Marilyn Mackel, a Save Our City leader, maintains that even with these changes, the supervisors could not “in good conscience” approve the bonds a second time. The community continues to oppose the project for a variety of reasons.

The Marin City building will remain five-stories, as in the original plan, much to the chagrin of residents at Village Oduduwa, a two-story apartment complex for low-income seniors located just yards away from the planned development. Sun studies conducted by The Pacific Companies show that the larger building will block some sunlight from reaching Village Oduduwa.

“In terms of the design of the building and its impact on the community, it still puts the senior housing in the shadows and impacts the amount of traffic and street parking in the community,” Mackel said. “It’s across the street from Marin City’s only park, and the increased traffic presents a danger to children.”

Most of all, Mackel emphasizes that the Marin City project and the revisions did not include input from the community. They want the supervisors to give significant consideration to the wants and needs of Marin City residents before a future vote on the bonds.

The Future

Interestingly, the county has delayed moving forward with a Memorandum of Understanding with Roope about changes for the Marin City project. Although slated for the Oct. 15 Board of Supervisors meeting, the topic did not appear on the agenda. The county also has not yet provided the promised information about the Shoreline proposal for consideration by the Tam Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. All these meetings would allot time for public comment.

According to Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency, the court’s tentative ruling issued on Oct. 8 provided “a point to pause and evaluate.” However, Freccero’s final order did not affect the developer’s approval under SB 35 for the Marin City project, and the permits and construction remain valid, she said.

“How this project proceeds and the timing for development will be up to the developer,” Jones said. “We’ll know more in the days and weeks ahead.”

San Rafael Nonprofit Covers AP Exam & College Application Fees

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
San Rafael Nonprofit Covers AP Exam & College Application Fees

When the nonprofit Karma Club opened last year at Northgate Mall in San Rafael, students streamed into the safe and comfortable teen center to socialize, have a snack and do their homework.

And they keep coming back.

Sally Newson, founder and executive director of Karma Club, knew a need existed in Marin for a nurturing after-school space for teens, not to just hang out, but also to participate in enriching programs—all at no charge. With one other staff member and student interns from nearby Dominican University, Newson has created a welcoming and well-appointed teen center.

“You don’t see many kids on their phones at Karma Club,” Newson said. “They come here because they crave human interaction and social connection. It gives them a sense of belonging, sense of community and sense of purpose.”

In a typical week, Karma Club kids can play chess, join the English as a Second Language homework group, play group video games with an adult volunteer, take a calligraphy or crocheting class, learn AI storytelling and enjoy a guitar jam session.

Or they can find a quiet corner in the large space to do homework. For students without laptops, Chromebooks are available.

The big buzz right now centers on Karma Club’s newest program, FuturePrep. Launched on Sept. 30, FuturePrep pays the fees for Advanced Placement (AP) exams and college admission applications for students at Terra Linda High School and San Rafael High School, regardless of socioeconomic background.

Terra Linda High School has 1,300 students, with over 45% qualifying for financial assistance, according to principal Katy Dunlap. Sixty percent of the students are Latinx.

At San Rafael High School, 66% of the 1,400 students identify as Latinx, said Ruth Graham, the school’s student data systems specialist. And 71% of the student population qualifies for financial support.

Initially, FuturePrep received $100,000 from an anonymous family educational foundation to pay the AP exam and college admission fees for Terra Linda High School students. Both the foundation and Newson wanted an easy process to access the program, making it available on a “just ask” basis with no income verification required.

Soon Newson began fundraising to bring FuturePrep to San Rafael High School students, also available with the same easy process.

“The idea is to eliminate financial barriers and open the doors for getting into the college of their choice,” Newson said. “We know that the AP exams are tremendously helpful in getting into colleges and universities.”

Students in AP classes take AP exams toward the end of the school year. Scoring well on the exams offers students the opportunity to earn college credit while in high school and skip some introductory courses once they enter college.

Each AP exam costs $99. If a student qualifies for financial assistance, the price drops to $62. But many families struggle to pay the fees, especially when a child is taking more than one AP exam.

“It’s also hard on middle-income families,” said principal Dunlap. “Just because I don’t qualify for aid doesn’t mean that I’m rolling in the bucks.”

Additionally, FuturePrep will provide professional college counselors for students from both schools. During workshops and one-on-one meetings, the counselors will guide students through the college application process, including writing the all-important essay and applying for financial aid.

“Karma Club is about bringing social and academic equity to this community, where there’s huge socioeconomic disparity,” Newson said. “And FuturePrep is really leveling the playing field for college acceptance by paying for AP and college application fees.”

Students who may have only applied to one college because of the fees now can apply to others, increasing their chances of getting into a school of their choice. FuturePrep helps college-bound kids become more competitive.

Newson came up with the idea for FuturePrep when she began taking Karma Club teens out to lunch separately. The goal of the outings was to find out what the students needed.

At one of the lunches, a straight A Terra Linda High School student shared with Newson that she wants to go to Oxford and hopes to take five AP exams. 

“She said my mom’s a single mom who works from 9 to 9 almost every day,” Newson explained. “Then she told me that the five AP exams cost $500, and she didn’t know if her mom could afford to pay for one exam.”

Around that time, the head of a family educational foundation called Newsom, saying he had heard about Karma Club and wanted to meet. After the meeting, Newson submitted a proposal for FuturePrep. Ten minutes later, the foundation agreed to pay the AP exam fees for Terra Linda High School students and later added the college application fees.

Last week, I visited Karma Club to speak with teens about FuturePrep. Eswin Lopez; his younger brother, Duberson Lopez; and Santos Hernandez, all Terra Linda High School students, were excited to talk about AP exams, their accomplishments at school and why they enjoy spending time at Karma Club.

Hernandez and Eswin Lopez said they signed up to take the Spanish AP exam, and FuturePrep is paying the fees. Duberson Lopez, Eswin’s younger brother, can’t take any AP exams this year because he’s in 9th grade, and Advanced Placement courses at Terra Linda High School are for 10th-12th graders. But the aspiring artist plans on taking AP classes  next year.

For all three boys, English is their second language, yet they speak it eloquently. Hernandez and Eswin Lopez started a club at school that welcomes new students who are just learning English and showing them the sights around Marin.

“It’s called the Explorations Club, and Lisa Crawford is our teacher advisor,” Eswin Lopez said. “We’re planning on bringing them to Karma Club.”

The Lopez brothers and Hernandez come to Karma Club every day or two and stay for a couple of hours. In fact, Eswin Lopez and Hernandez were the first two teens to enter Karma Club when it opened in August 2023.

“It’s chill here,” Hernandez said. “I can do my homework without someone [siblings] interrupting me.”

On my way out, I spoke with Crystal, who didn’t want to provide her last name. Crystal’s daughter, an 11th grader at Terra Linda High, will soon take three AP exams. They were at Karma Club to sign up for the FuturePrep program, which will pay $297 for the exam fees.

“The process was super simple,” Crystal said. “It took less than a minute. Honestly, it’s a wonderful thing to me. We really encourage children to sign up. Getting into the classes and taking the AP exams indicates that you can apply yourself, and it helps you get into a good university.”

The fundraising for FuturePrep continues. For more information, email Sally Newson at in**@********ub.org.

Marin Homeless Union Accuses Novato of ‘Sneak Attack’

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Marin Homeless Union Accuses Novato of ‘Sneak Attack’

Another brouhaha has developed between Novato and the Marin Homeless Union.

This one is over the city’s recommended resolution to close a sanctioned homeless encampment and a proposed ordinance that would essentially ban all camping on public property.

At least for the moment, the City of Novato won’t move forward with either.  

Both issues appeared on the City Council’s Sept. 24 agenda. However, city attorney Gary Bell removed them at the start of the meeting, announcing that the Homeless Union had requested a “meet and confer” before the City Council votes on the proposals.

Marin Homeless Union attorney Anthony Prince maintains that Novato violated a 2022 settlement agreement with the union by placing the items on the agenda for a vote. The parties reached the settlement agreement after the union filed a federal lawsuit against Novato for issues similar to the current dispute—restricting homeless people from camping on public property.

“The city’s idea was to enact the ordinance and pass the resolution that very same night,” Prince said. “We found out about it. We immediately contacted the city. We immediately contacted the magistrate judge who has been assigned to resolve disputes between us and the city. We stopped the sneak attack.”

Keeping the 17-tent encampment open is a priority for the union. Prince said that it has been a successful staging ground for people to obtain permanent housing and services. The County of Marin reports that 25 former Lee Gerner Park camp residents have been housed.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Novato established the homeless encampment in Lee Gerner Park, and agreed it would remain open for at least two years—a period that ends next week, on Oct. 13. Yet the city could choose to keep operating the camp. 

The agreement also struck down restrictive language in a city camping ordinance and created an ongoing Housing and Homeless Committee, composed of Marin Homeless Union representatives and community members.

But Prince claims Novato did not fulfill the agreement’s requirements to change the current camping ordinance or permanently close the encampment, which suffered extensive damage during an arson fire on July 30. 

After the fire, the city provided the displaced campers with motel rooms for 28 days. Even that gesture became tainted, Prince said, because a city staffer forced the homeless people to sign an agreement that waived many of their rights without consulting legal counsel. As the Marin Homeless Union’s attorney, Prince represents all Lee Gerner Park camp residents.

Novato officials declined to speak with the Pacific Sun, although city spokesperson Sherin Olivero provided written answers to submitted questions. 

Olivero said the city asked campers to sign a “Motel Agreement” outlining the parameters of the program. Still, she gave no explanation as to why the contract contained a considerable waiver of the campers’ rights.

The camp has remained shuttered since the blaze, leaving many campers with no place to stay when the motel program ended. Two weeks ago, some campers returned to Lee Gerner Park and pitched tents outside of the burned camp. The city quickly posted notices stating the tents must be removed and offered no suggestions about where the campers could go.

Another conflict between Novato and the union involves whether the city followed a settlement agreement requirement to review the state of housing and homelessness three months prior to the end of the two-year period. The review’s purpose is to assist the City Council in determining if there’s a need to continue operating the homeless camp. Both sides agree a review took place, and the Homeless and Housing Committee even approved a written report. Nevertheless, the union has cried foul on the way city staff conducted this business.

“Far from a sneak attack, the City followed the process in the settlement agreement and communicated with all interested parties as required,” Olivero said.

Jason Sarris, a union representative who also serves on the Housing and Homeless Committee, said that Olivero’s statement left out important nuances. According to Sarris, city staff withheld they were recommending the City Council close the encampment and pass an ordinance banning camping—only revealing the crucial information after the committee approved the state of housing and homelessness report. Neither of these issues made it into the 18-page report, although both clearly impact homelessness in Novato.

“The Housing and Homeless Committee absolutely should have had an opportunity to weigh in on this and have it included in the report,” Sarris said.

Additionally, the settlement agreement lays out procedures to terminate the camp if financial issues arise for Novato—a reason the city has given for shutting it down. While the City Council has sole discretion on the decision, Novato must provide the designated union representative with evidence of the financial findings and give at least 60 days’ notice of the closure date.

Sarris said he never received any financial evidence or 60 days’ notice. On Sept. 18, just six days before the City Council meeting, he learned that the council members would be voting on whether to close the camp.

The city points to its multi-year budget deficits as the reason it can’t afford to reconstruct the camp after the fire damage. Yet at last month’s Housing and Homeless Committee meeting, city staff noted that Novato has $19,500  for the Lee Gerner camp and $429,00 for homeless initiatives, Sarris said. 

“None of the County or State one-time grant funds are eligible to support the potential rebuild or clean-up of the Lee Gerner Park site; therefore, General Fund dollars would need to be assigned to the project,” Olivero wrote.

She did not respond to a question about whether the city had researched or applied for other funding to rebuild the encampment.

During a meeting last week with the attorneys from both parties and the federal magistrate judge overseeing the 2022 settlement agreement, the city said it would respect the settlement agreement, according to Prince.

He contends that until officials provide financial evidence and 60 days’ notice of the camp’s closure—and then actually shut it down—the city cannot enact its proposed ordinance prohibiting camping because it doesn’t contain an exception allowing Lee Gerner Park camp to exist.

Novato is evaluating its current camping ordinances based on the recent Supreme Court ruling in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, Olivero said. The ruling held that regulating camping on public property does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

“We’re going to do our best to see to it that the city does not join all these other cities kicking the homeless out with a green light that they think they’ve gotten from the Supreme Court,” Prince said. “But if they do, we know how to fight. We know how to argue the Fourteenth Amendment [state created danger doctrine], and we’ve already put the city on notice that that’s exactly what we’ll do.”

Meanwhile, the campers who recently moved back to Lee Gerner Park hope they’ll receive permanent housing before their time at the makeshift camp runs out.

San Rafael evicts disabled homeless man for second time, gets sued again

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
San Rafael evicts disabled homeless man for second time, gets sued again

Mark Rivera has spent the last few years living in a tent alongside a public parking lot in San Rafael, forced into homelessness by chronic disabilities, he said.

Like most homeless people, Rivera, 65, wants a home. He longs for a small yard because he misses the companionship of a dog, he said during an interview. 

Mostly, Rivera talked about San Rafael posting an eviction notice at his campsite on Aug. 13. In response, Rivera filed a lawsuit and obtained a temporary restraining order from a U.S. District Court to prevent the city from ousting him.

The restraining order has now expired. Last week, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers declined to issue a preliminary injunction against San Rafael, paving the way for Rivera’s eviction. Still, the underlying lawsuit will continue.

San Rafael did not offer Rivera alternative shelter. Instead, on Monday, it forced him to relocate. He pitched his tent at an established homeless encampment, following the city’s recommendation. However, Rivera remains concerned about living with other people. In the past, it has triggered his post-traumatic stress disorder, which has sometimes resulted in violence, he said. 

This isn’t his first rodeo in federal court. Rivera sued the city last year after receiving an eviction notice at the same location. That case ended with a settlement agreement between the camper and San Rafael, one that prevented the city from evicting him, albeit with a couple of caveats.

In the current lawsuit, Rivera claims the city breached the settlement agreement and that the eviction violated his civil rights.

“The bigger picture is that the City of San Rafael broke the contract,” Rivera said. “We had a written agreement.”

Officials reject Rivera’s allegations and have hired attorney Scott Emblidge of Moscone Emblidge & Rubens to defend the city against the lawsuit. Rivera is representing himself.

The facts of the case initially appeared straightforward, although they have grown convoluted during recent legal proceedings. Let’s start at the beginning.

Last year, San Rafael’s city manager issued an administrative order prohibiting camping at the adjacent Menzies Lot and Falkirk Cultural Center. The city served eviction notices to all campers at the two sites, including Rivera.

The 2023 eviction prompted Rivera’s first lawsuit, which stated he suffers from “severe chronic disabilities,” including dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder and the effects of two strokes. He contended that staying at the campsite would allow him to maintain routines and stability.

A federal magistrate assisted Rivera and San Rafael in reaching a settlement agreement that went into effect on Nov. 27, 2023.

San Rafael agreed not to enforce the administrative order against Rivera. Simply put, he could camp at the Menzies Lot and Falkirk Cultural Center. In return, Rivera dismissed his lawsuit against San Rafael.

The settlement included two exceptions. First, Rivera would remain covered by the settlement agreement as long as the administrative order remained in effect.

Second, the city could take enforcement action against Rivera for “whatsoever not based on the Order.” Essentially, San Rafael could enforce laws and other administrative orders impacting Rivera.

The city kept its bargain for nine months. Then, history repeated itself when a San Rafael park ranger posted a seven-day eviction notice at Rivera’s campsite and instructed him to vacate by Aug. 19.

Rivera and his advocate, Robbie Powelson, contacted city officials to reverse the eviction. After all, Rivera had an agreement with San Rafael—a legal contract. He even hand-delivered a cease-and-desist letter to the city attorney, Rob Epstein. Nothing worked. Backed into a corner, on Aug. 16, Rivera sued San Rafael again. 

What caused the city to try to evict Rivera a second time? Officials point to two recent changes.

In May, the San Rafael City Council passed a camping ordinance with numerous restrictions, including a prohibition on camping within 250 feet of a school. Rivera’s tent at the Menzies Lot, as the crow flies, was within 250 feet of Marin Academy.

The settlement agreement allows the city to enforce its new ordinance, requiring Rivera to relocate from the Menzies Lot. Yet, by moving his tent about 40 feet away onto the Falkirk Cultural Center property, he could comply with the new law and remain covered under the settlement agreement.

But the city took another action in August, a week before Rivera’s scheduled eviction. City Manager Cristine Alilovich lifted the portion of the administrative order that prohibits camping at Menzies Lot since the city’s new camping ordinance bans pitching a tent within the school buffer zone.

“Meanwhile, camping on the Falkirk Cultural Center Property remains prohibited by the Administrative Order,” according to an August staff report approved by Alilovich.

The report appeared to refer to the same administrative order that San Rafael cannot enforce against Rivera. Sure, Alilovich modified it by lifting the Menzies Lot portion. Yet last month’s staff report clearly stated that the administrative order is still in effect for Falkirk.

Why, then, did John Stefanski, assistant city manager, write in an email to Rivera’s advocate that the camper could not relocate to the Falkirk property? 

I contacted Alilovich to ask for a reason.

“In response to your question about Falkirk, the City is not going to allow anyone to camp at Falkirk Cultural Center,” Alilovich wrote in an email.

Curious reply. Ditto for San Rafael’s written opposition to the preliminary injunction Rivera sought from the court. It did not seem to deny the claim that the city breached the settlement agreement.

Fast-forward to the hearing on Sept. 4. Rogers did not grant Rivera a preliminary injunction, explaining that the Falkirk Cultural Center is a “public facility” and the city’s camping ordinance bans camping at public facilities.

However, that’s not entirely accurate. The city does allow camping on the grounds of some public facilities. And the the camping ordinance doesn’t prohibit camping on the Falkirk property. It doesn’t mention Falkirk at all.

The city manager’s administrative order is the only measure preventing camping on the “non-open space” portions of Falkirk’s property. To be clear, San Rafael bars camping in all open space, but Falkirk has both open and non-open space areas.

With those facts in hand, after the hearing on the preliminary injunction, Rivera filed a motion asking the judge to reconsider. Rogers ordered the city to respond.

Only then did Emblidge, San Rafael’s outside counsel, provide the court with a “new” administrative order, which went into effect on Aug. 13, 2024. It appears similar to the administrative order issued last year—the one the city can’t enforce against Rivera. Both ban camping at Falkirk.

The new administrative order is not the administrative order “referred to in the November 17, 2023 settlement agreement” was one of Emblidge’s arguments to justify Rivera’s eviction.

The judge again agreed with the city, issuing an order denying Rivera’s motion for reconsideration.

Interestingly, the “new” administrative order is titled “Revising Administrative Order of The City Manager Regulating Camping on Certain Public Property: Falkirk Cultural Center and Menzies Parking Lot, Non-Open Space.” 

Does revising an administrative order constitute a new order? If not, shouldn’t the settlement agreement remain in effect, allowing Rivera to camp at Falkirk?

Based on these questions and other issues, Rivera plans to appeal Roger’s decision to allow his eviction, hoping to be heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

In the meantime, the lawsuit moves forward, with the next court date set for Nov. 25.

UPDATED: Developer buys second property to reduce size of Marin City housing project

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
UPDATED: Developer buys second property to reduce size of Marin City housing project

Marin County announced last week that the developer of a controversial five-story, 74-unit affordable housing project in Marin City has purchased a property near Tam Junction, with the goal of splitting the number of units over the two sites.

The new plan calls for 42 units at 825 Drake Ave., Marin City, and 32 units at 150 Shoreline Hwy., Tam Junction. Both properties are in unincorporated Marin County.

While the Marin County Board of Supervisors must approve the proposal, it may be a fait accompli. The developer, Caleb Roope of Pacific West Communities, and the county have worked together on the terms for months.

Pacific West Communities closed on the Shoreline property on May 20, according to the assessor’s office. The developer paid $1.8 million for the vacant lot, located just off the freeway, next to the Holiday Inn and Floodwater restaurant.

Neither the developer nor the county announced the purchase at the time, despite strong public interest and substantial opposition to the Marin City housing project. Both said they wanted to ensure the Tam Junction site met the developer’s needs.

On Aug. 19, the developer requested a zoning change from the county for 150 Shoreline, yet it’s already zoned for multi-housing.

“The rezoning would be to change it to the Housing Overlay Designation, which allows for ministerial approval,” said Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency.

Jones went on to explain that ministerial approval removes discretionary reviews. Instead, it relies solely on county staff to ensure that the project meets coding standards and requirements, bypassing subjective judgment and assessment of the development’s merits. It also eliminates the need for an environmental study under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Simply put, the developer wants fast-track approval for its Tam Junction development.

In 2020, the Marin City project received ministerial review under Senate Bill 35, state legislation passed in 2017 to address California’s housing shortage. If a local government has not met state mandated housing production goals, SB 35 requires the streamlined approval process for multi-family developments. 

When the developer applied for the Marin City project approval, the county had not reached its housing production goals. Now, it has.

While the 825 Drake property benefited from ministerial approval, the project stalled as the developer and county considered numerous objections raised by the densely populated community.  

Roope, owner of Pacific West Communities, says he needs ministerial approval of the Shoreline development to avoid further delays.

“We’re so behind,” said Roope. “We’ve been sitting doing nothing for a year or more, trying so hard to find this other situation to move units off of Drake. Ministerial approval basically means staff approval. We really can’t afford a long, lengthy review of the new property.”

Construction delays, buying the second site and changing the project design have added signifant costs, which Roope estimates at $4 million.

The revised proposal may alleviate some of Marin City’s concerns, including the lack of parking. Still, reducing the number of apartments has not changed the height of the building. It towers over the two-story senior housing complex just yards away. 

Traffic and safety for children remain issues, with Marin City’s only park directly across the street. The planned development, located in a state-designated high fire hazard zone and an area prone to flooding, could strain the infrastructure in an emergency. Marin City has only one road in and out.

Although Roope had repeatedly said he wanted to reduce the building’s size to three stories, now the developer and the county agree that 825 Drake will be the site for a five-story building with 42 apartments.

The 74 modular units, for two wings of a building, were constructed months ago for Marin City, but never moved to the site. Reconfiguring the modules for two properties proved difficult, especially because of the Tam Junction site’s size limitation—just over half an acre. Meanwhile, 825 Drake is almost an acre.

Roope said he focused on finding a second site large enough to accommodate two stories from each wing of the Marin City building. But available properties did not fit the bill.

As Jones observed, “One of the things that we’ve been working through with his development team is what are the possibilities of configuring these units differently.” She added, “We ultimately came to the conclusion that the feasible way for this project to get split was to do a vertical slice and separate the wings.”

The Marin City hilltop property will retain the larger, five-story wing, with the four-story wing going to the smaller parcel in Tam Junction. Roope and the county must still iron out details for the second site.

A property adjacent to 150 Shoreline, owned by the county, could provide much needed parking for the planned 32 apartments. However, Jones said the county would not “gift public land” to the private developer, mentioning a lease or sale of the property as options.

On Oct. 15, the Board of Supervisors will consider a memorandum of understanding on the proposed project changes, which is based on a “term sheet” agreed to by Roope and the county in April.

Even without approval for the two-site plan, the developer already has a building permit for 825 Drake Ave. Grading and foundation construction could begin this fall. Roope estimates the Marin City construction could finish in 15 months. If he receives ministerial review for the Tam Junction site, Roope says that project should be completed in about 21 months.

The public can weigh in at Board of Supervisors meetings, a not yet scheduled workshop at the Tam Design Review Board and Planning Commission meetings, according to a county news release.

Ultimately, if the county grants ministerial approval for 150 Shoreline, the Tam Design Review Board and Planning Commission will have no say. Neither will the community, with one possible exception.

Save Our City, a local group opposing the Marin City development, filed a lawsuit against the county and the developer to stop the project. The lawsuit seeks to reverse the Board of Supervisors approval of the issuance of $40 million in tax-exempt bonds to develop 825 Drake, claiming county counsel advised the board incorrectly before the vote.

Last year, Save Our City rejected an offer by Roope to settle the case. The terms were similar to the proposal now under consideration by the county.

Roope, however, says the lawsuit will not stop development.

“The lawsuit is about financing,” Roope said. “It’s not about our physical ability to build. Could our financing be hurt by this lawsuit at some point? Yeah, I guess it could, but so far it has not. And if it does get hurt, that will be well after we’re already under construction. Maybe even built.”

In a statement released last weekend, Save Our City indicated they’re “skeptical that the new proposal will address their “core concerns.” The group also says its members were never included in discussions with the county and developer.

“Our strategy hasn’t changed,” Marilyn Mackel, a Save Our City member and named plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in an interview. “Nothing has changed for us—nothing. The next court date is October first.”

DA accepts judge’s decision to drop case against ex-cop

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
DA accepts judge’s decision to drop case against ex-cop

A Marin County Superior Court judge dismissed the remaining charge against a former San Rafael police officer accused of assaulting a local gardener.

The ruling last week by Judge Kevin Murphy ended the criminal case against Daisy Mazariegos, who faced a felony charge of assault by an officer under color of authority. That charge carried a sentencing enhancement for causing great bodily injury to the victim, Julio Jimenez Lopez, in 2022.

Murphy denied a motion to dismiss two felony charges against co-defendant and former officer Brandon Nail for the same incident.

The Marin County District Attorney’s Office could appeal Murphy’s decision to drop Mazariegos from the case. It also has the option of taking a second bite at the apple and filing charges against her again. However, the DA will do neither.

“Although the Marin County DA’s Office believes both former officers are culpable for crimes that led to the serious injuries suffered by Mr. Lopez, we respect and accept Judge Murphy’s ruling,” prosecutor Geoff Iida said in an email. “We now will focus on making our case in court to hold defendant Nail accountable for his unlawful actions.”

Surprising Decision

The decision surprised many who have followed the proceedings against Nail and Mazariegos. Last year, Judge Beth Jordan presided over the defendants’ preliminary hearing and found probable cause for them to stand trial.

Yet, Jordan’s ruling in December dismissed a felony count against Mazariegos for allegedly making false statements on a police report, leaving only the assault charge with a sentencing enhancement. Murphy’s decision last week threw out that remaining charge.

Exactly what happened to allow Mazariegos to walk away from two felony charges stemming from stopping three men suspected of drinking on the sidewalk in the Canal area of San Rafael? After all, the then-officers’ body-worn cameras captured the beating of one of the men, Jimenez Lopez, who ended up face down on the street, laying in a pool of his own blood.

First, Jordan believed Mazariegos’ preliminary hearing testimony on why her police report differed significantly from what can be seen in the police videos. The ex-cop testified that she wrote what Nail had told her, but failed to attribute the words to him. Out went the charge for falsifying a police report.

Then, in April, Mazariegos’ and Nail’s defense attorneys each filed what is known as a “995 motion.” Essentially, in separate motions, they appealed Jordan’s decision to order the defendants to trial, asking Murphy, the trial court judge, to dismiss all charges against their clients.

These motions rarely succeed, according to attorney Julia Fox, who represents Nail. She estimates that dismissals from 995 motions occur about 15% of the time because preliminary hearings have a very low standard.

A preliminary hearing judge needs only to find probable cause—a reasonable belief that defendants committed a crime—to send them to trial. At a criminal trial, the standard increases significantly, requiring a prosecutor to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

Still, the 995 motion filed by Mazariegos’ attorney, Alison Berry Wilkinson, did succeed. The straightforward argument presented by the attorney convinced the judge.

Wilkinson’s strategy separated Mazariegos’ actions from Nail’s. Video evidence, she said, showed her client attempted to handcuff Jimenez Lopez with minimal force. It was Nail who employed a leg sweep maneuver to bring Jimenez Lopez to the ground and then punched him in the face, according to Wilkinson.

“You have to look at Daisy individually, as opposed to in combination with Brandon Nail,” Wilkinson said in an interview. “Based on what she individually did, it doesn’t meet the basic elements of the [assault] charge.”

Wilkinson’s motion cited case law in support of her position. Additionally, Murphy reviewed the preliminary hearing transcript and exhibits, which included the police videos. The tide then turned for Mazariegos.

“The video is very clear on what Daisy did,” Wilkinson said. “The judge found that she had nothing to do with the leg sweep. She had nothing to do with the punch. And the techniques she used to put handcuffs on him, which she was lawfully entitled to do, were reasonable, not excessive. Judge Murphy said there’s no basis to hold her accountable.”

Indeed, Murphy’s order states, “There is a difference between the two defendants and their actions.”

Brandon Nail will continue to trial as the solo defendant, with the date still to be determined.

Ruling Response 

Reactions to Murphy’s rulings run the gamut.

“I am disappointed that Brandon’s motion was not also granted,” Fox said. “I have tremendous respect for Judge Murphy. That remains unchanged.”

Mazariegos feels relieved and grateful, according to Wilkinson. And the attorney said that she is happy for her client, who has a family, including two toddlers.

Many community members do not share these sentiments. In fact, after Jimenez Lopez’s attorney, Charles Dresow, released the police videos to the media almost three months after the beating, public protests erupted.

The incident occurred on June 27, 2022. Mazariegos, on patrol in the Canal area, came upon Jimenez Lopez standing near his truck, while his two friends sat on the sidewalk with beer. She called for backup and ordered the men to sit down and produce their identification. Jimenez Lopez stood to retrieve his ID.

Nail arrived as backup and told him to “Sit the fuck down,” the video evidence shows. Jimenez Lopez complied and then stood up again, appearing to want to explain something. That resulted in the officers trying to handcuff him. Within three seconds, Nail used the leg sweep maneuver, followed by the closed-fist punch to Jimenez Lopez’s nose.

Police arrested Jimenez Lopez, and the DA filed a variety of felony and misdemeanor charges against him. The DA dismissed all charges after reviewing the body-worn camera footage.

Once the public saw the videos, people demanded that San Rafael Police Chief David Spiller fire Nail and Mazariegos and that the DA file charges against the officers. They implored the city to initiate an independent investigation. Months after the use of force against Jimenez Lopez, those demands were met. 

“These officers were still on duty, Dresow said. “It was only after the videos justifiably caused outrage in the community that the city did the right thing.”

For those community members disappointed by last week’s ruling to dismiss Mazariegos from the criminal case, they may be interested to know that Jimenez Lopez filed a civil rights lawsuit against her, Nail and the city.

Attorney Anthony Label, who represents Julio Jimenez Lopez in the civil lawsuit, said that he disagrees with Murphy’s ruling, although he appreciates the judge’s thorough and reasoned analysis. But Label has no plans on releasing Mazariegos from the civil litigation.

“The burden of proof in a criminal case is very different than in a civil case,” Label said. “This ruling does not affect Julio’s civil rights lawsuit.”

In this regard, Mazariegos may still be held liable for her actions.

Stonewalled: When public officials refuse to speak to press

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Stonewalled: When public officials refuse to speak to press

“Transparency” is a big buzzword for governments now. From the White House to tiny town councils, transparency means that the government conducts its business openly and without secrets.

Marin constituents can read all about the transparency of their local municipalities with a few keystrokes. Our cities, towns and the county reference the concept on their websites.

As a reporter, my job includes gathering government information of interest to the public and writing about it. With all this transparency talk by our governments, I should get my work done lickety-split and have plenty of time for afternoon siestas.

However, not all Marin municipalities embrace the approach. As a result, I’m forced to work overtime.

Two weeks ago, Marin County and Novato officials were especially elusive. Mind you, I wasn’t asking for nuclear launch codes or their personal bank account numbers. I had a few relatively simple questions about newsworthy issues. Almost all my numerous phone calls and emails went unanswered. The three written replies that I received contained no information.

I wouldn’t exactly describe this behavior as government transparency. Murky would be more apt.

Case in point, Supervisor Mary Sackett, an elected official serving on the Marin County Board of Supervisors. She also serves on a subcommittee working to bring forth a sheriff’s oversight ordinance for the supervisors to vote on, one that establishes a civilian oversight commission and an office of the inspector general. My questions, had I been able to ask them, were about the ordinance.

Essentially, I wanted an update on when the ordinance would come before the entire board and the specific causes for the delay. In February, Sackett told me the vote would “hopefully take place in late spring.” And county counsel said at the time that they would soon engage in a final step, a mandatory “meet and confer” process with two law enforcement labor unions.

Even before February, community members were demanding to know about the hold-up. The county has been working on this ordinance for two years. It must be a masterpiece, considering it took just 17 days to draft the Declaration of Independence.

Certainly, it’s fair to ask what the heck is going on. Why has the county had numerous meetings, at least five, with the labor unions? When will the process end?

In a reply to my email sent two weeks ago, Sackett wrote that she had no information and sent a link to the county’s website. I had already read the outdated material posted there, and it didn’t provide the answers I sought regarding the current status of the ordinance.

But I had reason to believe that Sackett did have information. She recently met with two Marin residents, both of whom I know and respect, and reportedly gave them news that does not appear on the referenced webpage. Those two people provided the intel to a group of community advocates. Like a game of Telephone, it spread to more people, me included.

Last week, I followed up with Sackett via email, listing some of what I had heard. She decided to respond, denying that she made the comments. Additionally, she provided vague statements, saying that the website would be “updated shortly” and she’s “hopeful” the meet and confer process will conclude next month. 

And that is precisely the reason Sackett should have taken five minutes to speak with me—on the record. A conversation would give me the opportunity to press for clarification and specifics. Instead, members of the community will continue to repeat the words Sackett claims she never uttered. Worse yet, the public still doesn’t know when to expect the supervisors to vote on the sheriff’s oversight ordinance.

I find it ironic that the intent of the ordinance is to provide transparency into the inner workings of the sheriff’s department. Maybe the board of supervisors needs an oversight commission too.

Novato officials also recently ignored my many requests for a brief interview. Like Sackett, they referred me to a webpage that did not answer my questions about the city’s plans for a sanctioned homeless encampment devastated by a fire.

Why are these officials refusing to be transparent? The absence of information triggers conjecture, rumors and uncertainty.

Now, I will twiddle my thumbs waiting for responses to the public records requests I submitted to Novato and Marin County. Thank goodness for the California Public Records Act, legislation that forces government transparency, with some exceptions.

The growing phenomenon of public officials dismissing journalists occurs at the local, state and federal levels. The Poynter Institute, a nonprofit global media organization and newsroom, held a symposium last year on the topic and recently issued “Shut Out,” a 22-page report on their findings.

“Not all, but many who do the public’s business have taken a misguided and unfortunate stance that they are under no obligation to make themselves or their work available for independent journalistic review, even though it is an essential component of our civic life,” Neil Brown, the Poynter Institute president, said in the report.

“Shut Out” encourages journalists to tell the public how they tried to obtain information and provide details about uncooperative sources, as I’m doing here. Frankly, I’m not optimistic that it will prompt Sackett to call and tell me all about the sheriff’s oversight ordinance delay. Nor am I counting on hearing from Novato’s Amy Cunningham, city manager; Jessica Deakyne, assistant city manager; Rachel Farac, city council member; or any of the other folks I contacted about the future of the city-sanctioned homeless encampment.

I asked Candice Nguyen, a Peabody Award-winning reporter for NBC Bay Area, about the roadblocks she faced while working on an 18-part series about Oakland’s broken 911 system. The biggest issue, she said, was not receiving timely responses from city officials.

Nguyen said she repeatedly requested—at least a dozen times—to interview Oakland’s mayor on the crisis-level problems with 911. It took more than six months of “respectful persistence” to finally land that interview, according to Nguyen.

“I believe, as an investigative reporter, this delayed or lack of response is disappointing to the public, but it’s no surprise,” Nguyen said. “My stories often hold officials and agencies accountable.”

Even without receiving information directly from officials, Nguyen pointed out that she still gets the story. In fact, she ran 13 reports on Oakland’s 911 system before the mayor agreed to an interview. Her ongoing series shines a light on the extremely long wait times for 911 dispatchers to answer calls. That reporting prompted the city to make some improvements, and Nguyen continues to investigate the issue.

Officials have an obligation to respond to the media, “especially on matters concerning the public’s interest,” Nguyen said. 

Indeed, they do. However, when officials eschew their responsibility to transparency, they’ll still be part of journalists’ stories. 

Only they won’t get to tell their side to the public.

Homeless heroes save victims of encampment fire

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Homeless heroes save victims of encampment fire

It happened wicked fast, said the victims of last week’s fire at a Novato homeless encampment. The flames ripped through nylon tents, destroyed personal possessions and even damaged one man’s prosthetic leg—all in a matter of minutes.

Miraculously, none of the 15-or-so occupants of the city-sanctioned encampment in Lee Gerner Park were injured when the fire, allegedly arson, broke out on July 30 at 3:30am. But the residents described a terrifying scene, awakening to shouts of fire, seeing rising flames and feeling intense heat.

Scrambling out of their tents, John Sandfort and Geno Meyer immediately went to the aid of the camp’s two wheelchair-bound residents. Together, they pulled Mike Robertson and Kathy Plumb, life partners, to safety.

“Geno and John got me and Kathy out,” said Robertson, who has relied on a wheelchair since his leg was amputated. “They’re heroes because that fire took off like a bat out of hell.”

Another resident, David Tillotson, recalls hearing a cacophony of popping and banging as the fire climbed one tree and leapt to the branches of others.

A fire at the Novato homeless encampment displaced about 15 people. Video by Mark Alperin.

“We got lucky that there was no wind,” Tillotson said. “And the police and fire [department] got there almost right away.”

Novato Police Lt. Chris Jacob confirmed that after 911 dispatch received the call, police arrived in minutes, with the fire department not far behind. From the outset, the fire seemed suspicious to the two departments, and they investigated it as arson, according to Jacob.

Two days later, on Aug. 1, police arrested Brianna Giudice, 36, and Giovanni Allison, 39, former encampment residents. Police identified Giudice as the arson suspect, while Allison was named a person of interest.

The suspects were apprehended as they fled from a vacant building near the camp. Police booked Giudice into the Marin County Jail on suspicion of felony arson, burglary, resisting arrest and outstanding warrants. Allison’s booking charges include outstanding warrants, burglary, violating probation and resisting arrest.

The early morning blaze left half of the downtown Novato homeless encampment a heap of charred rubble and ash. Officials had no choice but to red tag the area and close it down—at least temporarily—keeping the displaced residents in limbo about their future.

The city moved most of the fire victims into a Novato motel, although at least one person, a young woman who said she has lived at the camp for about a month, was not provided with a room. Officials have declined to answer questions about how long they will continue to pay for the lodging or whether they will reopen the encampment, which has space for 17 tents.

Lee Gerner Park became the site of an impromptu camp in 2019, when a homeless Novato man, Jason Sarris, began sleeping there. Others soon followed. In July 2020, the city cleared the camp, but the unhoused people returned the following month.

Then the Novato City Council passed two anti-camping ordinances in May 2021, prompting Sarris to form the Novato chapter of the Marin Homeless Union. Civil rights attorney Anthony Prince quickly filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against Novato, and a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order preventing the city from closing the camp at Lee Gerner Park.

The union and the city engaged in negotiations, eventually reaching a settlement in 2022. Novato sanctioned the “Temporary Camp” and agreed to keep it open for at least two years, with that term expiring two months from now, on Oct. 13. The agreement states that the camp’s operation beyond that date remains solely at the city’s discretion; however, homeless advocates said they have always hoped for an extension.

A current budget deficit, more than $4 million this fiscal year, may influence the city’s decision about rebuilding. It’s also unclear whether the city would have funds for the camp’s ongoing maintenance, with multi-million-dollar budget deficits projected for the next several years.

The homeless residents understand the city faces financial issues, yet almost all want to return to the camp at Lee Gerner Park. Stability topped the list of reasons why the camp is important to them. And they hope that like other residents before them, staying at the camp will lead to permanent housing.

“The camp has been a bona fide pathway to housing with a proven track record,” said Sarris, who serves on the City of Novato’s Housing and Homeless Committee. “Twenty-three of our residents have been housed, and all have remained in their new homes.”

Sarris is among them. In 2022, soon after the city-sanctioned camp was established, he moved into an apartment—his first time off the streets in more than a decade. He wants others to receive the same leg up.

“That’s what’s bad about the whole thing, because you don’t know what’s gonna happen,” camp resident Tillotson said. “You can’t make any kind of plans. You know, it’s a really stressful situation. I’m not worried about me so much because I’ll get through this somehow. But other people, like Mike and Kathy, they’re in wheelchairs, and they don’t have anywhere to go.”

All the residents expressed great appreciation for the camp. Case managers connecting the residents with services and housing know where to find them, the mobile showers come weekly, and the central location makes it convenient to walk to the grocery store and Goodwill. And the Novato community has embraced the camp’s residents, with individuals, church groups and nonprofits regularly delivering clothing, food and other supplies.

While the homeless residents now stay in temporary quarters at the Days Inn in Novato, miles from a grocery store and other services, some community groups still check in. Residents sing the praises of Donald Cowan, a homeless outreach specialist for Community Action Marin, who provides transportation and much more.

When Cowan learned that Sandfort’s size 14 shoes were lost in the fire, he found a local group, Marin Cursillo, to donate new shoes. He also reached out to Rotary Club of Novato Evening to help another man who lost his wallet and all his clothes in the fire.

For now, the homeless residents’ immediate needs are being met. But until Novato decides how to move forward, they will continue living with uncertainty and fear about their future. Despite contacting numerous city officials to find out about a timetable, I received a single email stating, “There is nothing new to report.”  

“I really want the city to continue their good work and rebuild the camp,” Sarris said. “But at the same time, the Novato Homeless Union is preparing for the worst-case scenario if the city does, in fact, try to shut the camp down.”

Marin stays course assisting Binford Road’s unhoused people

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Marin stays course assisting Binford Road’s unhoused people

Part two of a two-part report. Read part one here.

Just the mention of Binford Road evokes strong reactions from folks in Marin County—positive, negative and sometimes downright caustic. 

Many consider the RV homeless encampment a shining example of government working compassionately to provide much needed services to people down on their luck. Others see it as a blight on their predominantly affluent community.

Last week, I spent the morning riding with Dep. Mike Thompson, homelessness outreach officer for the Marin County Sheriff’s Office, who spends a good portion of his shifts on Binford Road. We did this same ride in May 2023, and Thompson’s reasonable, caring approach toward his work with the Binford Road community remains unchanged.

Like most mornings, it was quiet on this stretch of street just outside of Novato city limits in unincorporated Marin. We saw only a few of the 78 homeless people who live in RVs, cars, trucks and even a few tents on both sides of the road. Many of the residents work during the day.

Thompson stopped beside a large bus. I know the young man who lives there, a tinkerer, though some might call him a hoarder. His site overflows with possessions, including used bike parts that he fashions into new bicycles.

A shiny black truck pulled up beside Thompson’s cruiser, and the middle-aged driver—not a Binford resident—rolled down his tinted window and shouted a question. Thompson told the man that he was busy, and we drove away, but the interaction clearly disturbed the deputy.

“I’ve never seen that guy before,” Thompson said. “He was like, ‘What are they doing with the bike thief?’ Well, how do you know he’s a bike thief? I’m not going to engage.”

However, Thompson’s position does keep him front and center with disgruntled people who want to discuss the Binford Road encampment. He typically hears them out.

“I think they’re just uninformed,” Thompson said. “For the average person who doesn’t know anything about what it really means to be homeless, all they know about homelessness is what they see. Not so much in Marin, but in the East Bay or San Francisco, what you see seems to be trash, crime, drug abuse and unchecked mental illness. Then that’s what they know homelessness to be.”

Binford Road doesn’t come close to resembling those hotspots featured often in the media, such as San Francisco’s Tenderloin or the frequently cleared camps in Oakland and Berkeley.

Thompson reiterated what he told me last year—there’s relatively little crime on Binford. An occasional fire or drug bust is about the worst of it.

Still, the RV encampment has its own set of unique circumstances, including lack of drinking water, personal property stored outside of vehicles near an environmentally sensitive marsh and lawsuits filed by a few of the residents.

Yet, Marin County officials remain committed to diligently working with its homeless population, connecting them with services and housing. This, despite last month’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning legal protections for homeless people and California Gov. Gavin Newsom last week urging cities and counties to clear encampments.

For years, homeless folks have taken up residence on Binford Road, but the population swelled during the pandemic. The county decided not to enforce the 72-hour parking limit, knowing that the ordinance pushes homeless people to become nomadic, making it more difficult for social workers, often called case managers, to find them.

“The high-water mark was 117 people, and currently we have 78 living on Binford Road,” Marin County Supervisor Eric Lucan said. “I’m pleased to see the number of individuals that we’ve been able to support and house.”

Last year, Marin secured $1.6 million over three years from California’s Encampment Resolution Funding, with the ultimate objective to house all the Binford residents. The state announced in April that the county will soon receive another grant for more than $3.72 million to “resolve” the Binford encampment.

The county has been using the initial award for enhanced outreach, housing-based case management and other direct support. New staff has come on board, and contracts were awarded to local nonprofit agencies, including Downtown Streets Team and Community Action Marin.

Since last year, 27 former Binford Road residents have received housing, according to Gary Naja-Riese, director of Marin County Homelessness & Coordinated Care. An additional 22 residents are at various stages on the path to housing.

It’s not unusual for people to spend years on the county’s “waiting list” for permanent supportive housing—housing combined with voluntary support services—which is prioritized based on a person’s need.

Zoë Neil, director of Downtown Streets Team, said her staff gets creative to find different ways to house folks. It’s a time-intensive process that often achieves results for their clients on Binford Road.

“We look at alternatives to permanent supportive housing, like rapid rehousing, which provides short term rental assistance and services to people with stable incomes,” Neil said. “The outreach folks are really trying to navigate the best possible pathway to housing.”

Another solution has included connecting some people with their families, who can provide a place for them to live, explains Neil. Or if someone enjoys the recreational vehicle lifestyle, the outreach manager can try to help them find a spot in an RV park.

Even while the county has multiple departments and outside contractors working to provide services for people on Binford, community activists say their efforts sometimes fall short.

In May, three residents filed a lawsuit against the county in federal court for seizing and destroying their property. Although the county provided 15 days’ notice of the “clean up” and stored the property for 90 days before destroying it, residents said that valuable items such as dog enclosures, shade awnings and solar panels were taken.

Clearly, a common sense approach exists. There’s a difference between seizing a hoarder’s cache and removing practical, necessary items. The county, it appears, will try striking that balance going forward.

A notice distributed to residents last week states that clean ups will now occur on the second and fourth Thursdays each month. Thompson said that with this new system, they will be more flexible. As we drove down Binford, the deputy pointed out some items that he said could probably stay, such as a small table and chair set and a shade awning.

“We plan on going out to watch the clean ups and monitor how they’re conducted,” said Jason Sarris, who was homeless for more than a decade and now leads the nonprofit Marin Housing for All.

The RV encampment on Binford Road took years to grow to this point, and it will likely take a couple more to house all the residents. Until then, everyone—Binford residents, Marin County, nonprofits and community activists alike—will continue providing a checks and balance system to ensure that life on Binford Road stays safe and manageable.

“Binford could be a model as to how we’re working on resolving homelessness, but it’s not without its challenges,” Lucan said. “I feel like we’re doing a good job, but still can do better.”

Rescued, Sausalito sea lion sculpture returns home

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Rescued, Sausalito sea lion sculpture returns home

A crowd gathered last week at sunrise to watch the dramatic homecoming of Sausalito’s beloved but accident-prone sea lion sculpture.

Plucked by a crane from the back of a pickup truck on Bridgeway, the newly restored bronze sculpture floated through the air and returned to its rocky nest just off the southern shoreline of Sausalito. 

“The sea lion is a symbol of Sausalito and the spirit of our community,” Mayor Ian Sobieski said as he stood among about 150 spectators. “The sculpture demonstrates how art can be profoundly affecting.”

In January 2023, a strong storm toppled the 1,900-pound sculpture into the bay, and the city removed it from the water for repairs. According to Felicity Kirsch of the nonprofit Sausalito Foundation, that marked the third rescue for the sea lion.

Artist Al Sybrian created the sculpture in 1957. It was originally concrete, a material that didn’t fare well in the sometimes harsh environment. Nine years later, the Sausalito Foundation raised funds to cast the statue in bronze.

Over the next several decades, the sculpture survived the elements and took on a beautiful green patina. But a 2004 winter storm wreaked havoc, knocking the sea lion off its pedestal. The Foundation stepped in again and paid to reseat it.

When the statue ended up in the water last year, the nonprofit enlisted Reason Bradley, a Sausalito native and owner of a marine company, Universal Sonar Mount, to repair it. Bradley and his team used their hi-tech skills to develop a comprehensive restoration plan that should keep the sea lion hale and hearty for the next hundred years. It began with laser scanning the sculpture and generating a digital model.

“Corrosion had been eating away the base of the sea lion for years,” Bradley said. “We approached the project with the concept of protecting the sea lion and creating a whole new base instead of doing a quick patch.”

Let’s geek out for a minute here to understand electrolysis, the main issue the team needed to resolve to keep the statue on its base. Electrolysis occurs when dissimilar metals come into contact with an electrolyte—in this case, the bay water—and the lesser metal corrodes.

The metal tabs connecting the sculpture to its base kept failing. Clearly, the team needed to figure out how to reduce the detrimental effects of electrolysis on the fasteners and the statue.

They tackled the issue in a few ways. The new base comprises a special concrete mix with fiberglass rebar inside, eliminating electrolysis caused by steel rebar. And the new design involved fabricating eight large bronze bolts to connect the base to the sea lion.

“We introduced a way to connect zinc anodes, four-inch wide by 10-inch long replaceable bricks that protect those bolts,” Bradley explained. “The zinc is the only dissimilar metal, and it’s intentionally a lesser noble metal. Now, the current eats the zinc, not the bolts.”

Pretty impressive. The Sausalito Foundation also deserves accolades for raising approximately $50,000 to pay for the innovative restoration and providing Sausalito residents and visitors with at least another century of enjoying the statue.

“Al Sybrian was a great sculptor,” longtime Sausalito resident and former City Council member Peter Van Meter said. “The sea lion is looking to the sky, looking to heaven. It’s optimistic.”

Marin group serving homeless people reaches crossroads

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Marin group serving homeless people reaches crossroads

For more than two decades, professionals from The Street Chaplaincy have walked throughout Marin, providing spiritual care to homeless people.

Now, The Street Chaplaincy needs some care and guidance of its own. The vital organization based in San Rafael faces major changes in its leadership, staff and financial structure.

Nick Morris, who has led The Street Chaplaincy since 2018, will soon leave the group, saying he wants to move on to different work. Last month, Rev. Charlotte Cramer, the organization’s only street chaplain, resigned. The Marin Interfaith Council just announced that it intends to discontinue its role as The Street Chaplaincy’s fiscal sponsor.

The fiscal relationship between the two organizations has allowed The Street Chaplaincy, which does not have an IRS 501(c)(3) designation, to conduct its charitable activities with the benefit of Marin Interfaith Council’s tax-exempt status.

“The Street Chaplaincy raises and spends their own funds on ministry to the homeless, consistent with their mission,” said Rev. Scott Quinn, Marin Interfaith Council’s executive director. “A fiscal sponsor guarantees that there’s an accounting process to ensure that every dollar that comes in is spent for the mission to which the money was donated.”

Finding an appropriate fiscal sponsor is key to The Street Chaplaincy’s future success. According to Quinn, Marin Interfaith Council will continue providing the service and some administrative support while seeking another partner, ideally a faith-based community, for The Street Chaplaincy.

Morris, too, plans on staying until that partner comes on board. He aims to shepherd the organization to a new home and offer a warm handoff.

So, the ministry soldiers on.

“I believe it’s important work, and that’s why I’ve been doing it for so many years now,” Morris said. “And the chaplain before me, Paul [Gaffney], did it for 13 years. Providing care for homeless people comprises mind, body and spirit, and the spiritual side tends to be the least supported.”

Marin Interfaith Council also understands that The Street Chaplaincy performs an essential function for a vulnerable population. Although Marin is one of the wealthiest counties in the country, it lacks enough shelter space for the almost 1,100 homeless people living here, leaving most of them struggling on the streets. The Street Chaplaincy is Marin’s only faith organization with a primary mission of tending to their spiritual needs.

Of course, that begs the question of why the Marin Interfaith Council is withdrawing as fiscal sponsor. Simply put, the coalition of faith communities is currently going through its own transitional phase. With most of its support coming from an aging population and younger people failing to flock to faith communities, the Marin Interfaith Council is doing some soul-searching about its path forward.

“A lot of our funding has shrunk,” Quinn said. “On top of that, we’re dealing with all the different crises of the past few years coming out of the pandemic—our racial reckoning and the laudable and necessary insistence on moving the needle on justice and equity that’s been so lacking in this county for so many decades. Really, this is a chance for MIC to take a step back and ask, ‘What’s our role in the community?’”

With a limited budget and small staff, Marin Interfaith Council does not have the bandwidth to continue providing administrative support and fiscal sponsorship to a separate organization. For example, Quinn spent months assisting The Street Chaplaincy in evaluating and acquiring insurance.

Last week, Quinn emailed Marin Interfaith Council’s members and supporters about the transition for both organizations. He has already received a few responses from faith organizations that want to be part of the conversation about the best place for The Street Chaplaincy.

Morris and Quinn agree that for The Street Chaplaincy to thrive, it needs an organization willing to not only become the fiscal sponsor but also take the administrative lead and run the group. It’s a big ask, but it is necessary to continue the essential programs for the homeless community.

In addition to visiting homeless people wherever they may be, such as shelters, encampments or the hospital, The Street Chaplaincy is part of Marin County’s Whole Person Care. The program enables service providers, including housing and medical case managers, to share information and collaborate on a homeless person’s care.

“We’re not case managers,” Morris said. “But as we provide spiritual support and build relationships with people experiencing homelessness, if they ask for help or there’s a roadblock in getting services, we’ll gladly interface for them with other organizations to help move the process along.”

Another goal for The Street Chaplaincy is to build community between the homeless and faith-based communities. Wellness Gathering, a weekly event, does just that by bringing homeless and housed folks together for an evening of meditation, prayer, storytelling and dinner.

“The Tuesday dinners are a way of creating relationships of care in the community, and that turns into support for housing,” Morris said. “People feel passionate about it, including the congregations that volunteer to help with the dinners.”

During The Street Chaplaincy’s transition period, the weekly dinners will continue, according to Morris. While the holiday season is still a few months away, Morris is thinking ahead to The Street Chaplaincy’s three major annual events, hoping that a new partner will be found by then.

At Thanksgiving, The Street Chaplaincy and volunteers from various groups provide dinner and entertainment for about 125 people. The evening includes a warm clothing giveaway for the homeless guests. A similar event takes place during the third week of December.

Also in December, around the winter solstice, The Street Chaplaincy holds a memorial service for homeless community members who died in the past year. Those attending include homeless people honoring their friends, parents who have lost children and homeless service providers.

“It’s incredibly moving,” Morris said. “The testimonies and the stories shared, they bring tears to my eyes. It’s a lot for everyone to carry.”

Indeed, ministering to homeless people is a heavy load. Now, Marin’s faith organizations and individuals must come together to preserve The Street Chaplaincy’s mission and good works.

Jason Sarris, who spent more than a decade living on the streets of Marin, experienced firsthand the important spiritual support offered by The Street Chaplaincy. And he has witnessed the positive impact their work has had on the homeless community.

“When I was unhoused, I talked to Rev. Marty Tracy, who was their street chaplain at the time,” Sarris said. “I’m not much of a religious person, and I’m not really comfortable speaking with clergy, but I found it easy to share things with her—soothing even. Rev. Marty related to issues that I was having living outside, and she helped me. Obviously, it would be a great loss if The Street Chaplaincy wasn’t able to continue.”

Contact Rev. Scott Quinn of the Marin Interfaith Council at di******@******fc.org with recommendations on potential partners for The Street Chaplaincy. 

Come to the Table: strangers meet to dine with open minds

Nikki Silverstein
-
6
Come to the Table: strangers meet to dine with open minds

The late celebrity chef Anthony Bourdain once said, “You learn a lot about someone when you share a meal together.”

That’s exactly the purpose of Come to the Table, a monthly free event where an unlikely group of guests eat dinner and spend time getting to know one another. Each event hosts 50 people for dinner, with half hailing from Marin City and the rest from other parts of the county. Still, the affair is intimate, with up to six dining at each table.

The second part of the evening consists of a spirited community forum for more than a hundred people, featuring Marin City leaders in conversation with experts from across the county and beyond. Topics have included work and housing issues, telling stories through art and culture, the history of Marin City and health care disparities. Speakers have ranged from Black and white physicians to a queer Mexican-American theater director to women business owners.

Come to the Table is the brainchild of Rev. Floyd Thompkins, who leads St. Andrew Presbyterian Church in Marin City. For years, Thompkins knew many residents of the predominantly wealthy and white Marin County were either unfamiliar with or disinterested in the issues facing their neighbors in Marin City, a diverse, low-income community in the southern portion of the county.

In November, Thompkins hosted a one-day “sit down” with religious leaders from across the county and leaders of Marin City organizations to try to uncover the causes of the divide and develop ways to address it. The participants came away with what the pastor calls astonishing realizations.

“There are people who have never been to Marin City—and they live within 10 miles,” Thompkins said. “They go to Sausalito next door, but they never take a right off the freeway and come to Marin City. They’re afraid to come over. So, they haven’t even had the chance to decide whether they want to be a part of the solution or not.”

It all boils down to misconceptions. For example, Marin City, a historically Black community, now has a multicultural population of 3,000. According to the 2020 U.S. Census data for Marin City, 34% of residents are white, 27% Black, 17% Latinx and 14% Asian.

Yet in a multiple-choice survey completed by Come to the Table attendees, almost a third answered that Marin City’s population is 80% Black.

And Marin City is not actually a city, but rather an unincorporated area without the self-governance of an elected mayor or city council. The Marin County Board of Supervisors, none of whom live in Marin City, makes decisions for the residents.

Certainly, Marin City has a unique history and circumstances, but residents across the county share many of the same concerns. The housing crisis, environmental issues and climate change impact everyone.

I attended this month’s Come to the Table. Understanding the genesis of the event, I expected some uncomfortable conversations. Not even close.

From the moment I walked into St. Andrew’s dining room, I could tell that the organizers had set up every aspect of the evening with intention. Right at the check-in, friends and partners were asked to sit at different tables to ensure that they met new people.

The dinner, prepared each month by a different Marin City caterer, is served at the table, allowing people to relax and focus on conversation. Advance fundraising covers the costs, and no one pays to attend the event.

Nonstop dialogue ensued at my table. We didn’t even need the prompts placed on each table, although I found them quite interesting. Most involved the forum topic. However, one set of questions remains the same every month: What is your relationship to money? How has this influenced your choices? How does this affect how you view yourself?

Our discussions delved into issues such as race, inequity and social justice, but we also chatted about the great equalizer—getting stuck on Highway 101 during the afternoon commute.

Tami Bell, raised in Marin City and now living in Richmond, shared that he spent most of his career in education; however, at age 77, he’s preparing to take the bar exam with the hope of practicing educational and social justice law. Bell, also a historian, is an expert on Marin City’s rich past.

Russ Pratt, a Tiburon resident, told stories of his Peace Corps days serving in Botswana. After his family returned from Africa, his children witnessed racism for the first time—in a Marin County school.

Yvonne Harris, a retired law office manager, grew up in Marin City. Her family members worked at Marinship building U.S. warships during World War II. Today, Harris lives in San Rafael. Sandy Smith lives at The Redwoods in Mill Valley, a retirement community, and has volunteered with Bridge the Gap in Marin City, a nonprofit preparing students for college.

We connected on some level, the five of us. While I frequently join events in Marin City, breaking bread with these folks left me with ideas I’d never considered before.

Barbara Bogard, a seasoned organizer and activist, volunteers for Come to the Table’s steering committee. I shared my enlightening dinner experience with her, and she marked it as another success for the event.

“When you sit down with somebody, share a meal with them and have a personal conversation, it really helps dispel myths you might have about Marin City and the people who live there,” Bogard said. “It’s really the most favorite project I’ve ever worked on because we’re not fighting against anybody.”

The after-dinner forum on health care disparities gave me more food for thought. The featured speakers were impressive, informative and accessible.

Dr. Elizabeth Talley, who grew up in Marin City and is a pediatric nephrologist and associate clinical professor at Stanford University, joined Marin County Public Health Director Dr. Matt Willis on the dais. The physicians shared some grim statistics and personal experiences on the inequality of health care for people of color.

The life expectancy for a Marin City resident is 77 years. Just a mile away, in Sausalito, residents can expect to be around for 92 years. Talley and Willis were clear about the drivers for the disparity—failure to screen for, diagnose and manage preventable diseases and chronic conditions. Willis identified these issues as social injustices.

Still, they offered the audience of about 120 people hope that change will come—through better training for health care professionals and recruiting more people of color to work in the industry. In the meantime, Talley and Willis recommend that patients get educated, advocate for themselves, bring someone with them to their health care appointments and look inside the community for support.

At the end of the forum, Thompkins introduced representatives from various Marin City organizations. He reports that true connections are being made—long after the dinner ends—with attendees continuing discussions and volunteering in Marin City.

“Come to the Table is not a destination,” Thompkins said. “When it works, it’s a bridge—a bridge for relationships.” 

Come to the Table, Environmentalism and Resiliency, Saturday, July 13. For more information, visit ctttmarin.org.

Fact Check: County points out reporter’s error, admits its own policy flaw

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Fact Check: County points out reporter’s error, admits its own policy flaw

Last month, I received an email from the county telling me that I made a mistake in an article. Indeed, I erred.

Typically, the Pacific Sun would run a correction, and that would be that.

But Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency, didn’t ask for a correction. We spoke at length about the situation, agreeing that it might benefit all involved to delve deeper and publish a second story.

In the original news article, which ran in the Pacific Sun’s May 8-14 edition, I wrote that the county had failed to inform Marin City residents when a private developer sought and subsequently received approval in 2020 to build a proposed five-story, 74-unit affordable housing project at 825 Drake Ave. This was inaccurate.

The county used four methods to alert Marin City about the proposed development before providing approval. From May to August 2020, these efforts included posting three signs on the property, creating a county webpage, sending out postcards to property owners within a 300-foot radius and holding a 10-minute workshop at a Planning Commission meeting on a weekday afternoon.

After the plans were approved in November 2020, a group of young Marin City residents working with the county requested that staff hold a public Zoom meeting to discuss the project, according to Tiawana Bullock, a group member. About 70 people attended the December 2020 meeting.

Yet most of the 3,000 residents in this unincorporated county area remained unaware of the plans until more than two years later, long after the project received the county’s approval. And when folks finally did find out that a large apartment building—the tallest in Marin City—was slated for their densely populated neighborhood with serious infrastructure issues, they were mighty upset.

So, what happened? Simply put, the message didn’t reach its intended audience.

Jones, who started working at the Community Development Agency in November 2021 and became the director two years ago, admits that the county fell short in its communications with Marin City by using a one-size-fits-all approach. And she wants to make changes.

“Outreach and what’s an effective way to communicate with people is definitely something that we’re struggling with and trying to work through,” Jones said. “It’s different in different communities.”

Marin City, a historically Black community, is now one of the most diverse areas in the county. While Marin ranks among the wealthiest counties in the United States, more than 9% of Marin City’s residents live at or below the poverty level, according to the latest census data. The median household income is far lower in Marin City than in the rest of the county.

Consequently, Marin City residents experience what is known as the digital divide—having less access to computers and the internet than the rest of the county. Digital literacy and language barriers also contribute to the problem.

Emails, online surveys and county website postings aren’t the best means of sharing important information with Marin City residents.

Ditto for public meetings held during the workday. Many residents don’t have the luxury of flexible work schedules.

“I understand that some people in Marin City don’t have the time,” Jones acknowledged. “It’s not fair to demand that somebody be a professional citizen to stay informed.”

Leaders in Marin City, including those who run nonprofit organizations and churches, say they know how to connect with folks. They do. I’ve attended countless standing-room-only events and meetings in the community.

“There are a variety of methods to do outreach to a population of 3,000 people,” said Felecia Gaston, founder and director of Performing Stars of Marin, a nonprofit serving Marin City. “Make it user-friendly. You can’t just do digital.”

Texting, disseminating flyers in different languages, going door-to-door, posting banners at the freeway exit and tabling in front of Target at the nearby shopping center top Gaston’s list. She emphasized that the community is small enough that these efforts have a big impact.

Golden Gate Village, a public housing project in Marin City, is home to about 700 people. Royce McLemore, who serves as the Resident Council president, pointed out that there are numerous homeowner and tenant associations in Marin City—all of which communicate with their members.

“The county could use those various organizations to get the word out,” McLemore said. “But nothing beats going door to door.”

It takes manpower to knock on hundreds of doors, and that’s not necessarily practical for the county. However, these community organizations regularly connect with their members, and the leaders who I spoke with want to help keep residents up to date on issues.

“We have a whole street outreach program,” Gaston said. “We are so good at it that I brag about it. Clipper Card contacted us specifically because we know how to research and contact people in Marin City.”

Rev. Floyd Thompkins of St. Andrew Presbyterian Church in Marin City believes the county’s first step is developing a communication policy with Marin City. According to Thompkins, some departments within Marin County, including public health and behavioral health, have made strides in this area.

“There’s no plan on the county level on how you talk to Marin City,” Thompkins said. “What is the procedural plan when something is going to affect Marin City? It’s always ad hoc. The county should do it for all unincorporated areas. Even if they develop that plan without us and tell us what it is, we will have an expectation of how they will communicate.”

Jones agrees that her department needs to proceed differently moving forward. But she also realizes that new policies won’t remedy what occurred in the past.

Ultimately, she says that the county would probably be in the same place about 825 Drake Ave. It’s not a good place either. Last year, Save Our City, a community group opposing the project, sued the county and developer to try to stop it. That lawsuit is wending its way through the courts.

It’s true that the county had no choice but to approve the project. When the developer submitted the project application, unincorporated Marin County was subject to Senate Bill 35 because it had not met its state-mandated housing production goals. SB 35, a 2018 state law, requires a streamlined approval process for multi-family housing projects that meet specific criteria, and 825 Drake checked all the boxes.

Still, one must wonder what might have happened if a significant number of residents were aware of the proposed housing project while the county was reviewing it, before the developer sunk tens of millions of dollars into the property. Instead of raising funds to pay for a lawsuit, perhaps the community could have bought the one-acre plot—the last buildable site in Marin City.

Another incarcerated person dies in Marin County Jail cell

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Another incarcerated person dies in Marin County Jail cell

An incarcerated man died in the Marin County Jail early this morning, marking the fourth in-custody death since August.

He has been identified as Derrek Leeds, 43, of San Rafael.

A deputy performing a routine check of jail cells found an individual in need of medical care at about 2:09am, according to a press release issued by the Marin County Sheriff’s Office. Deputies performed life saving measures until the San Rafael Fire Department arrived minutes later to continue those efforts. However, Leeds was pronounced dead at 2:42am.

At the request of the Marin County Sheriff’s Office, which operates the jail, the San Rafael Police Department will conduct an independent investigation into the death.

The autopsy will be performed by the Sonoma County coroner’s unit, said Deputy Rob Dillion of the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office.

This recent spike of in-custody deaths has caused concern among activists in the community, who have been calling for a civilian sheriff’s oversight commission for years.

In February, Marin County unveiled a proposed ordinance to establish an oversight commission. At the time, Supervisor Mary Sackett said that law enforcement labor unions must sign off before the board of supervisors can consider the ordinance. Sackett anticipated that negotiations with the unions would last until late spring.

Store harassed homeless people with loud music, lawsuit claims

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Store harassed homeless people with loud music, lawsuit claims

A court order put the kibosh on a San Rafael tire store “blaring loud music” from speakers pointed at the adjacent homeless encampment.

“Blaring” and “loud” aptly describe the noise I heard when Arthur Bruce, a homeless advocate, called me from the camp on Sunday, just before 7pm. In fact, I had to turn my phone volume down because the carnival-like music was annoying—not to mention ear-piercing when it hit high notes. This marked the third night that East Bay Tire Company’s loudspeaker played music continuously. The two previous days, it blasted from 6pm to 6am, Bruce said.

During a later video call, Bruce showed me a tower with loudspeakers and flashing blue lights that stood on the tire store’s property, just on the other side of the fence from the encampment. The 22-foot tower and accouterments are components of a mobile security unit leased by East Bay Tire.

On Monday morning, Bruce Gaylord, a resident of the homeless encampment on Mahon Creek Path in San Rafael, filed a lawsuit against East Bay Tire Company for intentional infliction of emotional distress and creating a public nuisance. The lawsuit states the speakers emitted noise levels ranging from 51 to 118 decibels.

To give that reading some perspective, manufacturers of gas-powered leaf blowers report that their equipment reaches a decibel level of 65–80 from a distance of 50 feet. The World Health Organization recommends less than 40 decibels of nighttime noise outside of bedrooms to prevent adverse health effects.

At a hearing last Tuesday, Marin County Judge Sheila Shah Lichtblau listened to both parties and then issued a temporary injunction preventing the store from playing music when the volume exceeds the limits of San Rafael’s sound ordinance.

In a commercial zone, San Rafael sets the limit for nighttime constant noise at 55 decibels.

The judge’s order seems entirely reasonable, although I wondered if Gaylord could have achieved his goal by contacting the San Rafael Police Department about his noisy neighbor. Police typically respond to complaints of loud parties in the wee hours of the morning. This is a somewhat similar situation, albeit the tire store and encampment aren’t in a residential area.

“I called the police on Friday night—non-emergency number,” Gaylord said. “I asked them, ‘Can you find an ordinance they’ve violated to get this shut down?’ Somebody called back to confirm what I had told them, and I explained again.”

But Gaylord said the police made no effort to abate the noise. The camper thinks three officers walked down the Mahon Creek Path after his call that evening but can’t be sure because his vision is poor and he doesn’t have eyeglasses. However, there’s nothing wrong with his hearing, and he’s certain the music continued for three consecutive nights, leaving him sleep deprived and on edge.

San Rafael Police Lt. Scott Eberle verified that the department received a call on May 17 for advice about a tire shop using cameras and playing loud music at night. Officers responded to the location, according to Eberle.

“We went out there and spoke to the individual who made the call,” Eberle said. “They didn’t want to press charges. It seemed like they just wanted advice on what they can do.”

More than 30 homeless people live in the tent encampment on the Mahon Creek Path, making it likely that officers spoke to yet another person concerned about the noise. Regardless, the music played on that night and the following two nights.

Gaylord’s tent is a few dozen yards from the equipment that blared the music. Confined to a wheelchair and set up on a campsite designed to accommodate his special needs, he couldn’t simply relocate. Besides, he shouldn’t have to. A federal judge’s order protects Gaylord and about 50 other homeless people, allowing them to live at the Mahon Creek Path encampment while a different lawsuit works its way through the court, according to homeless advocate Robbie Powelson.

STOP THE MUSIC East Bay Tire’s mobile security unit, as seen from the homeless encampment. The top of the 22-foot tower houses the loudspeakers and strobing blue lights.

East Bay Tire conducted “psychological warfare” against the campers with its unwanted overnight music, Gaylord contends. The noise exacerbated his mental health conditions, and even with prescription medication that causes drowsiness, he didn’t sleep a wink on the second and third nights that the music blared. Gaylord felt violated.

Indeed, there is a long history of using music to disorient people. The FBI employed the tactic during a 1993 standoff with the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the U.S. military subjected prisoners of war in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay to nonstop loud music to break them and obtain information in interrogations.

A 2020 report issued by the United Nations Human Rights Council identified loud music as a method of psychological torture. The ACLU is one of many other organizations that concur.

“It was cruel—extremely cruel for East Bay Tire Company to play that music,” said Jason Sarris, who was homeless for more than a decade and serves on the Marin County Lived Experience Advisory Board. “It was done on a weekend when the business was closed and there was no way to address the noise with their management.”

After court on Tuesday, I went to East Bay Tire to speak with assistant manager Robbie Derho, who represented the company during the hearing. Derho denied that they are targeting homeless people in the encampment, saying the security equipment is used to prevent crime.

“We’re not here trying to torture anyone,” Derho said. “We just want our employees and customers to be safe.”

Derho and two other employees appeared genuinely frustrated. People living in the encampment or visitors throw trash on the store’s property, and there are more serious issues happening outside of their gates, such as prostitution and drug use, one of the staffers said.

At a San Rafael City Council meeting last year, East Bay Tire’s general manager, Jay Ress, pointed to the encampment as the reason for declining business at the location. East Bay Tire bought the store from Brandon Tire two and a half years ago, and the homeless encampment was established about a year later, in March 2023.

It’s unclear when the store brought in the mobile security unit with its 22-foot tower, blue lights and loudspeakers, but Derho claimed that a third-party monitoring service—not East Bay Tire—made the decision to play the music.

LiveView Technologies (LVT), the company supplying the security equipment to East Bay Tire, confirms that it uses a third-party for monitoring. However, that service doesn’t determine how the equipment is used, according to LVT, which has installed thousands of mobile security units at businesses across the country.

“The LVT Unit’s features and capabilities are set up with the customer prior to implementation,” Matt Deighton, communications manager at LVT, wrote in an email. “Changes cannot be made by the monitoring service without customer approval.”

Most LVT customers use the loudspeaker to talk to potential “bad actors” on their property as a deterrent, according to Deighton, who also acknowledges that some do use the audio feature to play continuous music to prevent loitering and “illegal squatting at or near private property.”

For now, East Bay Tire won’t be deploying the loud continuous music feature. The next hearing on the issue is scheduled for June 28.

Remembering ‘The Serial’ writer, Cyra McFadden

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Remembering ‘The Serial’ writer, Cyra McFadden

In November 1975, Cyra McFadden’s “The Serial,” a weekly satirical column capturing Marin’s self-indulgent ’70s, premiered on the pages of the Pacific Sun. “The Serial” quickly gained popularity, spawning a best-selling book and an underappreciated film.

McFadden focused “The Serial” on the idiosyncratic lives of a fictional middle-class Mill Valley family, leaving no ’70s trend unturned. Deft descriptions of open marriage, consciousness-raising groups, communal living, primal screaming, macrame, Fetzer Cabernet Sauvignon, orgies, Werner Erhard’s est training, bonsai, hot tubs, permissive parenting, cults and oh so much more delighted Marin readers. Others, who didn’t get the joke, took offense.

McFadden died last month on her houseboat in Sausalito at age 86. The celebrated author is survived by her daughter, Caroline McFadden, also a member of Sausalito’s houseboat community.

Almost 50 years later, “The Serial” holds up as the quintessential ’70s story, replete with far-out lingo and, of course, McFadden’s “Marvelous Marin” family, the Holroyds, who live in a tract house in the flatlands of Mill Valley’s Sutton Manor, just off 101, and aspire to move “uphill” like their more successful friends. And that’s not all they dream about.

The hedonistic adventures of middle-aged Kate and Harvey Holroyd play out in fern bars, restaurants and living rooms throughout the county. While the couple tries to get over each other’s hang-ups, their relationship soon goes on the rocks, and Harvey hops onto a waterbed with the young grocery store cashier.

“It resonated,” said Natalie Snoyman, a librarian and archivist at the Mill Valley Library. “‘The Serial’ became this really sharp, but funny critique of the broader societal trends of the ’70s, including the New Age fad and the whole self-help movement that Cyra McFadden was observing in the county at the time.”

McFadden wasn’t the first to write “The Serial” for the Pacific Sun. That distinction belongs to Armistead Maupin, who was just beginning his writing career when he penned the feature in 1974 for the short-lived San Francisco edition of the alt-weekly newspaper. Steve McNamara, the owner of the Pacific Sun from 1966 to 2004, filled me in on the magnificent history of “The Serial” in the hands of Maupin and McFadden.

“The first installment appeared in the issue of Aug. 1 to 7, 1974, and Mary Ann Singleton was looking to be picked up in the frozen food section of the Marina Safeway,” McNamara said. “It was an immediate hit.”

The Pacific Sun ran five of Maupin’s tales before the San Francisco office closed. Although Maupin was eager to try a Marin version, McNamara and his editor, Don Stanley, reluctantly declined the offer when the talented young writer said that he wasn’t very familiar with Marin.

“Well, it wouldn’t work because the charm of this production really is based a lot on local knowledge,” McNamara said.

Stanley and McNamara needn’t have worried about Maupin. Two years later, his charm and local knowledge landed him a regular column in the San Francisco Chronicle, where the original version of “The Serial” took the title “Tales of the City,” launching 10 books, a PBS miniseries and a Netflix revival.

In the meantime, the Pacific Sun’s publisher and editor were on the hunt to replicate “The Serial” in Marin, but couldn’t find a suitable writer. McFadden had previously written serious reviews for the paper’s “Literary Quarterly,” although the content didn’t showcase her proficiency for parody.

“Then we received unsolicited, through the mail slot, a review of a French restaurant located somewhere in Mill Valley that was populated by motorcycle gangs—with the French food as seen by the bikers,” McNamara said. “It was very funny, clearly a send-up of the more proper, well, pretentious sorts of food reviews that were common.”

The writer of that mock review was McFadden, who had the chops to take on “The Serial,” Marin style. It took some convincing by Stanley until McFadden finally agreed.

Pacific Sun art director Tom Cervanek’s stylized illustrations of Marin’s hip crowd with flowing hair and en vogue clothes complemented the clever prose McFadden put out week after week. And most readers were digging it, really staying in touch with their feelings for the Holroyd family. After all, who in Marin couldn’t get into rapping about Japanese hot tubs versus saunas?

Apparently, Emily Woodward of San Anselmo was one who couldn’t. She found “The Serial” insulting with its overabundance of cliches and “preposterous plot,” according to her letter to the editor about the fourth installment.

Despite Woodward, Marin’s love affair with the saga continued. By September 1976, the 30th installment ran. However, the following month, a notice appeared in the paper saying that “The Serial” was on vacation.

“The last chapter is, unfortunately, a little bit sour,” McNamara explained. “Cyra has this big success on her hands, and she engages a very effective New York publicist who negotiates a wonderful contract for her. The problem is at that time, copyright law was such that the ownership of a work of literature, if you will, belonged to whoever had first published it and had run a little copyright plug. The Pacific Sun Publishing Company owned the rights to ‘The Serial.’”

McNamara and McFadden had a somewhat tense lunch meeting, eventually agreeing that the paper would give the writer the copyright in exchange for 10-15% of the book sales and movie revenue. The issue placed a permanent wedge in their relationship.

McFadden wrote 22 more chapters for the book, The Serial: A Year in the Life of Marin County, published in 1977 by Alfred A. Knopf. It contained a unique spiral-bound cover and Cervanek’s illustrations—and soon hit the New York Times’ best seller list.

Along with the national acclaim came criticism. In 1978, NBC ran a documentary, I Want it All Now, featuring an interview with McFadden and depicting Marin in an unfavorable light. Although NBC was later censured by the National News Council for inaccuracies, some in the county were unhappy with the attention.

In an oral history recorded with McFadden by the Mill Valley Historical Society, she discusses the book’s reception and how it impacted her personally. She received angry letters and late night phone calls. People threw eggs at her Mill Valley tract house.

McFadden soon fled from Marin. In 1985, she began writing a regular column for the San Francisco Examiner. The following year, she published a second book, Rain and Shine: A Family Memoir, detailing her youth on the rodeo circuit with her father, as well as other family relationships. The book was a finalist for the 1987 Pulitzer Prize in general nonfiction.

Finally, in the late ’90s, McFadden returned to live in the county that she satirized so well, settling on a Sausalito houseboat. While she felt nervous about the move, all had quieted.

“I had achieved enough local, or rather, national notice that I was now sort of the fair-haired daughter of Marin, and it turned out everybody liked the book,” McFadden said. “Everybody said, ‘Oh, I loved that book. I thought it was wonderful. I felt so bad for you with all those letters to the paper.’ And I thought, ‘You’re sure you didn’t write one?’ Because all of a sudden, I had nothing but fans, which was very nice.”

Developer agrees to reduce size of controversial Marin City housing project

Nikki Silverstein
-
5
Developer agrees to reduce size of controversial Marin City housing project

Marin County struck a deal with an affordable housing developer to reduce the size of a hotly contested five-story, 74-unit project planned in Marin City.

Though not yet inked by the Idaho developer or the county, the agreement calls for no more than 42 units at 825 Drake Ave. in Marin City, with the remaining units to be built at another location in Southern Marin.

While the county claims the revised plan responds to concerns expressed by the community, officials kept residents in the dark about the negotiations. Some in Marin City say they’re unhappy with the outcome.

Save Our City, a local group embroiled in a lawsuit against the county and developer to stop the project, rejected a similar offer last year. Developer Caleb Roope, chief executive officer of The Pacific Companies, proposed building 40 units at the Drake site. The group told Roope they wanted him to abandon the Marin City location altogether.

“From the beginning, Save Our City/Stop 825 has wanted Marin City residents to control the 825 site and its land use,” said Bettie Hodges, a Marin City native and founder of Save Our City.

The county is not in a position to purchase the property from Roope, according to Sarah Jones, director of Marin’s Community Development Agency. Instead, officials have taken a proactive role in working with the developer to decrease the size of the Marin City project and find a second site for the other units.

“This approach was not what Save Our City asked for—they wanted to see no project here.” Jones said. “He [Roope] wasn’t willing to do that, but he was willing to pursue making the project smaller. We think it’s a better outcome for Marin City than a 74-unit project.”

At first blush, an outsider may consider Save Our City’s position a page from the “Not In My Back Yard” playbook—simply a neighborhood pushing back against development and affordable housing. However, Marin City, a historically Black community, is already densely populated and contains far more low-income housing than any other unincorporated area of Marin County.

Digging deeper, this story stems from a complex set of issues. California’s housing crisis has prompted state legislation to mandate development, leaving local authorities with less control. The new laws and attractive financing have encouraged for-profit developers to build big and maximize revenue. 

Taking the brunt of the blame is Marin, a wealthy, predominantly white county that subjected its Black residents to decades of housing discrimination and segregation, and still gives them little agency today over decisions affecting their community.

The current issue began in 2020, when the county failed to inform Marin City leaders that a developer bought the one-acre property at 825 Drake. Soon after, the county approved plans for a five-story, 74-unit affordable housing project on the site and neglected to share that news with the community.

Although not required, the county could have notified the neighbors after approving a project of this size. Marin City’s infrastructure is already taxed—the area is in a state-designated high fire hazard zone, prone to flooding, and served by only one road in and out.

It wasn’t until 2023 that most Marin City residents learned about the project. The Marin County Board of Supervisors had scheduled a hearing on the issuance of $40 million in tax-exempt bonds to develop 825 Drake. Despite community outcry, the board approved the bond issuance, saying it had no choice.

While county officials were obligated under Senate Bill 35 to streamline approval of the project, questions remain as to whether the board had to approve the $40 million issuance of tax-exempt bonds—an amount that will fund most of the development’s estimated $57 million cost.

SB 35, legislation passed in 2017, restricts local governments from rejecting multi-family residential developments if the municipality hasn’t met state mandates aimed at resolving California’s housing shortage. When the county received the application to develop 825 Drake, it had not yet hit the required housing allocation.

But were the county supervisors required to approve the issuance of tax-exempt bonds for the project? That is the crux of Save Our City’s lawsuit, which asserts that county counsel advised the board incorrectly before the vote approving the bond issuance.

Last year, a Marin County judge issued a temporary order preventing the California Municipal Finance Authority from issuing any of the project’s tax-exempt that had not yet been released.

However, that ship may have sailed. Roope says the $40 million in tax-exempt bonds were issued prior to the judge’s order.

“All the bonds have been issued,” Roope said. “It’s all basically funded and set aside for this project.”

Marilyn Mackel, a Save Our City member and plaintiff in the lawsuit, sees the distribution as merely a bump in the road to permanently shutting down the Marin City project.

In February, an expert witness for Save Our City, Jack Chen, stated in a declaration to the court that if Marin County’s approval of the bond issuance is not valid, it “would create a cascade of consequences invalidating every financing agreement related to the Project.”

“In my opinion, the most likely action that Citibank and bond investors would take is to declare Events of Default under the Drake Financing Agreements to terminate those agreements, unwind the structure and seek a return of their capital,” Chen said in the declaration.

For his part, Roope doesn’t seem worried. Last year, he said that he could find other financing if necessary.

But he acknowledges that he needs to provide 74 units in Marin to fulfill his obligations to the state, county, lenders and investors. If push comes to shove, he owns the 825 Drake property, has approval for all the units at that site and will move forward. However, that’s not the way he wants to develop the project at this point.

“I’ve never had this kind of opposition before,” Roope said. “I’m trying to be as sensitive as I can, given the situation I inherited, as well as the financing that we have already. There are all these considerations, and I’m just trying to balance as best as I can.”

Adding a second location significantly increases development costs, according to Roope. Another challenge is finding a site that can accommodate the project because the 74 modular units have already been constructed. It will require a substantial design reconfiguration to fit the modules into two buildings on two different properties.

“It’s really kind of tricky from a real estate perspective,” Roope said. “I have a Rubik’s Cube process to go through.”

In the meantime, details about the new site remain vague. Roope says he’s still looking, while Jones maintains the county has identified a property in Southern Marin.

“First steps have been taken to pursue it,” Jones said. “I say that to let you know this is serious. This is not speculative.”

Save Our City says it will continue with its lawsuit to stop the development at 825 Drake, emphasizing that the community lacked a voice in the project and the county has not advanced their interests.

“The latest 40-unit agreement between the developer and the county continues this pattern and is emblematic of the power imbalance between Marin City and the County of Marin that Save Our City/Stop 825 is hoping to change,” said Hodges. “The deal between the county and the developer does not change our objectives. Our pursuit of that goal continues.”

New legal battle emerges from San Rafael cops’ use of force

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
New legal battle emerges from San Rafael cops’ use of force

A legal battle has erupted because the City of San Rafael says it needs a witness’ help to prevent ex-cop Brandon Nail from getting his job back. Police Chief David Spiller terminated Nail last year.

Julio Jimenez Lopez, the witness, wants his testimony in the employment arbitration proceeding between Nail and the city kept confidential. San Rafael refuses. Consequently, Jimenez Lopez isn’t keen on testifying, despite the subpoena he received from the arbitrator.

On Tuesday, attorneys for San Rafael and Jimenez Lopez will square off in a Marin County courtroom. San Rafael wants Judge Stephen Freccero to compel Jimenez Lopez to testify without any restrictions, while Jimenez Lopez’s motion asks the judge to issue a protective order requiring confidentiality of his testimony.

San Rafael’s attorneys maintain that Jimenez Lopez’s account of a July 27, 2022 police use of force incident could sway the arbitrator to uphold Nail’s termination. It just might.

Jimenez Lopez testified in a criminal hearing last year that Nail and then-officer Daisy Mazariegos assaulted and injured him during questioning about an open container of beer. 

As a result of that hearing, Judge Beth Jordan ordered both Nail and Mazariegos to stand trial for assault under color of authority with a sentencing enhancement for causing “great bodily harm” to Jimenez Lopez. Nail also faces a felony charge for making false statements in a police report.

It’s curious that San Rafael refuses Jimenez Lopez’s request for confidentiality, even as its attorneys repeatedly state his arbitration testimony is important.

“There can be no dispute that Mr. Lopez is a key witness and recipient of the conduct underlying the City’s decision to terminate Mr. Nail’s employment,” San Rafael’s outside counsel wrote in their opposition to Jimenez Lopez’s motion to keep his testimony confidential.

Theo Emison and Anthony Label, civil attorneys representing Jimenez Lopez, believe the city has a hidden agenda—namely to use their client’s testimony against him in yet another upcoming legal proceeding based on the use of force incident.

Last year, Jimenez Lopez filed a lawsuit in federal court against San Rafael, the police department and the two former officers for violating his civil rights. One can hardly blame him. Medical reports and his testimony at the criminal hearing indicate that he suffered a broken nose, concussion and injuries to both knees and shoulders, with the left shoulder requiring surgery.

Adding insult to injury, the police arrested Jimenez Lopez on felony and misdemeanor charges, stating in a report that he hit Nail and attempted to put him in a headlock. While the videos from the then-officers’ body-worn cameras verify Jimenez Lopez’s account of the incident, they do not show him striking or putting Nail in a chokehold. The Marin County District Attorney dropped all charges against Jimenez Lopez after watching the videos.

“Though Mr. Lopez supports the City’s efforts to keep Mr. Nail off its police force, the City refuses to agree not to use Mr. Lopez’s testimony in Nail’s employment arbitration as a double-edged sword against Mr. Lopez in his pending federal civil rights trial against the City,” Emison said. “This raises serious questions about the City’s motive in calling Mr. Lopez to testify at Nail’s employment arbitration.”

San Rafael’s outside counsel, the attorneys who are opposing Jimenez Lopez’s motion requesting confidentiality for his arbitration testimony, call Emison’s claim “speculation and unsupported by any facts.”

If Emison’s theory is wrong, why not simply agree to the confidentiality request? In fact, Spiller and Rob Epstein, city attorney for San Rafael, both told me that Nail’s employment arbitration is confidential.

I called Epstein to discuss the arbitration, and he agreed to consult with outside counsel and provide written answers. However, many of his responses simply do not shed light on the issues raised.

“This arbitration is a confidential proceeding, which means that members of the public cannot observe or listen to the arbitration hearing,” Epstein wrote. “The question whether any or all of the arbitration transcript will remain confidential after the arbitration is concluded is an open question that may need to be decided in a future court proceeding.”

Does a court really need to decide? San Rafael could simply agree to keep the confidential arbitration, well, confidential.

I asked whether Jimenez Lopez could receive a transcript of the entire arbitration to use in his civil rights case against the city, police and ex-cops. After all, what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. Again, Epstein wrote that this, too, remains “an open question that may need to be decided in a future court proceeding.”

Epstein also noted that the city can’t waive the rights—“whatever they may be”—of the other defendants to use the arbitration transcript against Jimenez Lopez in the federal lawsuit.

It sure seems like all the parties would want the answers to these questions before they put up their witnesses, including Nail and Spiller. But by now, more than a month after the arbitration began, they’ve likely already provided their testimony. The roadblock to finishing the arbitration is Jimenez Lopez’s refusal to testify without a confidentiality protection, according to San Rafael.

Although a memorandum of understanding between the City of San Rafael and the San Rafael Police Association gives terminated employees the right to submit a grievance and initiate the arbitration process, it does not specify the parameters of the arbitration—except that the arbitrator’s decisions are binding and final.

It’s unclear whether the city and Nail made any agreements before the arbitration began. Could they have agreed not to use arbitration testimony against each other at Jimenez Lopez’s civil rights trial? 

Jimenez Lopez is a witness and “recipient of Mr. Nail’s improper, disrespectful and aggressive behavior,” according to the city. Even as the city admits he’s a victim, he remains in the dark about any of the arbitration stipulations that could impact him.

I’m speculating now, but a sentence in the city’s opposition to Jimenez Lopez’s motion for confidentiality appears quite telling.

“Live testimony will also allow the parties and Arbitrator to note any inconsistencies between the testimony and the prior statements made by Mr. Lopez, and assess his credibility,” the city’s outside counsel wrote in the court filing.

If the city’s only motive is to keep Nail from returning to the police department, wouldn’t inconsistent testimony hurt the city’s case?

And could inconsistencies assist San Rafael and Nail in their defenses to Jimenez Lopez’s civil rights lawsuit? I asked if in this instance, do the city’s and ex-cop’s goals align?

Epstein didn’t respond to any of these questions.

What’s cooking with Novato’s Curtis Aikens

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
What’s cooking with Novato’s Curtis Aikens

Celebrity chef, author, athletic coach, master gardener, literacy advocate and diabetes educator—Curtis Aikens Sr. is a Renaissance man.

I spent a couple of days last week getting to know Aikens, who is instantly likable. We met at the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Academy in Marin City, where he’s transforming a neglected garden and teaching children how to grow fruits, vegetables and flowers.

Aikens, 65, puts his heart and soul into the project, not to mention some serious sweat equity. On a sunny and hot afternoon, I watched him haul huge bags of mulch, mow the lawn and weed. But his favorite gardening activity is working with the kids, sixth graders from teacher Michelle Rampulla’s class.

A few children took me on a garden tour, proudly identifying each plant or tree. They showed me radishes that had just been harvested and gave me a lesson in root vegetables. Aikens’ work is having an impact.

“Curtis is great at connecting with children,” Rampulla said. “He knows how to talk and engage with them.”

Rampulla also shared that Aikens, despite his great success, is humble. He doesn’t want the children to focus on his celebrity status.

Yet, Aikens is quite the celebrity, a familiar face to people nationwide. In 1990, he began appearing regularly on ABC’s The Home Show, and then on Good Morning America. Three years later, he was hired as one of the original chefs on the Food Network, where he spent the next decade hosting his own cooking shows, including Pick of the Day, From My Garden, Meals Without Meat and Food in a Flash. 

He developed a large and loyal following, among them three first ladies—Barbara Bush, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama. The chef was invited to the White House several times, and not just to cook. Bush, also a literacy advocate, recognized him for his work in the field.

Growing up in Georgia, Aikens never learned to read. But he faked it. He faked it so well that after graduating high school, he was accepted into college, playing football for Southern University. However, it was nerve-wracking to keep up the façade, so he transferred to the University of Georgia, where he again played football.

“I run from Southern to the University of Georgia so I can hide some more, and I got another year to pretend,” Aikens said.

Even his family didn’t know his well-guarded secret. He fled Georgia in 1981 and moved to Marin. Although he started a produce company, illiteracy stopped him again. He found it difficult to run the business without being able to read and write.

Aikens felt defeated. Then he saw a public service announcement on TV that spoke to him.

“So, this commercial pretty much said, ‘You’re not the only one who can’t read. If you want help, call us, the Literacy Volunteers of America in Marin,’” Aikens said.

He dialed the number on the TV screen, which led him to meet regularly at the Fairfax Library with two volunteer tutors from the group. At the age of 26, Aikens learned to read.

For the first time, he could read letters from his mom. She had often asked her son why he didn’t write back, and he replied that he liked calling her.

Today, Aikens speaks openly about literacy and his own struggles. His goal is to motivate others who can’t read and write.

“That’s what it’s all about—getting people to read,” Aikens said. “I tell folks, ‘If you read, you can succeed.’”

Reading opened a new world for Aikens. In 1986, he closed his Marin business and moved to Manhattan. He became a “foodie” while working at Balducci’s, the city’s premier gourmet grocery store at the time. From there, he moved into food styling for television commercials and then to craft services, where he prepared food for the cast and crew of television shows.

His mother wanted him to return to Georgia, so he picked up and moved again. In his hometown of Conyers, he started another produce company and opened a produce store, both family businesses. Then, he wrote his first book, Curtis Aikens’ Guide to the Harvest.

A publicist friend sent Aikens’ bio to TV stations. WXIA in Atlanta invited him to discuss his book on one of their shows. He was a hit. The station asked Aikens back again and again, eventually hiring him for a weekly segment. Soon enough, he began appearing regularly on more than a dozen television stations in the Southeast, talking about how to select the best produce and showing people how to cook it.

ABC’s The Home Show had him come on for a five-minute segment about zucchini. The producers realized the chef had a certain je ne sais quoi, and he walked out with a contract from the network. Aikens had reached for the stars, and he had made it.

While he guest hosted The Home Show with Sarah Purcell, they did a segment on literacy. He didn’t know a word on the teleprompter, and while on the air asked Purcell about the word. A few seconds later, he burst into tears, believing the stumble would end his television career. Instead, the phones started ringing at ABC, all supportive of Aikens. Literacy centers, too, received calls from people wanting to learn to read.

Dan Rather heard about the incident, prompting him to feature Aikens’ journey to literacy in his book, The American Dream: Stories from the Heart of Our Nation.

Eventually, Aikens made his way back to Marin, settling in Novato in the early ’90s. He commuted to New York and Los Angeles to continue his television career. In 1993, Aikens joined the Food Network, and his star continued to rise. A decade later, he retired from the cable network to spend more time with his children.

The downtime also allowed him to fulfill a lifetime goal. He earned a bachelor’s degree from Limestone University in South Carolina.

Aikens enrolled in a graduate program at Dominican University in San Rafael. Attending classes wasn’t enough to keep the student busy, and he signed on as the assistant women’s basketball coach at the school. In 2013, he graduated with a master’s degree in education.

“I love learning, especially now that I can read,” Aikens said.

The celebrity chef also loves sharing what he’s learned. Diagnosed with type two diabetes, Aikens took on another project, educating others with the disease.

“I got a chance to work with incredible dietitians and nutritionists, and I learned so much,” Aikens said. “I travel the country teaching people with diabetes how to cook good food that’s good for the body.”

There’s also volunteer work—he recently served on Marin County’s Human Rights Commission and a working group that developed the framework for the civilian sheriff’s oversight commission.

Somehow, Aikens also found the time for a new two-episode cooking show, Cooking with Curtis. The first episode is airing in April on Lifetime Real Women.

“I built the shows around the Costco rotisserie chicken,” Aikens said. “We’re doing six recipes from one $4.99 bird. If you’re a family on a budget, you can get two of those birds and feed four people for a week.”

Aikens comes up with new ideas constantly. Clearly, he has more in store for the world, and I’m eager to learn what’s next on the menu.

Autistry Studios Creates Community for Autistic Adults

Nikki Silverstein
-
9
Autistry Studios Creates Community for Autistic Adults

My wonderfully offbeat friend, Ken Pontac, has told me for a dozen years about a magical place in San Rafael called Autistry Studios. Last week, I finally visited. Pontac, who recently began working there, wasn’t kidding.

Somehow, it seems too mild to say that I was absolutely enchanted by every person I met and delighted by each piece of art I saw. Autistry Studios feels alive, a bustling beehive of gifted students and mentors working together—not just to create artwork, but also to empower young autistic adults to stretch and reach their potential.

I hesitate to share the stats and clinical definition for autism because at Autistry, it’s a footnote. But to offer some perspective, about one in 36 children is diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Autism is a neurological and developmental condition that affects social interactions, communication, learning and behavior.

Yet, the purpose of Autistry Studios, a nonprofit, isn’t to keep students occupied with busy work to pass the time. As Autistry co-founder Janet Lawson likes to say, “We don’t make macaroni art here.”

Indeed, they don’t.

A retail store at the downtown studios, the Autistry Makers Market, sells the students’ original artwork. One collection includes beautiful hand-turned wood pens possessing the perfect weight and feel for writing a long letter. Captivating hand-sewn puppets—decked out in jaunty hats and whimsical outfits—look like they deserve starring roles in the next Muppet movie. Wall clocks, themed coasters and greeting cards with sweet, hilarious and even dark sentiments are just a few of the other items found in the store.

Chloe, a student at Autistry Studios, is comfortable working with large equipment to help create her artwork.

Autistry also offers theater and animation programs, as well as reading, writing and math remedial classes to give students what Lawson calls “the dignity of risk.” The education, vocation and life skills programs are designed to help an individual achieve their highest level of independence. 

“We challenge them,” Lawson says. “If you can draw, can you paint? If you can paint, can you sculpt? If you can sculpt, can you make that move into animation?” 

Pontac mentors the students in animation and storytelling, seeing his role as identifying their superpowers. An expert in the field, Pontac spent the last four decades writing for classic shows including Gumby, Arthur, Woody Woodpecker and Happy Tree Friends, to name just a few.

Autistry students work on animation projects using the Story Xperiential platform, which follows Pixar’s process. It requires working on computers, drawing and writing.

“My interaction is helping them ferret out their ideas,” Pontac says. “I’ll point out that maybe a close-up would be good here. Or this needs perspective. If a student wants a character posed at a certain angle, I’ll take a picture with my camera of the student posed like that. They can copy the picture and be on their way.”

Pontac loves sharing the story of a young autistic man brought to Autistry Studios by his special education teacher. Courtney, according to the teacher, would never be able to read or write. Soon enough, with Pontac’s spelling help, Courtney was writing his own animated story. Today, his trajectory is pointed sky high.

Partnerships with businesses and community groups equip students with new skills. Double Rainbow operates a coffee house at Autistry Studios and trains students in the art and science of all things java and tea. And here’s a scoop—Autistry will soon be the new home of Marin’s favorite Double Rainbow Ice Cream shop.

Baristas Ian (left) and Tenaya stir up java masterpieces at the Double Rainbow Cafe inside Autistry Studios in downtown San Rafael.

An alliance between the Marin Shakespeare Company and the Autistry Drama Group recently burst onto the stage. On April 26, they’re presenting Dorothy’s Adventures in Oz. Again, this isn’t a “macaroni” production, and tickets are a hot commodity.

Autistry’s theater director, Tim Flavin, was the first American to win a prestigious Olivier Award, England’s equivalent of the Tony Awards—and he went on to take home three more of the British statues.

Theater, too, provides invaluable opportunities for students to hone their abilities. Scripts must be read and memorized. Physical routines involve coordination. And participating in a production necessitates working with other people.

“We help individuals create identity,” Lawson says. “Many autistic students haven’t had the identity-building experiences that one usually has in high school. Like being part of a sports team or a drama team—anything that has to do with being with other students and testing your personality against theirs. That’s how you build.”

In 2008, Autistry was born of necessity, established by Lawson and her then-husband, Dan Swearingen, in their backyard. Their son, Ian, is autistic, also known as neurodivergent.

“Neurodivergent,” says Lawson. “I love the phrase because it’s not shaming. It just says, ‘I’m wired differently.’”

When Ian was diagnosed as a young child, Lawson, a licensed therapist, and Swearingen, an astrophysicist and engineer, set out to learn everything they could about the condition.

Through that process, the couple was presented with a new revelation. Lawson saw tears running down Swearingen’s face while he read a book about autism by Temple Grandin, a well-known college professor and author who is neurodivergent.

“He said, ‘I don’t know about Ian, but this is me,’” Lawson recalls. “And that was a real sea change right there because it explained so much of his life and his childhood.”

During Ian’s school years, Lawson and Swearingen grew concerned that the secluded special education classes, laser focused on keeping children safe, stymied development.

“They have no expectation that these students can challenge themselves, grow further and excel,” Lawson says. “Partly because they don’t want them to be hurt, be disappointed or fail. But if you don’t have an opportunity to fail, you also have no opportunity to succeed.”

The couple couldn’t find programs after high school that would help Ian and people like him prepare for college, employment and independent living. Lawson and Swearingen felt forced to take matters into their own hands and opened Autistry Studios.

Currently, there are 42 students and 26 staff members, some of whom are former students. About 15 people are on a waiting list, a testament to the success of Autistry’s methods.

Some students go on to community college. A few obtain bachelor’s degrees.

“But for the majority of our students, succeeding in community college for several semesters is sufficient to give them the confidence and increased executive functioning that enables them to live with minimal in-home support,” Lawson says.

Although Autistry Studios teaches students practical skills and how to interact in the workplace, finding employment for those who are able to take that step can be difficult. Successful placement primarily depends on the employer’s understanding and acceptance, according to Lawson. Autistry works with students through the interview and hiring process, remaining involved to help the employee and employer adjust to the new culture.

On average, people stay in Autistry’s programs for three years, but some have remained for more than a decade. Those who have been in the workshops for years help those young people just starting out, allowing the magic of Autistry Studios to continue.

“There’s a great need, and that’s why we plan on expanding,” Lawson says. “Autistry has become not just a program, but a productive and supportive community.”

For tickets to Autistry Studios’ theater production of ‘Dorothy’s Adventures in Oz,’ click here.

Marin County Jail’s new program aims to reduce recidivism

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Marin County Jail’s new program aims to reduce recidivism

The young woman felt compelled to steal from Rite Aid, Safeway and other stores, partly because she knew selling the merchandise would help provide for her two sons.

It’s hard to say whether Deja Munson, 25, possesses much talent for thievery. While admitting to stealing regularly, she also seems to get caught frequently enough, spending almost four of the last seven years behind bars at various correctional facilities, including a 22-month stint at the women’s state prison in Chowchilla.

Munson, a Vallejo resident, currently lives in the Marin County Jail. A January arrest for stealing from a CVS store in San Rafael also triggered a parole violation. Taking a plea deal, she received a three-month sentence for both offenses.

On April 16, the young mom will leave her cell and rejoin life with her two sons, ages 2 and 7. Determined never to be locked up again, Munson believes she can stay on the straight and narrow this time.

“I’ve just been so stuck on the easy route,” Munson said. “But I want more. I want so bad to be just, you know, a regular citizen doing the right thing, living the right way, working hard for it.”

Describing herself as impulsive and prone to self-sabotage, Munson knows she has a tough road to navigate when she gets released. Resisting the temptation to steal has proven too daunting in the past. Whether she succeeds will depend on her commitment to understanding her behaviors and learning problem-solving skills.

Munson, who is bright and enthusiastic, says she can do it. I believe her.

Last week, I met Munson twice at the jail. The first occasion took place when the Marin County Sheriff’s Office, which operates the jail, invited the media to the launch of the Family Reunification Program. Munson, the first participant, had a “contact” visit with her children and mother, allowing her to hug them after three months of separation.

Before the reunification program, a wall with a glass window stood between an incarcerated person and their loved ones during visits. Now, those who qualify for the program see and touch their family in a cheery, newly remodeled room, replete with a comfortable sofa, chairs and plenty of toys for the kids.

Dressed in a brown uniform, Munson entered the room, hugging and kissing her boys. She greeted her mother, Sumatra McGilbery, affectionately.

“He’s getting so tall, Mom,” Munson said of her 7-year-old son. “I miss you.”

McGilbery, seated next to me on the sofa, watched her daughter playing with the children on the floor. Softly, the grandmother began to cry, saying that her daughter has been incarcerated for too much of the children’s lives.

Indeed, Munson missed four of her eldest son’s seven birthdays. The youngest child was born while Munson was in state prison. Two days later, McGilbery brought the infant into her home.

McGilbery has devoted years to raising her grandchildren, taking them in each time her daughter has landed in a cell. She hopes that during these family visits, Munson will realize what “she’s been missing out on and won’t leave them again.”

That is the primary purpose of the Family Reunification Program. Although Sheriff Jamie Scardina didn’t attend the inaugural family contact visit, the program is part of his initiative to reduce recidivism, according to Deputy Phil Marsh, a jail reentry team member.

Visitation helps families maintain meaningful relationships. In addition to decreasing the reoffense rate, plenty of research shows that these visits are invaluable to the well-being of an incarcerated person and their kids in several ways, including improved mental health.

“Where the visitation is of a high quality, it is associated with positive outcomes for children,” concluded a Maryland Law Review article, “Prisoners of Fate: The Challenges of Creating Change for Children of Incarcerated Parents.”

Family reunification is one of many programs offered by the jail’s reentry team, which consists of four people. Marsh said they work with other county agencies and nonprofits to provide classes, all designed to ease an incarcerated individual’s transition into the community after being released.

Bay Area Community Resources, a nonprofit, leads in-custody classes on parenting, anger management, changing behavior, mindfulness and more. Once released, a person has the opportunity to continue with programs on the outside, according to Pattie Williams, a manager with the organization.

Munson credits the programs, and particularly Williams, for the “mind-blowing, life-changing” difference in her outlook. During past incarcerations, she couldn’t get into these types of classes due to long waiting lists. But she had no such problems at the Marin County Jail.

“There are so many skills that I’ve learned, especially with responding to anger,” Munson said. “Active listening is a big thing for me because I tend to talk, instead of listening to understand the other person’s point of view. Just proper communication, you know, stopping and thinking.”

Next week, Munson will move in with her father. Although she won’t live with her children, she will begin co-parenting them. Munson’s mother, McGilbery, wants her daughter to acclimate to life outside of jail before she begins caring for the boys full-time.

“She needs time to stabilize,” McGilbery said. “Deja’s a good mom. I know she loves them. They’re her children.”

I visited Munson again at the jail, allowing me to meet with her one-on-one. She’s clear on the fact that she committed crimes for complicated reasons, and it’s going to take all the grit she can muster to avoid her previous behaviors.

Her goals are simple: a job, spending quality time with her sons and maybe returning to school. Munson is grateful that her family has stood by her and knows she has hurt them.

Even though she’s getting out soon, Munson spoke wistfully of the time that she has missed with her children, saying she constantly wonders what they smell like. The expression on her youngest son’s face during their contact visit tugged at her heart.

“He kind of was like looking at me like, ‘I know who you are. But where [have] you been at?’” Munson said.

Fortunately, Munson is young. She has plenty of time to build bridges and strong bonds with her family. With their support and her drive, Munson is well on her way.

Employees say no deal on offer from Marin Housing Authority

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Employees say no deal on offer from Marin Housing Authority

Despite meeting for months, the Marin Housing Authority and its 30 unionized employees have yet to reach a labor agreement.

The contract between the Marin Housing Authority (MHA) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) 1021 expired on Dec. 31.

Both sides have engaged in bargaining sessions since November. At last count, they’ve sat down at the table 18 times to hash out their differences.

The primary sticking points include wages and benefits. In addition, the union wants MHA to staff up with in-house employees, rather than using outside vendors to provide contract workers.

MHA’s wages are 20-30% less than other housing authorities in the Bay Area, making it difficult to hire and retain qualified union employees, according to Joel Evans-Fudem, an SEIU 1021 field representative. Increased health insurance costs also take a bite of an employee’s paycheck.

Carrie Smith, an MHA housing locator, said the lack of competitive wages and benefits has created financial hardship for many MHA staff members.

Last month, I interviewed several employees while they walked the picket line in front of MHA’s office in San Rafael. Some say they are on the brink of losing their own housing. One worker couldn’t afford the health insurance offered by MHA and was forced to place her children on Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program.

“I can’t afford to pay for child care while I’m at work,” said Jessica Jackson, an MHA case manager. “It’s hard. I’m one step away from drowning.”

The descriptions of their struggles led me to the obvious question: Why do these union workers stay at MHA? The answer I repeatedly heard was that their clients need them.

Those clients include thousands of Marin residents. Many live in the 496 public housing units operated by MHA. Others are part of the Section 8 voucher program run by MHA, which currently consists of 2,300 households. The union maintains that the ongoing labor issues negatively impact the people MHA serves, especially when jobs are farmed out to contract workers.

“This is work that we truly, truly care about,” said Ceena Ford, an MHA program specialist. A lot of us have been housing insecure. Our clients need help from people that have that understanding and passion and will treat them with dignity. Even though some employees are struggling, they can’t bring themselves to hurt our clients by leaving.”

If they resign, the employees fear they’ll be replaced by the contractors that MHA has relied on for years. They cite serious issues with one of those contractors, Nan McKay and Associates.

Marin public housing residents and voucher holders lined up at recent MHA Board of Commissioners meetings to complain about the firm. Some spoke of Nan McKay and Associates failing to send the necessary paperwork, losing submitted documents and sending unjustified eviction notices. These aren’t isolated cases.

In November, the San Francisco Housing Authority filed a lawsuit against Nan McKay and Associates for breach of contract, contending the firm hurt the city’s vulnerable population by “providing services poorly or not providing services.”

Still, in February, the MHA board approved a one-year contract with Nan McKay and Associates for $425,000 and the option for another year at $125,000. However, Kimberly Carroll, MHA’s director, agreed to a transition plan to bring these case management positions in-house and to another vendor within 12 to 15 months.

And so, the MHA employees stay on for the sake of their clients and hope they can hammer out a new labor contract. Whether MHA and the union workers are close to an agreement depends on who you ask.

In an email, Carroll said that she is confident the matter will soon be resolved with a fair and reasonable multi-year contract.

“Marin Housing has significantly improved its offers over the course of these negotiations,” Carroll said.

However, the union disputes Carroll’s claims, maintaining the housing authority refuses to bargain in good faith and lacks the transparency required of public agencies.

“They haven’t moved from their proposal and don’t seem interested in creative solutions to get to an agreement,” Evans-Fudem said. “They keep promising and failing to deliver current, accurate financial data.”

As a result, the union filed an unfair practice charge with the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), claiming MHA is bargaining in bad faith and has failed to provide the requested information. In a February letter, PERB said it would schedule an informal settlement conference soon.

In the meantime, MHA provided a “last, best and final offer,” with two options that would remain in effect through March 31, 2027. Neither addresses that employees earn 20-30% less than workers in similar positions at other Bay Area housing authorities.

The first option provides union employees with a 6% increase after the agreement is accepted and a 3% annual raise during each of the following two years. Additionally, MHA would pay 90-100% of the Kaiser health insurance premium.

MHA’s second option offers the same 6% wage increase after acceptance of the contract and a 4.5% bump in both 2026 and 2027. However, the employee would be responsible for a larger portion of the health insurance cost.

MHA apparently wants union employees to choose between wages and health care. Should a full-time worker at a public agency in one of America’s wealthiest counties have to decide whether they prefer to put food on the table or take their kids to the doctor?

Evans-Fudem believes the MHA board needs to provide more oversight to the agency. He’s not alone. The board, which includes the five members of the Marin County Board of Supervisors and two “tenant commissioners,” has often been criticized for not paying enough attention to the agency they govern.

As an example, Evans-Fudem points to the December meeting, when the board quickly approved MHA’s 2024 budget of $92 million.

“There were almost no numbers in the short budget presentation,” Evans-Fudem said. “The board asked hardly any questions.”

There are other concerns. MHA is top-heavy, with almost one manager for every 1.5 workers, according to Evans-Fudem. And poor conditions at the public housing properties have been an ongoing issue.

Historic Golden Gate Village in Marin City, with its 296 units, is by far the largest property MHA manages. Residents have long complained that apartments are rife with rodents, mold, plumbing leaks, broken heating and faulty wiring.

An MHA employee of seven years, Jose Godinez, spoke about the conditions at Golden Gate Village during public comment at last month’s MHA board meeting. He works on the property’s maintenance.

“We have right now in the system over 350 work orders,” Godinez said. “We need more help.”

Indeed, it seems that MHA staff members require more support from their employers to enable them to provide clients with the services they deserve.

Currently, the union hasn’t accepted either of the options in MHA’s “last, best and final offer.” It remains to be seen whether MHA will put out a better plan. Until then, the stalemate continues.

County disbanding commission focused on ending discrimination

Nikki Silverstein
-
19
County disbanding commission focused on ending discrimination

The Marin County Board of Supervisors placed the Human Rights Commission on “pause” three months ago, suspending its operations. This week, the board unanimously approved beginning the process to “sunset” the group.

A scenic-sounding euphemism for shutting it down doesn’t make the pill any easier to swallow. With Marin ranked as California’s third most racially disparate county in the 2023 Race Counts report, it seems the local commission’s mission of promoting social justice and equality and eliminating discrimination would be mighty important.

The pending dissolution comes as a blow to the dedicated volunteers appointed to the commission. Ditto for those concerned about Marin’s continuing struggles with equity, including increased racial segregation, racial profiling by law enforcement, significantly lower life expectancy in underserved communities, homelessness, lack of affordable housing, food insecurity and more.

Over the last year, the Human Rights Commission (HRC) tried to tackle some of these issues with their relatively low $13,500 annual budget. During their public meetings, the group approved funding for community refrigerators in low-income neighborhoods, lunch gift cards during the summer months for vulnerable children and porta-potties for homeless people in Fairfax and San Rafael.

Funds were also earmarked for a brake light clinic to replace broken bulbs in vehicles belonging to people of color, helping to prevent pretextual stops by law enforcement. Working brake lights help folks breathe easier when they’re trying to get to work on time, especially when the Marin County Sheriff’s Office stops Black people at almost nine times the rate of white people, according to data analysis by Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment.

But the county never allowed any of the projects to move forward; instead, seemingly stringing the group along for months.

Marin residents should demand some straight talk from the county about the reasons behind disbanding a vital group. I tried, but the responses I received don’t make much sense. Neither does the county’s recently issued press release or administrative staff report.

Jamillah Jordan, Marin’s Office of Equity director, played a role in the recommendation to ax the commission. It began, she said, with a process to reevaluate all 59 boards and commissions under the Board of Supervisors.

In November, the county surveyed members of the groups and determined that they are predominantly white, over 60 and well educated, Jordan said. While stating the county needs to work on broadening inclusion, Jordan cited two groups with diverse membership—the Commission on Aging and the HRC.

Indeed, sitting behind the dais at the HRC meetings are two Black men, one Black woman, a Latinx woman, a white man who was formerly homeless and a white woman.

Yet the diverse HRC is one of five groups on the chopping block. When looking at the list provided by Jordan, it’s easy to spot that one of these things is not like the others.

The Access Appeals Board last met in 2015. The Architectural Commission and the Building Board of Appeals haven’t held meetings since 2018. Jordan couldn’t say when the Fair Advisory Board met previously, although she verified this group lacks current members and has no applications for new ones.

Those familiar with the beleaguered 60-year history of Marin’s HRC might not find it surprising that it’s currently the subject of debate. Mill Valley librarian Natalie Snoyman’s podcast, 80 Years of Racial Justice Work in Southern Marin, chronicled the county’s previous pushback on the group.

“It’s history repeating itself, unfortunately,” Snoyman said. “The Human Rights Commission hasn’t always received a lot of support.”

Marin County Supervisor Eric Lucan served on the subcommittee created to review the county’s boards and commissions. He stands behind the recommendation to rid Marin of the only commission devoted to human rights. This is despite the fact that Marin is “the most segregated county in the region by far,” according to UC Berkeley’s Othering & Belonging Institute.

“The scope of the HRC was overly broad,” Lucan said. “I think there were internally lots of questions—what is the scope of the HRC? That’s something different members were trying to sort out amongst themselves, and it probably needed a lot of clarity from the Board of Supervisors.”

Additionally, Lucan pointed out the county will soon launch a Sheriff’s Oversight Commission, which is also a talking point in the staff report that attempts to justify sunsetting the HRC.

The county’s position is that for the last two years, the HRC’s primary function involved exploring the creation of the Sheriff’s Oversight Commission. With that work now complete, the staff report states the county needs to focus on establishing the oversight group, inferring the HRC distracts from that mission.

Lucan and Jordan also maintain that the work of the HRC can be absorbed by the future sheriff’s oversight group and other boards and commissions. Both mentioned the Women’s Commission and the Commission on Aging as groups with concerns about equity.

However, expecting other Marin commissions—tasked with their own specific missions—to address equity on a consistent basis could pose a challenge for those groups. One might say these commissions would then have an “overly broad scope.”

The county’s reasons for disbanding the HRC ring hollow. However, I have some plausible ideas about what may have precipitated the decision.

Emails show friction existed between the commission chairperson, Jeremy Portje, and staff liaisons, particularly Roger Crawford, who is also the county’s equal employment opportunity director.

Portje acknowledges that he didn’t always submit meeting agenda items or corrections to the minutes in a timely manner. More substantial issues surfaced when trying to get staff to purchase supplies for the programs approved by the commission, Portje said.

I reviewed emails between Portje and staff that would lead a reasonable person to believe resources were forthcoming. Yet month after month, there were delays.

Unbeknownst to Portje at the time, no amount of effort would have been enough to shake loose the budget—not for the brake light clinic and community refrigerators approved in May, the children’s lunch program approved in June or the port-a-potties approved in September.

“No commissions have the authority to enter into contracts or direct staff to enter into service agreements,” County Administrator Matthew Hymel told me in an email. “I did not tell Roger Crawford to stall, but I did tell him that the funds were not set aside for direct services like the brake light clinics as soon as I heard of it. I told him that the Commission, as an advisory board, could adopt a resolution or letter requesting that the County explore providing these services.”

Crawford and sometimes other staff liaisons were present at the meetings when the HRC approved the projects, never informing the commissioners that their research, discussion and votes would be for naught.

“No one had said any of this before,” Portje said. “We never knew these programs were out of our purview.”

Hymel doesn’t remember when he told Crawford about the policy. Finally, in October, long after relations had become strained, Crawford sent an email to Portje stating that he should consult with the Board of Supervisors “before doing such things as hosting a break [sic] light clinic and buying port-a-potties.”

Meetings sometimes turned into a circus, becoming another problem for the county to contend with. A Berkeley citizen journalist, Eva Chrysanthe, often disrupted meetings when she refused to adhere to time limits during public comment and talked over the commissioners.

During the April and December meetings, the situation with Chysanthe spun out of control, according to several members of the commission. I asked Chrysanthe for her perspective.

Chrysanthe alleged that she was shoved and coughed on during the April meeting by Portje’s wife. When a “promised” apology from the commission didn’t materialize, she submitted a written report about what she described as an “assault” to the Board of Supervisors, their aides and Marin County District Attorney Lori Frugoli. Ultimately, Chysanthe said she decided not to pursue the matter.

Portje, vice chair Jason Sarris and several attendees at the meeting said that they saw no physical altercation, though two to three members of the public approached Chrysanthe and told her to stop interrupting.

At the conclusion of the December meeting, Chrysanthe approached another attendee, who indicated that she didn’t want to answer any questions. Sarris blocked her from following the woman, Chysanthe said, but she maneuvered past him. However, according to Chrysanthe, Portje shoved her to prevent her from exiting the room.

While Chrysanthe showed me a video that she purported would prove Portje assaulted her by bumping her with his chest, I did not see any evidence of physical contact. Chrysanthe declined to let me view the video a second time, instead saying that she would release it to the public.

Portje filed a report with the Marin County Sheriff’s Office about the same incident, claiming Chrysanthe shoved him. It’s still under investigation, Portje said.

Thorny issues. So, why didn’t the supervisors simply ask Portje to step down as chair or resign from the HRC? Perhaps it’s because he’s one of few Black people serving on a commission, and that wouldn’t be a good look for a county. Or maybe the county is concerned about legal blowback. Portje is currently suing the City of Sausalito for $21 million, claiming his civil rights were violated by police officers who targeted him because he’s African American.

Curtis Aikens, an HRC commissioner, suggested months ago to the supervisors that the group needed a reboot. Ideally, he wanted to open the application process and have everyone reapply for their seats.

“We have a system that is not working,” Aikens said. “The county did not properly train us. We should have known how to conduct a meeting. We should have known our duties and responsibilities for outreach to the community. I’m faulting all of us, but the work we did and can do is needed by the county.”

BREAKING NEWS: Fired San Rafael cop standing trial for felony assault wants job back

Nikki Silverstein
-
7
BREAKING NEWS: Fired San Rafael cop standing trial for felony assault wants job back

Brandon Nail, a former San Rafael police officer who will soon stand trial on criminal charges, has appealed his termination from the police department and is seeking reinstatement.

A confidential binding arbitration hearing is scheduled this month to determine whether Nail will get his job back. The City of San Rafael is defending its decision to oust Nail, who was fired on June 27 for violating department policies.

A memorandum of understanding between the City of San Rafael and the San Rafael Police Association gives terminated employees the right to submit a grievance to the city manager and initiate the arbitration process.

The arbitrator’s determination, expected 60 days after the hearing concludes, will be final. Neither side can appeal.

“It’s a super awkward position for the city,” San Rafael Police Chief David Spiller said. “An arbitrator can make a decision for the [former] employee to return.”

In a lengthy memo sent to Nail in May, Spiller spelled out his reasons for recommending the termination, all related to a 2022 use of force incident captured on police body-worn cameras. While Nail provided back up for another officer who had stopped three men for drinking in public, he “unnecessarily escalated” the situation and punched one of the men, causing him to “bleed profusely,” according to Spiller’s memo.

Spiller confirmed that he will testify in the arbitration hearing but didn’t want to comment about how he’d feel if the arbitrator clears the way for Nail to return to the San Rafael Police Department.

“I terminated Brandon Nail, so I’ll leave it at that,” Spiller said.

Even if Nail wins at the arbitration hearing, he must still face criminal charges stemming from the use of force incident. Nail and his co-defendant, former officer Daisy Mazariegos, return to Marin Superior Court next month for a pre-trial proceeding.

In December, after a preliminary hearing, Judge Beth Jordan ordered both defendants to stand trial for assault under color of authority with a sentencing enhancement for causing “great bodily harm” to Julio Jimenez Lopez, one of the men stopped for public drinking.

Jimenez Lopez testified at the hearing that he suffered a broken nose, concussion and injuries to both knees and shoulders, with the left shoulder requiring surgery.

Nail is also charged with making false statements in a crime report. The judge said that based on videos of the incident, she didn’t believe Nail’s written account.

Both Nail and Mazariegos have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Civil attorney Anthony Label, who represents Jimenez Lopez in a federal lawsuit filed against Nail and Mazariegos, finds it disturbing that Nail is seeking to return to his job as a police officer.

“I can’t think of any other profession where someone could be terminated and facing criminal charges for assaulting a person while on the job and then has the right to file an appeal to get reinstated,” Label said.

And that’s not Label’s only concern.

“Brandon Nail is unfit to be a police officer in San Rafael or any other city,” Label said. “It’s unimaginable that the city might be forced by an arbitrator to rehire a person who treated a member of this community with such inhumanity, disrespect and disregard.”

Julia Fox, Nail’s attorney, did not respond to requests for comment by publication deadline.

ICE in Marin: sheriff defends cooperation with immigration authorities

Nikki Silverstein
-
5
ICE in Marin: sheriff defends cooperation with immigration authorities

Marin County Sheriff Jamie Scardina continues his discretionary cooperation with federal immigration law enforcement despite pushback from the county supervisors and community members.

In 2023, the sheriff’s office provided the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with information about 13 people booked into the county jail for serious or violent felonies, down from 33 people in the previous year, Scardina said at a forum on March 5.

The Marin County Board of Supervisors held the annual community forum, as required by the Transparent Review of Unjust Transfers and Holds (TRUTH) Act—state legislation passed in 2016 that mandates local government to receive and consider public comment if local law enforcement allows ICE access to an individual in the past year.

Supervisors Mary Sackett and Dennis Rodoni, as well as several community members, expressed their disapproval that the sheriff shares information with ICE about individuals who have been arrested, although not convicted of a crime.

“I am very much concerned,” Marin resident Johnson Reynolds said. “The issue is ‘charged but not convicted’… Unless the person has gone through the due process and is actually being convicted, there’s no reason to communicate with ICE about that person.”

Only one person, a Larkspur man, spoke in favor of the sheriff’s policy, advocating for more data “to understand the extent to which illegals contribute to crime in Marin and what to do about it.”

Scardina showed no regret for his voluntary cooperation with ICE. During the sheriff’s presentation, he described the alleged offense of one of the 13 people caught in the information-sharing net.

“We arrested him with two kilos of fentanyl,” Scardina said. “When you break it down to two milligrams, a lethal dosage of fentanyl, that’s over a million lethal doses that we took off the streets in Marin County. That’s enough to kill San Francisco and most of Marin County. So, I don’t feel bad.”

After the forum, Scardina told me about another case of a person in Marin’s jail who was of interest to ICE. In this grisly account, the suspect dragged a woman by the hair into a vehicle, drove drunk and then sodomized the victim against her will. The individual’s release date was provided to ICE; however, Scardina admits that he doesn’t know whether the person was tried or convicted for the alleged crimes.

The sheriff’s office reduced its cooperation with ICE and modified its policies after the 2017 passage of Senate Bill 54, which prevents state and local resources from being used to assist federal immigration enforcement. SB 54 also states that law enforcement can only cooperate with immigration authorities when a person has been arrested for or convicted of any of the serious crimes specifically listed in the bill.

Scardina’s critics say there is much room for improvement. While his predecessor, Sheriff Robert Doyle, stopped allowing ICE agents into the jail several years ago, Scardina has not implemented any recent changes.

Rodoni pointed out that he is uncomfortable with the sheriff’s practice of notifying ICE about the release dates of people who were convicted of a serious crime and then served their time. Indeed, one of the 13 people in the jail whom ICE received information about was released after completing their sentence.

The other 12 left custody without being convicted of an offense, according to Sgt. Adam Schermerhorn of the Marin County Sheriff’s Office. Six were released on bail, two on their own recognizance, and four on court-ordered release. The sheriff’s office does not track whether these individuals were later convicted or if ICE detained them.

ICE initially learns that a person of interest is in the Marin County Jail soon after the booking process. The arrestee’s fingerprints are sent to the Department of Justice, and that federal agency shares the information with ICE.

The jail then receives a fax from ICE with a request for notification of the individual’s release date or an immigration detainer. The sheriff’s office will only hold an individual if the detainer is signed by a judge, which is very rare, Schermerhorn said.

Since the sheriff doesn’t allow ICE agents in the jail, the booking sergeant typically notifies the immigration authorities of a release by calling them on the phone while the person changes into their civilian clothing and staff processes the release paperwork. Schermerhorn said it usually occurs just a few minutes before the person leaves the facility. 

That begs the question, how does an ICE agent arrive within minutes?

“Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) San Francisco does not have an office location in Marin County,” Denise Hauser, an ICE public affairs officer, said in an email.

As it turns out, agents don’t actually need that phone call from the booking sergeant or to be located in an office near the jail. A public website maintained by the sheriff’s office lists every inmate in the Marin County Jail, with their release date added once it is scheduled. The jail releases inmates twice daily, at 7:30am and 7:30pm.

Clearly, the Marin County Sheriff’s Office makes it easy for ICE to pick up any undocumented immigrant upon release from the jail, even if the person was booked for a single misdemeanor and never held to the charge.

“There are some counties, aka San Francisco, that don’t call ICE for anything,” Scardina said. “There are counties—I’ve talked to my peer sheriffs—that do far more than we do.”

Lisa Bennett, a long-time immigration reform activist who has kept track of Scardina’s and his predecessor’s cooperation with ICE, believes the policy is steeped in racism.

“If you support the criminal justice system, then let it do its job,” Bennett said. “People serve their time and technically pay their debt to society. But people who are considered ‘other than us’ are subject to further punishment. In Marin, that’s brown people just because of where they’re from. Most of those 13 people [whom ICE received notification about] were from Central America.”

Rodoni told me that he is also concerned about potential deportations—especially to certain countries—that arise from the sheriff’s cooperation with ICE.

“I’m not comfortable with deporting someone who may be guilty or even someone convicted,” Rodoni said. “They may go back to a country where they have no human rights, and they could be being taken care of in our [judicial] system here.”

Although Rodoni would like the sheriff to continue improving his policy, he did note that a few of the 13 people on the ICE notification list had been in jail several times. One individual racked up 18 stays, and another had 12.

It doesn’t appear that Scardina has plans to reduce his cooperation with ICE anytime soon. While Scardina said he’s willing to speak with anyone about his policy, the sheriff remains entrenched in his position.

“I’m in the business of public safety,” Scardina said. “I’m going to do my part to tell ICE that this person has just been arrested. I’m the sheriff of Marin County, and I don’t want that individual to be back in our community. I have to try to keep people safe here.”

Back to the news: Johnny Colla on recording “We Are the World”

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Back to the news: Johnny Colla on recording “We Are the World”

Almost 40 years ago, dozens of ’80s icons gathered overnight in a Los Angeles studio to record “We Are the World,” the hit single that has raised more than $80 million to provide humanitarian relief in Africa.

The fundraising vinyl record was the brainchild of Harry Belafonte, who wanted to help fight famine in Ethiopia. The song was recorded on Jan. 28, 1985 because the American Music Awards were held earlier that evening, affording producer Quincy Jones the perfect opportunity to assemble superstars from rock, country, soul and pop in the same studio.

Netflix recently released The Greatest Night in Pop, a fascinating documentary on how the 21 A-list artists, including Michael Jackson, Lionel Richie, Bruce Springsteen, Cyndi Lauper, Willie Nelson, Stevie Wonder and Marin’s own Huey Lewis, gave life to the song with their solos.

The doc also has plenty of footage of the 23 singers who completed the celebrity chorus, hitting those high and low notes of “We are the world. We are the children. We are the ones who make a brighter day, so let’s start giving.”

Among the choir members on the four-level riser, I spied my favorite hometown musician—saxophonist, guitarist, vocalist and songwriter Johnny Colla of Huey Lewis and the News. The handsome young Colla stood below Belafonte and shoulder to shoulder with Ruth Pointer of The Pointer Sisters, belting out those now familiar lyrics. The rest of his bandmates were there, too.

It’s not surprising that Huey Lewis and the News, one of the most successful bands to materialize from Marin, was front and center during the recording of “We Are the World.” The group had been a staple on contemporary radio stations since the early ’80s, topping the charts the previous year with “I Want a New Drug,” “The Heart of Rock and Roll,” “If This Is It” and “Walking on a Thin Line.”

While Lewis has left Marin for Montana, Colla, a gifted storyteller, still lives in San Anselmo. I called Colla to ask about his memories of what’s come to be known as The Greatest Night in Pop.

The band, nominated for two American Music Awards, would be traveling from Marin to Los Angeles for the upcoming televised awards show, according to Colla. Just days before their trip, Lewis received a demo cassette tape of “We Are the World” and an invitation for the band to participate in the recording session to take place after the awards. Lewis and his newsmen immediately agreed they were in.

First stop, the American Music Awards at the Shrine Music Theatre, where Huey Lewis and the News were honored as the favorite pop/rock video artists. After the show, they went to A&M Studios in Hollywood for “We Are the World.”

“I was thrilled to be a part of the whole thing, and walking into that studio was like something out of a strange movie set,” Colla said. “I’m fully aware that the News, The Pointer Sisters and the Jacksons—other than Michael—were the vocal wallpaper to fill out the riser.”

Johnny Colla holds the gold. “We Are the World” achieved Gold status within the first week of its release in 1985, selling more than 500,000 copies. Later that year, it became the first multi-Platinum song, with sales in the millions. Photo courtesy of Christie-Claire Colla.

The modest Colla said there was a moment that night when he became so excited that a four-letter word involuntarily left his lips—loudly enough to be caught by one of the cameras documenting the production. While he was getting his makeup done, Ray Charles walked by. As a 10- or 11-year-old boy, when Colla thought no one was watching, he’d play “I Can’t Stop Loving You” on his parents’ one-speaker record player and stand on the piano bench to sing along with Charles.

“Now, I am in the room with Brother Ray,” Colla recounted. “He isn’t just my hero; this guy’s a national treasure.”

Other recollections from the recording session also stand out. An Ethiopian woman spoke to the singers about the gravity of the famine in her country, tugging his heartstrings. Another wasn’t quite as touching—Colla’s quick encounter with Waylon Jennings.

“I got to hang out with Waylon for seven seconds,” Colla said. “I introduce myself and tell him that I’ve been a big fan forever. Waylon doesn’t even say hello. He just says, ‘Hey, you know where a guy can get a beer around here?’”  

According to The Greatest Night in Pop, it wasn’t just Colla who Jennings slighted. The country singer later walked out of the session never to return when Stevie Wonder brought up adding Swahili lyrics to “We Are the World.” Colla remembers something else said about that situation.

“The conversation lost steam, partly because Swahili isn’t the Ethiopian language,” Colla said. “Stevie came back to it, still trying. I hear one of the Jacksons say affectionately, ‘Aw, shit. Here goes Stevie again.’”

While Colla enjoyed singing the harmony, his cherished hours occurred after the chorus had finished their part and been dismissed. He quietly slipped into the control room with the engineers and news reporters to watch the singers perform their solos.

“I put on a look of importance, like I had business being there,” Colla said. “You know, Quincy and Lionel had started the night with that line, ‘Check your ego at the door.’ Of course, there were a few folks who didn’t. But when I was in the control room, I was taken by how no one tried to be anything but who they were and what they sounded like. I was struck by the professionalism of everybody and how they took direction.”

Colla felt nervous when they gave Huey Lewis his line to sing—a line out of his range because it was intended for Prince, who didn’t show up. But he needn’t have worried.

“Huey nailed it,” Colla said proudly. “My hero pulled it off.”

The conversation about “We Are the World” eventually wound down. With emotion in his voice, Colla talked about the abrupt end to Lewis’ singing career in 2018, caused by hearing loss from Meniere’s disease. Calling Lewis his “fearless leader,” Colla said the band members remain close.

Although the group no longer visits the studio to record new music, Huey Lewis and the News is experiencing a resurgence. Their blockbuster song, “The Power of Love,” is currently featured in the Broadway show, Back to the Future: The Musical. Next month, a repertoire of the band’s songs will be showcased in a new Broadway show, The Heart of Rock and Roll, also the title of the wildly popular song co-written by Lewis and Colla about 40 years ago.

These days, Colla is working on material in his own studio. He just put the finishing touches on Voices Only!!!, the final album in his critically acclaimed trilogy—all three inspired by his love of a cappella. The new release will be out next month.

Voices Only!!!, Johnny Colla’s new album, will be released in April. Photo courtesy of Christie-Claire Colla.

Until then, fans can sing, clap and stomp their feet to the first two albums, I Hear Voices! and I Hear Other Voices!! Filled with cover songs from the ’50s and ’60s,” the rip-roaring collection showcases Colla’s smooth vocals and a chorus of other familiar voices, including Santana’s Tony Lindsay and Gabi Wilson, now known as H.E.R.

While the Voices trilogy is complete, Colla promises there’s more to come. Solo projects and new albums from Huey Lewis and the News.

“I’ve become the gatekeeper to Huey Lewis and the News’ extensive analog library, including live performances from around the world,” Colla said. “We hope to have three to four live releases in the next few years.”

Colla also has at least two records written that he’ll soon be producing. And he’d like to get back on stage.

“I wanna put a local band together so I can open shows for big shots,” Colla said.

That’s music to our ears.

Colla’s albums are available at johnnycolla.com.

Sheriff’s oversight ordinance fundamentally flawed, says watchdog group

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Sheriff’s oversight ordinance fundamentally flawed, says watchdog group

After years of discussion and debate, Marin County has finally unveiled a proposed ordinance that could soon lead to civilian oversight of the sheriff’s office. But a watchdog group is already sounding the alarm that the ordinance is “fundamentally flawed.”

Assembly Bill 1185, state legislation enacted in January 2021, allows counties to establish an oversight commission, an inspector general position or both to assist in overseeing the sheriff’s office. Another provision in the bill permits counties to grant subpoena power to the commission.

Marin’s ordinance does all three. A nine-member independent civilian oversight commission will work with an inspector general employed by the county. The almighty subpoena power provides the commission with a tool to conduct meaningful reviews into complaints about officers, alleged misconduct, use of force and other incidents.

This model confers substantial authority to civilians, and it’s the type of oversight that community activists and civil right groups have been demanding. Elected sheriffs, they say, have often operated with little supervision and transparency.

Transparency—pulling back the curtain on the sheriff’s activities—is one of the ordinance’s stated goals. The others are for the oversight commission to build trust between the public and the sheriff’s office and provide accountability.

It appears the ordinance equips the commission with the necessary teeth to meet these objectives, as opposed to police advisory committees without investigative or subpoena powers, such as those in San Rafael and Novato.

Many stakeholders worked together to bring this ordinance to the table. County Supervisors Mary Sackett and Katie Rice are on the board’s oversight subcommittee. Additionally, the board appointed a working group with 15 community members to develop the oversight framework. The county hired the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), a nonprofit, to guide the working group in best practices. The sheriff’s office, law enforcement labor organizations and county staff also weighed in on the oversight ordinance.

Still, there are three major problems with the ordinance that will seriously undermine oversight, according to Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment (MVFREE), a local group working to eliminate bias in policing. Last week, MVFREE sent a comprehensive letter to the Marin County Board of Supervisors identifying their concerns and providing revisions to resolve them.

“We want the Board of Supervisors to seriously consider that these three issues will prevent the oversight commission from doing their jobs,” said Tammy Edmonson, a retired attorney and MVFREE member.

First, the ordinance does not provide the commission with access to all the necessary information from the sheriff’s office, MVFREE claims. Instead, the ordinance specifies that commission members may review specific types of “completed” investigations.

While this language limits the information that the commission may see, MVFREE believes it may also preclude the commission from receiving any information at all. If the sheriff’s office doesn’t complete an investigation, the commission will never even know of its existence.

The second issue is secrecy in the oversight process, even though transparency is a stated goal of the ordinance, MVFREE said. The group’s letter notes that the word “confidentiality” appears in the ordinance numerous times.

“The way they drafted the ordinance, they focused on protections for the sheriff’s office, rather than the overriding obligation of transparency,” Edmonson said.

Lastly, MVFREE expressed concern that the ordinance restricts the commission’s investigative power. The ordinance allows the commission to call for an independent investigator to investigate the sheriff’s office; however, the process presents four hurdles that will prevent the commission from ever doing so, states MVFREE’s letter.

One obstacle, according to MVFREE, is that the sheriff’s office must complete an internal investigation before the oversight commission may seek an independent investigation.

But the biggest impediment to the commission launching an investigation is time, contends MVFREE. Under the ordinance, the commission can’t order an independent investigation if it “would violate the time limits set forth in the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights.”

The ordinance cites the California’s Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBR), legislation enacted to protect the rights of sworn law enforcement officers. POBR contains only one time limit, found in its policy that prevents punitive action from being taken against an officer unless the investigation is completed within one year of the discovery of alleged misconduct.

MVFREE’s interpretation of this portion of the ordinance is that the sheriff’s internal investigation and the oversight commission’s independent investigation must be completed within one year of learning of an incident.

While MVFREE maintains this time limit will stymie the commission’s ability to order an investigation, Marin County Sheriff Jamie Scardina disagrees with the group’s assessment.

“In my 26 years, we’ve never come close to taking one year,” Scardina said. “It’s usually just several months.”

That certainly raises the question of why the time limit is in the ordinance at all. The oversight commission has no power to take punitive action against officers. Rather, its purpose is to shine a light on the activities of the sheriff’s office. Does an independent investigation that will never result in an officer’s punishment constitute a violation of POBR?

Brian Washington, Marin County’s counsel, declined to answer questions about the time limit and its impact on the oversight commission, stating that the county must still participate in a “meet and confer” process with law enforcement labor organizations. That process could result in revisions to the ordinance.

“I think it’s a good working ordinance,” Scardina said. “Do I think it’s perfect? No. But it’s a step in the right direction for the community we serve and our organization.”

MVFREE wasn’t surprised that the sheriff seems amenable to the ordinance. And Stephen Bingham, a civil rights activist and member of the working group that helped draft the ordinance, says the group made a concerted effort to get along with the sheriff and his representatives.

“We had an agreement in the working group that we wanted a process that wasn’t confrontational with the sheriff’s office,” Bingham said. “Camme [a NACOLE employee] said it just wasn’t helpful to be at loggerheads with the sheriff’s office because they can stall the process and make it not work.”

Sackett approves of the working group’s approach and believes that everyone developed an understanding of the other side during the process. Yet she appreciates MVFREE, acknowledging the need for watchdogs.

Meanwhile, with no fanfare, the county posted a link to the proposed ordinance on its website almost two weeks ago. Once the labor unions sign off, the Marin County Board of Supervisors will consider public comments and vote on the ordinance, hopefully in late spring, Sackett said.

Before that time comes, MVFREE wants the board and public to consider the issues it has raised and the recommendations for revisions to the ordinance.

“Everyone wants to give the sheriff the benefit of the doubt,” Edmonson said. “Fine, but the civilian oversight is designed for the worst scenario, and there has been overreach by the sheriff’s office in the past. Our main concern is that the civilian oversight process be given a fighting chance to be effective, to be informed, to use the power of independent investigation.”

North Bay nonprofit removes deadly ghost nets from Great Pacific Garbage Patch

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
North Bay nonprofit removes deadly ghost nets from Great Pacific Garbage Patch

Mary Crowley prefers not to use the term “garbage patch” when referring to the tons of plastic littering the Pacific Ocean and killing marine life.

“Patch sounds small,” Crowley said. “People mistakenly think of it as a big clump of garbage.”

Small, it’s not. There are 79,000 metric tons (87,100 U.S. tons) of plastic afloat in the area from California to Hawaii, according to a 2018 ocean and aerial survey chronicled in Scientific Reports, a peer reviewed journal. 

To give that statistic some perspective, worldwide, 269,000 tons of plastic is floating in the oceans, revealed a 2014 study in PLOS One. The section of the Pacific Ocean between California and Hawaii contains almost a third of the global total.

If anyone can accurately describe the massive scope of the plastics problem in the Pacific, it’s Crowley, the founder and director of Ocean Voyages Institute, a nonprofit based in Sausalito. She didn’t, however, set out to become an expert on the topic. In fact, the seasoned mariner was happy operating her yacht chartering company and logging 125,000 miles sailing the world. Yet with each passing year, she noticed more and more plastic in the ocean.

Finally, Crowley knew she had to act. Since 2009, she’s led eight cleanup expeditions, hauling more than 700,000 pounds of plastic out of our planet’s blue heart and transporting it to recyclers. Although Ocean Voyages Institute is relatively small, it’s dynamic, Crowley said. The local nonprofit works with renowned establishments, including the Smithsonian Institution, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the University of Washington and the University of Hawaii.

Ocean Voyages Institute has plucked all types of plastic from the Pacific, including laundry baskets, car parts and pieces yet to be identified. Photo courtesy of Ocean Voyages Institute.

Crowley and her team of volunteers from Ocean Voyages Institute don’t simply sail to a huge stationary island of trash ready to be collected—there’s actually no such thing. Instead, they head to a portion of the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre, between California and Hawaii, in search of accumulated plastic.

A gyre, a large swirling ocean current, draws in and traps debris in the calm center of its vortex. Each of Crowley’s cleanup missions has recovered almost every type of plastic garbage imaginable, including enormous pieces of fiberglass vessels, tangles of nylon fishing nets weighing from 600 pounds to 10 tons, lawn furniture, children’s toys and microplastics.

“The question comes, where is the garbage gyre, and how large is it?” Crowley asks. “Because it’s an area made by ocean currents, it moves around some and changes in size. It can start as close as 600 miles off the coast of California and as far as 600 miles off the coast of Asia. Some say it’s the size of Texas, or double or triple that large. But the plastics are really quite spread out.”

As Crowley learned during Ocean Voyages Institute’s first two missions, it’s challenging to locate these moving targets of garbage in the vast ocean. The problem, currents pushing the garbage from place to place in the ocean, also presented the solution.

“I began thinking about debris distribution—the way the ocean sorts things,” Crowley said. “The current puts things of similar shapes and sizes together over time. I have personally seen more than 4,000 white laundry detergent containers spread across a five-mile area in the ocean. People who don’t understand ocean currents ask, ‘Who dropped all these bottles out here in the same place?’”

Crowley wondered if the ocean currents also sorted synthetic fishing nets in the same way, even though they come in many different shapes and sizes. While all plastic pollution in the ocean spells disaster for the ecosystem, abandoned fishing nets can be particularly deadly to marine life. Ghost nets, as the derelict gear is often called, continue to fish for as long as they remain in the ocean, ensnaring and killing whales, dolphins, sea turtles and pelagic fish such as tuna, swordfish and mackerel, which inhabit the ocean column away from the bottom or shore. 

A sea turtle skeleton entangled in a deadly ghost net that was hauled out of the ocean by Ocean Voyages Institute. Photo courtesy of Ocean Voyages Institute.

“Sadly, we hardly ever get to rescue creatures caught in the ghost nets,” Crowley said. “Because they’re skeletons when we find them.”

Removing ghost nets became a priority for Ocean Voyages Institute. But the organization still needed effective methods to locate the gear. In 2010, Crowley put together a “marine debris collection think tank,” which included folks from sailors to scientists trying to find the answer.

Think tank members developed a method to keep track of the abandoned nets, even as the ocean currents moved them to different areas. Using GPS technology, they designed a volleyball-sized tracking device with a very long battery life that could be attached to the debris with carabiners.

The organization now distributes these reusable seven-pound trackers to volunteer mariners making a trip from California to Hawaii. Upon encountering ghost nets or other large debris, the sailor clips the tracking device to the garbage, turns it on and informs Ocean Voyages Institute that the beacon is now operating.

“The trackers were a breakthrough for us,” Crowley said. “It allows our oceanographers to have access to the movements of the plastic in real time and allows our cleanup ships to go directly to the ghost nets.”

Tracking the garbage also proved Crowley’s theory that the currents sort the derelict nets in the same way they sort laundry detergent bottles.

“Frequently, where there is one ghost net, we might find five or six in the same area, along with other plastic debris,” Crowley said. 

Sausalito nonprofit Ocean Voyages Institute focuses on finding fishing nets between California and Hawaii, eventually sending the debris to plastic recyclers. Photo courtesy of Ocean Voyages Institute.

After the plastic is collected by Ocean Voyages Institute, it’s brought to land—but never to a landfill. Volunteers sort the plastic for distribution to different recycling companies. Climate action artists from the University of Hawaii used the plastic in art projects, and a German company transformed it into jewelry and dog leashes.

The bulk of the garbage goes to larger companies, such as ByFusion in Los Angeles, which recycles plastics into building materials. Resynergi, a Rohnert Park company, uses the debris to produce clean chemicals that can then be turned into plastic again. Circle of life.

Since it appears that society and industry aren’t willing to stop manufacturing and using plastics anytime soon, Ocean Voyages Institute’s mission continues. This summer, the team will again be cleaning up the Pacific’s plastic vortex, and they’re asking for assistance from the mariner community.

“We’re actively seeking sailors who are going from California to Hawaii,” Crowley said. “They could take photographs or bring our GPS trackers to tag ghost nets. People doing more extensive cruising can help with water sampling. Sailors can make a big difference to help ocean science.”

Mariners interested in volunteering, contact Ocean Voyages Institute at

Nonprofit serving LGBTQ+ and HIV communities suspends all programs

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Nonprofit serving LGBTQ+ and HIV communities suspends all programs

The Spahr Center, a nonprofit organization serving Marin’s LGBTQ+ and HIV-affected communities, announced Friday that it is suspending services indefinitely due to ongoing financial issues. Most of the staff members were laid off on Thursday, according to an email from the organization.

The Ryan White HIV services will continue operating for another week as clients are transitioned to the County of Marin for continued support. The center’s food pantry will be open on Feb. 21-23.

The closure comes as a blow to the hundreds of people that the Spahr Center serves annually. In addition to the food bank and HIV services, the center ran dozens of support groups for LGBTQ+ teens and adults and their families.

The Spahr Center also provided a vital countywide harm reduction program that distributed clean syringes, Narcan and fentanyl test strips to substance users.

While no details were given, an email from Joe Tuohy, the center’s executive director, and Amy Schroeder, chairperson of the board of directors, indicated that they have begun discussions with a community partner about forging a strategic alliance.

The Spahr Center did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Founded in 2016, the Spahr Center was created by the merger of Spectrum LGBT Center and the Marin AIDS Project, two organizations founded in the 1980s by Rev. Jane Spahr.

Rocket science: Sausalito’s mayor designed missiles for the Army—the good kind

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Rocket science: Sausalito’s mayor designed missiles for the Army—the good kind

In preparation for the Pacific Sun’s spotlight on Sausalito this week, I jotted down a list of captivating people to profile. Well-known musicians, writers, artists and restaurateurs who live and work in the picturesque village quickly came to mind.

Then my thoughts turned to Sausalito’s new mayor, Ian Sobieski, who began his tenure on the City Council three years ago, after winning his seat by just two votes. Indeed, it would be interesting to get to know a bit about the lone man on the five-member council.

The mayor shares the dais with four exceedingly accomplished women—Joan Cox, Jill Hoffman and Janelle Kellman are successful attorneys, while Melissa Blaustein, an avid swimmer who swam the English Channel, heads up a global alliance of startup organizations.

Sobieski is no slouch either, serving as the chairperson of Band of Angels—America’s first high-tech angel investment group—which currently has more than 165 members investing in and mentoring early-stage startups. Joining Band of Angels in 1997, soon after it launched, Sobieski also spent years as the group’s managing director.

Although entrepreneurial investing has worked out quite well for Sobieski, it wasn’t what he dreamed of as a kid. The son of a NASA rocket scientist, he had similar aspirations. After graduating with a philosophy degree from Virginia Tech, he worked on designing missiles for the Army.

“The good kind of missile, by the way—the kind that shoots down other missiles,” Sobieski said.

He even went on to earn a Ph.D. in aerospace, aeronautical and astronautical engineering from Stanford in the 1990s. However, that placed Sobieski in the heart of Silicon Valley during the dot-com boom, and it changed his career trajectory.

“The drama of entrepreneurship in the startup world caught my imagination and fit my skill set, sitting astride the technical and the interpersonal,” Sobieski said. “But I still have a passion for space and am a lifetime member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.”

Another passion, boating, led Sobieski to frequently visit Sausalito, which he calls “the best maritime community in the Bay Area.” His affair with sailing and motor boating began in his hometown of Hampton, Virginia, where he spent every summer day on the Chesapeake Bay.

In 2011, Sobieski bought a home in Sausalito. When he’s not conducting business on behalf of Band of Angels or tending to the city’s politics, Sausalitans might spot him on Richardson Bay aboard one of his several watercraft.

“I love getting out on the water in my 17-foot Boston Whaler, but my favorite is pushing a paddleboard off the Sausalito Cruising Club dock,” Sobieski said.

The former triathlete also sails, kayaks and mountain bikes. These days, he partakes just for fun, too busy for rigorous training.

Nevertheless, Sobieski finds time to enjoy wandering around Sausalito, which he says packs a lot of flavor into its two square miles. Much as I tried, I couldn’t get the mayor to share his preferred haunts, although he admits to eating lunch in the same restaurant almost every day.

Of course, he’s very open to talking about local politics. Sobieski’s motivation to participate in government came from a desire to serve his community.

“I thought that my background and perspective might be useful,” he said. “A healthy board has a variety of perspectives. I’m an engineer, have a philosophy degree and work in private enterprise. I don’t think I have all the answers, but I’m adding a different voice to the deliberations.”

For a small city with only 7,000 residents, Sausalito faces some big challenges, according to the mayor. The top three include an aging infrastructure, the effects of climate change and uncertain future expenses. Fortunately, the City Council is trying to address the issues, but there are no quick and easy fixes.

Like many municipalities, Sausalito neglected its infrastructure through years of underinvestment. Last year, the city passed Measure L, a tax that will bring in $24 million over eight years for infrastructure improvements.

The elements that make scenic Sausalito a destination for tourists from around the world—the rolling hills overlooking the bay—present their own set of problems, including the risk of flooding, fire and landslides.

“Climate change affects our waterfront and hillsides in different but profound ways,” Sobieski said. “We have a comprehensive study of our waterfront underway to assess subsidence and sea level rise, and we are doing a comprehensive assessment of our city-owned properties.”

Finally, he expressed concern that the volatility of pension costs for city employees makes financial planning difficult.

“Our finance team is building a model to project out our finances—not for two years, but 10 years,” Sobieski said. “It will be imperfect, but better than nothing at all.”

Sobieski spends more than 40 hours a week on his mayoral duties. And that’s on top of his day job’s responsibilities. It sounds particularly demanding, yet he maintains that he’s no different than his colleagues on the City Council—or anyone, for that matter.

“Everyone is busy in their lives with kids and jobs and family and health obligations,” he said. “I juggle my challenges the same way everybody else juggles theirs: imperfectly.”

Perhaps trying to keep all those balls in the air is the reason Sobieski hasn’t decided whether he’ll run for the council again when his four-year term expires in December. And it appears that he may have some interest in checking out other locales.

When I asked Sobieski where he would choose to live if Sausalito didn’t exist, he didn’t hesitate to throw out some ideas.

“Well, a ski mountain would have been my answer for the last several years, but increasingly a catamaran in the tropics has been on my mind,” Sobieski said.

Until then, there’s still work to do in Sausalito. And the mayor invites its residents to help. While the city appoints volunteers to official boards and commissions, Sobieski believes the main way for folks to get involved is by joining community groups such as Sausalito Beautiful, Age Friendly Sausalito, the Rotary Club, the Sausalito Working Waterfront Coalition, the Lions Club and Sausalito Village.

“If we all engage earnestly, and with humility, I think we will get to better collective answers,” Sobieski said.

Nightmare on Pine Street II: Sausalito flip-flops on approval of controversial project

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Nightmare on Pine Street II: Sausalito flip-flops on approval of controversial project

Home—that safe, familiar, comfortable space offering respite from the world—often evokes deep emotions. 

In Marin, where home sweet home is a huge monetary investment, proposed renovations can draw battle lines among neighbors.

Ask Jake Beyer and his wife, Georgia Glassie Beyer, who live on Pine Street in Sausalito. Just over a year ago, the couple submitted design plans to the city to transform their 1920s one-story cottage into a modern three-story home with enough room for their family of five. The plans call for nearly doubling the square footage, from 1,319 square feet to 2,620 square feet, including an accessory dwelling unit (ADU).

Most of the houses in this quaint downtown area of Sausalito are located on small lots, creating close quarters for neighbors. This is why some of the Beyers’ neighbors object to the proposed renovation, claiming the new structure would block their primary views, sunlight and privacy.

Houses on small lots are crowded together on Pine Street in Sausalito. Some neighbors fear they’ll lose privacy, sunlight and views by the proposed renovations at the Beyers’ cottage (c). Photo by Nikki Silverstein.

While the couple insists that they have changed the design numerous times to address those concerns, the neighbors argue that the revisions weren’t substantive and didn’t resolve the issues. Relations between the Beyers and several neighbors became strained fairly early in the process.

Now, the conflicts have grown quite contentious, with calls to the police initiated by both the Beyers and some neighbors. 

The pair say that they are currently in the process of filing restraining orders against three neighbors who separately harassed them in front of their young children. Neighbors counter that Jake Beyer intimidates those who oppose his project and disparages them on a website he posted about the renovation.

It appears that Sausalito’s governing bodies also disagree about the plans submitted to the city by the Beyers. On Nov. 15, the Sausalito Planning Commission voted 5-0 to approve the design, despite alleged code violations cited by neighbors. Two months later, the Sausalito City Council reached a different conclusion.

Architectural rendering of the proposed renovation at 426 Pine St. Photo courtesy of Jake Beyer.

Six neighbors filed a formal appeal of the planning commission’s approval for the Pine Street project, triggering a three-hour hearing by the city council on Jan. 22. Kristin Teiche, a principal planner in Sausalito’s planning department, told the council members that the design complied with the codes and recommended they deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s decision. After hearing from the concerned parties and their representatives, the council rejected that staff recommendation.

In a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Ian Sobieski abstaining, the council decided to “continue the hearing to a date uncertain to allow the applicant an opportunity to address the design review and heighten[ed] design review findings council as a body indicated were not able to and revise the designs to remove the decks as discussed with the proviso that it is a permanent removal, and applicant will not return in the future to seek approval of adding a deck.”

Let’s break down that awkwardly worded decision, which appears in the draft of the hearing minutes. The council hasn’t yet approved or denied the appeal, and didn’t provide a time frame for when it will. Additionally, the council members couldn’t find that the design met all the criteria necessary to approve the project, and they are allowing the Beyers to address these issues. Lastly, the council directed the couple to remove the two back decks from the plan and forbid them from ever submitting an application to add another deck to the home.

Although not voted on, most council members suggested the Beyers try to compromise with the neighbors opposing the project. Sobieski, however, stated that if he were a neighbor, he would say that he’s not going to agree with anything.

The Beyers are reeling from the outcome of the city council’s hearing, saying it raised more questions than it answered. Not surprisingly, they are considering legal action.

“Frankly, we are confused and disappointed by the lack of clarity the City Council provided at the January 22 hearing on the appeal,” Jake Beyer texted. “Nor can we understand what action the council intends for us to take per the motion as written in the minutes.”

Of course, the neighbors opposing the project believe the council reached the right decision. So does Michael Rex, a local architect hired by Conrad Gann, a neighbor with two homes adjacent to the Beyers’ property. Gann paid Rex to review the renovation plans and represent him at the council’s hearing.

It’s understandable that the Beyers and the neighbors who filed the appeal disagree on whether the council members got it right or wrong. But how did the planning commission and city council come up with such different findings?

City officials did not provide a response to that specific question. However, Rex, who has worked as an architect in Sausalito for more than 40 years, believes he knows the reasons for the dueling decisions reached by the commission and the council. 

It started when the Beyers engaged a designer to create the plans for their new home, according to Rex.

“They hired a non-architect who is not familiar with our codes,” Rex said. “The designer is looking to the planning staff for what the codes require. Our codes were developed in 1962 and have been amended time and time again. They’re badly written, resulting in a confusing law put together with Band-Aids.”

It should be noted that the City of Sausalito does not prohibit a non-architect from submitting a design for planning review. David Grabham, the Beyers’ designer, owns G-Design, a San Rafael firm specializing in residential “design-build” services.

Rex maintains that the high turnover in Sausalito’s Planning Division contributed to what he sees as the issue. He also explains that the staff provides inconsistent interpretations of the codes, with no sense of precedent.

“In this particular case, they didn’t have an inexperienced planner,” Rex said. “Kristin [Teiche] was one of our top planners 20 years ago and was recently hired again by the city. This planner has institutional knowledge, but not knowledge that is current.”

When the code is ambiguous, the planning division director may interpret it, according to Rex. That person is also relatively new. Brandon Phipps, who is the director of Sausalito’s Community Development Department and oversees the planning division, was hired in October 2022.

“The department interpreted the code willy-nilly for this project,” Rex said. “The applicant was not instructed correctly.”

The planning commission appeared to follow the planning division’s lead. But the city council had their own interpretations of the code. Hence, the different findings leave the Beyers puzzled about how to move forward.

“At this point, we can’t make the house any smaller and have it still be compatible for a family of five—and add a unit [ADU] to the lot,” Jake Beyer said.

Rex has made suggestions on how the pair can achieve their goals, albeit with a revised plan. The Beyers say that the current design represents their dream home.

Gann, the neighbor who hired Rex, thinks the path is clear for his neighbors. Because Gann raised his family in a modest-sized home next door to the Beyers, he understands their desire to expand the cottage they’ve outgrown.

“The council provided a course of action,” Gann said. “If the Beyers choose to continue the project and are willing to work on solutions, we’re available to provide feedback. We want to create a win-win.”

Three people died while in Marin County Jail’s custody during last six months

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Three people died while in Marin County Jail’s custody during last six months

An incarcerated individual died in their cell at the underground Marin County Jail last week. It’s the third in-custody death since August, indicating an unusual spike.

In the 10-year period from 2013 through 2022, five incarcerated people died—four by suicide and one from Covid. Of note, no in-custody deaths took place during the five years from 2016 through 2020. 

Community activists are expressing concern about the sudden rise in the number of deaths since late summer. However, the Marin County’s Sheriff’s Office, which operates the jail, does not believe the increase signifies a trend.

“There does not appear to be any relationship with the three in-custody deaths,” Sgt. Adam Schermerhorn of the Marin County Sheriff’s Office said. “It seems to be more of a coincidence than any policy or procedural changes that occurred in the last six months.”

The three deaths include two suicides last year. While the cause of death and identity of the incarcerated person who died last week has not been released, some information about the circumstances of the death was provided.

On Jan. 25, a deputy performing a routine check of jail cells found a person in need of medical care at about 5:45am, according to a press release issued by the Marin County Sheriff’s Office. Deputies performed life saving measures until the San Rafael Fire Department arrived and continued those efforts. But at 5:56am, the person was pronounced deceased.

The Novato Police Department is investigating the incident. The agency also conducted the independent investigation into the October death of a man, 21, found hanging in his cell at the Marin County Jail. He was awaiting trial.

In August, a deputy discovered a 36-year-old man hanging in his jail cell, which was “jointly occupied” by another incarcerated person, according to information released by the sheriff’s office. The man, who was awaiting arraignment, died in the hospital three days later. The San Rafael Police Department investigated the death.

Schermerhorn said the Marin County Sheriff’s Office also conducts internal investigations into in-custody deaths to determine if any policies were violated and whether the policies and procedures in place are adequate.  

“The jail is providing the same or a higher level of care than legally required,” Schermerhorn said. “The mental health staff is there 24/7—usually one person after 11pm and oftentimes two during the day.”

In addition, when a person in custody threatens to harm themselves or poses an immediate danger, they are placed in the jail’s safety cell, essentially a padded room. The staff checks the safety cell every 15 minutes.

Frank Shinneman, a community activist who keeps his eye on law enforcement in Marin, believes the three recent in-custody deaths, along with a 2021 death attributed to Covid, prove that the sheriff’s office must take corrective action.

“These three hangings—how did the staff not know that these people were suicidal?” Shinneman asked. “A man died of Covid. Who let him into the jail and didn’t notice that he was so sick? I’m angry at the lack of responsibility.”

Another activist, Tara Evans, is also alarmed. Evans is a member of the AB 1185 Community Outreach Working Group, a volunteer committee appointed by the Marin County Board of Supervisors to develop recommendations for civilian oversight of the sheriff’s office. In June, the supervisors agreed to move forward with one of the oversight plans presented by the working group, with minor staff changes. Seven months later, and still no civilian oversight.

“How many more deaths will it take for the Board of Supervisors, Assemblymember Damon Connolly and Sen. Mike McGuire to actively shine a light on Marin’s problem of jail suicide?” Evans asked. “Caring for those in custody means ongoing identification of high-priority needs, developing clear standards to measure outcomes and the implementation of effective sheriff’s oversight.”

Local government agency behind schedule to remove mariners anchored in Richardson Bay

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Local government agency behind schedule to remove mariners anchored in Richardson Bay

The Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) issued a press release this month to recognize 2023 as a “banner year.” Many people living aboard boats anchored in Richardson Bay dispute that statement.

While the RBRA celebrates milestones reached last year, including a 27% decrease in “boats illegally anchored in Richardson Bay,” mariners still living on the anchorage say they’re worried about their future.

The sailors face two looming deadlines. By October, most of the 40 boats anchored in Richardson Bay must be removed, according to a 2021 agreement between the RBRA and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), a state agency. The few in the Safe and Seaworthy program may stay until October 2026. After that, the regulation limiting vessels to a 72-hour stay in Richardson Bay will be enforced for all.

Mariners who live on the anchorage, often referred to as anchor outs, wax eloquently about their love of nature and the nautical lifestyle. Yet they also admit that they can’t afford the hefty price tag to rent a marina slip or apartment in Marin County—ranked as the 4th wealthiest county in the nation by a 2023 SmartAsset study.

In May, the RBRA threw a lifeline to the sailors by launching a state-funded program to secure temporary housing vouchers for those meeting eligibility requirements. The RBRA and the Marin Housing Authority have said that those who receive the temporary housing will transition to a Section 8 housing voucher, which doesn’t have an expiration date.

Initially, the program aimed to house 17 anchor outs a year for the next three years. But it got off to a slow start because the case management team from Episcopal Community Services (ECS) didn’t come on board until October. Consequently, 2023 saw only four people housed.

About 35 people currently living in Richardson Bay qualify for the housing program. Fortunately, the pace is picking up for voucher distribution, but not fast enough to meet the October 2024 deadline.

“Six people have vouchers in hand and are actively seeking housing,” Brad Gross, executive director of the RBRA, said. “We will house as many people as we can by October 2024, but there is a very good likelihood that we will be going to the BCDC to ask for an extension.”

Gross believes that another 13 vouchers can be distributed this year, in addition to the six recently issued vouchers. Contacting landlords about providing housing to people in the program is the next step—often a lengthy process.

Even with accelerated momentum, many eligible anchor outs fear that they’ll be forced from Richardson Bay before receiving housing, rendering them homeless. Gross seems confident that he can successfully negotiate with the BCDC for an extension. In fact, in three instances during the last six months, Gross has obtained extra time for mariners subject to other deadlines.

“I believe the BCDC will see the wisdom in the program,” Gross said. “It’s just timing to get people into housing. Timing and the cooperation and support of the BCDC. The program is working; just give us the time we need, and we won’t go past October 2026.”

Those words should go far in alleviating the apprehension felt by those who qualify for the housing program. However, several people living on the anchorage aren’t eligible.

Lisa McCracken, who is about 60, is falling through a crack in the RBRA’s housing program. Since 1989, she has lived aboard vessels anchored-out in Richardson Bay, with an occasional brief hiatus on land. McCracken resides on a 50-foot sport fishing yacht owned by Steve Fischer, 65, a long-time friend. They are roommates.

While both roommates said Fischer was offered a spot in the housing program, McCracken did not receive an invitation. It appears that leaving McCracken out in the cold is not an oversight.

“Sasha [the case manager], from Episcopal Community Services, when I asked, said it was the owner of the vessel who gets housing,” McCracken said. “One housing voucher per boat.”

The vouchers only allow relatives and married couples to live together. Unmarried couples and friends are out of luck.

It was difficult to pin Gross down on the one voucher per boat policy. He claimed that the RBRA is not a party to such decisions, despite agency press releases and Gross himself referring to the “RBRA’s housing program.” At the same time, Gross said that the RBRA is aware that Fischer and McCracken occupy one boat.

“We fund the vouchers that place people in housing,” Gross said. “There is a complete disconnect between RBRA and the housing program—the actual processing and the paperwork, who gets a voucher and whatever,” Gross said.

A statement provided by Episcopal Community Services contradicts Gross. The nonprofit declined to comment on McCracken but confirmed the policy of distributing only one housing voucher per boat. The statement also acknowledged that the RBRA provided the policy to ECS—not vice versa.

A few sailors living on the anchorage don’t qualify for housing because they weren’t present for the RBRA’s two censuses of boats anchored out on Richardson Bay. In June 2022, the agency took the first count, with the second in April 2023. Boats present during both surveys meet an important requirement for the housing program. The other vessels must be removed, without the RBRA providing a housing voucher to the owner.

In recent years, the RBRA has seized and crushed boats that overstayed their welcome. Some were unoccupied. Others were people’s homes.

It remains unclear how long the RBRA will give boat owners who arrived after the June 2022 census to pull up their anchors and leave Richardson Bay. According to Gross, the agency is trying to be accommodating.

“We don’t want to take anybody’s boat unless we really have to, but we do have to continue with the enforcement process,” Gross said.

Seizing and crushing boats can be expensive. The RBRA has settled some lawsuits filed by people whose boats were seized or destroyed, all at taxpayer expense.

Robyn Kelly, a former anchor out, said the agency paid her a $150,000 settlement this month. When Kelly went ashore for Thanksgiving a few years ago, the RBRA seized and destroyed her boat. Since then, she has been homeless, frequently residing in a Marin homeless shelter.

Kudos to the RBRA for taking a new tack and coming to the table with its housing program for the mariners. In addition, the RBRA established a boat buyback program that pays the registered owner $150 per foot to turn in their vessel. 

One of the first four mariners to receive housing, Shel Snyder, 58, has been in her Gerstle Park apartment for four months. Although Snyder loved living on the anchorage for the last 25 years, she finds that dwelling on land also has its perks.

“When people want you gone [from Richardson Bay], it’s not a peaceful place to live anymore,” Snyder said. “I sacrificed my boat but now I’m in another phase of my life and I’m happy.

It appears that the housing program is working. Still, the RBRA could take one more tiny step by providing vouchers to the few ineligible boaters anchored in Richardson Bay. It would surely beat forcing vulnerable people into homelessness.

Fierce competition at national fencing tournament in Bay Area

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Fierce competition at national fencing tournament in Bay Area

When I heard a four-day national fencing tournament was coming to the Bay Area, I thought watching a few bouts might make for an entertaining morning. Instead, the tournament was exciting, peppered with political intrigue, fierce competition and strong camaraderie.

The field of competitors included Olympic medalists and hopefuls, veteran fencers in their 50s to 80s, teens, international fencers and local enthusiasts—both men and women. In fact, the January North American Cup (NAC) hosted more than 2,300 fencers from a dozen countries and 40 states at the San Jose Convention Center.

Some fencers were trying to earn points to qualify for the Olympics or Junior Olympics. Other competitors participated because they love fencing.

By chance, during the first bout, I stood next to Igor Chirashnya, the knowledgeable owner of the Academy of Fencing Masters, located in Campbell and Sunnyvale. Chirashnya explained his passion for the sport.

“Fencing is the most romanticized sport in the history of the world,” Chirashnya said. “We all grew up on stories of Alexander the Great, The Three Musketeers and Zorro. This is about sword fighting—beautiful and elegant.”

Chirashnya calls fencing the most democratic sport because it doesn’t discriminate against gender or body type. Unlike other sports, a fencer can be tall or short, slow or fast. Physical strength doesn’t guarantee a win. The key is intelligence—analyzing opponents and exploiting their weaknesses—comparable to a game of chess.

I eagerly accepted Chirashnya’s offer to introduce me to an Olympian who coaches at his fencing academy. While waiting, I Googled the coach’s name and discovered there was far more to his story.

Sergey Bida, 30, and his wife, Violetta Bida, 29, fled Russia last summer because they oppose the country’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Russia appears unhappy about the Bidas’ sudden departure to the U.S. The couple is now wanted by the Russian police for unspecified criminal charges, according to Mediazona, an independent Russian news outlet.

Currently, the Bidas are seeking U.S. citizenship, with Sergey Bida hoping to represent the USA in the Paris Olympics later this year, according to a text message from Jack Wiener, the couple’s attorney. Sergey Bida represents no country at the moment, but competes at tournaments as a “neutral.”

Fencer Sergey Bida, who defected from Russia with his wife, is seeking U.S. citizenship. Photo courtesy of Sergey Bida.

Both Bidas are remarkable athletes. Sergey Bida ranks as one of the top epee fencers in the world, winning the silver medal in the Tokyo Olympics and numerous medals in international competitions. Violetta Bida captured a silver medal in the 2019 World Fencing Championships and competed in the Tokyo Olympics.

Coaching is challenging but rewarding, Sergey Bida said. From his own experience, he understands the nuances of shaping fencers.

“I can see that my (coaching) system is working, as the technical and physical improvements of my students are significantly visible,” Sergey Bida said. “It is very interesting and exciting to combine the career of a professional athlete and a coach at the same time.”

Bout after bout, I watched men and women of almost all ages compete. Fencers are often graceful, moving like dancers. Then comes the attack, where a fencer tries to score a point by touching their sword to the opponent’s body.

There are three types of fencing disciplines, dictated by the weapon of choice: epee, foil and saber. The rules vary for each. For example, in epee, the entire body is fair game. Foil limits the parts of the body the sword can touch—torso only. When competing in saber, the target is from the waist to the top of the head and includes both arms.

I was hooked on fencing, even going back to watch the January NAC finals. Sergey Bida placed 5th in a field of 350 epee fencers.

Wanting to learn more about the sport, I contacted a local fencing school, the Marin Fencing Academy in San Rafael. Owner Tom Tully, along with other Marin and Petaluma fencers, also competed at the NAC tournament earlier this month.

“This is my sport,” Tully said. “Some people have a sailboat. I have a fencing academy.”

Tully, who loves fencing and enjoys talking about it, invited me to the academy to meet some of the 100 members. 

Ernie Simac, 82, started fencing at age 65. The Petaluma resident was introduced to the sport through a summer class at the Petaluma Recreation Center. Although Simac has always been an athlete, going to the 1960 Olympics as an alternate for the U.S. equestrian team, he said fencing is now his only sport.

Simac holds the honor of being the most senior competitor at the January NAC tournament. While he keeps up with a rigorous training schedule—three to four days a week, for a couple of hours each day—Simac said that he puts in the time because he enjoys fencing and competing.

“It’s fun to compete and match your skills with somebody else,” Simac said. “Fencing is a strong mental challenge, and it inspires me.”

The Marin Fencing Academy also has Olympian coaches, including Dorina Vaccaroni, who started fencing when she was five or six. Vaccaroni has won Olympic gold, silver and bronze medals in women’s fencing.

“If you’re good, you continue,” Vaccaroni said. “I went to the Olympics at age 16 because I followed my dream. I never give up, and I teach the kids to never give up.”

Vaccaroni helps coach Lorenz Finney, 17, a foil fencer who’s following his dream. Finney, a Tam High student, started fencing when he was eight. Three years ago, he began competing in tournaments. Now, Finney is the highest-rated fencer at the Marin Fencing Academy, according to Tully.  Finney doesn’t necessarily want to go to the Olympics, but he plans to continue fencing in college.

“I really like the competition aspect, strategizing against the opponents,” Finney said. “Through fencing, I’ve made friends and know different people across California.”

Desmond Evans, 10, is another impressive fencer who loves competing. Last year, at his first tournament, Evans placed 8th out of a field of 40. Not surprisingly, the Novato resident also gets straight As in school. Evans calls fencing his number one sport and encourages other kids to try it.

“I think they’d like fencing,” Evans said. “There are good coaches here (at Marin Fencing Academy), and the people are nice. One of my favorite things is traveling to tournaments and meeting new people along the way.”

After spending the weekend at the January NAC and visiting Marin Fencing Academy, I learned that every fencer is wildly passionate about the sport. It’s clear that fencers appreciate the camaraderie, even as they compete against one another. And who doesn’t love a sport where height and speed don’t matter?

Tully’s trying to convince me to take a fencing lesson. I think that I’ll take him up on it. En garde!

‘The Lion King’ rolls out red carpet for Marin City children

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
‘The Lion King’ rolls out red carpet for Marin City children

When Felecia Gaston, director of the nonprofit Performing Stars, says she wants to bring 40 low-income kids from Marin City to see a live performance of The Lion King, she makes it happen.

And when Miss Felecia, as the children call her, decides to fill the entire day with activities that even adults would envy, she dials up VIPs from her Rolodex and makes it happen. After all, she’s been at the helm of Performing Stars since founding the organization 32 years ago.

“This is just one of the many experiences I’ll expose our children to,” Miss Felecia said. “It’s especially important for low-income kids and children of color. They’re going to a live Broadway show; these children couldn’t afford to do that.”

Miss Felecia chose The Lion King for several reasons, including its relevance for Black children. The musical tells a story from South Africa, with numerous Black performers gracing the stage. Not to mention that it’s a fabulous, Tony Award-winning show.

“The show could inspire our children to be on stage,” Miss Felecia said. “We’re introducing them to professional training in the arts, and it opens their horizons. The lightbulb could go off, and they realize, ‘I could be an actor in The Lion King or perform with the Dance Theatre of Harlem.’”

On Dec. 16, the magical day arrived. At 9am, parents delivered their children, ages 8 to 10, into the capable hands of the Performing Stars’ staff and volunteer chaperones, who were waiting in a Marin City church parking lot.

The little girls looked beautiful, decked out in fancy dresses and black patent leather Mary Jane shoes. The handsome young boys donned their Sunday best.

The first surprise waiting for the children involved eight officers from the California Highway Patrol and Marin County Sheriff’s Office, whom Miss Felecia invited to do some community building with the kids before the bus departed for the theater. The girls and boys readily hopped onto CHP Officer Andrew Ashley’s motorcycle, gleefully—and loudly—revving the engine to their heart’s content.

VROOM VROOM CHP Officer Andrew Ashley watches over Isha Kambi revving his motorcycle. Marin City, Dec. 16, 2023. Photo by Nikki Silverstein.

About an hour later, 40 excited children and 15 adult chaperones boarded a Marin Airporter bus for the trip to the Orpheum Theatre in San Francisco. Miss Felecia provided etiquette tips and announced the most important aspect of the day—having fun.

The merriment began in earnest when the kids received special treatment typically reserved for visiting dignitaries. As the bus pulled out of the lot, several law enforcement vehicles surrounded it. The officers turned on their flashing lights and escorted the bus from Marin City to the Golden Gate Bridge. Every child gazed out the windows, mesmerized by the blinking blue lights atop the officers’ vehicles. The youth understood the convoy meant they were important. 

The rest of the drive to the theater was uneventful, although some of the kids were awestruck by the large buildings in San Francisco. Once the bus arrived at its destination, everyone disembarked and entered the theater—for most it would be their first time at a professional live performance. Cheerful children’s voices rang out as the group moved toward the theater’s dining room, reserved just for them.

A catered buffet offered a delicious array of healthy food and cookies for dessert. The youth ate lunch, quietly conversed and colored lion cub and lion king masks. But they became lively when they learned a true VIP was in their midst, Yvonne Cagle, M.D., one of the few Black women astronauts.

Cagle, a chaperone, came dressed in a flight jumpsuit and had a comfortable style with the kids. It wasn’t just her NASA astronaut claim to fame—Cagle spent time with each child in the dining room, asking and answering numerous questions on a variety of topics.

STAR-STUDDED DAY Marley Miller (l) feels like she’s on top of the world with NASA astronaut Dr. Yvonne Cagle (c) and chaperone Meloni Gail Page (r), who is also Miller’s grandmother. Orpheum Theatre, Dec. 16, 2023. Photo by Vicky Tierney.

Finally, the group moved into the theater. The next surprise became apparent when the theater attendants showed the kids to their orchestra seats. As anyone who’s had the pleasure of seeing The Lion King knows, actors dressed in animal costumes dance down the aisles of the orchestra section on their way to the stage. The children could practically reach out and touch the performers, letting out oohs and aahs every time the animals passed by.

The kids remained engaged throughout the show. Malakai Wayne, a nine-year-old boy from Marin City, was enamored with Simba and waved to the young lion prince when he entered the stage. Many of the kids knew The Lion King songs, belting out “He Lives in You” and “Hakuna Matata” when the actors sang those tunes.

During intermission, Wayne eagerly expressed his opinion of the show. Although he had never before attended a live theater performance, Wayne certainly knows what tickles his fancy.

“I like it 1,000%,” Wayne said. “I like Simba the best. This show is better than the movie because of the costumes and the music. They put their sweat and tears into it.”

It seemed that every child had their own unique take on the show, all of it positive and upbeat. Ta’Nyla Wilson, a 10-year-old girl from Marin City, noted details about the set and one particular costume.

“I really liked how the colors kept changing in the background,” Wilson said. “The green grass was nice. And I liked the giraffes, how they have big, tall necks and little arms.”

After the show, the children enjoyed their biggest surprise of the day. They met a few of the show’s actors and heard inspiring stories about their start in theater and the hard work that goes into learning the Lion King roles. The grand finale included the stars answering the kids’ questions.

Actor Khalifa White plays the part of Nala, a lioness who eventually marries Simba, the lion prince. White has a strong, clear voice and sings like a nightingale. Still, she auditioned four to five times before she got the Nala role.

Gerald Ramsey stars as Mufasa, the benevolent lion king. Growing up, Ramsey said he was a shy person, often stuttering. He credits acting for helping him overcome those challenges.

Pumbaa, played by John E. Brady, explained that it takes 18 18-wheeler trucks to transport the sets and costumes to the different cities where they perform The Lion King. Brady said that most cast members play several roles and wear 9 to 12 costumes each show. It takes four weeks of constant rehearsing for each person to learn their parts.

The children had plenty more questions, but the actors had to eat dinner and rest before their evening performance. Reluctantly, the kids filed out of the theater and back to the bus. They clearly didn’t want the day to end.

Miss Felecia has been receiving letters from the children that express their gratitude to the donors, including saxophonist Dave Koz, who paid for half of the children to attend the performance. 

Thanks to Miss Felecia’s ideas and the generosity of donors, 40 kids had an experience they’ll remember for years to come.

Judge takes 10 days to review criminal case against ex-cops, perhaps struggling with decision

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Judge takes 10 days to review criminal case against ex-cops, perhaps struggling with decision

Two former San Rafael police officers accused of beating a local gardener will soon learn whether they’ll be standing trial on felony charges.

Last week, after closing arguments in the preliminary hearing—a proceeding to determine if there is enough evidence for a case to go to trial—Marin County Judge Beth Jordan stated that she would render her decision on Dec. 15.

Jordan is contemplating whether the former police officers, defendants Daisy Mazariegos and Brandon Nail, will answer to charges of assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report, both of which are felonies. 

The prosecution also alleges that the beating, caught on police body-worn cameras, caused “great bodily injury” to the victim, allowing for a sentencing enhancement if the case goes to trial and the defendants are found guilty of assault. Both Mazariegos and Nail have pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Typically, preliminary hearings result in defendants being bound over for trial. However, Jordan could reduce or dismiss the charges for one or both defendants.

Alison Berry Wilkinson, defense attorney for Mazariegos, believes that Jordan is struggling with the decisions. Although Wilkinson is a seasoned lawyer, she said it’s difficult to know which aspects of the hearing are giving the judge pause.

“It is unusual for a judge to take 10 days to consider her ruling before announcing it,” Wilkinson said. “The most common and expected thing, since we were at lunchtime, is that she’d take the hour and a half lunch break and issue her ruling. It’s the standard practice. I don’t have a crystal ball, but clearly, she has not decided as of yet that the district attorney met his burden.”  

Or it could be, as Jordan said, that she needs time to review the exhibits and precedent cases presented at the hearing. It seems sensible, given the hearing has started and stopped several times over a two-month period due to scheduling issues, the death of defense attorney Chris Shea and Mazariegos giving birth.

Prosecutor Geoff Iida insisted throughout closing arguments that he presented sufficient evidence to meet the probable cause benchmark Jordan will use to evaluate the case. Some legal pundits who watched the hearing from the courtroom gallery said that Iida made his case against Mazariegos and Nail, noting that probable cause has a much lower bar than the higher standard used in trial—proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The charges against Nail and Mazariegos resulted from an incident last year on Windward Way in San Rafael’s Canal area. A relatively new officer, Mazariegos had been riding solo for only four months when she saw Julio Jimenez Lopez and two friends on the street with open containers of beer. Mazariegos ordered the three men to sit on the curb. Nail soon arrived as backup.

Police videos show Mazariegos instructed Jimenez Lopez to retrieve his identification and he stood to do so. Nail yelled at him to “Sit the fuck down,” which Jimenez Lopez did temporarily. However, he stood again, attempting to explain why he was standing. The then-officers grabbed Jimenez Lopez, with Nail maneuvering his leg to trip the man. As all three tumbled to the ground, Jimenez Lopez briefly grabbed Nail’s vest. Nail then punched the man in the nose with a closed fist.

Jimenez Lopez was arrested and charged by the district attorney; however, after the DA reviewed videos from officers’ body-worn cameras, all charges were dropped. According to the prosecutor, the videos contradict the police reports written by Mazariegos and Nail. 

Mazariegos’ report lists Nail as the “victim,” due to his “injuries.” Jimenez Lopez was identified as the suspect, despite the report noting that he is 5 feet tall and 130 pounds, while Nail is 6 feet two inches and 250 pounds. Both officers stated in their reports that Jimenez Lopez tried to put Nail in a headlock. Nail wrote that Jimenez Lopez struck him in the head several times. None of these actions appear in the videos.

Jimenez Lopez testified in October that he suffered a broken nose, concussion and injuries to both shoulders, with the left shoulder requiring surgery.

During closing arguments, Iida stated that both defendants caused great bodily injury to Jimenez Lopez. Nail threw the punch, but when Jimenez Lopez was bloody and lying face down on the pavement, Mazariegos and Nail pulled the man’s arms behind his back and put their weight on his shoulders.

Iida also contended that Jimenez Lopez meant no harm when he grabbed Nail’s vest as the trio fell. Jimenez Lopez never aggressively held onto the officer’s vest, because he was holding his wallet in one hand and his identification in the other. Yet, Nail punched him.

Mazariegos and Nail acted without lawful necessity, Iida maintained. Jimenez Lopez remained polite and cooperative, was not a threat to the officers and did not resist efforts to handcuff him, according to the prosecutor.

“That is essentially the issue in this case—whether the officers were justified in using force against Julio on July 27, 2022,” Iida said.

Nail’s attorney, Julia Fox, relied heavily on the testimony of the defense’s use of force expert, Sean McCann, to establish that the amount of force used was reasonable. A former police officer who is currently an administration of justice teacher at Napa Valley College, McCann asserted that Jimenez Lopez actively resisted commands to sit down and moved his arms when Nail and Mazariegos tried to handcuff him.

McCann’s primary premise centered on the fact that Mazariegos and Nail didn’t know Jimenez Lopez and his two companions. Therefore, the officers needed to evaluate whether Jimenez Lopez’s alleged resistance posed a risk to their safety.

Another former law enforcement officer who attended much of the hearing and spoke on the condition of anonymity disagreed with McCann’s assessment.

“Cops rarely know who they are dealing with,” the former officer said. “That argument allows them to do whatever they want to anyone. I can’t support that.”

California Penal Code 835 states the decision “to use force shall be evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation…” And that is the bone of contention. From use-of-force experts to members of the public, folks can’t agree on whether the officers behaved reasonably.

But McCann never wavered from his position, saying this incident evolved quickly, and the officers caught in the moment must determine the risk and course of action.

“If there’s a risk, then it’s a justifiable use of force,” McCann said.

In her closing argument, Fox said Nail threw the punch because Jimenez Lopez grabbed the officer’s vest, which contained “a hotbed of weapons,” including a taser and OC [pepper spray].

After the hearing, Fox remained adamant that there was not enough evidence to send the defendants to trial. When asked if Mazariegos and Nail could have prevented the incident by attempting to de-escalate the situation, perhaps by stepping back from the sidewalk to reduce any risk posed by Jimenez Lopez or the other two men, Fox didn’t give an inch.

“They did not have a duty to retreat,” Fox said. “Taking a step back is a retreat.”

Officers are required to use “deescalation techniques, crisis intervention tactics, and other alternatives to force when feasible,” according to California Penal Code 7286. The former officer who has been watching the hearing believes putting distance between the officers and Jimenez Lopez and his friends could have de-escalated the situation.

“I don’t think that’s retreating,” the former officer said. “I’ve asked people to step back.”

And so, the debate continues about what is reasonable and if Mazariegos’ and Nail’s actions were lawful. It’s not surprising that Judge Jordan needed 10 days to rule on whether the ex-cops will stand trial. We’ll all have the answer when court reconvenes on Friday, Dec. 15, at 1:30pm.

UPDATED: Everybody poops, yet stingy San Rafael stymies sanitation

Nikki Silverstein
-
13
UPDATED: Everybody poops, yet stingy San Rafael stymies sanitation

Editor’s Note: This article was updated with additional information on Monday, Dec. 11.

Homeless people cite many challenges when it comes to living outside. Lack of public restrooms is always a chief concern.

For about nine months, the City of San Rafael has repeatedly refused to pony up for porta-potties and handwashing stations at a homeless encampment on the Mahon Creek Path.

Approximately 20 homeless people relocated to the Mahon Creek Path in March, after the city evicted them from Albert Park, which has bathrooms. It seemed the least the city could do was provide a couple of toilets at the new site, dubbed Camp Integrity by the campers.

A homeless activist, Robbie Powelson, says he asked city officials numerous times about paying for porta-potties and they shot down the idea. In July, I asked City Councilmember Rachel Kertz and San Rafael’s assistant director of community development, Chris Hess, why.

“We’re not doing that,” Hess answered, without further explanation.

Fortunately, Powelson took matters into his own hands soon after Camp Integrity was established. He set up a GoFundMe page for donations to buy a handwashing station and rent a single porta-potty for the campers. Within a week, the Honey Bucket arrived.

Every month, the GoFundMe barely raises enough money to pay the bill. The handwashing station broke, so the campers now rent that device, too. The population of the camp gradually doubled, which created the need for an additional porta-potty and handwashing station. Currently, two toilets accommodate more than 40 people.

The monthly bill totals $610. However, the December invoice jumped to almost $1,200 because the porta-potties had to be moved down the path. Powelson sent out an urgent email requesting donations.

A generous contribution soon arrived from Frank Shinneman, a retired CEO who volunteers his time for social justice issues. Not only did Shinneman donate $500, but he also challenged San Rafael Mayor Kate Colin and the other city councilmembers to match his gift.

Dear Mayor Kate,

I want to wish you and your council peace and health this holiday season. While we have disagreed over resource policy this year, I believe that as individuals you are all caring and compassionate. I fully understand the constraints of your guidance of a municipality compared to your personal desires. 

I want to give you an opportunity to publicly demonstrate your personal generosity and goodwill by challenging you to match my $500 contribution of one month’s cost for bathrooms at Camp Integrity. If each of you accepts this challenge, your most needy residents will be assured the minimum hygienic resources through the spring of next year. 

Hygiene facilities are amongst the most fundamental of human rights. To intentionally degrade people by denying toilet facilities is unnecessary torment and tantamount to incitement to break the law. 

Attached you will find notice of my contribution as well as a link for you to make a contribution.

Best Regards,
Frank Shinneman

A little more than three hours later, Colin replied to Shinneman’s email. Apparently, she has no intention of opening her own pocketbook.

Mr. Shinneman,

Thanks for caring about all members of our community. The City continues to work with the ‘Camp Integrity’ plaintiffs in the lawsuit (as you know the City is currently being sued) and as the City will be entering into a settlement agreement, items like the one you suggest will be considered. The City is committed to working with advisors who have ‘lived experience’ with homelessness and their input will be important when considering the prioritization of limited resources.

Warmly,
Kate

There’s a lot to unpack in the mayor’s three sentences. First, many of those living at Camp Integrity sued San Rafael after city officials passed an ordinance limiting the size and number of homeless campsites allowed in an area. Although the ordinance required that more than half of the campers leave the Mahon Creek Path, it didn’t address where they could go.

Colin’s email seems to suggest that San Rafael will only pay for the porta-potties as part of a lawsuit settlement. Are toilets for homeless people now the city’s bargaining chip?

And if resources are limited, should San Rafael spend its budget fighting a lawsuit about an ordinance that should never have been passed in the first place or on toilets for homeless people? Crying poor seems especially absurd since city officials have acknowledged they expected to be sued over the severely restrictive camping ordinance.

Finally, Colin says that the city will seek input from people who have experienced homelessness to determine whether porta-potties are a priority.

C’mon, Mayor Kate. Shinneman, who is a human being, already explained to you that it’s a matter of dignity for people to have access to toilets. Are you really saying that only those with “lived experience” can verify that people don’t want to poop on the sidewalk in front of strangers?

I contacted Jason Sarris, a member of the Marin Lived Experience Advisory Board—a group appointed by the county to give guidance on homelessness policies— to find out if he believes porta-potties are a top priority for homeless people. Not surprisingly, he does.

Sarris spent a decade living on the streets and remembers the difficulty of finding bathrooms. While a few grocery stores and gas stations remain open 24/7 and allow the public to use the facilities, he couldn’t always find a spot near the stores to camp. In fact, Sarris developed gastrointestinal issues from not eliminating.

“I didn’t want to poop without using a bathroom,” Sarris said. “I tried to have a routine, but in camp life, you don’t eat when you want—you eat when you get food.”

Sarris confirmed that the Marin Lived Experience Advisory Board met with representatives from San Rafael this week. They discussed porta-potties, and Sarris recommended that the city provide the portable toilets for its homeless residents.

The next question is, of course, will San Rafael begin paying for the porta-potties and handwashing stations at Camp Integrity? I asked.

Hess, the city’s assistant director of community development, responded via email. Actually, he sent two emails, the first indicating that porta-potties and handwashing stations are among the recommendations under consideration.

A few minutes later, a second email arrived, stating that I should use this “tighter response,” which contained no mention of porta-potties or handwashing stations. Instead, Hess said that the city would conduct a needs assessment with the homeless people living on Mahon Creek Path. I emailed and called Hess for clarification but didn’t receive a reply by publication deadline.

Shinneman’s attempt at shaming the mayor and city council didn’t work. Powelson’s pleading has fallen on deaf ears. The Marin Lived Experience Advisory Board appeared to make some impact, yet not enough for the city to commit to anything but a needs assessment.

How many more people, homeless or housed, must tell the City of San Rafael that humans need toilets?

Hours after the publication deadline, the City of San Rafael abandoned its gobbledygook messaging and finally responded with some straight talk. Assistant City Manager John Stefanski sent an email to the ‘Pacific Sun’ revealing that the city will provide porta-potties and handwashing stations for the homeless campers.

Marin sheriff installing license plate readers amid concern of eroding civil liberties

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Marin sheriff installing license plate readers amid concern of eroding civil liberties

The Marin County Sheriff’s Office will soon install new surveillance cameras throughout unincorporated Marin County to keep a record of the coming and going of vehicles. 

Supporters believe these automated license plate recognition (ALPR) cameras will help reduce or deter crime, with opponents citing concerns about the erosion of civil liberties.

Last week, the Marin County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved Sheriff Jamie Scardina’s proposal for an ALPR system with 31 cameras in nine locations. Scardina received the green light to spend $198,650 for a two-year contract with Flock Group Inc., a privately held Atlanta company that will lease the cameras to the county, as well as install and maintain them. The funds will come from the sheriff’s existing budget.

The ALPR cameras capture still images of the rear of vehicles, including the license plates. The system runs the license plates against “hot lists” from law enforcement databases, which contain vehicles associated with active investigations, such as stolen vehicles and those involved in alerts for missing children. If a vehicle on a hot list is detected, the sheriff’s dispatch center will be notified in real time.

The sheriff provided the supervisors with success stories of other agencies using Flock Group cameras. In Georgia, a Flock camera identified a suspect vehicle involved in the kidnapping of a one year old, and in less than six hours, the baby and mother were reunited. In San Bruno, police created a hot list for a suspect vehicle in the smash and grab robbery of a jewelry store. When the vehicle entered the area again, officers located it within seconds of the alert, potentially preventing another robbery.

These cases are gripping, but Marin isn’t exactly a hotbed of crime. The sheriff’s own website shows that most categories of crime have decreased over the last two years in the county. In 2022, property crime in unincorporated Marin dropped to its lowest level since 1985, according to FBI data.

A local activist who has kept his eye on Marin law enforcement for years, Frank Shinneman, says the low incidence of crime in the county doesn’t appear to justify increased surveillance. Shinneman suggests that each of the five county supervisors participate in a 60-day ALPR tracking demonstration of their own personal vehicles.

“It will show their travel in great detail and demonstrate how much of their lives are revealed to anyone who has access to the system,” Shinneman said.

For years, civil rights groups have been sounding the alarm about law enforcement’s use of camera systems with tracking ability. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is especially concerned about ALPRs supplied by the Flock Group, claiming the company is building a nationwide mass-surveillance system through its cameras in 3,000 communities across the country. 

Drivers will soon notice the sheriff’s Flock cameras in Marin City, Strawberry, Tam Valley, Greenbrae, Oak Manor, Santa Venetia, Peacock Gap, Marinwood and Lucas Valley, as well as at Atherton Avenue near Binford Road and Highway 37 in Novato and the east and west ends of Indian Valley Road in Novato. The sheriff’s office selected locations based on crime “heat maps” for retail and vehicle theft, with the targeted areas having only one or two ways in and out.

Several Marin cities and towns already use Flock cameras. Police departments in Sausalito, Belvedere, Tiburon and Novato have contracts with the company. San Rafael recently approved the installation of 19 ALPRs from Flock.

Marin neighborhood groups and homeowner associations also use Flock cameras, including Wolfback Ridge in Sausalito, Paradise Cay in Tiburon, Los Ranchitos in San Rafael, Oceana Marin in Dillon Beach and Dillon Beach Association. Some of these private groups allow law enforcement to monitor and access the camera data.

The Marin County Sheriff’s Office is quick to point out safeguards to protect privacy, including that it owns the collected data, and Flock won’t have access. Yet, the sheriff will share the information with law enforcement agencies around the state, which is perfectly legal.

While the sheriff stated the data will be destroyed after 30 days, critics say that’s a relatively long retention period. In New Hampshire, if a plate doesn’t get a hit, the state requires law enforcement to purge the data within three minutes.

Flock’s camera network reminds many of George Orwell’s “Big Brother” concept in 1984. It’s not unfounded. Last year, then-sheriff Robert Doyle settled a lawsuit claiming his office illegally shared the license plate data and location information of Marin motorists with hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the country, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Still, other Marinites welcome the surveillance technology. Some in Marin City, a historically Black community that has long objected to over-policing by the county, favor ALPR cameras.

In February, the Phoenix Project, a Marin City organization mentoring at-risk young males and adults, surveyed 105 people in the community about installing ALPR cameras in the area. Almost 63% of respondents said it was an idea that should be considered. Others commented that the cameras were an invasion of privacy.

Felecia Gaston, director of the Phoenix Project, understands both sides. But she wants the cameras.

“As a Black woman, Marin City resident and the founder of the Phoenix Project of Marin, I am very conscious and aware of the issues around the use of cameras by law enforcement, especially when it comes to Black people and Black men, so I can see how this can seem invasive,” Gaston said. “However, this issue is dealing with safety in our community, and the use of license plate readers can be useful to work on solutions when an incident happens.”

Although criminal incidents occur less frequently in Marin County than in surrounding areas, Sgt. Adam Schermerhorn of the Marin County Sheriff’s Office points out that crime does exist here.

“What we’re trying to do is solve the crime that just occurred,” Schermerhorn said. “These cameras are a fantastic tool to help us identify who may have been in the area at a particular time. We can go and search those records to see which vehicles were there. It’s a great way for us to start generating leads, where we otherwise would have absolutely no information.”

As for the Flock cameras being a slippery slope that tramples civil rights, Schermerhorn isn’t worried. The cameras don’t collect identifying information, such as photos of drivers or passengers, and there’s no facial recognition component, according to Schermerhorn.

Nonetheless, if innocent drivers pass an ALPR camera around the same time as a vehicle making a getaway from a crime, identifying information for the owners of all those vehicles will be accessed by law enforcement.

Marin County Supervisor Eric Lucan, a former member of the Novato City Council, said that when the Novato Police Department acquired ALPR cameras, they recovered quite a few stolen vehicles. The situation then plateaued, perhaps indicating that word got out to car thieves not to come to Novato, according to Lucan. He believes that since no new budget was allocated for the ALPR system, the county should try it.

The ACLU remains wary, with Flock Group’s rapid growth causing particular concern. In an article published earlier this year, Chad Marlow and Jay Stanley, two senior ACLU staffers, urged communities to oppose Flock and other mass surveillance systems.

Although that ship has sailed in Marin, the board of supervisors directed Scardina to come back in a year to review the implementation of the Flock cameras.

“In our country, the government should not be tracking us unless it has individualized suspicion that we’re engaged in wrongdoing,” Marlow and Stanley wrote. 

50 days in Gaza, released hostages have local ties

Nikki Silverstein
-
6
50 days in Gaza, released hostages have local ties

On Oct. 7, a pineapple farmer opened his door to Avigail Idan, a three-year-old girl covered in blood. Quickly, he ushered the little girl, his wife and their own three children into the home’s safe room.

With his family and their young charge locked indoors, the farmer, Avichai Brodutch, who is training to be a nurse, left his home to determine what was happening outside and to try to help.

Unbeknownst to Avichai, Hamas terrorists had invaded Kibbutz Kfar Aza, extinguishing the peaceful existence of the farming community where he lived with his family. The kibbutz, located in southern Israel, is just four miles from Gaza.

The village massacre left approximately 52 to 60 people dead, including tiny Avigail Idan’s mother and father. Tragically, she was present when Hamas murdered her parents during the early morning rampage.

About 17 others from Kibbutz Kfar Aza were kidnapped by Hamas, transported to Gaza, held as hostages and then used as human bargaining chips.

By the time the terrorists withdrew, Kibbutz Kfar Aza, once home to about 765 residents, was left in ruins.

Avichai, 42, the patriarch of the Brodutch family, survived the brutal attack on his village, although he sustained an injury from shrapnel. Sadly, by the time he returned home, it became apparent that his wife, three children and Avigail, the bloodied little girl who had hidden with them, had fared far worse. They were among those kidnapped.

Many know Avigail Idan’s name. President Joe Biden has recently spoken of the young child, who is also called Abigail Edan, as she holds dual American and Israeli citizenship. But other hostages aren’t as well-known to the public.

One person who grew up in Marin, however, is very familiar with Avichai Brodutch and his family—wife, Hagar, 40; daughter, Ofri, 10; and sons Yuval, 8, and Oriya, 4. The Brodutches have kin from Marin.

The local family member, an Israeli-American, fears revealing their identity due to the chaos of the conflict. We will call them “Ariel.”

About a week after the Hamas attack, Ariel, who was living in Israel, relocated temporarily to the North Bay with their children. Ariel’s spouse remains in Israel.

“Everything shut down in the entire country,” Ariel said. “Schools stopped. We went into emergency mode, with only supermarkets and medical facilities open. We wanted to shelter our children.”

However, Ariel and their spouse can’t shield themselves from the news of the Israel-Hamas war. During the last seven weeks, the couple has quietly suffered, feeling constant terror over the fate of their kidnapped family members, stolen away from the kibbutz where they’d lived for years. Avichai, the pineapple farmer, is their cousin.

In October, after Hamas kidnapped his family, Avichai and his dog, Rodney, sat outside Israel’s Ministry of Defense in Tel Aviv to draw attention to his family’s plight, according to Ariel. At first, Avichai sat alone in a plastic chair, dog at his side, but soon many others came to support him with signs and chants, telling the Israeli government to bring the hostages home.

Finally, on Sunday, Ariel learned that their four relatives were among the 17 hostages released earlier in the day. Avichai was reunited with the rest of his family, who were flown by helicopter to Schneider Children’s Medical Center of Israel. The hospital is equipped to deal with the immediate physical, mental and emotional needs of the former hostages.

Avigail, the orphaned little girl, was also brought to the same hospital. Her extended family is now by her side.

Physically, the Brodutch family members who were held hostage appear to be in good condition, Ariel said. But the emotional trauma that will haunt the kidnap victims remains unknown, and the scars may never disappear.

“One can only imagine what they are going through,” Ariel said. “But they are all now surrounded by loving family and communities who will rally to do everything possible to care for them. But who really knows what to do? There is no playbook for child hostages. Nothing prepares you for this.”

Some of the children’s life milestones passed while they were in captivity. Avigail turned four years old without her family to make her birthday wishes come true. She also missed her parents’ funerals.

The day after being kidnapped, Ofri had her 10th birthday. The Brodutch family had planned a special celebration lasting more than a day.

“They were supposed to start celebrating [Ofri’s birthday] the morning of Oct. 7, but instead they were kidnapped by Hamas,” Ariel said. “Her birthday cake and candles were later found by soldiers, who broke down crying when they opened the refrigerator and saw her cake.”

The impact of the attack will continue to weigh on civilians and soldiers. Israel is small enough, according to Ariel, that most everyone either knows someone who was killed or held hostage—or they are acquainted with someone who does.

For the Brodutch family and others who lived on Kibbutz Kfar Aza, the egalitarian, agrarian lifestyle they endeavored to live is gone—at least for now and the foreseeable future.

“They’re not going home because their homes were destroyed,” Ariel said. “The villagers have been displaced. People can’t go back. Each village is temporarily housed elsewhere. But we will do everything we can to help them recover and rebuild. The people in this farming community really lived peacefully with the neighbors across the border.”

The current ceasefire between Israel and Hamas has helped bring home some of the hostages, who are being traded for Palestinian prisoners being held by Israel. While the ceasefire is scheduled to end Wednesday, negotiators working with both Israel and Hamas say they hope it will be extended to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza and the release of the remaining hostages.

Clearly, there are too many variables to predict whether the ceasefire will continue and for how long.

“You can’t go down the slope of your fears because these feelings are just too much,” Ariel said. “Life was suspended. It still feels like that. There is a sense of helplessness. No one really knows what to do. Of course, we’re relieved our family has been released, but we can’t be happy, because there are so many people still being held hostage.”

Marin scientist shaking up Stanford’s stem cell research scene

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Marin scientist shaking up Stanford’s stem cell research scene

Royce McLemore, a Marin City leader and activist, couldn’t stop smiling when we chatted about her 21 grandchildren, one in particular.

“My granddaughter is the first Black stem cell research scientist from Marin County,” McLemore declared proudly.

“How do you know?” I asked.

“Do you know another one?” McLemore replied.

Good point. Until last week, I didn’t know any stem cell research scientists—of any race—from Marin County or anywhere else. Clearly, my circle of acquaintances is lacking.

Then, I met Malachia “Melli” Hoover, 33, a Black woman poised to earn her Ph.D. in stem cell research from Stanford University, School of Medicine. Last month, Hoover successfully passed her oral exams by defending her dissertation on stem cell biology and regenerative medicine.

Since 2017, Hoover has been conducting research on spine degeneration and potential treatments at the Stanford Institute of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. While I’d like to say that I understand the research Hoover excitedly explained, mmm, she blinded me with science.

Then she broke it down in layperson’s terms.

“As we age, our spinal discs degenerate at a very alarming rate,” Hoover said. “It’s a common problem, and we have to find novel ways to regenerate this tissue. Right now, there are not a lot of effective treatments. Treatments include taking out the disc and fusing together the bones. But it’s not pinpointing the crisis. How can we regenerate that tissue, without replacing it?”

Fortunately, Hoover is well on her way to answering that question. During her research, she identified factors that can regenerate spinal disc tissue via skeletal stem cells, which has enormous implications for keeping humans upright and moving pain-free.

It will be a while before people can benefit from Hoover’s research, but her experiments on mice with injured discs show great promise. Hoover inserted a hydrogel of special factors—proteins—into the rodents’ spinal injury sites. The mice were observed over the next three weeks and then tested for cartilage and bone growth.

“We see with these factors that the disc is completely regenerated,” Hoover explained. “I’ve been working on this project for six years. I’m proud to be done. Now, I’m working on submitting these findings to a top tier, peer-reviewed scientific journal.”

Clearly, Hoover is going places. The scientist has obtained trademarks on the special factors that she identified in her research and protected the intellectual property. Next up, she’ll start a company.

“Then we’ll go into clinical trials and eventually have a treatment for spinal regeneration,” Hoover said.

Hoover’s research achievements are remarkable, and her journey to Stanford is equally so. While she lives in Novato now, her roots are in Southern Marin. The eldest of five children, Hoover and her siblings were raised by her mother and stepfather in Golden Gate Village, a public housing project in Marin City, the county’s only historically Black community.

Her early education took place at Marin Country Day School. By the time Hoover graduated from Tamalpais High School in 2008, she was already keen on science and math.

Learning was always emphasized in Hoover’s home. Her mother, Lori Fall, is currently working on her own Ph.D. in public administration. Two of Hoover’s sisters are working on their graduate degrees.

“My mom pushed me to reach all my educational goals,” Hoover said. “When I was a little girl, she would tell me that I was going to be a successful doctor.”

Other strong women also played a role in encouraging and supporting Hoover. Her grandmother, McLemore, lived around the corner, and was a significant influence.

“My grandmother is an important educator, active in civil rights and what’s going on in Marin City,” Hoover said. “I knew that I couldn’t be mediocre.” 

Bettie Hodges, who runs the Hannah Project, a Marin City nonprofit offering scholastic support for children of color, also looked out for Hoover and helped her focus on her objectives. It was obvious early on that “Melli” was a very bright student, according to Hodges.

“Ms. Bettie played such a major role in my academic journey,” Hoover said. “In high school, she helped me with SAT prep classes and took me on a Southern California tour to look at colleges. Then in college, the Hannah Project gave me a scholarship for many years.” 

The Sausalito Women’s Club also provided scholarships for Hoover, starting with her freshman year at Cal State University, Northridge in 2008. The club assisted Hoover until she finished her studies.

“For almost 15 years, the Sausalito Women’s Club has given me a scholarship,” Hoover said. “I think I’m their longest recipient.”

Hoover’s academic achievements drew national attention, too, and she was awarded prestigious fellowships. The Ford Foundation bestowed Hoover with a pre-doctoral fellowship.

During Hoover’s Ph.D. studies at Stanford, the National Institute of Health (NIH) presented her with a doctoral fellowship, of which she is particularly proud.

“Only 1% of people applying get this NIH grant,” Hoover said. “I worked on it for several years.”

As if all of Hoover’s accomplishments aren’t impressive enough, she also enjoys a well-balanced life outside of Stanford and her stem cell research. Hoover is married with two young children, ages one and three.

The kids from the Hannah Project are never far from Hoover’s thoughts. She still makes time to visit the Marin City nonprofit and speak with children about her experiences growing up in Marin City, committing to her education and her love of all things science.

In her spare time, which she somehow finds, Hoover loves baking, likening trying out a new recipe with following a protocol in the lab. Then there’s her secret “bad addiction.”

“I am addicted to reality TV,” Hoover confessed. “Everything on Bravo. All the Housewives. The Bachelor, too.”

I’m tired just thinking about Hoover’s schedule. She’s inspiring—a true force filled with boundless energy and optimism.

“It’s impossible not to be proud of Melli because I’ve seen her journey,” Hodges said. “There was never a question that she could be whatever she wanted to be. Melli’s beautiful, humble and giving, as well as an intellectually strong person.”

By March, Hoover will turn in her written dissertation to Stanford and then walk across the stage in the springtime to pick up her hard-earned doctorate degree. Dr. Malachia Hoover. It certainly has a nice ring, doesn’t it?

Loneliness Epidemic: Help for Seniors Just a Call Away

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Loneliness Epidemic: Help for Seniors Just a Call Away

The U.S. Surgeon General recently issued an 82-page advisory about an epidemic that’s not talked about much—loneliness. 

Approximately half the adults in this country report feeling lonely, and the phenomenon began before the COVID pandemic.

“Loneliness is far more than just a bad feeling—it harms both individual and societal health,” Surgeon General Dr. Vivek H. Murthy said.

It makes sense that loneliness can lead to anxiety and depression, which is cited throughout the advisory. Yet, it also negatively impacts health in many other ways. A combination of data from 16 independent studies reveals that loneliness substantially increases the risk of heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, dementia and more.

Researchers reached the bleak conclusion that a lack of social connection is as dangerous as smoking 15 cigarettes a day, according to a 2017 study, Advancing Social Connection as a Public Health Priority in the United States, published by American Psychology. And it’s worse than consuming six alcoholic drinks daily.

In his advisory, Murthy called upon the public to build connections and relationships to help reduce loneliness and isolation. Although that might be relatively easy for some folks, it’s certainly more challenging for others. For example, how does an older person, who may be homebound because of a disability or isolated after losing a spouse, meet new acquaintances?

Anja Gibson, a Mill Valley preteen, aimed to answer that question for her Junior Girl Scout project. The project’s goal was to identify a problem in the community and find ways to address it. Because Gibson, 12, enjoys a close relationship with her “Nana,” she decided to help seniors.

Carol Brooklier, Gibson’s grandmother, and her neighbor, Sandra Otanez, live in the Rotary Valley Senior Village in San Rafael. Gibson sat down with the two women to ask about issues they face on a regular basis. Both agreed that everyone in their village feels loneliness and isolation to a degree, with some residents rarely leaving their cottages.

While Brooklier, 77, and Otanez, 85, live alone, the two friends are outgoing and enjoy socializing. They’re not necessarily isolated, but loneliness still creeps in.

“Mainly, I feel lonely in the evening,” Brooklier, who is a widow, said. “In the day, I go to the YMCA and take Hawaiian dance and strengthening classes, so I’m around people. Sometimes, when I’m driving, a song will come on the radio that my husband and I liked, and all of a sudden, I’ll get a sense of loneliness.”

Otanez, like Brooklier, spends time visiting with nearby family. And she joins the activities at the community center in her village, such as the recent Halloween party and the occasional happy hours.

“It is hard to be alone,” Otanez said. “But I have Mike, my cat, which certainly helps. I talk to him.”

Brooklier and Otanez are fortunate to have solid relationships to keep loneliness at bay most of the time. However, they expressed to Gibson their concerns for neighbors who stay isolated in their homes, only venturing out to retrieve the mail.

The summer meeting with the two women had a profound impact on Gibson, giving the Girl Scout project a new importance. She became determined to help her grandmother’s neighbors alleviate their loneliness.

“These are problems that won’t go away on their own,” Gibson said. “The main one was feeling isolated. A lot of people there are living alone and don’t have contact with their family members.”

After the meeting, Gibson began the research phase of her Girl Scout project. Some ideas seemed a bit complicated, such as establishing a cooking club, enabling neighbors to prepare and eat meals together. And perhaps the people most in need wouldn’t participate.

Then Gibson discovered Friendship Line, a free statewide service for people 60 and older and adults living with disabilities who want to have a conversation. The line is answered by extensively trained, compassionate volunteers and staff who listen and provide emotional support to callers.

“It’s not just a warm line,” Katy Spence, senior director of Friendship Line, said. “It’s also a crisis line, offering interventions for people feeling hopeless. We’re here 24/7, 365 days a year.”

Friendship Line, in existence for 50 years, receives an average of 7000 to 9000 calls a month. Call volume jumps 20% to 25% during the holiday season.

The holidays can be a difficult time, particularly for people with ambulatory issues who can’t travel to family gatherings. Others must contend with bittersweet memories of past celebrations with loved ones now gone. Winter’s shorter days offer less sunlight, which plays a role in feelings of loneliness and depression, according to Spence.

“Sometimes, we all need a friend,” Spence said. “That’s the basis of the Friendship Line. Our connection to others is what binds us to life.”

Friendship Line, Gibson knew, could provide her grandmother’s neighbors and others with a respite from loneliness. Now, she had to get the word out. She created and printed flyers with information about the service and ordered magnets with Friendship Line’s phone number.

Gibson delivered the information to her grandmother’s village, where the materials remain posted next to the mailboxes. Brooklier asks everyone to take a magnet, saying that even if they don’t need Friendship Line’s services, they should give it to someone who does.

Next, Gibson visited Varenna, a luxurious independent living community for seniors in Santa Rosa. At first blush, it might seem that residents of the upscale property, which offers numerous amenities, fitness classes and social activities, wouldn’t be interested in calling Friendship Line.

Yet, loneliness is still an issue.

“We have a pretty robust group here, but activities that we take for granted, like carrying in the groceries, become challenging as we get older,” Jenny Latourette, Varenna’s life enrichment director, said. “A big part of mental well-being is maintaining independence.”

Varenna staff was greatly appreciative when Gibson reached out with Friendship Line flyers and magnets. The info is prominently displayed in the activities room, which receives foot traffic all day.

“When residents are in crisis, it’s one of the first resources we give them,” Latourette said. “Money can’t buy happiness. It’s all about your optimistic outlook and meaningful connections with other people.”

Last month, Gibson earned the Bronze Award, the highest honor in Junior Girl Scouts, for her project that has helped lessen loneliness for seniors in Marin and Sonoma counties.

Inspired by Gibson, I set out to find a nonprofit that assists Napa County seniors, especially those who are homebound, in building relationships with people. Molly’s Angels fit the bill.

This remarkable organization provides folks, age 60 and older, with a variety of free services. The Hello Molly Care Calls program matches each senior with a volunteer who calls them once a week to help reduce feelings of loneliness.

“These calls are a friendly chat to see how they’re doing, but more importantly, a connection to the community and reassurance someone is there,” said Jill Jorgensen, program director at Molly’s Angels. “For some, the care calls are the only people they hear from. Beyond a phone call, the weekly chat provides a safety check-in by trained volunteers.”

The relationship between the senior and volunteer sometimes becomes more than a check-in. A 97-year-old woman with a wide repertoire of songs sings to her volunteer. Another senior and volunteer exchange vegetables from their gardens. Yet another pair regularly swaps books.

Friendship Line and Hello Molly Care Calls offer just what the U.S. surgeon general ordered—the power of social connection. 

Give them a call.

Friendship Line may be reached at 888.670.1360 and Molly’s Angels of Napa Valley at 707.224.8971.

Marin teen vying for prestigious international science award

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Marin teen vying for prestigious international science award

If this were a radio show, I’d cue “Rocket Man” by Elton John or maybe David Bowie’s “Space Oddity.”

Then I’d launch into the narrative of a brilliant Marin teen promising millions of people around the world, “I’ll make you love space,” and in about 60 seconds, he actually does.

Bayanni Rivera, 18, has a knack for breaking down complicated astronomy concepts and creating stellar videos to share the science scoop on social media, allowing average folks like me to relate to the universe. A recent video by Rivera explaining the rare blue supermoon garnered almost 30 million views on TikTok—and he knows exactly why.

“It’s the difference between being a science nerd and a science communicator,” Rivera told me during a lengthy conversation about astronomy, rockets and earning a place in the final round of the Breakthrough Junior Challenge, a prestigious international science competition.

It certainly doesn’t come as a surprise to those who know Rivera that he’s one of 15 finalists in the contest that seems tailor-made to his unique skills. 

This year, more than 2,400 high school students entered the Breakthrough Junior Challenge by submitting an original video on a complex science theory, with the goal of making the idea easy for everyone to understand. Sound familiar?

While Rivera’s video, “The Crisis in Cosmology,” is vying for the $400,000 grand prize, he sounded remarkably calm when we spoke about the competition. But the Greenbrae native couldn’t contain his excitement when describing this cosmology crisis, which is about two different methods for calculating how fast the universe is expanding—with conflicting results. And this probably isn’t anything to worry about right now, but will the universe expand to infinity?  Could it reverse or even stop? Yep, I caught Rivera’s contagious enthusiasm on the topic.

To make it to the finals in the extremely competitive Breakthrough Junior Challenge, Rivera’s affinity for astronomy and effective communication weren’t quite enough—he also had to polish his video-making skills. He spent 90 hours producing “The Crisis in Cosmology,” which is just two minutes long. Rivera used animation in his video and found the learning curve a bit rocky.

“Animating things is very time-consuming,” Rivera said. “The first animation that I made for the Challenge lasts 15 seconds and took me eight hours to produce. It’s harder than it looks.”

Rivera finds the painstaking attention to detail worth the effort because he thoroughly enjoys sharing astronomy info with others. He credits Elise Rubio, his science teacher at Redwood High School, with inspiring him. Rubio brought an upbeat energy to her teaching, especially in astronomy class, according to Rivera.

Rubio, however, sees the beginning of Rivera’s fascination with astronomy somewhat differently. During astronomy class, Rubio said Rivera constantly remained engaged, worked hard and asked good questions, even during COVID, when many students were challenged by the online-only curriculum.

“Kids like Bayanni tend to think that someone else is responsible for sparking their interest in a subject,” Rubio told me. “Really, it was inside him all the time. The astronomy course gave him the platform he needed to study the thing he loved.”

And Rivera’s passion for astronomy has grown over the years. In 2021, during his junior year, Rivera founded Redwood High’s astronomy club, with Rubio as the advisor.

Last year, Rivera began posting his imaginative astronomy videos to TikTok. He came up with the idea when he wanted to learn more about astronomy and searched the internet for videos less than 10 minutes long. There weren’t any.

“I wished there were more condensed videos, to learn science essentials on the go,” Rivera said. “At the time, a lot of people thought TikTok was just a place to be entertained. But I thought maybe people would want to learn some cool science in 30 seconds to a minute. I decided to do it.”

Of course, Rivera was right. His TikTok videos, delivered with flair and humor, have already amassed over 100 million views. Followers can learn about phenomena including black holes, wormholes and a dark matter star with the mass of a million suns.

However, Rivera is no longer producing his videos from Marin County. Since September, the astronomy devotee has been contemplating all things science from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he’s now a freshman. 

“Getting into MIT was a goal that was long in the making,” Rivera said. “In my freshman year at Redwood [High School], we wrote a letter to our senior selves. I wrote that my dream school is MIT. There you go. I got it.”

The TikTok science star is currently deciding whether to focus his undergraduate studies on aerospace engineering or physics. Perhaps Rivera’s leaning on the aerospace side since he just joined the MIT rocket team. The group will be building a rocket, called Prometheus, eventually entering rocket launching competitions against other schools.

With Rivera’s full schedule, somehow, he manages to carve out time for his other interests. Last week, in time for Halloween, he posted a spooky new astronomy video to TikTok about three stars that mysteriously disappeared from the sky in 1952.

Rivera is also a talented musician. While he’s given up the French horn for now, he’s still playing the piano and composing classical music. Some of his compositions are posted on YouTube.

As my conversation with Rivera was winding down, he admitted that he is a tad nervous about the Breakthrough Junior Challenge. The $400,000 prize includes a $250,000 scholarship, a $100,000 science lab for the winner’s school and $50,000 for the science teacher.

The champ will be chosen by a committee of prominent scientists, professors and teachers from around the globe; however, the competition hasn’t yet determined a date to announce the winner. That’s leaving me on pins and needles, too.

It’s clear that Rivera is a winner in every sense of the word. I asked Rubio, the Redwood High teacher, what propels Rivera to succeed. She didn’t hesitate for a minute with her answer.

“Bayanni needs no nudging to get out there and learn, find opportunities or just explore,” Rubio said. “He has this internal drive that is otherworldly. Bayanni craves learning and craves human interaction. It’s a gift that he has. He loves his friends, his family, his teachers and his community. Bayanni’s a once-in-a-lifetime kid.”

Federal judge limits San Rafael’s homeless camping ordinance

Nikki Silverstein
-
16
Federal judge limits San Rafael’s homeless camping ordinance

Another lawsuit pitting homeless people against a city in wealthy Marin County is now in full swing. This time, San Rafael occupies the hot seat.

A recent order by a federal judge has substantially diminished the impact of San Rafael’s restrictive homeless camping ordinance. In addition, the city must perform administrative tasks that may be challenging for officials to manage with its current resources.

Homeless people and their advocates are praising the 50-page preliminary injunction, issued by Senior U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen on Oct. 19, saying that it helps to ensure safety for campers.

“We’re pleased with the order overall,” Anthony Prince, the San Rafael Homeless Union attorney who is representing some of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said in an interview. “On balance, the city lost. They’re paying for their overreach and their apparent extremism.”

A group of homeless people living at Camp Integrity, an encampment on the Mahon Creek Path in San Rafael, filed the claim in August, after the city passed a controversial ordinance imposing severe limits on the size and number of campsites in an area. While homeless people maintain there is safety in numbers, city officials argue that large encampments pose health and safety risks because of increased crime, fires and garbage.

To help make their case, the homeless plaintiffs enlisted Jeffrey Schonberg, Ph.D., a researcher who focuses on the Bay Area’s homeless population. Schonberg submitted a report to the court stating that the ordinance is dangerous because it isolates homeless people. 

Leaving women isolated significantly increases the risk of sexual assault, domestic violence and human trafficking, Schonberg said.

Drug overdose deaths will increase by 15% to 25% if the ordinance is enforced, because “one of the single largest risk factors of overdose is using in isolation,” Schonberg testified. And homeless people rely on one another for survival by exchanging favors and providing care for the more vulnerable campers, according to Schonberg.

Schonberg’s report appeared to sway the judge, but the homeless plaintiffs still didn’t get exactly what they wanted in the preliminary injunction. Neither did the city.

San Rafael had hoped the judge would lift—without restrictions—a previous order that prevents the city from enforcing the ordinance. The campers believed the best outcome would have completely blocked the ordinance, allowing the dozens of tents on the Mahon Creek Path to remain in place.

Instead, Chen’s preliminary injunction provides a compromise.

“The Court will lift the broad temporary restraining order and issue a narrowly tailored preliminary injunction which permits enforcement of the Ordinance under limited conditions, conditions which accommodate the competing interests of both parties while minimizing their respective hardships,” Chen wrote in the most recent order.

The city’s ordinance, passed in July but never implemented because of the court’s temporary restraining order, limited the size of a group campsite to 10 feet by 20 feet. It also required 200 feet of separation between campsites—the equivalent of two-thirds the length of a football field.

Chen’s preliminary injunction doubles the size of a group campsite to 400 square feet, with each site housing up to four people. The distance between campsites was reduced to 100 feet.

San Rafael Mayor Kate Colin believes the constraints in the original ordinance would have been more effective in “reducing violence,” citing incidents of stabbings, tent fires and drug arrests at the Mahon Creek Path encampment.

“Unfortunately, the judge’s order did not approve the ordinance as written, so I am not pleased with that,” Colin told the Pacific Sun. 

The Mahon Creek Path encampment has continued to grow over the last several months. In July, there were approximately 33 tents. Currently, there are 61 tents, according to the city.

The encampment starts at the intersection of Lindaro Street and Anderson Avenue and ends at Lincoln Drive. The area measures about 540 feet in length. Even with the conditions Chen placed on the city’s ordinance, the majority of camp residents will need to relocate.

But San Rafael faces a few hurdles before the judge will lift the ban on the ordinance. First, the city must submit for the court’s review a street level map identifying permissible campsites by size and number of occupants. At each site, boundaries must be visibly designated.

The court must also review the city’s process for designating how campsites are allocated or claimed.

After the court permits San Rafael to implement the modified ordinance and oust many of the Mahon Creek Path residents, city officials will still have to jump through hoops. The city must provide moving assistance for campers required to relocate from Mahon Creek Path. Additionally, for campers whose tents and bedding won’t fit in the allotted space, the city must provide replacement gear.

Perhaps the most labor-intensive aspect of Chen’s requirements for San Rafael involves how the city must handle a homeless person’s request for reasonable accommodations based on a disability. The city can’t evict or prosecute a person making such a request, “unless and until it completes an interactive process (including administrative appeals) with that Plaintiff to address the need for reasonable accommodation,” according to the preliminary injunction.

It remains to be seen whether San Rafael has the administrative bandwidth to meet the requirements in Chen’s order.

“The city has received the judge’s lengthy order and is studying it carefully to determine next steps,” said Michael von Loewenfeldt, of Wagstaffe, von Loewenfeldt, Busch & Radwick, who is one of the attorneys representing San Rafael in the lawsuit. 

It may benefit the city that the preliminary injunction applies only to residents of the Mahon Creek Path encampment who are named plaintiffs or belong to the San Rafael Homeless Union, narrowing the number of protected people. Homeless people living in other encampments throughout the city are not covered by Chen’s order.

But therein lies the rub for San Rafael. If the city begins enforcing the regulations in the original ordinance for other encampments, affected homeless residents are free to file a claim in federal court. And the Mahon Creek Path lawsuit serves as an easy blueprint to follow.

In the meantime, residents of the Mahon Creek Path encampment say the city has begun retaliating against them. Last week, Brian Nelson, one of the lawsuit’s named plaintiffs, received a notice from the city that the wood pallet foundation beneath his tent is unsafe and must be removed in 48 hours.

The pallets have been in place for eight months and prevent water from entering his tent, according to a letter that Prince, the San Rafael Homeless Union attorney, sent to von Loewenfeldt. The letter also warns that unless the city rescinds the notice, the matter will be reported to the court.

San Rafael and its homeless residents look like they’re following a playbook from a similar case in Sausalito. In February 2021, a group of homeless people sued Sausalito over an ordinance restricting homeless camping. The city responded by hiring expensive outside counsel to defend the lawsuit. The litigation dragged on for 18 months before the parties reached a settlement. All in, Sausalito spent approximately $2 million of taxpayer funds.

Surely, there must be a better way.

“It’s time for the city to deal with homelessness,” Prince said. “This lawsuit was brought by homeless people, and they now have a measure of protection from the court. These lawsuits are going to happen over and over again. I say the parties should sit down and settle by making policies that will keep homeless and housed people safe.”

Perhaps they can all discuss it in front of Chen at the status conference on Nov. 1. 

Nightmare on Pine Street

Nikki Silverstein
-
21
Nightmare on Pine Street

The Beyers are the kind of family most people want living next door. For years, they lived harmoniously with their neighbors on a quiet block of Pine Street in Sausalito.

Now, they say some of their neighbors want them out.

To be sure, several neighbors are unhappy with the Beyers’ plans to renovate their traditional one-story cottage to a modern three-story house. Unhappy might be an understatement. It’s gotten downright ugly, replete with accusations, name calling and even a call to the police.

The saga had a joyous beginning. In 2017, Jake Beyer and Georgia Glassie Beyer were renting a Sausalito apartment. They loved the neighborhood and searched for a nearby home to buy. As luck would have it, they found 426 Pine St., a charming cottage built in the 1920s. And then they learned their first baby was on the way.

“It was serendipity,” Glassie Beyer told me in an interview. “I know this is where we’re meant to be.”

The couple checked into whether the zoning code would allow for expansion of the 1,319 square foot home. It did, so they plunked down $1.5 million and moved in.

One, two, then three children. The Beyer family quickly grew to five members, and the two-bedroom, two-bath home felt like it was bursting at the seams.

But the Beyers had a vision. Three years ago, they began designing their dream home. Little did they know that some of their neighbors would consider it a nightmare.

I stumbled upon the situation while scrolling on Nextdoor, a social media platform that often plays host to neighborhood feuds. Earlier this month, Beyer posted a plea for people to support the renovation project by sending letters to the Sausalito Planning Commission. To date, the post has garnered 270 comments, most positive, some not.

Beyer’s post provided a link to a professionally produced, 10-minute video about his family and their struggles to get their renovation approved. The Beyers also created a comprehensive website containing the proposed plans, a section on the dissenting neighbors and a timeline of project milestones.

Clearly, the Beyers are on a public relations mission, and with good cause. The city’s powerful planning commission and long-time residents have a reputation for resisting change.

From the beginning, the couple knew the approval process wouldn’t be a cake walk. They’d also have to work with the constant staff turnover in Sausalito’s planning department, which is responsible for reviewing and analyzing planning permit applications.

“We’ve been through six different city planners,” Beyer said during one of my several interviews with him. “Building in Sausalito is difficult.”

Brandon Phipps, Sausalito’s community and economic development director, confirmed that the planning department hired five new planners in the last year—100% turnover.

In addition, a design review by the five-member Sausalito Planning Commission, required for significant renovations, can take as long as several months or more, depending on factors such as the project’s complexity and opposition by neighbors. The commission’s decisions are based on both objective and subjective criteria, Phipps said.

Aware that they must receive approval from the planning commission to make their dream a reality, the Beyers developed an approach to make their journey easier. Their designer, Dave Grabham, of G Design, advised the couple to work with neighbors early in the process, prior to submitting the renovation plans to the city.

With that in mind, in May 2021—before the first set of plans were complete—the Beyers informed neighbors of the planned remodel. Eight months later, the couple presented neighbors with the renovation plans.

“Our goal was to try to make everyone happy,” Beyer said. “We wanted our neighbors excited to have a new family in the neighborhood.”

By Marin standards, the proposed design appears modest. The square footage of the house and ADU, or accessory dwelling unit, is just over 2,620 square feet. Some nearby homes are larger, others smaller.

Architectural rendering of the Beyers’ planned renovation. Photo courtesy of Jake Beyer.

However, the more the Beyers shared their plans, the more opinions they heard. Many appreciated the modern design, which boasts large windows and three decks to maximize outdoor living. Of course, there’s also a contingent who said the home won’t fit in with Pine Street’s traditional Victorians and wood-shingled cottages. A few immediate neighbors expressed concerns that the renovated home would negatively impact their views, privacy and sunlight.

In September 2022, the Beyers began communicating frequently with several interested neighbors. I reviewed dozens of emails showing that the couple hosted Zoom meetings, where Grabham walked neighbors through the renovation plans and 3-D models. Beyer also met with neighbors in person.

When Sam Chase, who lives uphill, became concerned about his view, Beyer and Grabham climbed onto the roof of the cottage and installed plastic story poles, which represented the rear outline of the proposed structure. While the city would require a full set of wood story poles later in the process, this preview determined the additional two stories would block a small portion of Chase’s expansive water views.

“We adjusted the roofline three different times,” Grabham said. “And brought a wall in.”

After a second set of plastic story poles was erected the following month to reflect the design revisions, Chase gave his “conditional” approval to the project.

In the meantime, Beyer was also in contact with Conrad Gann, the owner of two houses adjacent to the Beyer property. The three homes are in close quarters.

Gann voiced several concerns throughout the planning process, particularly about the renovation affecting privacy and blocking sunlight to his two homes. But the Beyers and Grabham said that as soon as they addressed one of Gann’s concerns, another objection surfaced.

Not surprisingly, Gann disputed this assessment when I spoke with him. In September 2022, Gann requested that the Beyers conduct a professional sun study, which is documented in emails. More than a year later, Gann said he still hasn’t received a report, and blocked light remains a concern.

Beyer, however, told me about a shade study. The design may cast nominal shade on Gann’s homes for about 30-40 minutes a day during about two months of the year, according to Beyer. 

The couple worked with Grabham to address other issues raised by Gann. For example, to maximize privacy, they changed the position of windows to avoid direct alignment with the windows in Gann’s homes. Gann isn’t convinced this resolves the privacy problem.

“The front and back third-floor decks and oversized windows lord over the neighborhood,” Gann said. “And when the wood story poles went up, and I saw the shadows cast on both stories of one of my homes, I told them the design was detrimental to the natural light. I objected to the design.”

Conrad Gann’s two homes (left and center) and the Beyers’ cottage with story poles on the roof (right). Photo from Sausalito Planning Commission.

The project rolled forward. In January, the Beyers submitted their plans to the city’s planning department. They continued to work with neighbors, Beyer said. Soon, they received notice that the planning commission review was scheduled for July.

However, Gann had quietly hired his own architect, Michael Rex, to review the renovation plans. Rex found a code issue—the proposed home would be too close to the property line shared with Gann. The Beyers were forced to revise their design, losing the garage. This change also delayed the planning commission review by more than three months.

On Oct. 25—after the Pacific Sun print deadline—the planning commission will finally review a new iteration of the renovation plans, sans garage. The planning department’s staff report seems generally positive, though it notes some issues. It specifically states that elements of the design will negatively impact the privacy of Gann’s homes and cause reduced access to light and air. Rejecting or approving the plan are both possibilities. 

Gann, of course, opposes the project. Chase changed his mind after the wood story poles were erected, and he is now against the current design.

But five people on Pine Street and 15 others submitted letters of support. Perhaps the Beyer family will soon be living in their dream home.

Staff Report on Proposed Renovation

Criminal defendant Daisy Mazariegos gives birth, hires new defense attorney

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Criminal defendant Daisy Mazariegos gives birth, hires new defense attorney

A brief hearing today resolved issues about how the criminal case against two former San Rafael police officers will move forward after the untimely death of defense attorney Christopher J. Shea last week. The case left off early last week in the middle of the preliminary hearing.

Shea represented Daisy Mazariegos, an ex-cop who is charged with assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report for a July 2022 use of force incident. Co-defendant Brandon Nail, also a former officer, faces the same charges and is represented by Julia Fox.

Marin County Superior Court Judge Beth S. Jordan began the hearing by congratulating defendant Mazariegos on the birth of her baby, born yesterday.

The court then turned its attention to whether Mazariegos had selected a new attorney. Alison Berry Wilkinson, an attorney practicing in San Rafael, told the court that Mazariegos had reviewed multiple options. In the end, Mazariegos chose Wilkinson, whose practice centers on representing law enforcement in criminal, civil and administrative proceedings.

“I currently serve as civil defense counsel for both Ms. Mazariegos and Brandon Nail in a federal civil rights litigation arising out of same set of facts,” Wilkinson said.

Julio Jimenez Lopez filed the civil lawsuit against the City of San Rafael, Mazariegos and Nail after suffering great bodily injury in the use of force incident last year.

Wilkinson acknowledged there is a potential for conflict of interest because she is representing both defendants in the civil case. While Nail consulted independent counsel regarding the potential for conflict, Mazariegos did not. Both ultimately signed waivers allowing Wilkinson to continue to handle the civil case and also represent Mazariegos in the criminal proceedings.

Assistant district attorney Geoff Iida stated that he had a greater concern for Nail with the potential for conflict. At this time, Mazariegos and Nail appear to have the same criminal defense strategy, however that could change. Mazariegos could decide to point the finger at Nail for the alleged offenses.

“His [Nail’s] current civil attorney is in a position to advance a defense to shift responsibility to Mr. Nail,” Iida said. “If he goes in eyes wide open, we can proceed.”

The judge verified that Nail understood he is giving up rights to later claims of inadequate representation. Nail’s criminal attorney, Fox, also stated that she had no objections.

With the conflict of interest matter resolved, it was then determined that Wilkinson will need time to review the criminal case files before the preliminary hearing resumes.

“I attended the two days of the [preliminary] hearing,” Wilkinson said. “But I was focused on monitoring testimony, not questioning witnesses.

The hearing concluded with Iida sharing a story about working with Shea, who was a Marin County prosecutor for more than a decade before becoming a defense attorney. Iida, fresh on the job, told Shea that he had just encountered a new legal issue in a case he was working on. Shea, according to Iida, told him not to worry about it. A few hours later, Shea delivered a legal brief to Iida to help him with the case.

“Chris had a big personality, was loud and very confident, Iida said. “He was also generous with his time with new attorneys.”

On Oct. 23, the court will determine the date for the preliminary hearing to resume.

Defense attorney dies, leaving uncertainty in police use of force case

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Defense attorney dies, leaving uncertainty in police use of force case

The criminal case against two former San Rafael police officers took a tragic turn when one of the defense attorneys, Christopher J. Shea, died last week. He was 57.

Family, friends and colleagues expressed their distress and sorrow at the sudden loss of Shea, a seasoned criminal defense attorney who also spent more than a decade as a prosecutor in the Marin County District Attorney’s Office.

“Chris was an excellent attorney and a good, generous man,” defense attorney Douglas Horngrad wrote on the Pacific Sun’s website. “His untimely death is a terrible shock and tragedy.”

Another tribute mentioned that Shea was humble. Shea’s mother, Diane Shea, agreed, telling me in an email she didn’t think her son knew the extent of the love and respect so many people had for him.

“Chris was comfortable in his own skin, happiest in flip-flops and a Hawaiian shirt,” Diane Shea said.

In addition to saddening his family and friends, Shea’s unexpected death will likely delay—or possibly restart—the police use of force case he was involved in.

Early last week, Shea appeared in Marin County criminal court for two days to represent ex-cop Daisy Mazariegos during a preliminary hearing, a proceeding which determines whether there is enough evidence for a case to go to trial.

Mazariegos and Brandon Nail, also a former officer, are charged with assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report for a July 2022 use of force incident. Both were terminated from the police department earlier this year.

Co-counsel Julia Fox, who is representing Nail, sat next to Shea during the proceedings. Fox told me that she noticed Shea loosened his tie while court was in session, something not usually done in that formal setting.

Courtroom spectators observed that Shea also unbuttoned the top button of his shirt and wore his sunglasses on top of his head while questioning a witness, leaving many now wondering whether the lawyer felt unwell. Still, Shea’s performance during the preliminary hearing was remarkable.

On the second day of the hearing, Shea made the surprise move of calling Mazariegos to testify. Several attorneys told me this is done only when a defense attorney believes the judge will find that their client should not be held to answer the charges. Shea had added incentive to convince the judge to send his client home—Mazariegos is pregnant and due on Oct. 19.

“It is very anomalous to have the defendants testify in a prelim,” Fox said. “Off the top of my head, I’ve only seen that happen maybe once before.”

Shea led his client through the details of the police use of force incident that began when Mazariegos contacted three men for drinking in public. Mazariegos indicated that she told the men to sit down to gain control.

“There were three of them and one of me,” Mazariegos said.

Under Shea’s questioning, Mazariegos established that one of the men, Julio Jimenez Lopez, stood to retrieve his identification. By then, Nail had arrived. The two officers instructed Jimenez Lopez to sit, but he soon stood again.

The officers grabbed Jimenez Lopez to handcuff him. Mazariegos claimed that Jimenez Lopez stiffened up and moved his arm, prompting Nail to trip the man and bring all three of them to the ground. During the encounter, Jiminez Lopez grabbed Nail’s vest, which held some of the officer’s equipment, including a baton and “OC spray,” also known as pepper spray, according to Mazariegos.

“I looked at Nail,” Mazariegos said. “His demeanor changed. He had a blank stare on his face.”

Nail then punched Jimenez Lopez in the nose with a closed fist. The use of force was consistent with her training because Jimenez Lopez was actively resisting, Mazariegos said.

The preliminary hearing ended before Assistant District Attorney Geoff Iida had the opportunity to cross examine Mazariegos.

But Iida had spent most of that day’s session, as well as the previous day, questioning prosecution witnesses, including Jimenez Lopez, DA investigator York Tsuruta and San Rafael police Cpl. Oscar O’Con, the supervising officer who approved the police reports submitted by Nail and Mazariegos.

During Iida’s examination of his own witnesses, it sometimes appeared that he was unaware of specific information that others in the courtroom knew. For example, when O’Con declared that the officers’ use of force was reasonable, the prosecutor failed to push back. Iida could have cited Police Chief David Spiller’s disciplinary letter to O’Con, who was suspended for four days due to his inadequate supervision of the incident.

The chief’s letter is one of numerous records recently released to the public from San Rafael’s independent investigation into the use of force incident and its aftermath. Other documents include the investigator’s interviews with Mazariegos and Nail, who were still officers at the time.

Marin County District Attorney Lori Frugoli declined to answer whether Iida has access to those interviews and other files from the independent investigation.

However, Fox, who is a former prosecutor, shed some light on the subject. While she believes that Iida may be legally able to review the records, the constitutional protection against self-incrimination would prevent him from using any information gleaned from Mazariegos’ and Nail’s statements.

“The officers were compelled to give their statements under the threat of insubordination,” Fox explained. “Those statements can’t be used against either officer because of the Fifth Amendment privilege.”

Another attorney suggested to me that it is safer for Iida to refrain from examining the investigative records altogether, to avoid inadvertently using the information and tainting the legal proceedings.

Iida’s questioning of Jimenez Lopez seemed more effective. Speaking through an interpreter, Jimenez Lopez explained that he was drinking a few beers after work with two friends when Mazariegos contacted them on Windward Way in the Canal neighborhood. Jimenez Lopez cried on the witness stand as he was forced to watch videos from the officers’ body-worn cameras of the beating. 

During his testimony, he listed his numerous injuries resulting from the officers’ use of force, including a broken nose, concussion, a torn labrum in his shoulder requiring surgery and injuries to both knees. Jimenez Lopez said that he no longer plays soccer because of his injuries.

Theo Emison, Jimenez Lopez’s attorney in a civil lawsuit filed against San Rafael and the former officers, told me that his client was in fear for his life during the bloody beating.

“Both Julio and his wife were in tears after they left the hearing,” Emison said. “This has been an incredibly emotional experience for both of them. The hearing took Julio back into reality of the event, and he relived it in full.”

Unfortunately, Jimenez Lopez will likely be called on again to provide testimony—either at another preliminary hearing if the case has to start over or at trial.

The preliminary hearing is scheduled to continue on Oct. 10.

Disciplinary Letter to Cpl. O’Con

BREAKING NEWS: Christopher Shea, defense attorney for former San Rafael cop, dies at 57

Nikki Silverstein
-
19
BREAKING NEWS: Christopher Shea, defense attorney for former San Rafael cop, dies at 57

Christopher J. Shea, a criminal defense attorney and former Marin County prosecutor, died on Thursday. He was 57.

Earlier this week, the seasoned attorney spent two days in a Marin County courtroom representing his client, former San Rafael police officer Daisy Mazariegos, in a preliminary hearing.

Shea, who grew up in the Bay Area and received his law degree from the University of San Francisco, spent more than 10 years as a Marin County deputy district attorney. In 2007, he left the DA’s office, switched sides and began practicing as a criminal defense attorney.

Other lawyers have praised Shea as a skilled attorney with a “bare-knuckled” approach to defending his clients.

“He has an excellent reputation, and deservedly so,” said attorney Julia Fox in an interview with the Pacific Sun on Thursday, prior to learning of Shea’s death.

Fox was Shea’s co-counsel in a current Marin County case against two former San Rafael police officers who are accused of assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report. It is unclear at this time how the case will be handled moving forward.

“We’re all digesting this a bit,” Fox, who is representing Brandon Nail in the case, said in a text message.

The ex-cops’ preliminary hearing, which determines whether there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial, began on Monday and continued Tuesday. It left off with Shea making an unusual move for a preliminary hearing—calling his client, Mazariegos, who is pregnant with a due date of Oct. 19, to testify. 

The hearing is scheduled to continue on Oct. 10.

Editor’s Note: This story is still developing.

Documents reveal San Rafael cop had previous credibility issues

Nikki Silverstein
-
5
Documents reveal San Rafael cop had previous credibility issues

The Marin County district attorney knew that San Rafael police officer Brandon Nail had credibility issues long before he beat and bloodied a local gardener during questioning about an open container of beer, according to an internal police memo.

This is just one of many disclosures in the 89 documents, audio files and videos related to the City of San Rafael’s internal investigation into a July 27, 2022 use of force incident. The files were released last week, after a Marin County judge ordered San Rafael to disclose the records in response to three lawsuits that sought to obtain the information under the California Public Records Act. All the materials are now posted on the police department’s website.

A review of the records pulls back the curtain on how the police department manages complaints about its officers. Unless police misconduct falls into certain categories, officers’ records are confidential. These investigative records became public because the use of force resulted in “great bodily injury.”

Nail, who was fired earlier this year, has been charged with two felonies—assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report—for his role in the incident. His co-defendant, former police officer Daisy Mazariegos, was also terminated from the department and faces the same charges.

Apparently, this is not the first time that the district attorney has accused Nail of improper reporting. In an Aug. 25, 2022 memo about the use of force incident, San Rafael police Lt. Lisa Holton documented a previous conversation with Chief Deputy District Attorney Dori Ahana.

The DA’s office was questioning Nail’s credibility in the use of force case, but they already had concerns about him stemming from a July 2020 case, according to Holt’s memo.

“DA Ahana told me that their office had a prior issue with inconsistencies in a report written by Officer Nail,” Holton stated in the memo. “In the prior case DA Frugoli decided to handle the issue by speaking to Chief Bishop about it and letting the police department handle it internally.”

Attorney Charles Dresow, who represents Julio Jimenez Lopez, the victim in the use of force incident, is deeply troubled by the information in the memo. 

“It begs the question whether the policies of the DA’s office allowed an officer with credibility problems to remain on the street and a member of the public was injured because of it,” Dresow said. “This is why it’s so important for the public to have access to records of officers with credibility or misconduct issues.”

After the 2020 case, Frugoli could have placed Nail on the Brady list, the prosecutor’s list of officers with credibility issues. This would have required the DA’s office to inform the defense in all cases involving Nail as a witness of his previous conduct. 

Yet, Frugoli failed to do so. She justified her decision in an email to the Pacific Sun, stating that the inconsistencies in Nail’s report of the prior case did not include false statements. 

Two years later, Frugoli again had to review Nail’s conduct—his use of force against Jimenez Lopez and the discrepancies between his police report and the videos from body-worn cameras. This time, Frugoli took more definitive action.

“The Brady committee decisions are made on a case by case basis and consist of a team of experienced prosecutors,” Frugoli said. “This committee determined that Officer Nail would be put on a notification/disclosure list.” 

In June 2023, the DA’s office finished its investigation of the use of force incident and filed criminal charges against Nail and Mazariegos for assaulting Jimenez Lopez and falsifying their police reports. Frugoli stated that there is evidence to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

The DA’s conclusions conflict with those of Paul Henry, the independent investigator hired by San Rafael to conduct an internal investigation. Henry’s reports, issued March 29, 2023, were part of the records released last week.

Mazariegos and Nail did not use excessive force against Jimenez Lopez, according to Henry. Additionally, Henry found there was insufficient evidence to determine whether their police reports accurately described the facts.

The use of force incident began when Mazariegos contacted Jimenez Lopez and his two friends on Windward Way in the Canal area about drinking in public. Mazariegos instructed the men to sit on the curb and asked for their identification. 

Henry found that Mazariegos didn’t attempt to develop a rapport with Jimenez Lopez and that her “demeanor was stern, challenging and officious.” The situation escalated when Nail responded to “provide cover” for Mazariegos. 

Jimenez Lopez stood to retrieve his ID, and Nail told him to “sit the fuck down.” Although he obeyed, Mazariegos once more requested his ID and he stood again. The officers told him again to sit down and then grabbed Jimenez Lopez’s arms to handcuff him.

“Both officers expressed a concern that Mr. Lopez may try to flee the area or assault one or both police officers,” Henry stated in his report.

Despite their concern, Mazariegos and Nail never patted down Jimenez Lopez or his two friends to search for weapons. In fact, one of the men, also a gardener, had gardening shears on his belt, which was discovered by another officer who responded to the scene after the use of force.

Holton reviewed the body-cam videos and did not agree that Jimenez posed a threat. “Jimenez [Lopez] was not being aggressive or giving any indication that he was planning to run or fight the officers,” Holton wrote in her Aug. 25, 2022 internal memo.

Henry’s and Holton’s perspectives diverged on Jimenez Lopez’s actions when the officers tried to handcuff him. While Holton indicated that Jimenez Lopez “tenses up,” Henry stated that Jimenez Lopez resisted the officers, necessitating the use of force.

That force included Nail tripping Jimenez Lopez and punching him in the face, the records and videos show. Jimenez Lopez suffered a broken nose, concussion and a torn labrum in his shoulder, which required surgery.

The officers arrested Jimenez Lopez, stating in their police reports that he attempted to put Nail in a headlock. Nail also said that Jimenez Lopez hit him in the head several times. However, the body cam footage did not show Jimenez Lopez putting Nail in a headlock or hitting him.

The DA’s office filed charges against Jimenez Lopez, but subsequently dropped them after watching the videos.

Corporal Oscar O’Con, the supervisor who responded to Windward Way after the incident, signed off on the officers’ reports prior to watching the videos. Henry also investigated O’Con.

Although O’Con kept his body-worn camera on when he interviewed Jimenez Lopez and the other two men at the scene, he turned it off when interviewing Mazariegos and Nail about the use of force. It took O’Con almost a month to write the use of force report, leaving his superiors in the dark about the incident.

Ultimately, Henry found that Mazariegos, Nail and O’Con violated some department policies. 

Mazariegos and Nail failed to employ de-escalation techniques and didn’t consider alternative tactics to use of force, according to the report. Henry also stated that use of force could have been avoided, and Mazariegos and Nail handled the incident poorly. Both officers brought discredit to the police department, Henry said.

O’Con’s list of violations included negligence of duty and unsatisfactory work performance. Henry summed it up by stating that O’Con did not “adequately supervise an incident involving a use of force.”

Police Chief David Spiller terminated Mazariegos in May 2023, and Nail was fired the following month. Nail, who was with the department for five years, is appealing the decision; however, Mazariegos was let go during her probationary period, and has no right to contest.

For O’Con’s role in the incident, Spiller meted out a four-day unpaid suspension.

As Henry repeatedly indicated in his report, use of force situations evolve rapidly. Officers are forced to “make split second decisions,” he said.

During lengthy interviews with Mazariegos and Nail, Henry tried to understand the officers’ mindset during the incident. Both indicated they believed there was no alternative but to use force against Jimenez Lopez, who was stopped for a minor infraction.

We may never know what the two officers were actually thinking. However, Mazariegos did impart some interesting information to Henry during her interview. 

Mazariegos and Nail were “beat partners” and had spoken at the beginning of their shift, discussing whether they were caught up on their paperwork. Both were.

“So we decided to go and try and get an active arrest,” Mazariegos said.

Indeed, they did. 

Lt. Holton Memo

Paul Henry’s Interview of Daisy Mazariegos

Paul Henry’s Interview of Brandon Nail

Paul Henry’s Interview of Oscar O’Con

San Rafael releases investigative reports on police use of force

Nikki Silverstein
-
7
San Rafael releases investigative reports on police use of force

Reporter’s note: At the conclusion of this article, the three investigative reports into three San Rafael officers involved in the use of force incident are provided in their entirety. The videos of the incident are also unedited and contain violence and profanity.

After almost six months of delays, the City of San Rafael released the investigative reports into the police beating of a local gardener during questioning about an open container of beer.

The three reports focus on a July 27, 2022, incident, when two then-officers, Daisy Mazariegos and Brandon Nail, used physical force against a man in the Canal area. Corporal Oscar O’Con was also investigated for failing to follow department policies during his supervision of the incident.

Mazariegos, Nail and O’Con were found to have violated some department policies. However, many of the findings in the reports appear to be in direct conflict with each other.

For example, the reports state that Mazariegos and Nail did not use excessive force against Julio Jimenez Lopez, yet it is also concluded that they brought discredit to the San Rafael Police Department.

“The investigative report soft sells what happened,” said Charles Dresow, an attorney for Jimenez Lopez. “If Mazariegos and Nail didn’t use excessive force, how did they bring discredit to the police department?”

Paul Henry, a 27-year veteran of the Santa Rosa Police Department who is now a consultant, conducted the internal investigation and issued the report, despite public concern that a former officer may have biases toward law enforcement.

Mazariegos and Nail failed to consider alternative tactics to using force and failed to employ de-escalation techniques, according to the report. Henry also states that use of force could have been avoided and Mazariegos and Nail handled the incident poorly.

“Through Nail’s and Mazariegos’s own misconduct, they created the need for use of force,” Dresow said. “Henry says the use of force was not excessive, but no force should have been used in the first place.”

While Henry doesn’t believe excessive force was used, the incident left Jimenez Lopez with a broken nose, concussion and a torn labrum in his shoulder that required surgery.

The reports place the blame for the then-officers’ decision to use force squarely on Jimenez Lopez for “resisting commands” to sit down. Jimenez Lopez stood up to comply with another command to produce his identification.

Adamant that Jimenez Lopez did not resist, Dresow said one only needs to look at the videos from the police body-worn cameras that captured the incident. Dresow also maintains that the commands were not lawful orders because the police did not have cause to detain his client for the minor infraction of an open container of beer.

“The City of San Rafael, including the city attorney, Rob Epstein, should be ashamed at the report that they have commissioned to justify the abuse of my client,” Dresow said.

The reports seem to raise as many questions as they answer. Some of these issues may soon be resolved in a court of law. Mazariegos and Nail, who are no longer employed by the San Rafael Police Department, are each facing two felony charges for assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report. Their next court date is Oct. 2.

Investigative Report into Daisy Mazariegos

Investigative Report into Brandon Nail

Investigative Report into Oscar O’Con

Video from Daisy Mazariegos’s body-worn camera of the use of force incident on July 27, 2022. Caution: contains profanity and violence.
Video from Brandon Nail’s body-worn camera of the use of force incident on July 27, 2022. Caution: contains profanity and violence.

Love of dogs continues for iconic star of Lassie TV show

Nikki Silverstein
-
6
Love of dogs continues for iconic star of Lassie TV show

What does a tiny toothless senior pooch living out his golden years in Santa Rosa have in common with Lassie, the most famous Hollywood dog of all time?

Both canines captured the heart of Jon Provost, the actor who played young Timmy Martin on the Lassie television series from 1957 to 1964. Provost was already a veteran actor when, at the age of seven, he began working side-by-side with Lassie, the majestic rough collie.

Actually, Provost co-starred with three different Lassies during his seven-year tenure on the top-rated CBS program. Like all the dogs who played the role of the female Lassie, Timmy’s three faithful companions were males.

“We only had one Lassie at a time,” Provost, 73, told me during an interview earlier this month. “The last dog [Baby], I worked with for five years, so he and I bonded like crazy. I loved that dog. He loved me. But if I told him to do something, give him a command, he’d look at me and say, ‘You’re my buddy, not my trainer.’”

Today, Provost’s love affair with dogs continues. He and his wife, Laurie Jacobson, recently adopted Casper, a 12-year-old Maltese, who had been surrendered to a shelter. The family of three resides in Santa Rosa, where Casper is settling into a new routine filled with affection, lots of treats and leisurely strolls.

RESCUED Jon Provost and Laurie Jacobson recently adopted Casper, a 12-year-old Maltese. Photo courtesy of Jon Provost.

That’s how I had occasion to chat with Provost and Jacobson. Casper came from Muttville, the Bay Area’s senior dog rescue, where I’ve volunteered for years.

Casper’s story certainly pulls on heartstrings. But I couldn’t resist learning more about the fictional little boy, Timmy, and his dog, Lassie. Fortunately, Provost was happy to reminisce about Lassie and his days as a child actor.

His acting career began when he was two years old, while his family was living in Pasadena. Provost’s mother responded to a newspaper ad placed by Warner Brothers. The studio was seeking a two- to three-year-old boy for a film, So Big, starring Jane Wyman and Sterling Hayden.

“My parents were not show business people,” Provost said. “My mother grew up on a farm in Texas, and her idol was Jane Wyman, the actress. Mom took me to the audition because she wanted to meet Jane Wyman and get an autograph. I got the job and then a contract with RKO.”

Before landing the role of Timmy in Lassie, Provost appeared in about 10 movies. He acted alongside Grace Kelly and Bing Crosby in the 1954 film, The Country Girl, and with Rod Steiger and Anita Ekberg in the 1956 film, Back from Eternity. There were also parts in early live television programs.

Then came the role of a lifetime, Timmy Martin. Provost remembers the seven years on Lassie with great fondness, especially his TV mom, June Lockhart. It was Lockhart who instilled in him that although he was a little boy, he was still a professional actor on the same playing field as the adults.

“June is still with us,” Provost said. “She’s 98 years old. We are the only living members from the series and have kept in touch over the years. Every birthday, every Christmas.”

Lassie’s owner and trainer, Rudd Weatherwax, also played a pivotal role in Provost’s life. Weatherwax, a surrogate grandfather to Provost, wasn’t above bribing the young actor.

“Rudd sat me down when we first started shooting, and said, ‘Look, if you don’t bug Lassie—don’t pull his tail, don’t ride him, don’t sit on him—for your eighth birthday, I will give you a Lassie puppy.’ I worked very hard that first year to do everything I was supposed to do,” Provost said.

True to his word, Weatherwax presented Provost with a male rough collie puppy. Provost named him Rudd, to honor Weatherwax.

“That was the only collie I ever owned,” Provost said. “Collies are a lot of maintenance. Lassie was constantly groomed—24/7.”

Provost starred in 249 episodes of Lassie. Week after week, Timmy and Lassie embarked on adventures. Lassie pulled Timmy’s loose tooth, freed him from quicksand and helped him bring an escaped baby circus elephant out of the woods. However, Lassie never rescued Timmy from a well.

“Timmy never fell in the well,” Provost said. “My mother saved every script. Somebody fell into the well, and Timmy and Lassie saved him.”

Jacobson, who helped write her husband’s autobiography, concurs. Although most Americans have heard the “Timmy fell down the well” tale, it never happened.

“We don’t really know where it came from,” Jacobson said. “We know everybody uses it. They use it when their dogs bark. Stephen Colbert on The Late Show uses it once a month. It’s everywhere.”

While Provost still accepts the occasional acting role, he and Jacobson are currently focusing their energy on helping Casper, their senior Maltese, adjust to his new digs.

“Casper has pretty severe separation anxiety,” Jacobson said. “He went through a lot before we got him.”

Indeed, he did. The adorable little Maltese lived with the same person for most of his 12 years, until she was forced to give him up because of a change in her housing situation. After that, Casper went to two different shelters before ending up at Muttville, the senior dog rescue. Along the way, he was diagnosed with severe dental disease.

“Casper lost his original owner and all his teeth within a matter of weeks,” Jacobson said. “It’s no wonder he has separation anxiety.”

Still, Casper captivated Provost and Jacobson when they met him at Muttville, and they instantly knew he was the perfect dog for their family. Coincidentally, the couple has just launched Spray, Mix ’n Go!, a calming CBD product for dogs who suffer from separation anxiety, a condition that causes distress for canines when they’re apart from their humans. 

From Lassie to Casper, Provost has provided friendship to famous dogs and dogs in need. And he doesn’t plan on stopping anytime soon.

“Dogs and Timmy are synonymous,” Provost said. “I learned a lot from Rudd [Lassie’s trainer], his philosophy. Lassie was treated like royalty. All the training was through rewards and respect. That’s what I learned from Rudd—respect. I saw the benefit of what canines can do for people. The rest is history.”

Marin County sheriff says lawmakers need to make changes to prevent profiling

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Marin County sheriff says lawmakers need to make changes to prevent profiling

A local watchdog group is again raising concerns about the Marin County Sheriff’s Office, saying the law enforcement agency refuses to address its high incidence of racial profiling.

Marin County Sheriff Jamie Scardina disputed the department’s need to make policing policy changes when I interviewed him last week. While Scardina said that he didn’t have time yet to review a report by Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment (MVFREE), the information it contained came from data provided by the sheriff’s office.

MVFREE analyzed the data for almost 4,500 stops, including pedestrian, traffic and calls for service, from April 2021 through March 2022, which it obtained through a public records request. The results reflect the anecdotal evidence that people of color in Marin have talked about for years.

The sheriff’s office stopped Black people at almost nine times the rate of white people, according to MVFREE. Latinx people did not fare well either. They were stopped at more than twice the rate of white people.

Some might believe the stop rates by the sheriff’s office indicate that Black and Latinx people commit more crimes than white people; however, that presumption is biased and false, Tammy Edmonson, a member of MVFREE, said during an interview. The data shows that the agency releases Black, Latinx and white people—without arrest or citation—at the same rate.

“I sent the information to the sheriff months ago,” Edmonson said. “Then I submitted questions to him about it during a Marin Coalition forum on policing. He was dismissive of the data.”

The sheriff’s data collection is required under AB 953, the Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA), state legislation passed in 2015. Law enforcement agencies must gather and report on 16 categories of information every time a stop is conducted. The data includes the perceived race of the individual detained, the reason for the stop, all actions taken by the officer and the outcome.

The purpose of RIPA is to eliminate racial and identity profiling in law enforcement. The RIPA advisory board reviews the data reported by agencies throughout the state. In January, the board issued a report summarizing the data collected by 58 agencies during 2021.

On average, those reporting agencies stopped Black people at 2.75 times the rate of white people, with Latinx people stopped at a rate 1.3 times higher than white people, based on MVFREE’s analysis of the RIPA board’s report.

“The Marin County Sheriff’s Office stop disparities of Latinx and Black people were among the highest of all 58 reporting agencies in the state,” Edmonson said.

Yet, Scardina, who has been with the department for 23 years, remains doubtful that the collected data provides enough information for a complete analysis.

“I don’t have too much confidence in the RIPA board,” Scardina said. “The RIPA data doesn’t paint the entire picture. It’s a little flawed. The data is not taking into consideration several important factors. So, we started keeping data on two additional categories, and I don’t think that it’s being analyzed.”

One of those categories is whether the person stopped is a Marin resident. This has long been a concern for Scardina. In fact, he mentioned it to me during a February 2021 interview about the first four months of RIPA data reported by the sheriff’s office. Three months later, the department began tracking Marin residency information for each stop.

Indeed, MVFREE analyzed the stop data for Marin residents only, and it is likely not what Scardina expected. Sixty percent of the people stopped by the sheriff’s office are residents of Marin. The racial disparity rates were even higher than when the visitor stops were included in the data, with Black residents stopped at 10.1 times the rate of white residents.

The stop rate for Latinx residents remained about the same as the rate of overall stops of Latinx people.

Also in May 2021, the sheriff’s department began collecting data on whether the officer noted the race of the person before the stop. Scardina said that 85% of the time, the officer did not know.

I pressed the sheriff on the validity of that statistic. After all, Black, Latinx and white people are all released without an arrest or citation at the same rate. What then, I asked, could account for the extremely high disparity of stop rates for people of color over white people—residents or visitors?

“I want to look at the data you’re talking about,” Scardina said. “I know she [Edmonson] sent me a bunch of it, and I would like to have an opportunity to look into that.”

Fair enough, but the data came from the sheriff’s department. I took a gander at the limited amount of RIPA information posted on the department’s website and was able to quickly confirm MVFREE’s analysis of the stop rates for Black and Latinx people over white people during the specified year. MVFREE obtained the complete raw data set.

Back in that February 2021 interview that I had with Scardina, when he still held the undersheriff position, he indicated that the sheriff’s office would analyze the RIPA data.

“We’ll use the data to identify any disparities that we may have within the sheriff’s office,” Scardina said at the time. “And we’ll use that to evaluate ourselves in the department and look at the reasons and causes for those differences. If they continue, we’ll create policies or practices to eliminate those disparities.”

Now that Scardina is the sheriff, appointed to the role in June 2022, his perspective seems to have changed. Instead, he places the responsibility on the shoulders of lawmakers, not law enforcement.

“Every single agency that I’ve heard of that [has] analyzed the RIPA data—there are disparities across the board,” Scardina said last week. “I’m in the business of enforcing the laws that are on the books. If certain acts need to be passed to keep law enforcement from doing certain types of traffic stops for low-level infractions, that needs to be passed by legislation.”

Several jurisdictions, including San Francisco, Berkeley and Los Angeles, have recently limited police stops for minor traffic infractions. These low-level violations are often used by law enforcement as a pretext stop, allowing an officer to fish for more serious crimes. Pretext stops disproportionately target people of color.

Passing legislation to restrict pretext stops may address some of the issues, but MVFREE has suggestions for policies that the Marin County Sheriff’s Office could establish. Although the department has a “bias-free policing policy,” MVFREE believes the sheriff should include “the enforceable requirements, practical guidance and accountability measures of the RIPA model.”

The group also calls on Scardina to increase the number of anti-bias training courses provided for personnel. The agency currently meets only the minimum statutory requirement of one course every five years, Edmonson said.

The human cost in not implementing new policies is great, according to MVFREE. They point to the statistics, including that Black Americans are three times more likely than white Americans to be shot and killed by police.

A 2020 Kaiser Family Foundation study found that 41% of Black people in this country reported they’ve been stopped or detained by police because of their race. And 30% of Black men said they have been the victim of police violence.

As a Black woman who is the mother of three boys, Celimene Pastor, an MVFREE member, is extremely concerned about the sheriff’s position and rejects it. The legislature, she maintains, passed the RIPA act to enable law enforcement agencies to examine their racial disparities in policing. Scardina now must do his part, according to Pastor.

“Not only does racial profiling endanger the lives of Black and Brown people, but it also creates mistrust in law enforcement,” Pastor said. “The sheriff needs to do his job by addressing the data so that he may better serve communities of color.”

San Rafael homeless campers sue city over restrictive ordinance

Nikki Silverstein
-
14
San Rafael homeless campers sue city over restrictive ordinance

In another David versus Goliath story, San Rafael is paying two outside law firms to defend the city against a lawsuit resulting from a restrictive homeless camping ordinance passed in July.

Residents of “Camp Integrity,” a homeless encampment on the Mahon Path in Central San Rafael, say they were compelled to file the legal action because the city’s ordinance violates their constitutional rights and places them in physical danger.

Last week, Senior U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen extended a temporary restraining order against San Rafael, prohibiting the city from enforcing the new ordinance, which limits the size and number of homeless campsites in an area.

At the conclusion of the 90-minute hearing, Chen directed both sides to provide more information to the court before the next hearing on Oct. 2. Specifically, the federal judge wants briefings on whether San Rafael’s camping ordinance interferes with freedom of association, a protected right under the First Amendment, and the applicability of the state-created danger doctrine.

Chen also ordered the city to “produce a detailed legible map showing areas where camping is permitted (legible enough to see street boundaries) with an indication of the number of campers allowed in each area pursuant to the proposed density restrictions.”

The city’s hotly contested ordinance limits the size of a group campsite to 10 feet by 20 feet. An individual campsite can’t exceed 10 feet by 10 feet. All campsites must maintain at least 200 feet of separation—two-thirds the length of a football field.

Currently, about 40 people occupy 33 tents on half of the Mahon Path, from Lindaro Street to Lincoln Drive, an area measuring about 540 feet. Under the ordinance, only three campsites would be permitted in that space.

Some of the campers have disabilities and depend on their homeless neighbors to deliver necessary supplies, according to the lawsuit. Others, who have been the victims of sexual assault or domestic violence, rely on nearby campers for safety.

Chen questioned the city’s attorneys about the constraints that they claim will keep homeless people and the rest of the community safe.

“I don’t know what that number is—but couldn’t a larger cluster be accommodated so folks at least have enough in numbers that they feel safe, or they can count on somebody to help them with food and water?” Chen asked.

San Rafael’s attorney, Mark Austin of Burke Williams & Sorensen, referenced a staff report that “set forth all of the dangers of larger encampments.” Austin also pointed to the declaration of Lynn Murphy, a licensed therapist who works for the San Rafael Police Department as the mental health outreach liaison.

“When there’s three or more tents that get together and start to grow in terms of the trash, the crime, the biohazards, the fire risk, etcetera,” Austin said.

Chen then sought evidence for Austin’s assertion that when the homeless encampment population reaches a certain threshold, problems increase.

The city’s other attorney, Michael von Loewenfeldt of Wagstaffe, von Loewenfeldt, Busch & Radwick, jumped in to clarify.

“Your Honor, this is the city’s first attempt to limit density,” von Loewenfeldt said. “There’s no social experiment that’s been run where we count tents and measure problems…It’s not that we don’t want to answer your question; it’s just it’s hard to understand what it is you’re looking for, and it seems inconsistent entirely with the city’s legislative power, and this court’s very limited role in analyzing the constitutionality of ordinances like this.”

In other words, the city doesn’t believe their ordinance is a matter for the courts.

Anthony Prince, the attorney for the California Homeless Union, disagrees, maintaining that the ordinance isolates people. That isolation is the crux of the matters that Chen wants the parties to address. Does forcing homeless people into small groups with less than three tents prevent them from freely associating with one another? Is the city placing them in danger?

Homeless people need to associate for safety, sufficient access to services and community assistance, according to Prince, who is representing one of the homeless campers in the lawsuit.

Isolation creates more vulnerability, Prince asserted. Numerous studies back him up. Homeless people are far more likely to be victims of violent crime than housed people.

“Larger encampments tend to be safer,” Prince said.

Prince also pointed to a major benefit of large encampments—case managers know where to find their homeless clients and can keep them on a path toward permanent housing.

San Rafael has first-hand experience with the advantages of a large city-sanctioned encampment. From July 2021 through August 2022, the city operated a “service support area (SSA).” A staff status report, released in December 2021, touted the SSA’s success.

“It creates a central, designated place for our partners to provide services…Service providers have remarked to staff that the SSA allows them to reach more people and make greater impacts than if encampments were spread out over many locations.”

Ultimately, 35 of the 47 campers received permanent housing, according to Chris Hess, San Rafael’s assistant director of community development, housing and homelessness. 

Yet, Austin, San Rafael’s attorney, provided the court with a much different account than the city’s own assessment.

“In fact, with respect to the case managers and other third-party service providers, they actually have a more difficult time in some instances accessing the homeless individuals at the larger encampments because they get harassed by some of the members of those encampments,” Austin opined. “And so, some of them avoid the encampments entirely.”

Lynn Murphy, the city’s mental health liaison, helped run San Rafael’s SSA. However, in her declaration to the court, she provided a similar, though milder version of Austin’s statement.

“Within the large encampments, the individuals living in the encampments are welcoming to the case managers, but it can often be intimidating for case managers to enter a site that is occupied by a large group of campers,” Murphy wrote.

After years of covering homelessness, I was unfamiliar with these intimidation and harassment claims. I contacted local nonprofits that employ case managers and outreach workers to determine whether they avoid homeless encampments.

“We always go into encampments,” said Chandra Alexandre, chief executive officer of Community Action Marin. “That’s our job. That’s what we do. Our people are trained for this kind of work, and they can go in pairs.”

Alexandre said that her staff has not reported feeling intimidated or harassed at the Mahon Path. Zoë Neil, director of Downtown Streets Team, concurs.

“Our case managers are in encampments all the time,” Neil said. “We do safety and de-escalation training, but I’ve had no reports that case managers are uncomfortable going into the Mahon Path or other San Rafael encampments. If we feel uncomfortable, we use the buddy system.”

Clearly, San Rafael and the homeless plaintiffs have a lot to work out. Chen arranged for the parties to engage in settlement talks beginning on Sept. 20. A rational solution, such as establishing a city-sanctioned encampment, will hopefully surface during those negotiations.

Otherwise, the city and its homeless residents will be bound by Chen’s next ruling, likely leaving one side unhappy. But for now, the campers will stay on the Mahon Path.

Former San Rafael cops appear in court to face felony charges

Nikki Silverstein
-
9
Former San Rafael cops appear in court to face felony charges

The two former San Rafael police officers looked appropriately somber as they walked through the corridor outside of Courtroom C in the Marin County Civic Center last week. Twice this month, they have appeared before a judge to face two felony charges each—assault by an officer under color of authority and making false statements on police reports.

On both court dates, spectators gazed intently at the co-defendants, Brandon Nail and Daisy Mazariegos, while everyone waited in the hallway until the bailiff arrived to unlock the courtroom doors. Mostly, Nail and Mazariegos averted their eyes from the gawkers. Flanked by a small entourage of attorneys and others, probably family and friends, Nail and Mazariegos turned their heads away as photojournalists took their shots.

The pair now look different than they did in the widely circulated videos from that defining incident on July 27, 2022, when they questioned a Latinx man about an open container of beer and then forcibly restrained him, leaving him injured and laying in his own blood on a street in the Canal neighborhood.

The previously clean-shaven Nail currently sports a full beard and mustache. But it’s Mazariegos whose appearance has changed more substantially. She is visibly pregnant, due in mid to late October, her attorney, Christopher Shea, told me.

During the arraignment on Aug. 11, the first court date for the defendants, there was audible whispering among the crowd when they realized Mazariegos is pregnant. It’s unsettling to consider that this fresh-faced young woman is preparing her criminal defense at the same time she’s preparing to welcome a baby into the world.

Both Mazariegos and Nail pled not guilty at the arraignment, which prompted Marin County Superior Court Judge Beth S. Jordan to schedule a preliminary hearing, the proceeding that determines whether the case will move forward to trial.

Last week, a small group gathered again outside of Courtroom C, waiting to be ushered in for the preliminary hearing. The prosecution was slated to present evidence in support of the charges against Nail and Mazariegos.

The proceedings began with prosecutor Geoff Iida and defense attorney Julia Fox, who is representing Nail, announcing that a conflict must be addressed. Iida, Fox and Shea moved to the bench to discuss the issue with the judge, out of earshot from those sitting in the gallery.

After a couple of minutes, Jordan stated there was “good cause for conflict.”

Nail told the judge that he wanted Fox to continue to represent him and waived his right for the preliminary hearing to take place in the next 10 court days.

However, Shea, on behalf of his client, Mazariegos, did not waive the time. Shea indicated that they had come to court expecting to confront witnesses at the preliminary hearing.

“My client wants to see this behind her as quickly as possible,” Shea said.

Jordan ordered that briefs regarding the conflict be submitted to the court the following week and set a new preliminary hearing date for Sept. 6.

It was evident from the dialogue that the conflict had to do with Fox, which she confirmed to me during an interview. Fox’s law practice focuses on representing law enforcement officers.

“There’s a witness that the people [district attorney] intend to call at the preliminary hearing who has been represented by me previously,” Fox said. “We all want to honor and make sure that this is a clean record on solid legal ground.”

Fox seems confident that the conflict won’t be an issue going forward and she’ll continue to represent Nail. The truly concerning issue, according to Fox, is that District Attorney Lori Frugoli filed charges against her client.

Questioning the Charges

“I think that it was an irresponsible and reckless filing decision,” Fox said. “I am a former prosecutor, and this case very clearly cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that the DA did file, regardless of that reality, to me, it certainly suggests strongly that they just capitulated to public outcry, as opposed to standing their ground with regards to their ethical responsibility.”

If Frugoli submitted to public pressure, it was an extremely slow capitulation. The DA took 11 months to file charges against the defendants.

Shea, Mazariegos’s attorney, told me that he believes the DA’s actions are “politically motivated.”

“Daisy is not guilty of anything,” Shea said. “She did what she’s trained to do as a police officer.”

Both Shea and Fox claim that their clients have already been cleared—by the City of San Rafael’s independent investigative report on the use of force incident. Maybe so, but the report is not a judge or jury.

Furthermore, San Rafael’s report, which has not yet been released to the public, didn’t persuade the DA to stand down. Fox is clearly dismayed about it.

San Rafael’s independent investigation, according to Fox, could not support the charges against Mazariegos and Nail. And the standard of proof for the city’s investigation isn’t as high as what is necessary in a courtroom—beyond a reasonable doubt, Fox explained.

I reminded Fox that San Rafael was heavily criticized for hiring Paul Henry, a former Santa Rosa police officer, to conduct the investigation and issue the report. The cited concerns included that Henry, who spent 27 years in law enforcement, would have a bias toward the officers.

LOST IN THOUGHT Julia Fox, defense attorney for Brandon Nail, waits outside the courtroom for her client’s case to be called. Photo by Stephanie Mohan.

“Well, to that I would say—and this is a really troubling and big component—the DA’s office sought out their own use of force expert, and he similarly cleared these officers,” Fox said. “And yet somehow, they [the DA’s office] now have another use of force expert, which to me has all the hallmarks of shopping for answers.”

Interesting, but does it negate the other evidence that Frugoli claims to possess—evidence she believes will demonstrate that Nail and Mazariegos assaulted Julio Jimenez Lopez without cause and then filed false police reports about the incident?

“After a thorough review of the evidence, which included body-worn camera footage, eyewitness accounts, medical records, and reports from the San Rafael Police Department, my office has concluded there is sufficient evidence to prove these charges beyond a reasonable doubt,” Frugoli said in a statement issued on June 29, 2023, the date she filed the charges.

An Insistent Public

The public has already seen some of the DA’s evidence from the incident. Nail’s and Mazariegos’s body cam videos, as well as their police reports claiming that Jimenez Lopez hit Nail in the head, were leaked to the media last September.

The videos show that during questioning about an open container of beer, Jimenez Lopez stood to retrieve his identification. Nail and Mazariegos then grabbed Jimenez Lopez and took him to the ground. In the footage, Nail can be seen punching Jimenez Lopez in the face. 

Even watching frame-by-frame, it doesn’t appear that Jimenez Lopez hit Nail. Yet Jimenez Lopez was arrested and the DA filed criminal charges against him. Those charges were later dropped, after the DA watched the videos.

Graphic content. The video, from a police body-worn camera, shows Daisy Mazariegos and Brandon Nail using force against Julio Jimenez Lopez.

Protests erupted when the story hit the media, and the public demanded the officers be fired and prosecuted. Both Mazariegos and Nail left the employment of the police department earlier this year, although the city has not confirmed whether they quit or were terminated.

Still, people are clamoring to obtain San Rafael’s investigative report, the one Fox and Shea claim clears Nail and Mazariegos. The independent investigator completed the report on April 28, after an eight-month investigation.

City attorney Rob Epstein then spent weeks vacillating on whether to release the report to the public. In June, Epstein decided against releasing the report, stating that the former officers had threatened to sue the city if he did.

While there are strong laws protecting the privacy of law enforcement officers, Senate Bill 1421 requires disclosure of records when an officer’s use of force results in great bodily injury to a person.

Medical reports provided to the Pacific Sun reveal that Jimenez Lopez suffered injuries including a broken nose, concussion and a torn labrum in his shoulder that required surgery. 

Another Day, Another Court

Although Epstein may have fended off a lawsuit by Mazariegos and Nail, San Rafael is now the defendant in three legal actions, all seeking to force the city to release the report under the California Public Records Act (CPRA).

Tyler Larson, a San Rafael resident and law student, is one of three petitioners that filed against San Rafael. Jimenez Lopez’s attorney and the Marin Independent Journal filed similar actions. 

If the judge rules in their favor, Larson told me that he intends to distribute the report to the community, via Nextdoor and other venues. He filed because he was disturbed by what he saw in the videos, even more so because he’s raising his children in San Rafael.

“I followed the story very closely from when the body cam was released last year, and then I filed CPRA requests for the investigative report,” Larson said. “I think it is important that the community see the city’s and the police department’s internal reflections on this incident. We have a right to understand.”

In mid-August, Marin County Superior Court Judge Andrew Sweet issued a tentative ruling that San Rafael must release the report. The city opposed the ruling, and Sweet is now considering the matter. The next court date is Sept. 25.

Higher Stakes

It’s easy to become mired in the legal battles, both criminal and civil, as they play out in the courtroom. Comparing notes, keeping score, getting the scoop.

But as I prepared to leave the Civic Center last week, I was reminded that there’s much more at stake. A friend introduced me to Jimenez Lopez’s wife and young daughter. 

The family’s attorney, Anthony Label, agreed to let me speak with Jimenez Lopez. Label is representing him in a civil lawsuit against San Rafael and the former officers.

As I waited for Jimenez Lopez to return from the restroom, Label told me that his client had received a subpoena from the prosecution to attend Nail’s and Mazariegos’s preliminary hearing.

The minutes ticked by. Finally, someone went to look for Jimenez Lopez, and he eventually emerged, looking nervous. He admitted that he hid in the bathroom to avoid Mazariegos and Nail.

“I feel afraid,” Jimenez Lopez said. “I don’t want to see them.”

Yet, he also said that he will continue to come to court, whether he receives a subpoena or not. Jimenez Lopez simply wants justice.

 “Everyone has to be responsible for their actions,” he said. “I didn’t do anything to them.”

Marin City group rejected offer to reduce size of housing project

Nikki Silverstein
-
8
Marin City group rejected offer to reduce size of housing project

The developer of a controversial Marin City affordable housing project says he will break ground in about 90 days, despite opposition from the local community.

Legal and moral issues are at stake, according to Save our City, the group campaigning to stop the five-story, 74-unit apartment building from going up in Marin City, a densely populated community in an unincorporated area of Marin County.

In fact, Save Our City has filed legal action against the developer and Marin County to reverse the Board of Supervisors’ approval of a $40 million bond issuance for the project at 825 Drake Ave. With the cost for construction estimated at almost $57 million, the bond would pay for most of the development.

Developer Caleb Roope, CEO of The Pacific Companies, maintains that he is obligated to build 74 units of affordable housing because he made commitments to, and accepted financing from, the state, the county and private funders.

Still, Roope told me that he has tried his best to reach a compromise with Save Our City. However, his efforts were unsuccessful.

“I had a conference call with Save Our City and made the offer for a 40-unit project at 825 Drake, and then I would find another location in Marin City or the county for the other 34 units,” Roope said. “I also offered to make it senior housing at the Drake site and provide one-to-one parking on-site. They said no to all of it.”

Rejecting Roope’s proposal was the consensus of the group, their collective position on determining what is built on “the last piece of buildable land” in the community, Marilyn Mackel, a leader with Save Our City, said in an interview.

“The community should have a voice that’s heard and regarded,” Mackel said. “Marin County has got to stop doing what they want to do and then telling us about it afterward. Caleb did that too. ‘Nothing about us without us.’ That’s where we are as a community. It’s quite simple.”

County officials have made plenty of decisions for Marin City, a historically Black community, without consulting its residents. At the conclusion of World War II, Black people who lived in temporary housing in Marin City while building ships for the war effort were prevented from buying property in the county. So, they put down roots in Marin City.

The community remained predominantly Black for decades. However, in the late 1970s and early ’80s, the county, without input from residents, approved the development of condos and luxury apartments in Marin City, which resulted in gentrification. More development followed in the ’90s.

Today, Marin City has a population of almost 3,000. Less than 27% of those residents are Black, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The apartment complex at 825 Drake will likely further gentrify the community. Although the units are considered “affordable,” the rent is based on the county’s average median income, which is almost twice as high as that of Marin City’s.

Roope is aware of the community’s history and has repeatedly told me that he has compassion for the residents. Why, then, is he insisting on building all 74 units at the Drake site, when it appears he could build fewer? Certainly, he doesn’t need Save Our City’s approval.

“I asked specifically for Save Our City’s support because they’re the adversary—filing litigation and fighting me at every turn,” Roope said. “There are other community members that are more moderate, but I wouldn’t have gotten forward on the lawsuit. I was disappointed, but on the other hand, it would have been a lot of work to make major changes.” 

For months, Save Our City has asked Roope to abandon the project. The area doesn’t have the infrastructure to support the large development, which will increase Marin City’s population by 6%.

Indeed, the one-acre plot at 825 Drake is in a state-designated high fire hazard zone, and the area is also prone to flooding. Public safety problems are compounded because there’s only one road in and out of Marin City. In addition, the new five-story building perched on the hillside property will cast a literal shadow over the existing two-story, low-income senior housing complex just yards away.

Yet, the 74-unit project is moving forward. Demolition and site preparation were completed earlier this month.

To satisfy an agreement that Roope made with county, he is finishing up some aesthetic design revisions and adding more parking, enough for one spot per unit. The original plan had only 24 parking spaces on the property.

“I’m changing the appearance of the building with craftsman style elements and putting in landscaping to shield the mass of the building,” Roope said. “On the parking, I might not get all the way to one-to-one on-site but I’m very close to achieving it. I might have to lease some spaces off-site.”

As the bond issue winds its way through court, it raises the question of how to prevent another 825 Drake scenario. If state Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco gets his way, there may be no stopping similar developments in areas that have infrastructure issues and other problems.

Senate Bill 35, authored by Wiener and passed in 2017, restricts local governments from rejecting multi-family residential developments that satisfy specific criteria. Zoning laws, local review processes and even the California Environmental Quality Act—be damned.

A municipality is subject to SB 35 if it hasn’t built enough new housing to meet the state mandates, aimed at resolving California’s housing shortage. And Marin County hasn’t, which paved the way for Roope’s development in Marin City.

Interestingly, Marin City has more affordable housing than any other area of the county. But SB 35 doesn’t provide exemptions for an unincorporated community when the county hasn’t met its housing numbers.

While SB 35 is set to expire in 2025, Wiener has introduced SB 423 to strengthen the legislation and extend it until 2036. Critics say the new bill is worse, citing that it would allow development in coastal areas and high and very high fire hazard zones.

State Assemblymember Damon Connolly, who represents the North Bay, doesn’t support SB 423, pointing to the recent Maui fires as a reminder that developments in high-risk wildfire zones can be catastrophic.

“Out of thousands of bills, I have heard the most from constituents expressing concerns and opposition to SB 423,” Connolly said in a statement to the Pacific Sun. “I share these concerns, especially after the events in Marin City, where local residents faced racial discrimination from developers trying to jam through a project without input from the community … SB 423 still has numerous flaws that will override local housing plans, disregard community voices and short circuit environmental review.”

Conversely, Sen. Mike McGuire, who also serves the North Bay, supports SB 423. It’s  surprising because he voted against SB 35. In a statement to the Pacific Sun, McGuire noted that SB 423 isn’t perfect, but it will remedy “some glaring issues” in the current legislation.

“For example, all housing projects must receive a public hearing at a Board of Supervisors or City Council meeting, which will ensure the community has an opportunity to sincerely engage early in the process,” McGuire said. “This amendment also stops the unscrupulous practice of a developer, like what we saw in Marin City, of not engaging with neighbors. It also ensures developers can’t bulldoze their way around community members, and it ensures local concerns are advanced.”

Well, not exactly. McGuire authored an amendment to SB 423 that merely requires one public meeting for low- and moderate-income Census tracts, like Marin City, to “provide an opportunity for the public and the local government to comment on the development.”

Save Our City can attest that offering comments to the developer doesn’t necessarily advance local concerns. And that’s going to be a continuing problem if SB 423 passes without some serious amendments.

The bill, currently in the state Assembly Appropriations Committee, is scheduled for a vote on Sept. 1. 

In the meantime, Roope has his building permits for the 825 Drake development and will soon deliver his promised design changes to the county. Roope believes the county will then give him the green light.

“It’s 90 days until excavation and construction begins,” Roope told me last week. “The only way to stop us is if the lawsuit turns into an injunction by the courts.”

The abandonment of Marin’s Poor Farm and Cemetery 

Nikki Silverstein
-
5
The abandonment of Marin’s Poor Farm and Cemetery 

On a bright, warm August day, I trudged through waist-high grass searching for any trace of the hundreds of graves in a Lucas Valley field.

The neglected meadow doesn’t resemble a cemetery—not a mausoleum, a columbarium or even a headstone in sight. I wasn’t sure whether I was in the right area, although a roadside sign indicated that I had entered the site of the “Marin County Farm Cemetery,” where approximately 600 indigent people were buried from 1880 through 1955.

A park ranger had informed me that most of the dead rest in unmarked graves. Since several markers still exist, I kept my eyes cast downward.

After about 10 minutes, I stumbled upon the first marker under an oak tree growing near the middle of the field. The makeshift headstone consisted of a rectangular metal tag, just a few inches long, affixed to a piece of concrete with two tiny screws. The concrete had been poured into a coffee can, which was then embedded in the ground.

Inadequate. Undignified. Almost invisible.

Here lies 72. The number was engraved into the oxidized metal.

Grave 72 at the Marin County Poor Farm and Cemetery, one of the few graves with a remaining marker. Photo by
Nikki Silverstein.

A few feet away, I found 96. Farther out in the field, 165.

I stopped to honor the unidentified people buried beneath my hiking boots, yet I didn’t know their names—or if they were men, women or children.

The cemetery, on Jeannette Prandi Way, is surrounded by a myriad of buildings. A ranger station, senior housing and the juvenile detention facility also occupy the county property.

I first learned of the Marin County Poor Farm and Cemetery in 2019, when two high school students screened their short documentary, A Silent Legacy, about the site. Georgia Lee and Mitchell Tanaka grew up in Lucas Valley but had no idea people were buried virtually next door—until Tanaka toured the cemetery during the Halloween Graveyard Stroll hosted by rangers from Marin County Parks.

Struck by the need to remember the people interred in the field, most of whom were impoverished, the students began a campaign calling for the county to install a sign at the cemetery. The film, which went on to win several prestigious awards, including the Audience Award for Best Short Documentary at the Golden State Film Festival, bolstered their efforts.

“I wanted to bring reverence to the lost souls that were buried there without any recognition,” Lee told me in an interview. “We had walked and biked past this graveyard our whole lives. Nobody knew it was there.”

The teens’ campaign succeeded. In 2019, Lee, Tanaka and other volunteers built a split-rail wood fence to separate the field from the road. Soon after, a permanent sign was erected to identify the cemetery and acknowledge that a farm, home and hospital also used to stand on the county property in Lucas Valley.

The cemetery lies beyond the wood fence. A florist delivers flowers to the field on occasion, according to ranger and historian Mike Warner. Photo by Nikki Silverstein.

Earlier this month, I was reminded of the Marin County Poor Farm and Cemetery when I attended a lecture hosted by the Mill Valley Public Library and the Mill Valley Historical Society. Mike Warner, who has spent years researching the site, presented a fascinating glimpse into the history and people of what is known as the “poor farm.”

Although Warner is now a supervising park ranger in Palo Alto, he grew up in Novato and was a Marin County Parks open space ranger for more than eight years. In 2016, Warner was one of the rangers leading the Graveyard Stroll, which was loosely based on the poor farm and cemetery. It piqued his interest. Since then, Warner has continued gathering information about the site and sharing its history with the public.

After the Civil War, America went through an economic boom, Warner explained. By the 1870s, a vast expansion of wealth was taking place among society’s top echelon, but working-class people were being squeezed by the rising costs of goods and services. Social welfare became a topic of discussion.

“As we have today, there was a widening gap between those that have a lot of wealth and those that don’t have enough to survive,” Warner said. “Popular political opinion began to swing to say, ‘Hey, we need to take care of our indigent, elderly and sick folks through government support.’”

In 1880, the Marin County Board of Supervisors purchased 94 acres of land in Lucas Valley for $5,717 to establish a poor farm, a place for people who couldn’t afford to live elsewhere. Though the residents were called “inmates,” they were free to come and go.

The farm included cattle, gardens and orchards. Milk and produce were sold to the public and helped feed the farm residents. In 1900, the supervisors passed an ordinance that required residents to work on the farm for their keep; however, the practice stopped in the 1920s or early 1930s.

The first county hospital opened on the property at about the same time as the farm. It consisted of two “pestilence houses” to provide accommodations and care for people with communicable diseases, such as smallpox, typhus, scarlet fever and tuberculosis.

In later years, an addition was built to the hospital, and one of the pestilence houses was converted to a dormitory for 24 nurses. The dorm still stands and is used as a storage facility by the Marin County Board of Education.

The state offset some of the poor farm and hospital expenses by paying the county $100 every six months for each person over the age of 60 admitted to the facility. That’s the equivalent of about $3,245 today.

In January 1881, William Dever’s body was the first to be buried in the cemetery, according to Warner. Dever, notorious for committing robberies and escaping from county jail, died in custody at San Quentin and left no money for his burial.

Occasionally, the death of a poor farm resident was reported in the local newspapers, such as the 1904 account in the Marin County Tocsin of Salvedore Fernandez. “He was a California Indian, and from a reliable source we learn that he was over one hundred years of age. In the year 1824 he appeared at the San Jose Mission and at that time was a full-grown man… And thus a typical Indian, for over 26 years an Inmate of the county farm, a once familiar figure with his trained dogs and sled, passed away.”

In the 1950s, the farm and hospital structures were deemed seismically unsafe. The supervisors chose not to allocate funds to rebuild, and both facilities closed in mid-1963. The remaining few residents and patients were moved to other local convalescent homes and hospitals.

The burial records can be found in the Anne T. Kent Room at the Civic Center branch of the Marin County Free Library. I spent an afternoon going through the delicate files, some handwritten, for Graves 1 through 287. Warner suspects there are far more graves than indicated.

It wasn’t only residents of the poor farm buried there. Stillborn babies, suicide victims and many others who died elsewhere in the county lie in unmarked plots.

Grave 72, one of the three marked tags that I saw, contains the remains of an unknown man hit by an automobile on Highway 101. He was interred on March 3, 1936.

Warner and others are committed to recognizing the people who lived on the farm and are buried in the cemetery. 

“I don’t think the intent was to treat them with disrespect,” Warner told me in an interview. “I think it was more of, ‘That’s the best they could do at the time.’” 

Perhaps it’s now time for the county to give dignity to those who remain eternally on the grounds by properly marking their graves.

Celebrity secrets and what we owe the dead

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Celebrity secrets and what we owe the dead

Two weeks ago, the Pacific Sun and the Bohemian published an article (“A Local Remembers Sinéad,” July 27) about singer and activist Sinead O’Connor, who died last month at age 56. 

The writer identified herself as a night shift caregiver to O’Connor, seemingly having no qualms about revealing her association with a “secret client.” O’Connor, the writer said, had undergone an undisclosed procedure and was recovering in a “rehab room.”

A description of the singer’s compromised physical appearance made it into the article a few times, as did the writer’s claim that O’Connor’s celebrity status made her want to protect her client.

“Each of us, in our vulnerable moments, deserves privacy and dignity,” the writer stated.

Yet, in the article, I don’t think the writer protected O’Connor. In addition to the unflattering comments about the way O’Connor looked, she also made reference to—but didn’t elaborate on—“gory details,” apparently regarding the procedure.

The caginess about the procedure and the rehab room left me wondering whether O’Connor had back surgery and was in a physical therapy rehab facility or if she had undergone electroshock therapy at a mental health rehab center. Not that I’m entitled to know.

The piece, clearly intended to be an homage to O’Connor, worked on a certain level. The writer compared her challenging life experiences with O’Connor’s, giving the reader a window into why the outspoken performer had such an impact on her.

But I couldn’t get past the fact that a caregiver violated the trust of a patient.

Caregivers see us when we’re weak, when we need help, when we must turn over some control to another person.

O’Connor entrusted her care, her privacy, her personal health information to a professional caregiver. I don’t think that her death should void the expectation of confidentiality.

I asked the writer about the issue. Frankly, I was unimpressed by her defense.

“I will say that I didn’t share anything that isn’t already public knowledge,” the writer told me. “It’s all on Wikipedia. She has revealed all the things that were alluded to in the piece.”

O’Connor certainly did share her struggles—from surviving child abuse to a difficult hysterectomy to multiple suicide attempts—with the public. That was her prerogative.

However, I firmly believe that a caregiver should never disclose observations about a patient recovering in a rehab room, especially in newspapers that remain on the internet. While O’Connor is no longer living, her children and other loved ones are still here.

To be clear, I would disagree with a butler, housekeeper or chauffeur broadcasting private details about their famous employer. Heck, I’m nobody, and I don’t even want my handyman telling my neighbors about my messy hair or unkempt home. It’s nobody else’s business unless I deem it so.

Of course, the Pacific Sun and the Bohemian had a role in this scenario. I asked my editor why he published the O’Connor piece. The privacy issue didn’t occur to him, he said. It didn’t occur to other people either. I know because I asked quite a few friends about it.

Interestingly, most of my millennial and Gen Z buddies were fine with the article. They told me that since O’Connor shared her troubles with the world, the writer didn’t cross the line.

Folks in the 55+ age group and those with health problems agreed with me. Health care providers, too, frowned on the caregiver/writer providing personal information about O’Connor.

Perhaps my younger friends will feel differently when they get a few gray hairs. As our population ages, the need for caregivers will increase.

Caregivers provide vital services in hospitals, rehabs, assisted living facilities and our homes. They feed us, wipe our tushes and tuck us into bed. While there are laws in place regulating a patient’s privacy, not every situation is covered.

We need to set some ground rules about what is permissible for a caregiver to divulge when they leave us, whether we’re Grammy winners or just regular Joes needing assistance with our bodies or mental health.

Rule number one: What happens in the room stays in the room. Two: Death doesn’t negate rule number one.

And if a caregiver breaks the rules, the media should carefully consider whether to publish their revelations.

Home sweet home: help for Marin homebuyers

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Home sweet home: help for Marin homebuyers

Every year, when the Pacific Sun is putting together the Best of Marin issue, I take stock of how fortunate I am to live here. 

World-class photographers, best-selling authors and award-winning filmmakers capture a corner of the county here and there. But those of us experiencing her unrivaled beauty every day are blessed.

And yet, not everyone who calls Marin home shares in one of the county’s bounties—actually owning a home. In fact, Marin is one of the most unaffordable real estate markets in America.

Marin ranks third in the nation for the highest income needed to buy a home, barely edged out of first place by New York and San Mateo counties, according to a report for the second quarter of 2023 by ATTOM, a real estate data firm.

To buy a median-priced home in Marin, a person needs an annual income of $352,153, the report revealed. New York County residents need to earn $383,062 a year, and in San Mateo County, the necessary salary is $361,004.

In June, the median price for all homes sold—including single-family detached houses, condominiums and townhomes—was $1,467,000, based on data from the Marin County Assessor’s Office. The median price is the midpoint, with half of the homes selling for less and half selling for more.

For a detached house, the median price comes in at $1,707,500, with condos and townhouses at $775,000. Unless one has been following the market, the figures seem astonishing, but the median home price dropped by more than 10% year-over-year.

Still, Marin’s real estate market is considered strong. A total of 337 homes sold last month, the assessor’s office reports.

Realtor.com called June a “seller’s market” in the county, with more buyers than available homes. Of course, the strength of the housing market is based on supply and demand. Marin simply doesn’t have enough supply, which keeps demand and prices high.

While we have NIMBYs today protesting new housing planned for their neighborhoods, Marin’s current housing crisis actually began many decades ago.

After the Golden Gate Bridge opened in 1936, interest grew in developing Marin. Owners of large estates and agricultural land began dividing their properties into smaller lots for new housing.

Although the term activist hadn’t yet been coined, small groups of Marin residents fought off real estate developers to preserve the county’s magnificent open space.

Members of garden clubs and conservation leagues stopped the development of some parcels of land, such as the Kittle Estate in Ross, which is now the Marin Art and Garden Center.

In the 1960s and early 1970s, concerned citizens worked to thwart Marincello, a planned self-sustaining city of industry and housing for 30,000 people in the Marin Headlands. Today, the land is owned by the federal government, part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area for everyone to enjoy.

West Marin was the site for other battles between early environmentalists and developers. The Bolinas Lagoon and Point Reyes National Seashore would look much different today if the developers had won.

The result is that almost 85% of the county’s land is protected from development, making it one of the most alluring destinations in America. Federal parkland, county open space, miles of beaches, the majority of Mount Tam, watershed land and city parks—all off limits to developers.

The unintended consequence is a severe housing shortage with inflated home prices. Children who grew up in Marin can’t afford to live here. Low- and moderate-income workers, including teachers, firefighters and police personnel, commute from surrounding counties.

Even with a dual-income household, grossing more than $350,000 a year, the amount needed to buy a median-priced home, is a tough nut to crack.

In Marin, the annual median income for a family of four is $175,000, and $122,500 for a single person.

Sure, Marin’s housing market seems tailor-made for wealthy people, but it’s not all doom and gloom. There are several little-known, yet extremely innovative programs that could put homeownership within the reach of low- to moderate-earners. Some are for Marin County residents and others can be applied to home buying elsewhere in California.

First-time buyers and people with lower incomes can apply to various programs and work with local professionals to guide them through the complexities of buying a home.

The Below Market Rate (BMR) Home Ownership program, operated by the Marin Housing Authority, keeps prices low on a small stock of homes throughout Marin, mostly condos. Currently, about 340 homes are in the BRM program, ranging in price from $150,000 to $500,000—a bargain compared to the county’s median prices. 

With a BMR unit, the amount of appreciation is limited, which preserves the home’s affordability for the next purchaser. But the homeowner enjoys pride of ownership, the tax benefit of writing off mortgage interest and living in a neighborhood they might not otherwise be able to afford.

“There are certain units that are priced so low, anybody earning 65% of the area median income or lower could qualify,” Ceena Ford, the housing authority’s homeownership programs specialist, said.

Quick math shows that a person earning $79,625 annually, or even less, could become the proud owner of a BMR unit. Larger units, appropriate for families, come with a higher price tag, but folks making up to 120% of the area median income are eligible.

People interested in the BMR program apply with the housing authority and are entered into a lottery. And they’ll certainly need a bit of luck. Each year, about five to eight properties become available for 100 to 200 applicants.

Other homeownership programs offered by the Marin Housing Authority help prospective buyers jump a big hurdle—coming up with the typical 20% down payment. For example, residents or workers in Marin City could take advantage of the Marin City down payment assistance program, which requires the buyer to contribute $5,000, with the remainder paid by the fund. The home can be located anywhere in the county.

The housing choice voucher homeownership program is beneficial for low-income earners. Also known as Section 8, most people are familiar with these vouchers paying for rent. But Ford said another aspect of the program is like gold for a person wanting to buy a home.

“You can take that voucher and apply it to a mortgage payment instead,” Ford explained. “The funds from the voucher can be used to build equity in a home, as opposed to going into your landlord’s pocket.”

Ford recommends that people interested in these programs contact the housing authority to apply. The next steps include talking to a mortgage professional to see how much they can afford and working with a real estate agent knowledgeable about the lower end of Marin’s housing market.

Pierre Masquelier, a mortgage banker at CrossCountry Mortgage in Larkspur, has spent 20 years assisting buyers navigate Marin’s real estate market. His secret weapon is getting creative.

“Buying a home in Marin is challenging,” Masquelier said. “The demand is unrelenting, and Marin is immune to the ups and downs of the economy. We’re at a point with high interest rates, hovering around 7%, but there are still buyers wanting to get into the market, no matter what the interest rates.”

In Masquelier’s experience, most first-time buyers get help from family members for the down payment. If that’s not possible, he suggests becoming familiar with the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA), which offers down payment assistance programs and mortgages for people with low- to moderate-incomes.

A popular CalHFA program that Masquelier has been keeping his eye on is the California Dream for All Shared Appreciation Loan.

“We call the loan a ‘silent second,’ because it doesn’t have to be repaid unless you sell or refinance your home,” Masquelier said.

Earlier this year, Dream for All ran out of funding within days of being introduced. But last month, the legislature approved another $200 million for the program. Updates and timelines will be issued soon.

Masquelier maintains that the Marin market will always be exceptionally competitive. The best advice, he said, is to make the decision to buy and move ahead.

“You just gotta get in,” Masquelier said. “If you keep thinking about it and wait for prices to come down, you’ll miss out.”

Amy Diller, a real estate agent at Coldwell Banker in Marin, represents many first-time buyers and folks with lower incomes. With 20 years of experience as an agent, she’s usually able to help her client find the right home.

“There are condos as low as $350,000 in Marin County, mostly in Novato,” Diller said. “There are homes in West Marin starting at $600,000. Sometimes they’re fixer uppers or sometimes there’s deferred maintenance, but there are opportunities to buy properties.”

While Diller loves Marin, she believes there are options if someone is feeling challenged by the county’s median housing price of almost $1.5 million.

“There are affordable opportunities in Petaluma, Cotati and Rohnert Park,” Diller said. “Point Richmond has some beautiful complexes on the water. So, you’re still close to Marin, but you can get more house for your money. People have to find where they’re comfortable and where they can afford.”

No place to go: San Rafael continues with plan to displace homeless people 

Nikki Silverstein
-
7
No place to go: San Rafael continues with plan to displace homeless people 

Part Two of a two-part report. Read Part One here.

Last week, San Rafael capitulated to residents complaining about homeless encampments by passing an ordinance that severely curtails camping. The new rules don’t come close to resolving the issues raised by people who say they are upset about crime, fires, trash and human waste at the camps.

Instead, the ordinance will exacerbate San Rafael’s homelessness crisis by forcing many people to exit established encampments and pitch their tents in nooks and crannies throughout the city, including residential neighborhoods.

The objectives of the regulations, which go into effect on Aug. 16, are to reduce the number of people living in existing camps and to prevent new “high concentration encampments.” This is accomplished through limiting each campsite to a small footprint. In addition, there must be at least 200 feet of separation between campsites.

Officials maintain that larger camps lead to increased public health and safety issues.

Let’s assume for a moment that it’s critical to reduce the size of encampments in San Rafael, particularly the largest one on the Mahon Path. The city has indicated that more than half of the approximately 40 homeless people living there must relocate to comply with the ordinance. And in a strange twist, officials say the campers will need to decide amongst themselves who stays and who goes.

I visited the Mahon Path twice recently and spoke with many of the homeless campers. None of them want to volunteer to leave. And, if they’re one of the unlucky ones pushed out by their peers, they don’t know where to go.

City officials steadfastly refuse to identify places for the ousted folks to live. 

“We’re relying on our partners for that,” Chris Hess, San Rafael’s assistant director of community development, housing and homelessness, told me during an interview.

Those partners are several nonprofit organizations, including Homeward Bound, Downtown Streets Team, Community Action Marin, St. Vincent de Paul Society of Marin and the Ritter Center, that work with homeless people throughout the county by helping them obtain services and shelter. The ultimate goal is for case managers to stay connected with their homeless clients and keep them on a path toward permanent housing.

But the partners aren’t magicians, and it’s almost certain that few, if any, of San Rafael’s displaced homeless people will receive a shelter bed or housing before the ordinance requires them to move to places unknown.

The supply of shelter beds in Marin is woefully inadequate, with less than 200 shelters beds for an estimated 1,121 homeless people, according to last year’s federally mandated point-in-time count.

One organization, Homeward Bound, operates most of the shelters in the county. While the majority of its beds are for adults coming in from the street, other beds are allocated specifically for homeless families, homeless folks just released from the hospital and homeless people with mental health issues. Another nonprofit provides shelter for people impacted by domestic violence.

Homeward Bound remains perpetually at capacity, although a minimal number of beds typically turn over on a weekly basis. Last Thursday, I called Paul Fordham, Homeward Bound’s co-chief executive officer, to ask how many beds were available for individuals living on the street.

“Today, right now, the answer is absolutely none,” Fordham said. “We are 100% full in our shelters at this moment. All 38 beds at Jonathan’s Place and all 80 at New Beginnings are full.”

It doesn’t appear that the situation will improve anytime soon. Fordham says about seven of every 10 people who leave Homeward Bound move into permanent housing. Currently, no Section 8 housing vouchers are available, and a new allocation isn’t expected until late fall.

“People are not moving through the shelter and out into housing anywhere near as fast as they were 12 months ago,” Fordham said. “We definitely have more demand than we have openings.”

Without enough shelter beds, the homeless people displaced by San Rafael’s new camping restrictions will scatter. Some may remain nearby. Others may move to remote areas, such as up in the hills.

The result is that case managers often won’t be able to locate the clients they’ve been tasked with helping.

“We’re doing our best, but as people get spread out everywhere it’s going to become a lot harder,” Zoë Neil, director of Downtown Streets Team, said in an interview. “We’ll have outreach coordination meetings with other service providers to say, ‘I can’t find Joe and we have a housing appointment set. Can you guys please let me know if you see him?’”

And if a case manager loses contact with a client for 90 days, the homeless person is dropped from case management. Unfortunately, there simply aren’t enough case managers in the county for everybody who needs one.

San Rafael’s ordinance seems extremely short-sighted. To appease complaining residents, the city is compromising the long and complicated process of getting people off the streets and into a shelter or permanent home.

The city’s partners can’t move mountains, Neil says. When I spoke with leaders at most of Marin’s other nonprofit groups working with homeless people, they voiced similar concerns.

“There’s not a lot we can do, of course, when there are incredible limitations on the number of shelter spaces and housing units available for folks,” said Chandra Alexandre, chief executive officer of Community Action Marin. “If people need medical assistance or any kind of immediate support, we’re there to help provide that for them. Clothing, blankets, tents, socks, hygiene kits, emergency food.”

I pressed Hess, San Rafael’s assistant director of homelessness, about his repeated assurance that the city’s partners would help the campers displaced by the ordinance. He failed to provide further details.

City Councilmember Rachel Kertz, who was also present when I interviewed Hess, took a stab at elaborating on the role the nonprofit partners would play.

“We can’t answer specifically, but partnerships are so integral to the city,” Kertz said. “As we go through the process, we’ll rely on them for the next step—maybe it’s just helping a homeless person around the corner. The plan is to make sure people know they’re held and supported, even if we’re not saying, ‘Here’s where you go next.’”

Somehow, hand-holding doesn’t seem like enough when a homeless person is required to move from the place they’re living and separate from their community.

San Rafael officials are well aware that a viable temporary solution exists—a city-sanctioned homeless encampment. In fact, for over a year, the city ran a “service support area (SSA).” It closed permanently in August 2022.

While critics were unhappy with its location beneath a busy freeway overpass, the city provided security, porta potties, handwashing stations and trash pickup. Equally important, case managers knew where to find their homeless clients and were successful in connecting them with services and housing.

“The city is not considering a sanctioned encampment along the Mahon Path or elsewhere,” Hess said. “We did that with the SSA and we’re proud that 35 of the 47 people ended up housed.”

The sanctioned camp was an expensive undertaking. I guess it’s not surprising that San Rafael won’t pony up to keep the Mahon Path encampment safe and sanitary, since officials won’t even pay for the two porta potties and handwashing station that are currently on site. The homeless campers pay for those essentials, courtesy of donations from a GoFundMe page.

San Rafael has apparently abandoned the sanctioned encampment concept. Fortunately, the city is still employing their best ally in helping homeless people connect to housing—Lynn Murphy.

Murphy, a licensed therapist who works for the San Rafael Police Department as the mental health outreach liaison, visits the city’s encampments daily.

“My focus is strictly on people who are homeless,” Murphy told me as I tagged along with her on an outreach mission that included about a dozen people from many of the city’s nonprofit partners.

They came together for a morning meeting and then fanned out across San Rafael to areas where homeless people are known to camp. The enthusiastic group, armed with pens and clipboards, wanted to contact as many of San Rafael’s homeless people as possible.

Their goal was to ensure that homeless folks had up-to-date information in the county’s coordinated entry system, the first step in eligibility for services and housing. If someone wasn’t in the system, case managers could assess them on the spot and input their data. 

Watching Murphy and the case managers in action was impressive. Murphy knew the name of every homeless person we encountered, and they all had a smile for her.

The team spoke to more than 15 campers on the Mahon Path during my time with them. Every homeless person was in the system but one. Although the woman declined to be assessed, Murphy said they’ll continue to work at establishing a rapport with her.

Without a doubt, Murphy and the nonprofits are doing indispensable work. Still, odds are that none of the homeless people contacted will have a shelter bed or housing before San Rafael’s ordinance kicks in. Being in the system likely won’t help them in the short-term.

“We care very much about everyone living outside, but this is one of the trickier situations,” Neil, of Downtown Streets Team, said about the ordinance. “The time frame is not ideal at all. I don’t know what the city council expects us to do or what their constituents think is going to happen.”

Tent tension: San Rafael further restricts homeless camping

Nikki Silverstein
-
16
Tent tension: San Rafael further restricts homeless camping

Part one of a two-part report. Read part two here.

The City of San Rafael is playing Whac-A-Mole with homeless encampments on public property. Unfortunately, it’s a zero-sum game, and everyone knows who ends up losing.

Anyone can participate. Check out the easy rules:

1.  Residents complain about the presence of an encampment because homeless people are scary to see and walk by.

2.  The city council votes to close the area to camping or severely restrict the number of campers.

3.  The police give notice to the homeless residents and clear the camp on the specified date.

4.  Displaced homeless people set up camp at a new location.

5.  Go back to step 1 and repeat.

On July 17, the San Rafael City Council unanimously approved an ordinance imposing limits on the size and number of campsites permitted in an area.

City officials say they crafted the new regulations in response to complaints about homeless encampments, including littering, human waste, noise and crime.

The ordinance, however, is not ready for prime time. Although overly specific and restrictive in many ways, it fails to delineate procedures for implementation and enforcement.

It’s disappointing the city missed the mark. San Rafael, more than any other city or town in Marin, tries to support its homeless residents.

The city has allocated millions of dollars to shelters and permanent supportive housing; the police department employs a licensed therapist to conduct mental health outreach on a full-time basis; and a mobile crisis intervention unit, SAFE, was launched this year.

Still, officials stress the ordinance is necessary, pointing to the Mahon Path camp, the source of most of the complaints lodged by residents. 

About 40 people occupy 33 tents on half of Mahon Path, which is in a commercially zoned area of central San Rafael. The encampment starts at the intersection of Lindaro Street and Anderson Avenue and ends at Lincoln Drive. The area measures about 540 feet in length and is sandwiched between a creek and a busy road.

The campers prefer to live in close quarters because there is safety in numbers. A homeless person is statistically far more likely to be a victim of violent crime than a perpetrator.

And yet, the new rules are designed to isolate the campers.

A group of homeless people camping together is limited to a site measuring 10 feet by 20 feet. A campsite for an individual can’t exceed 10 feet by 10 feet.

The kicker is that all campsites must maintain at least 200 feet of separation. That’s two-thirds the length of a football field.

Critics say the ordinance is placing homeless people at risk, especially while they’re sleeping.

Women and LGBTQ people are particularly vulnerable to sexual and physical assaults. Seniors may experience health emergencies. Will neighbors hear them calling for help?

I met with Chris Hess, San Rafael’s assistant director of community development, housing and homelessness, and City Councilmember Rachel Kertz to learn more about the regulations.

“The intent behind the ordinance is to reduce the large congregation of people, to provide a level of safety to the community,” Kertz said. “San Rafael is really committed to working with the homeless community.”

I’m sure Kertz is sincere, but neither she nor Hess provided an answer about where the displaced homeless people could go.

To calculate how many people will be forced to move, I had an architect survey the entire Mahon Path, including the portion that runs from Lincoln Drive to Francisco Boulevard West—where no tents are currently pitched.

Using the parameters in the ordinance, six campsites will fit on the two sections of the path, which is just over 1,100 feet in length. This spreads fewer campers across an area twice the size of the existing encampment.

The ordinance doesn’t specify how many people are permitted to live in the 200 square feet group sites; however, San Rafael Police Lt. Carl Huber shed some light on what the city is considering.

“There would be a total of possibly three people in each campsite,” Huber said. “We see a couple cohabitating in a tent and then an individual in another tent. That will allow a certain level of safety for people who want to camp together.”

Three people in six campsites, for a total of 18. Consequently, 22 of the 40 homeless campers must relocate.

Whac-A-Mole.

Some folks living on the Mahon Path moved there from Albert Park, which the city closed to camping in March. The Albert Park camp was established by homeless people displaced from the September closure of a city-sanctioned encampment under a freeway. And so it goes.

The residents complaining about the Mahon Path camp probably won’t like the practical answer about where those 22 homeless people might end up.

Brian, a camper on the Mahon Path, has a few ideas about where he will go if forced to move.

“I could pop up in a neighborhood,” Brian said. “Maybe next to one of the city council members’ houses.”

As Brian is aware, it’s perfectly legal for a homeless person to pitch a tent on public property near a residential home. Homeowners also seem to know the law.

During a special city council meeting held last week to discuss the ordinance, some homeowners demanded stronger restrictions that would ban camping close to residences.

Assistant city attorney Genevieve Coyle stated that she wouldn’t recommend a camping ban in residential neighborhoods because “it wouldn’t uphold constitutional scrutiny from a court.” Coyle referenced Martin v. Boise, a 2018 decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which allows homeless people to sleep on public property when a city can’t provide alternative shelter.

With homeless shelters in Marin County perpetually full, save for a bed or two turning over each week, San Rafael can’t provide shelter for most of its estimated 241 unsheltered residents.

Over the last few years, San Rafael has been whittling down the number of places where a homeless person may camp. Banned areas include all open space, two parks near downtown, city parking garages and public buildings and fences. The new ordinance also prohibits camping within 10 feet of public utility infrastructures and within 100 feet of playgrounds.

While the city’s ordinance establishes where the displaced homeless people can’t camp, it doesn’t address who may stay on the Mahon Path and who must go. 

Hess proposed “incentivizing” folks to leave the camp by bribing them with Safeway gift cards. Never mind that it’s exploitative to ask someone to give up a place to live and separate from their community for a few bucks. Unless Safeway offers housing, the campers will need far more than gift cards. 

The city would prefer the campers decide who should move, according to Huber. But none of the many homeless people I interviewed wants to be involved in the selection process that will oust more than half of them.

“You have to be able to cooperate,” Paul, a veteran, said. “Not everyone here is always coherent, and you have to be coherent to cooperate.”

Brian, 51, believes foisting the choice on the campers will create havoc, fear and possibly violence.

“You’ll have people trying to govern each other,” Brian said. “People already under duress will be put under more duress. It will be survival of the fittest—only the strongest will get to stay.”

Charges Dropped: Allegations against ex-cops wreak havoc in Marin justice system

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Charges Dropped: Allegations against ex-cops wreak havoc in Marin justice system

The Marin County District Attorney’s Office has dismissed criminal charges in at least 10 cases that would have relied on the testimony of two former San Rafael police officers who now stand accused of crimes themselves.

Other criminal defendants have been offered attractive plea deals for serious offenses because their cases involved the two ex-cops whose honesty is now in question.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Plenty more cases will be impacted before this mess is over.

The saga began almost a year ago, when then-officers Daisy Mazariegos and Brandon Nail were accused of beating and severely injuring a local Latinx man during questioning about an open container of beer. Julio Jimenez Lopez, formerly referred to as “Mateo” by the media, suffered a broken nose, a torn labrum in his shoulder and a concussion, according to medical reports that I reviewed.

The apparent brutality was caught on police body-worn cameras, with the footage contradicting Mazariegos’ and Nail’s police reports.

In September, Jimenez Lopez’s attorney released the videos to the media, and the public demanded action be taken against Mazariegos and Nail.

The next day, the San Rafael Police Department placed the pair on paid administrative leave, setting up a quandary for Marin County District Attorney Lori Frugoli. Could she put Mazariegos and Nail on the witness stand to provide vital testimony against criminal defendants that she was prosecuting?

Marin County Public Defender David Sutton was also considering the same issue. His office promptly began reviewing all of its clients’ cases that involved Mazariegos and Nail.

“We saw the videos, as everyone else did,” Sutton said. “Their credibility is an issue. We are looking at every single case—first the active ones and then the historical cases.”

As part of the pre-trial process for current cases involving Mazariegos and Nail, the Public Defender’s Office has been filing Pitchess motions, which are used in California criminal cases to gain access to the officers’ confidential personnel files for evidence of misconduct, such as excessive use of force or falsifying police reports. A new Pitchess motion must be filed for each case.

Sutton is prohibited from telling me what he may have discovered from the Pitchess materials because they’re subject to a protective order.

However, a private defense attorney who was in court during a few of those Pitchess motions provided some insight. The judge left the courtroom to meet with a representative from the police department to review Nail’s or Mazariegos’ personnel file. Upon the judge’s return, it was reported that nothing in the file would have an effect on the defendant’s case, according to my source.

That fact may have changed recently. Mazariegos separated from the police department in May, after the completion of an independent investigation into the use of force incident. Nail left last month. There has been no word on whether they were fired or quit.

The City of San Rafael has refused to release the investigative report to the public, with city attorney Rob Epstein stating that the former officers have threatened to sue if the report is disclosed. Instead, Jimenez Lopez’s civil attorney, the Marin Independent Journal and a law student are suing San Rafael to obtain the report.

Regardless, any potential negative findings from the independent investigation will make their way into Mazariegos’ and Nail’s personnel files.

The situation has since heated up even more. Two weeks ago, Frugoli dropped the hammer on the ex-officers. After a 10-month investigation, she filed felony charges against Mazariegos and Nail for “assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report.”

Sure, the wheels of justice have moved slowly, and Mazariegos and Nail are presumed innocent of their criminal charges unless proven otherwise. But the ripple effects of last year’s use of force incident just keep getting bigger.

Hence, Sutton’s diligence. He says that his office will continue filing Pitchess motions, as well as investigating and developing a plan of attack on behalf of his clients.

Currently, the Public Defender’s Office is representing criminal defendants in 65 active cases involving Nail and Mazariegos.

There are also prior cases, those where people have already been prosecuted and convicted based on the testimony of the then-officers. Sutton says his office is compiling a list of historical cases, paying special attention to any allegations their clients made against Nail or Mazariegos  and circumstances where the officers might have lied to justify their conduct.

“If there’s evidence of dishonesty which led to the conviction, then we would seek to recall those convictions,” Sutton said. 

The potential ramifications are significant. It’s possible that convictions could be overturned, according to Sutton.

The Public Defender appears to be on firm ground with his position, especially when considering the statement DA Frugoli issued after she filed the felony charges against Nail and Mazariegos.

“…my office has concluded there is sufficient evidence to prove these charges beyond a reasonable doubt,” Frugoli said.

That’s a sticky wicket for Frugoli. It must be challenging for the DA to simultaneously prosecute the ex-cops and continue with the prosecution of other cases dependent upon their testimony.

So far, Frugoli hasn’t called on Nail or Mazariegos to provide witness testimony since the use of force incident came to light.

“Six of our clients are being offered very favorable plea agreements for serious charges as a result of these two officers’ involvement in their cases,” Sutton said. “They’re pleading to less serious offenses.”

It’s not just Sutton raising concerns and combing through active and historic files. Private defense attorneys also represent clients whose cases involve Nail and Mazariegos.

Although it’s not yet clear how cases may be affected, the total could easily reach triple digits. While Mazariegos was a new officer and had only been on solo patrol for about four months before being sent home, Nail had served as an officer since 2017, in both the Sausalito and San Rafael police departments.

The DA’s Office probably has the best estimate on the number of cases called into question; however, Frugoli did not respond to my request for an interview, nor did she answer any of the written questions that I sent her via email.

Defendants, some who may have committed crimes, have already waltzed out of the courtroom scot-free—without a jury ever hearing the cases and determining whether the accused were guilty or not.

In the end, Frugoli isn’t responsible for Mazariegos’ and Nail’s alleged crimes. That blame lies squarely on the institution of law enforcement, which has been moving slow as molasses to make meaningful reforms. 

At least in this case, the wheels are in motion to hold Mazariegos and Nail accountable. Let’s hope that the entire process will be transparent, despite the best efforts of the former officers to keep their personnel records and investigative reports about their conduct cloaked in secrecy.

(Un)welcoming Waters: Sea otters poised for comeback to Marin and Sonoma counties

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
(Un)welcoming Waters: Sea otters poised for comeback to Marin and Sonoma counties

Flippers down, sea otters win the blue ribbon in the cutest critters contest. And to think, in the 18th and 19th centuries, man hunted sea otters to near extinction for their luxurious fur, which contains more hairs per square inch than any other mammal.

The sea otter slaughter lasted about 150 years. By 1911, when the animals became protected under an international fur treaty, less than 2,000 remained, down from an estimated population of 150,000 to 300,000.

Although the sea otter, Enhydra lutris, holds a place on many endangered lists in the United States and other countries, the population never recovered in a significant portion of their historical range, which once ran from the northern islands of Japan to Baja California, Mexico. The largest gap is from the San Francisco Bay to Oregon, where no sea otters remain.

However, the sea otter population in Northern California and Oregon could be on the brink of a comeback. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently completed a feasibility study on reintroducing the sea otter into these areas. Indeed, not only did the agency conclude it is feasible, but they also determined there would be significant benefits to reestablishing the animals, including improving the genetic diversity of the species and helping to maintain the ecosystem of their habitats.

Overall, the species possesses very low genetic diversity, with the southern sea otter, Enhydra lutris nereis, having the lowest of the three subspecies. By the early 1900s, it was generally believed that the southern sea otter was extinct. However, in 1911, the California Department of Fish and Game discovered 30 to 50 living off the coast of Big Sur. 

Two years later, California made it a misdemeanor to kill or possess a sea otter.

“What the state did was extremely important to preserve that population,” said Lilian Carswell, the southern sea otter recovery and marine conservation coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The conservation laws are working. In fact, the current population of 3,000 southern sea otters descended from the Big Sur stock. Slowly, they’ve expanded their range, occasionally with the help of relocation projects conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Southern sea otters presently inhabit the coastline from San Mateo County to Santa Barbara County and near San Nicolas Island, about 60 miles from the coast of Ventura County.

Now, if only sharks could read.

“One of the main problems for southern sea otters in California is the high level of shark bite mortality that they’re suffering,” said Carswell. “It’s always been quite high at the northern end of their range, which is San Mateo County, and it’s really ramped up in the southern portion of the Central California range, as well. This has prevented southern sea otters from having any net range expansion in about 20 years.”

Bringing the southern sea otter closer to the range of northern sea otters, found off the coasts of Washington and Alaska, could greatly benefit both subspecies. Interbreeding would certainly increase the genetic diversity in the southern sea otter. With climate change bringing warmer weather northward, the northern sea otter could also gain an advantage from interbreeding, perhaps enabling them to better adapt to new environmental conditions.

Another important consideration in reintroducing the sea otter is its critical role as a keystone species. Sea otters, known as voracious eaters, maintain their ecosystem by controlling the population of their prey. For example, sea otters eat sea urchins. Left unchecked, sea urchins can decimate kelp forests, which provide food and shelter for a large variety of plants and animals.

And kelp forests are currently being depleted by an out-of-control purple sea urchin population. The sea star, another main predator of the purple sea urchin, suffered a devastating population decrease from disease. Sending sea otters back to their historic habitats could help restore the kelp forests.

Slam dunk. Who would oppose the reintroduction of adorable creatures that keep their ecosystems healthy?

For starters, objections may come from the commercial fishermen who will compete with sea otters for crabs, clams, abalone and mussels. It may not be much of a competition either. While sea otters are the smallest marine mammals, measuring about four feet in length and weighing from 50 to 100 pounds, they have high caloric requirements.

On a daily basis, sea otters consume 25% of their body weight in food. Hence, there are very real concerns by the fishermen who make their living hauling in Dungeness crabs and the other invertebrates that sea otters devour. Reestablishing sea otters could disrupt an entire industry right here in Marin and Sonoma counties and beyond.

Dick Ogg, a Sonoma County resident for 62 years, has been fishing most of his life. For the last 25 years, he’s been a commercial fisherman, with his income relying heavily on crabbing. The soft-spoken Ogg is a philosophical enigma. While he believes the ocean resources belong to all, and he’s happy to bring seafood to many a dinner table, as a vegetarian, he won’t partake.

But Ogg is an important voice, representing the fishing community on more than a dozen state and federal committees. He’s worried—extremely so—about the possibility of reintroducing sea otters to the area. The Dungeness crab fishing season has already been substantially shortened due to migrating humpback whales becoming entangled in the fishing gear.

“When you think about what has happened to our industry in the last five or six years, we’re already down to the point where we basically cannot make a living,” Ogg said. “They’re cute, the sea otters, but they are going to eat whatever they can get their hands on. Everybody knows bringing them back is going to affect the crab industry.”

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is quick to say that there is no plan at the present time to reintroduce sea otters to Northern California and Oregon. The agency is still assessing.

“We’re gathering feedback from people up and down the coast right now,” Carswell said. “We’re trying to understand some of the nuances, like exactly where people are fishing, what depths they’re fishing at and what they’re fishing for. No particular sites have been identified yet, so I can’t actually speak to what the effects would be. I will say that past experience has shown us that reintroductions always start small and grow slowly over time. If a sea otter population became established, it would probably take decades.”

Ogg isn’t convinced that sea otter reintroduction should even be considered. It’s his belief that the intervention of man never works out for the betterment of the environment.

“I know the perspective is that the sea otters were here and man wiped them out,” Ogg said. “And that’s absolutely true. But I also understand that it happened 150 years ago, and the crucial environment is nothing like it was back then. It’s very important that we’re sure we’re not making a mistake, because once we’ve done this, there’s no turning back if things begin to get out of control.”

BREAKING NEWS: Criminal charges filed against San Rafael cops involved in “Mateo” assault

Nikki Silverstein
-
9
BREAKING NEWS: Criminal charges filed against San Rafael cops involved in “Mateo” assault

Marin County District Attorney Lori Frugoli filed criminal charges today against two former San Rafael police officers who beat and bloodied a man during questioning about an open container of beer.

Brandon Nail and Daisy Mazariegos were both charged with two felonies, including assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report. The DA’s criminal complaint states that each officer “personally inflicted great bodily injury” upon the victim.

View the police reports with alleged false statements here.

View the DA’s criminal complaint against Mazariegos and Nail here.

“After a thorough review of the evidence, which included body-worn camera footage, eyewitness accounts, medical records, and reports from the San Rafael Police Department, my office has concluded there is sufficient evidence to prove these charges beyond a reasonable doubt,” Frugoli said in a statement.

Nail left the employment of the San Rafael Police Department on Wednesday, while Mazariegos, who was still on her probationary period, separated from the department on May 15, about two weeks after the conclusion of an independent investigation into the use of force incident. The police have remained mum on the reasons behind the departures of the former officers.

“I’m prohibited from commenting because of confidentiality laws involving police administration investigations and the police officer bill of rights,” San Rafael Police Sgt. Justin Graham said.

The use of force incident took place on July 27, after Mazariegos approached three Latinx men who had open containers of beer on Windward Way in the Canal neighborhood of San Rafael. Under direction from Mazariegos, the men sat on the sidewalk while she questioned them. Nail arrived at the scene minutes later.

The officers violently assaulted Julio Jimenez Lopez, who the media has previously referred to as “Mateo,” after he stood to retrieve his identification. Jimenez Lopez suffered injuries including a broken nose, a torn labrum in his shoulder and a concussion.

Ironically, Jimenez Lopez was arrested and faced charges of a felony, obstructing and resisting an officer, and three misdemeanors, including battery on an officer. Mazariegos and Nail both filed police reports stating that Jimenez Lopez placed Nail in a headlock. Nail also asserted that Jimenez Lopez struck him in the head.

The reports appeared inconsistent with the police body cam videos, and the DA dropped the charges against Jimenez Lopez after reviewing the footage.

Charles Dresow, the criminal defense attorney who represented Jimenez Lopez, requested that Frugoli investigate the incident. On Sept. 7, Frugoli issued a statement that she would review the officers’ conduct.

Despite the body cam videos and other evidence, Frugoli took 10 months to review the case and file charges. The public has been critical of the DA for failing to act decisively in a reasonable amount of time.

“District Attorney Frugoli made the right decision,” Dresow told the Pacific Sun. “It’s an important step in rebuilding trust in the criminal justice system.”

Mazariegos and Nail are scheduled to appear in Marin County Superior Court on August 11 to face the charges. If convicted, they will be required to relinquish all firearms, according to the DA’s criminal complaint.

“The individuals who battered my client and falsely arrested him are bullies not fit to wear the badge,” Dresow said.

Guaranteed income of $1,000 a month changed the lives of Marin moms and their families

Nikki Silverstein
-
7
Guaranteed income of $1,000 a month changed the lives of Marin moms and their families

A couple of years ago, I heard about the launch of a fascinating program in Marin. A group of 125 low-income moms would receive $1,000 a month for two years to spend on whatever they wanted. No strings attached.

I opened my calendar, flipped forward 24 months and made a note to call the organizer in May 2023, when the program was scheduled to end. That’s how I recently connected with Barbara Clifton Zarate, the director for economic opportunity at the Marin Community Foundation, to learn more about MOMentum, the clever name given to the initiative.

Zarate has managed MOMentum since its inception. Actually, she’s still overseeing it today because the successful program has been extended for another year.

The idea to give moms $1,000 a month was born from a 2018 study that examined inequities in Marin County. During that research, the Marin Community Foundation engaged with moms to better understand their journeys towards self-sufficiency and the challenges they experience, Zarate explained.

“The moms told us, ‘We don’t need another program that tells us how to live our lives,’” Zarate said. “‘We don’t need you to teach us how to balance our checkbooks. We know how to do that; there’s just no money in there.’ Basically, the moms said, ‘Just give us money.’ And so, they spoke, and we listened.”

When establishing the criteria for moms to enter the privately funded MOMentum program, Zarate said they looked at who is struggling the most in the county. The data showed that it was low-income moms of color. With the simple parameters set, the project participants were selected. The moms came from zip codes all over the county, although families in Marin City, San Rafael’s Canal neighborhood, Novato and West Marin were found to suffer the greatest inequities and disparities.

The MOMentum model gives the moms autonomy in how to spend the money. In addition, the program offers support to them in other ways. For example, they partnered with Redwood Credit Union, which held a series on financial literacy for the moms.

“So often we have a narrative in this country that people with low income need some sort of mandate on what they do with their money,” Zarate said. “That’s an illusion.

Zarate and her team check in often with the participants, and their preliminary research demonstrates that indeed, “Mother knows best.”

While $1,000 a month may be a drop in the bucket to the majority of residents in Marin, where the median annual income for a four-person household is $175,000, the low-income moms in MOMentum say the money has changed their lives.

The moms report they are healthier and experience far less stress. The money enabled some to drop one of their multiple jobs, allowing them to spend quality time with their families. Others enrolled in college. Credit scores have drastically improved. Quite a few moms shared their windfall with neighbors in need. A mom living with roommates was able to move her family into their own home.

Claudia Muralles, 44, is one of the 125 moms in MOMentum. Having a child at a young age and dropping out of high school set Muralles on a trajectory that left her struggling financially. Today, two of Muralles’ four children still live at home with her in Novato. The $1,000 a month has provided the basics, plus a few special experiences for her family.

“I’m not waiting for the next paycheck because we ran out of money,” Muralles said. “I can tell my girls, ‘Yeah, we can go out for ice cream.’ Our lives are not extremely luxurious, but the extra money—definitely everyday—it gives peace of mind.”

Muralles is preparing to graduate from college and looks forward to buying a home. Why not? During her time in the program, she increased her credit score from 400 to 700.

Another mom, Jennifer Barron, 48, has three of her eight children living in her Novato home. The rest have left the nest. Every penny of the money that she’s received from MOMentum has been spent wisely, and mostly on her children, according to Barron.

“Our fridge is full,” Barron said. “Gas is so expensive, but I have gas in the car to drive back and forth to school. The kids have haircuts and clothes on their backs.”

The MOMentum program, while extended through May 2024, will begin tapering down the amount given to the moms—$1,000 a month for the first three months, decreasing by $250 each successive quarter.

I thought Barron might be terrified about being cut off from the funding. She’s not. Two years ago, Barron received her high school diploma and is now enrolled in community college. She’s confident that she’ll be able to get a good-paying job after she obtains a bachelor’s degree.

MOMentum is a test of the guaranteed income concept, which is also referred to as universal basic income. Andrew Yang, who ran for president in 2020, made it part of his platform to give $1,000 a month to every American over the age of 18.

Providing unconditional cash assistance to citizens isn’t a new idea. Napoleon Bonaparte talked about it. So did Thomas Paine, one of America’s founding fathers. Martin Luther King, Jr. was also a proponent. In his final book, Where Do We Go From Here?, King wrote, “The solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.”

Basic income programs can target a specific population, like MOMentum does, or they can be broad-based, as in Yang’s plan. There are now dozens of pilot programs in the United States. But other countries—many for years—have successfully used guaranteed income to increase the quality of life for its citizens. 

Since 2017, the Stanford Basic Income Lab at Stanford University has followed pilot programs and researched the aspects of basic income, including politics, economics and outcomes. Sean Kline, Stanford Basic Income Lab’s associate director, said the programs are working; however, there are those who oppose the concept.

Of course, some people believe everyone should “pull themselves up by their own bootstraps,” despite social inequities. Reasonable objections also exist, according to Kline. Some question whether basic income is the best single investment to make with public funds, rather than spending it on programs such as public health or education. But Kline doesn’t necessarily agree with those assessments.

“We have a tremendous amount of evidence, and a growing amount of evidence, that unconditional cash is a very, very good investment,” Kline said. “Sadly, I think we’ve worked ourselves into this scarcity mindset where there’s finite dollars, and we can spend it on only a few people in a few programs. Yet our wealthy country spends huge amounts of money on all kinds of things. We need to recognize that it’s more a question of political will as to how we spend our funds. Then we can begin to normalize the notion of basic income as a policy option.”

Based on Muralles’ experience in the MOMentum program, she has no doubts that guaranteed income programs should be adopted by the government. 

“I became a parent when I was 17 and dropped out of high school,” Muralles said. “Now, I’m on the right path to becoming a contributor because I was given the right tools and opportunity. Without programs like this, people will continue to be part of the poverty statistics.”

Lacking transparency: San Rafael adds insult to injury in police ‘use of force’ case

Nikki Silverstein
-
9
Lacking transparency: San Rafael adds insult to injury in police ‘use of force’ case

Almost 11 months have passed since the unprovoked use of force by two San Rafael police officers landed a Latinx gardener in the hospital with severe bodily injuries.

The July 27 incident, caught on the officers’ own body-worn cameras, consisted of a series of aggressive maneuvers to take down Julio Jimenez Lopez during questioning about an open container of beer. One of those moves involved Officer Brandon Nail punching Jimenez Lopez in the face.

During the violent takedown, which was aided by then-officer Daisy Mazariegos, Jimenez Lopez, 37, suffered a broken nose, a torn labrum in his shoulder that required surgery, a knee injury and a concussion. I know this because I saw Jimenez Lopez’ hospital records from the day of his beating and later medical reports detailing his shoulder surgery.

The public, outraged by the unnecessary brutal force shown in the videos, has demanded information about the incident and the independent investigation commissioned by the City of San Rafael. Senate Bill 1421, passed in 2018, says the public has the right to know.

Yet, as I reported last week, city attorney Rob Epstein refuses to release the investigative report and other documents, even after he repeatedly promised to do so. In May and June, Epstein sent a total of three letters to Jimenez Lopez’ civil attorney, Theo Emison, confirming that the city would produce the documents in response to a public records request. Then Epstein changed his mind.

I got bupkis when I asked Epstein for an interview and sent him questions via email late last week. Although Epstein responded, he ignored my interview request and didn’t answer any questions. Mostly, I just wanted to understand why he is protecting the officers, rather than providing the transparency the city keeps saying it wants to provide.

I also contacted David Loy, the legal director for the First Amendment Coalition, a press freedom advocacy group, to ask him for insight into what the heck Epstein is doing. Of course, Loy can’t read Epstein’s mind; however, he did explain the legislation that it appears the city attorney chooses not to understand.

“Historically, these records would have been secret—until the passage of SB 1421,” Loy said. “The key part of the statute requires disclosure of any and all records relating to any incident in which an officer’s use of force results in great bodily injury to any person. And those records must be disclosed, regardless of whether that force is being legally justified or not.”

On June 12, in a fourth letter, Epstein opined to Emison that he won’t release the records because the officers have threatened legal action against the city. Loy seemed unimpressed with using that as a justification to withhold the documents.

“Any lawsuit by the officers for disclosing the records, of course, would be transparently meritless,” Loy said. “In effect, he [Epstein] is privileging secrecy over disclosure, privileging police officers over the public. It’s not even a close call. The public has a right to this record, and police officers should not get special privileges.”

Epstein has also continually questioned whether Jimenez Lopez’s injuries are considered “great bodily injury.” In a May 19 letter, Epstein blamed this issue on Jimenez Lopez declining to be interviewed by the city’s independent investigator. Does Epstein truly believe that an interrogation of Jimenez Lopez by the city’s hired investigator, a former cop, would have revealed more information about injuries than the medical records which had already been provided?

Loy has no doubt that Jimenez Lopez suffered great bodily injury during the incident.

“There’s abundant case law which says things like abrasions, lacerations, bruising, broken bones and injury requiring surgery all qualify as great bodily injury,” Loy said. “…And I read this city attorney’s letter, and I think his argument is, quite frankly, just transparently ridiculous.”

Literally adding insult to injury, the San Rafael Police Department only seems to provide important details when cornered. Case in point, I reported last week that I was tipped off that Mazariegos, who was still on her probationary period as a new employee, concluded her employment with the department on May 15. The police confirmed when I inquired, but why didn’t they issue a statement about Mazariegos’ departure to the public, which has been demanding the ouster of the two officers for months?

Nail remains on paid administrative leave. Based on my conversation with Chief David Spiller last week, it seems that he’s made a determination about what, if any, discipline will be meted out for Nail.

“I’ve reviewed the case, and I have acted in the best interest of the organization and the community,” Spiller said. 

Although I’m speculating, since Nail isn’t back to performing his duties, he may be appealing Spiller’s decision. Under California’s Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act, Nail has the right to an administrative appeal.

When I pressed Spiller for specifics, he declined to elaborate on what consequences Nail may face. However, Spiller gave his thoughts about the content of the body cam videos, including the behavior of officers who arrived after the beating. I asked him about the joking taking place while Jimenez Lopez, still bleeding, spent 50 minutes in the back of a police car before being transported to the hospital.

“I wanted to go into reviewing the investigation without demonstrating any inclination of my intent, but now that I’ve done what I needed to do, I can say that I didn’t like what I saw in the video,” Spiller said. “It made me angry. And I know people don’t like this saying, but ‘It’s not representative of who we are.’”

It’s satisfying to hear Spiller’s admission of feeling anger, yet it doesn’t negate that the SRPD and the city have mastered lack of transparency—they have it down to a science. The methods used in this case include avoidance, remaining silent, excuses, victim blaming and delaying.

The public may not have known about this case at all if Nail and Mazariegos hadn’t arrested Jimenez Lopez and lied in police reports. 

Jimenez Lopez put Nail into a headlock and struck him several times in his head, the police reports said. Those allegations become patently absurd when considering that Jimenez Lopez stands 5 feet tall and weighs 130 pounds, while Nail is 6 feet two inches and 250 pounds. A kindergartner could have told Mazariegos and Nail that they were going to be in big trouble when somebody reviewed the body cam videos.

The assertions by the police resulted in the Marin County District Attorney’s Office filing felony and misdemeanor charges against Jimenez Lopez on August 2, just six days after his arrest. Jimenez Lopez was then forced to engage a criminal defense attorney.

About a month later, the DA dropped the charges after viewing the videos, which is when the defense attorney released them to the media, setting off a firestorm of protests and demands for justice.

Only then did city officials acknowledge the serious police use of force incident—five weeks after it happened.

Despite the obfuscation by public officials, one crystal clear fact has emerged: Jimenez Lopez’ life has been forever changed. 

“Julio continues to experience the physical and mental consequences of being brutalized by police officers sworn to protect the public,” Emison said. “Despite these ongoing issues, Julio returned to work because he has no other source of income to support his family.”

While it took less than a minute for Mazariegos and Nail to inflict lasting harm on Jimenez Lopez, the city and police department have been keeping the public in the dark for almost a year about the incident. Hopefully, Emison’s planned legal action to force the city to release the documents will bring the facts to light.

UPDATED: San Rafael police officer involved in violent beating out of a job

Nikki Silverstein
-
15
UPDATED: San Rafael police officer involved in violent beating out of a job

Editor’s Note: This article was updated with additional information on Tuesday, June 13, at 1:30pm.

It’s not much of a surprise that one of the two officers involved in the unprovoked bloody beating of a local gardener no longer works for the San Rafael Police Department.

After all, Daisy Mazariegos was still on her probationary period as a new employee when the violent incident, captured on the officers’ body-worn cameras, occurred last July.

What’s remarkable is that Mazariegos and the SRPD parted ways on May 15, about two weeks after the conclusion of an independent investigation into the use of force incident. The city hasn’t yet released the investigative report and never made a public announcement about the change in Mazariegos’ employment status. It remains to be seen whether the two are related, and we’ll only know if the city releases the report. 

Still, Mazariegos’ departure is news. Big news, some might say. The community has been staging protests and clamoring for the dismissal of both officers since September, when videos of the beatdown were first released to the media.

Under California law, a police officer on their probationary period may be released with or without cause. But to be clear, I have no idea whether Mazariegos was fired or quit. In fact, I only found out that she was gone because a source tipped me off last month, and I then confirmed it with the police department.

Neither Lt. Scott Eberle, who serves as the SRPD’s public information officer, nor Chief David Spiller, will tell me why Mazariegos is gone.

“Details regarding why any employee separates from the city are typically confidential personnel matters not subject to public disclosure,” Eberle said.

The public, although kept in the dark regarding the reason for Mazariegos’ exit, footed the bill while the then-officer enjoyed almost nine months of paid administrative leave during the investigation into the assault incident. Mazariegos’ compensation cost taxpayers a pretty penny. In 2021, she earned more than $96,000 in pay and benefits, according to Transparent California.

Brandon Nail, the officer shown on video punching the gardener in the face, has been with the SRPD for almost four years and continues on paid administrative leave. Though Nail is not currently protecting or serving San Rafael residents, he’s still receiving compensation, which, in 2021, totaled almost $192,000.

Earlier this week, we reported that the public may finally get to see the independent investigative report into the officers’ use of force against Julio Jimenez Lopez, who the Pacific Sun previously referred to as “Mateo” because he had feared for his safety. However, Rob Epstein, San Rafael’s city attorney, has once again reversed his position and will not voluntarily release the report.

Epstein has vacillated on the issue since the end of April, when the independent investigator hired by San Rafael provided the report to the city. Initially, Epstein refused to release the report to the public, citing the officers’ legal rights to confidentiality.

On May 19, Epstein agreed to release the report after Theo Emison, a lawyer representing Jimenez Lopez in a claim against the city, argued that the report is subject to release under the California Public Records Act. While legislation exists to protect the confidentiality of peace officers’ personnel records and reports, there are exceptions. One which seems on point in this case is when an officer’s use of force has resulted in death or great bodily injury.

Jimenez Lopez’ claim against the city states that he “sustained significant, life-altering injuries including but not limited to a fractured nose, loss of consciousness, traumatic brain injury, neurological and orthopedic injuries…”

But Epstein continued to delay providing the report, asserting that the city needed more time to make redactions. Then, on June 12, Epstein sent an astounding letter to Emison, revealing that the officers are threatening to sue the city if the report is released. Ultimately, Epstein again refused to distribute the report and invited Emison to bring legal action against the city to attempt to obtain it.

“…the City has concluded that it must not ring a bell that it cannot later un-ring if the Court later determines that the records are exempt from disclosure,” Epstein wrote.

On June 13, I spoke with Emison to find out his next move in this game of chicken that Epstein seems hellbent on playing. Emison will not back down in his pursuit of the report, believing that the public interest trumps the privacy rights of officers who landed a man in the hospital for enjoying a beer on a city sidewalk.

“After receipt of Epstein’s letter on the 12th, the day he previously promised to disclose the records, we began working on a writ of mandate forcing the city to disclose the investigative report and materials,” Emison said.

The report will likely elaborate on the the specifics already known to the public based on the videos of the incident. Mazariegos confronted three men who had gathered to drink after work on a street in the Canal. Nail arrived within minutes. During questioning by Mazariegos, Jimenez Lopez stood up to retrieve his identification. The situation devolved rapidly from there.

A frame-by-frame review of Mazariegos’ and Nail’s body cam videos shows a series of aggressive maneuvers by both officers left Jimenez Lopez lying face down on the pavement in a pool of his own blood with his hands cuffed behind his back. Jimenez Lopez was arrested and placed in the back of a police car. Despite his bloodied face, he remained in the car for almost an hour before being transported to the hospital.

A police report made allegations that were contradicted by the videos. Based on the report, the Marin County District Attorney’s Office filed felony and misdemeanor charges against Jimenez Lopez; however, those charges were later dropped after the videos were reviewed.

Last week, partly in response to the incident and the community’s demand for transparency and accountability, Spiller, the police chief, unveiled a plan for the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAAC). The San Rafael City Council voted 5-0 to establish the committee, despite opposition from the public.

The Marin Justice League, a grassroots organization formed in reaction to the Jimenez Lopez incident, had previously provided the city council with The People’s Plan as an alternative to the PAAC. There are significant differences between the two plans.

The seven San Rafael residents appointed to serve on the PAAC will advise on police policy and have no investigative authority. Conversely, the People’s Plan calls for an oversight commission of residents with the power to investigate complaints of police misconduct and an Independent Police Monitor that can audit the police department.

I spoke with Spiller about why the PAAC lacks investigative powers. It’s by design, mostly driven by the legal rights of peace officers, he said. Logistically, it’s difficult to structure a citizen commission with the authority to go poking into confidential records and personnel files. In fact, Spiller discussed the PAAC setup with the president of the local union, the San Rafael Police Association.

“We had conferred about the reality of operating the PD with a group of community members to provide recommendations and input to the leadership,” Spiller said.

Brenda Rivas-Camarena, of the Marin Justice League, disagrees with the city’s approach. She believes that the PAAC leaves out the accountability component, no matter the name.

“Yet again, the City of San Rafael and its police department continue to play a deceptive game of double-speak by unanimously voting to approve the police chief’s weak and useless plan called the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee,” Rivas-Camarena said in an email. “There’s nothing in the plan that remotely holds the department and its present and future rogue officers accountable for any alleged or actual wrongdoings.”

For now, the city is moving forward with the PAAC. But one has to wonder whether that might change after the independent investigative report is released to the public and we see what action, if any, is taken against Brandon Nail.

Tara Evans, a lifelong San Rafael resident and member of the Marin Justice League, told me in an interview that the group will continue fighting for true police accountability in San Rafael and throughout the county.

“Dynamics are changing,” Evans said. “Every person deserves to be policed in a way that is fair, equitable and aligned with the law. Harm to one member harms us all. I think it’s really in that ideology that the issue of police accountability is not going to go away.” 

Marin City pastors stage “intervention” with private developer over unwanted housing project

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Marin City pastors stage “intervention” with private developer over unwanted housing project

In front of a room crowded with concerned residents, two Marin City pastors had a come-to-Jesus meeting last month with an Idaho real estate developer who is planning a controversial affordable housing project.

Rev. Rondall Leggett and Rev. Floyd Thompkins did not mince words. If developer Caleb Roope, CEO of the The Pacific Companies, proceeds with the five-story, 74-unit apartment complex, he’ll be another in a long line of racists who think they know what’s best for Marin City, a historically Black community.

“We want you to go,” Leggett, of First Missionary Baptist Church, said. “We know that you may potentially have the capital you need. You definitely have commitment from the county. But you don’t have our consent.”

The meeting was hosted by Save Our City, a local group opposed to the planned project at 825 Drake Ave. The pastors, along with AJ Lambert, who lives across the street from the currently vacant lot, outlined some of the community’s numerous objections to the development, including that it’s dangerous to substantially increase the population of the small neighborhood already rife with serious infrastructure issues.

Not only is the property in a state-designated high fire hazard zone, but the area is also prone to flooding. Public safety problems are compounded because there’s only one road in and out of Marin City. In addition, the building will block the sun from reaching the two-story senior housing project behind the property.

“I’m the first guy to acknowledge that this project, from a neighborhood character perspective, is way too big for the neighborhood or for the surrounding area,” Roope said.

Roope confirmed to the pastors that he had read about Marin City’s history, which includes decades of racism experienced by the residents at the hands of the county government. Through the use of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, the Black population was excluded from purchasing and renting homes outside Marin City.

Redlining, the discriminatory practice of denying mortgages to Black people, also occurred. Marin City residents were prevented from owning property in the county when it was still considered an affordable area. Black people weren’t given the same opportunity as white people to build generational wealth in what is now one of the most expensive real estate markets in America.

“You have started in the middle of a racist, classist story…,” Thompkins said to Roope. “And so, to think that somehow you’re not perpetuating that by erecting a building that does nothing but make us more unsafe–and by doing the paternalistic, small-minded racist thing that’s been done for years, which is not even talking to us before it’s done–then we look at you and say you are what we always see, a racist doing nothing but hurting us.”

At the end of the 90-minute meeting, Roope said he would consider walking away from the project and that he may need help to break the news to county officials, who he called “stakeholders.” The pastors and Roope agreed to continue their discussions.

Roope, it seemed, saw the light.

But on May 24, just eight days after the meeting, Roope closed on the purchase of the property at 825 Drake Ave. Two days later, the county issued a building permit for the oversized development.

The county didn’t have much of a choice on the building permit. While all five members of the county’s board of supervisors have been critical of the development, they have said their hands are tied by Senate Bill 35, a 2018 state law which restricts local governments from rejecting multi-family residential developments that satisfy specific criteria. The project at 825 Drake Ave. checked all the boxes. 

Roope, however, did have a choice. In fact, Roope stated during the meeting that he was the sole decision-maker on whether he would move forward with the development.

I was at the meeting, which Thompkins called an “intervention,” and I thought that Roope was going to throw in the towel. Roope has told me more than once that he wouldn’t have become involved with the project if he had understood the community. I called him to find out what happened.

“I definitely considered it and did a lot of research for the past couple of weeks,” Roope said. “I had a call with the lender and investors. The financing–there would be an enormous penalty for me. I had an interest rate lock. It would be a permanent problem for me walking away from the lender.”

The county, too, is providing funding to Roope, despite the supervisors denouncing the project. Last year, the board of supervisors unanimously approved an allocation of $1,850,000 for the development from the Marin County Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

Then, in March, the board voted 3-2 to approve the issuance of $40 million in tax-exempt bonds from the California Municipal Finance Authority, enabling Roope to finance the bulk of the development’s cost—pegged at almost $57 million in a recent application for state funding. That includes a $6 million developer fee for Roope.

The Marin Housing Authority has committed to provide 25 Section 8 project-based housing vouchers for the project, providing a revenue stream of $463,728 in annual rental income. And the gifts keep on coming. The agency is now considering handing over ten more vouchers, Marin Housing Authority Director Kimberly Carroll told the Pacific Sun.

With the building permit in hand, Roope could break ground tomorrow at 825 Drake Ave. Instead, he said that he’s taking the next 90 to 180 days, and possibly longer, to make improvements to the project. On April 30, Roope signed an agreement with the county regarding the changes.

The four-page document contains a few solid commitments, such as providing one parking spot, either on- or off-site, for each of the 74 units. That’s a substantial increase from the original 24 spaces planned on the property.

However, other terms in the agreement simply require a “good faith” or “reasonable” effort that may or may not result in change. One of those vague areas addresses reducing the size and scope of the building. 

“Some of the language might be soft because there’s so much subject to other people’s decisions,” Roope said. “I have to deliver a certain amount of units [74], since I’ve gotten my financing–not just from the state, but from private lenders and investors. Could I deliver that in multiple locations? I have to secure another place to do that and I’m exploring those kinds of things right now.”

Another aspect of the agreement involves Roope possibly making a donation to local projects. Although the amount of $2.5 million has been bandied about by community members and recently reported in the Marin Independent Journal, the agreement does not specify a number. In fact, the agreement stipulates that a donation is dependent on whether Roope earns a profit during the development phase. I asked Roope for clarification.

“No determination yet on how much will be donated,” Roope said. “It will also be TBD based on whatever costs are incurred for project changes, etc. It will depend on what is left. I don’t take any developer profit until the project is built and fully leased.”

The community has concerns about the affordability of the apartments. The rents are calculated based on the median income for Marin County, which is substantially higher than Marin City’s median income. Unfortunately, that puts the rent out of reach for most Marin City residents.

The agreement has a clause that covers this issue, stating that any cost savings resulting from project changes will be used for “increased affordability.” It remains to be seen whether any savings eventually materialize.

Critics have indicated the agreement doesn’t guarantee lower rents or much else. But Marin County Administrator Matthew Hymel, who signed the agreement on behalf of the county, believes it is responsive to issues raised by the community and will ultimately improve the development.

“I think one of the structures of the agreement is that things like affordability and size and scope require more analysis,” Hymel said.  And part of the agreement is that Roope will come back to us for subsequent approval.”

However, it might be difficult for the county to withhold approval on the terms that only obligate Roope to make a “good faith” or “reasonable” effort.

Regardless of the agreement, Bettie Hodges, a Marin City native and founder of Save Our City, remains adamantly opposed to the project. Last month, her group filed a lawsuit, paid for by an anonymous donor, against Roope and the county. The legal action seeks to reverse the board of supervisors approval of $40 million in tax-exempt bonds.

“The project is ruining the fabric of the community in so many ways,” Hodges said. “Consider all of the issues people have raised. It’s an assault in ways that are hard to describe. If you place a non-native plant in a garden, it takes over. The building at 825 Drake is a large foreign object that will undermine the garden of Marin City. We have to do everything we can to throw a monkey wrench in this process.”

Tick Talk: Blood-sucking arachnids spread disease in Northern California

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Tick Talk: Blood-sucking arachnids spread disease in Northern California

What the heck is that thing in the photo? A hazelnut? A small dumpling with eight legs? Perhaps an odd seed pod? Nope.

Behold the engorged tick, swollen with blood stolen from its host. Not only do the little suckers feast on our vital red fluid, but they can also leave behind parting gifts, including the bacteria that causes Lyme disease and other tick-borne illnesses. It’s possible for ticks found in California to transmit seven different diseases to humans, according to the California Department of Public Health.

Exactly a decade ago, I wrote an article about Lyme disease featuring “Jane,” a Marin County native who had been suffering from a myriad of debilitating symptoms for three years.

“It started with a violent flu—the worst flu I ever had in my entire life,” Jane told me in 2013. “Then, I would wake up with numb arms and hands. My vision was slightly blurry.”

New symptoms continued to emerge. Severe headaches, extreme fatigue, joint and bone pain, memory loss and dizziness. Jane spent more and more time in bed.

She trudged to 14 doctors, who poked, prodded and misdiagnosed her. Finally, in May of 2013, the 15th doctor tested her for Lyme disease. Although Jane didn’t recall being bitten by a tick, nor had she noticed the tell-tale bullseye rash some people develop, she had Lyme.

While she was relieved to finally have a diagnosis, she was also confused—and rightfully so.

“First, I was told there was no Lyme in Northern California,” Jane said. “Then, I was diagnosed with chronic Lyme, a disease that I was told didn’t exist.”

In 2012, about a year before Jane’s diagnosis, a group of women in Silicon Valley started the Bay Area Lyme Foundation and convinced a couple of tick ecologists to conduct a study. The results, which came out in 2014, caused a stir in the science community. Sure enough, Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium that causes Lyme, was present in 1% to 7% of the western blacklegged ticks collected from Bay Area trails and parks, depending on the location.

“We found ticks carrying B. burgdorferi in nearly every park that we looked, and not just in wooded areas …” said Dr. Dan Salkeld, an ecologist and epidemiologist who was one of the study’s lead authors.

Based on this study and others, the medical community no longer quarrels about whether Lyme exists in Northern California. However, there are still many controversies surrounding the disease.

“No one is denying that Lyme disease is real,” said Dr. Matt Willis, Marin County’s public health officer. Willis contracted the disease years ago and had a bullseye rash. Fortunately, he was diagnosed and cured rather quickly.

“Lyme disease has been well established,” he continued. “The debate is around its prevalence.”

The Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District collects ticks year-round from trails, parks and recreation areas in both counties. The adult and young ticks, called nymphs, are tested for the bacterium that causes Lyme disease, and Borrelia miyamotoi, a bacterium that causes tick-borne relapsing fever.

In conjunction with the state, the district also tests for other pathogens, including the bacterium that causes anaplasmosis, a disease that is on the rise in Marin County, according to Willis.

About 2% of the adult ticks in Marin are infected with the bacteria that causes Lyme. Sonoma County fares a bit better at 1.5%.

Those percentages more than double when looking at the infection rate for the nymphs, which are about the size of poppy seeds. In Marin, almost 4.2% of the nymphs harbor Lyme-causing bacteria. The rate is 4.1% in Sonoma County.

“We’re in nymphal season now, from spring through summer,” said Dr. Kelly Liebman, an entomologist and the scientific programs manager for the Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District. “The ticks are out there, and the pathogens are there at low levels.”

But hotspots exist in certain areas, where a much higher percentage of the ticks carry pathogens, said Wendy Adams, research grant director for the Bay Area Lyme Foundation. And those locations can change from year to year.

In a Bolinas Lagoon study, 31% of the collected ticks harbored at least one pathogen, including the bacteria that causes Lyme, tick-borne relapsing fever and anaplasmosis, according to a 2021 research article by Salkeld that was published in the American Society for Microbiology Journal.

While the number of reported cases of Lyme disease remains low in the Bay Area—eight in Marin County and seven in Sonoma County in the last two years—experts agree underreporting occurs.

Consider the backflips by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which states that “many cases do not get reported” because health care providers are “busy.” The CDC receives 35,000 reports of Lyme disease cases annually, yet the agency uses insurance records to estimate that approximately 476,000 Americans are diagnosed and treated for Lyme disease each year.

It’s no wonder that the Bay Area Lyme Foundation is funneling millions of dollars into research at dozens of esteemed institutions, such as Stanford University, Johns Hopkins University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The organization aims to make Lyme disease easy to diagnose and simple to cure.

Diagnosis is difficult because the two-tiered Lyme antibody test recommended by the CDC, which has been around for 29 years, is known to provide false negatives. It often takes a few weeks for the body to produce enough antibodies to measure, causing a delay in treatment, according to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

“Accurate diagnostics are the linchpin for being treated appropriately for Lyme Disease,” said Adams, the research grant director. “We are hoping that with new, more sensitive detection technologies, we will be able to detect the bacteria itself in a blood sample, and not just the immune response which varies from infection to infection.” 

Adams knows firsthand the importance of early and accurate diagnostics. She went five years before being diagnosed with Lyme disease, and it took her several more years to fully recover.

Many Lyme patients and their doctors believe delayed treatment plays a factor in chronic Lyme, a condition the CDC refers to as Post-treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome. Even after the prescribed course of antibiotics, some people are still plagued by illness.

Last week, I revisited Jane, whose name is actually Kirsten Seifert-Stein. During our first interview, she insisted on a pseudonym because she feared her family’s health coverage would be canceled due to her Lyme diagnosis.

Ten years post diagnosis, Seifert-Stein, now 53, has not fully recovered. Her health insurance was never canceled, but it doesn’t cover much anyway. She stopped tallying her out-of-pocket medical expenses years ago when the total hit $100,000.

“I’m concentrating on my health and getting better,” she said. “But I’ve sacrificed a lot to do that, Including my career, education and relationships with friends and family.”

Ditto for Sarah Reid, 59, who was also diagnosed with Lyme in 2013. The Santa Rosa resident’s experience is eerily similar to Seifert-Stein’s. Reid doesn’t remember removing a tick or having a bullseye rash. Despite a decade of treatment, she hasn’t been cured.

“I have a persistent disease that pretty much is with me constantly,” Reid said. “Lyme has caused me a lot of trauma, both financially and emotionally, in trying to get diagnosed and treated.”

Remarkably, both women still venture into the great outdoors when they feel up to it. Reid volunteers for the horse trail patrol and rides in Sonoma County parks and preserves, while Seifert-Stein mountain bikes and walks her dog throughout Marin. They agree that preventing tick borne illnesses is the key.

“Take precautions,” Seifert-Stein said. “Use tick repellent, wear the right clothing and do tick checks. It’s OK to go outside.”

For tips on preventing tick bites, visit the Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District and the Bay Area Lyme Foundation.

‘Posh’ Marin and its homeless residents capture attention from tabloids

Nikki Silverstein
-
36
‘Posh’ Marin and its homeless residents capture attention from tabloids

Marin County became the hot tabloid topic this month with three sensational stories splashed across the pages of the New York Post and the Daily Mail.

The trio of articles scream about “posh” Marin allowing hundreds of “vagrants” and “tweakers” to live in recreational vehicles on Binford Road in Novato, bringing crime, drugs and devastation to the area. The New York Post calls Binford Road “shocking,” while the London-based Daily Mail maintains there are over two miles of vehicles, making it “one of the largest encampments in the country.”

I did some fact checking. In addition to interviewing county officials and law enforcement, I spent three days on Binford Road meeting its residents.

Actually, 86 people live in RVs and other vehicles on Binford Road, a stretch of pavement running alongside Highway 101 in an unincorporated part of Marin County. For years, homeless folks have occasionally taken up residence there, but the population swelled during the pandemic.

Most of the residents are from Marin; however, some have relocated from neighboring Sonoma County. Many municipalities in both counties now strictly enforce parking limits and RV parking bans. Binford Road may be the last haven around.

Bonnie Silveria, 53, arrived at Binford Road about two months ago, after losing her Rohnert Park home when her mother passed away. The RV where Silveria now lives has all the touches of home, with a small veranda overlooking the marsh. It took her a while to find a safe place to settle. Rohnert Park shooed her out and Petaluma made her move every 72 hours.

Silveria’s RV is one in a line of 135 vehicles extending 1.2 miles, with periodic breaks where there are no parked RVs, trailers or cars. Last month, county workers began installing berms and other barriers to prevent new people from taking up roadside residence.

The Binford Road encampment isn’t even close to being the largest in the country. In March, the Los Angeles Times reported on a six-mile-long camp with 425 recreational vehicles in LA County. The population at the “Zone,” a homeless encampment in Phoenix, has ranged from 500 to 1,000 people, although it is now being cleared block by block. The list goes on.

Both the New York Post and the Daily Mail call Marin “posh.” Sure, parts of Marin are pretty swanky. But Binford Road isn’t among them. In an area zoned for commercial and industrial use, the folks living in their vehicles share the neighborhood with an RV storage lot, a self-storage facility and a small county airport. Marin’s main freeway borders the west side of Binford Road and a marsh abuts the east.

The claims of criminal activity are exaggerated, according to the Marin County Sheriff’s Office, which has a homeless outreach deputy assigned part-time to Binford Road. Last week, I did a ride-along with Deputy Mike Thompson while he patrolled the area.

“For an encampment that has close to 90 people, we get very few calls related to actual crime,” Thompson said. “Our department put out a social media post recently on an arrest involving drugs and a gun. A lot of people like to think that that happens every day, with every single person and every single trailer up here doing exactly that. There’s no evidence of it.”

Thompson provides a monthly report about Binford Road to the Marin County Board of Supervisors. Mostly, he said, activities consist of “nuisance behavior,” such as people walking in the road or illegally parked cars.

“The calls out here are very minor,” he said.

The stories of the people living on Binford Road aren’t unique. I’ve been covering homelessness for years, and the folks living on this two-lane road have the same issues as the scores of other unhoused people I’ve met. They cite lack of affordable housing as the chief reason they’re homeless, with job loss a close second.

Many working class folks live on Binford Road, people who leave in the morning for work and come back home to their RV in the evening, Thompson said. But they don’t earn enough for a permanent home.

The median monthly rent in Marin County for a two-bedroom is $3,950, according to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development data. In Sonoma County, that same home rents for $2,432. Considering that a full-time, minimum wage worker grosses under $2,700 a month, it’s easy to grasp the gravity of the housing crisis.

Sprinkle in the impact of the pandemic, unexpected medical expenses, mental health issues and substance abuse, and one gets a pretty good picture of what sent people out to Binford Road.

Last week, while I walked Binford Road with Marin County Supervisor Eric Lucan, residents Gale and Raymond Staley invited us into their trailer. The married couple, who fell in love three decades ago when they worked together in Petaluma, told us they used to own a home in Sonoma County, where they raised their three children. 

Unfortunately, a series of incidents chipped away at their financial security. Around 2008, the Staleys joined six million other Americans who lost their homes during the banking crisis. When COVID hit, Raymond Staley, 62, was diagnosed with Parkinson’s and other serious medical conditions, ending his 40-year career at Kmart and leaving him unable to work. Gale Staley, 65, a travel agent, was a casualty of the pandemic layoffs. In September, the couple moved to Binford Road when the Bel Marin Keys home they were renting was sold. 

Often, as with the Staleys, it’s a combination of factors that send people down the path to homelessness. Providing stability and a leg up can set them on a new trajectory, which is the reason Supervisor Lucan is working to help the Staleys and their neighbors get back on their feet. Lucan is adamant that the current residents will not be displaced.

“We do not want to rip people from their housing, and we’re not enforcing a 72-hour parking rule,” Lucan said. “It took four to five years for Binford Road to grow like this. It’s going to take time to find better options for each of these individuals.”

The county has launched monthly service fairs at Binford Road to jump start the process. And the efforts are paying off. Three former Binford Road residents recently received permanent housing, according to Gary Naja-Riese, Marin County’s Homelessness Division director.

Naja-Riese says that multiple county departments have worked together to provide basic services, such as porta-potties, hand-washing stations and trash pickup. Sen. Mike McGuire secured $500,000 for the county from state surplus funds, with a significant portion going to Binford Road. The county is waiting to hear whether it will receive an additional $1.5 million in funding. And a social worker will soon be working full time overseeing Binford Road programs.

“The goal is to move people from Binford to permanent housing,” Naja-Riese said.

Clearly, it’s not the Wild West on Binford Road. This begs the question: Why did the New York Post and the Daily Mail descend on Novato—in the same four-day period—with reporters, photographers and drones, resulting in three stories that contain outlandish claims?

Exploitation comes to mind, as with the stark photos of the less than tidy areas belonging to a few tinkerers, mechanics and even a hoarder or two. 

As Deputy Thompson and I drove past the possessions overflowing from an RV, he talked about his other law enforcement duty—serving court papers to citizens. It gives him a window into what goes on behind the closed doors of private homes.

“There are a lot of hoarders everywhere,” Thompson said. “We just don’t see them.”

I contacted the three tabloid reporters multiple times to ask about their coverage. Daily Mail reporter Emma Jones replied via Twitter and email, directing me to talk to her colleague, Josh Boswell, who also wrote about Binford Road. Boswell never responded, nor did Stephanie Pagones of the New York Post.

Sadly, the hyped representation in those papers only served to demoralize the residents of Binford Road. 

“I don’t trust reporters,” said Ilan Miller, 59, a Binford Road resident. “Fake news. They made us look disgusting. These people, who don’t know the area and don’t know us.”

Miller, a handyman, hit hard times when his business dropped off during COVID. A tumor in his head is inoperable, although he can still do some work. He moved to Marin four years ago to be close to his family. Then his mother died, leaving him with funeral and burial bills.

As if the tabloid tales aren’t disheartening enough, Binford Road residents must also contend with locals who oppose the encampment. Tires have been slashed on motorhomes and other vehicles.

Cars whiz by at speeds higher than the 55 miles per hour limit, even with people walking on the narrow shoulder of the road to visit a neighbor or get to one of the restroom areas.

“It’s intentional,” Lucan said.

One particularly outspoken person who would like to see the Binford residents move out of the area is Novato resident Toni Shroyer, who lost her bid for a seat on the Marin County Board of Supervisors in 2018. 

Shroyer didn’t respond to my calls and emails, but she claimed on Facebook to possess “evidence of feces, toxins, oil, etc. going into the wetlands.” Her many photos of Binford Road failed to reveal more than some household trash.

Although Shroyer stated her Binford Road concerns are about the environment, it’s clear that’s not her only gripe. On social media, she discussed calling child protective services on a family living on Binford Road with an “underaged” daughter.

“Being homeless in and of itself is not a reason for investigation by Children and Family Services,” Naja-Riese said.

It seems unlikely that Shroyer will give up her campaign anytime soon. Thompson’s phone rang while I sat in his patrol car, and Shroyer’s ID popped up. She’s a frequent caller, he said.

Thompson takes it in stride, saying that he feels compassion for the people living on Binford Road, yet he also wants to be the voice of reason. He investigates the frequent complaints he receives about feces and oil directed into the lagoon, and he has found no proof. One call described a pipe going directly from an RV’s septic tank to the wetlands. It turned out to be a downspout, part of an awning.

“There is a resolution here,” Thompson said. “We can manage this in a way that allows people to exist safely and doesn’t harm the environment.”

Gale Staley is in agreement with Thompson, and said that she and her husband appreciate the beauty of the wetlands. She also had a message for the tabloids, Shroyer and anyone else dogging people on Binford Road: “I don’t think there’s anyone living out here by choice. It happened to us in a matter of a year. Eighteen months ago, we had it all. It can happen to anyone.”

Richardson Bay anchor-outs consider offer of housing on land

Nikki Silverstein
-
5
Richardson Bay anchor-outs consider offer of housing on land

A new program launched this month offers subsidized housing on land for people currently living aboard boats anchored off the shores of Sausalito.

Most of the scrappy sailors, known as “anchor-outs,” don’t want to leave the free anchorage and their nautical lifestyle to become landlubbers.

But the promise of long-term housing seems to be softening the blow, at least for some. They are resigned to giving up their boats on Richardson Bay, beaten down by the years of battling local officials hell-bent on dismantling the anchor-out community.

Others vow to stay until the bitter end, saying the only way they’ll leave is in handcuffs or a body bag.

“If [getting] housing entails getting rid of my boat, I’m not going to capitulate in any way shape or form,” said Aaron Kelly, 43, who has lived on the anchorage for 13 years.

Part of the problem boils down to mistrust of the Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA). While the RBRA is overseeing the new housing program, it’s also the local authority tasked by the state to remove the boats by Oct. 15, 2026.

One hand giveth, and the other taketh. And the taking process has been particularly harsh.

The anchor-outs’ dwindling population bears testament to the RBRA’s resolve in its mission to protect “environmentally sensitive waters.” In 2019, 200 vessels were anchored out on Richardson Bay.

Till then, the agency had largely ignored a regulation limiting boats in Richardson Bay to a 72-hour stay. Then, four years ago, under pressure from the state, the RBRA began enforcing the rule.

The harbormaster stepped up the agency’s boat seizure and crushing operation, often leaving people homeless. Today, only about 50 boats and 60 people remain on the water, according to the RBRA.

The anchor-outs and their supporters maintain their boats aren’t polluting the estuary. Instead, they point to sewage spills from treatment plants, pesticides running downhill into the water and the Chevron plant located in the East Bay. During the last 25 years, the oil company has been repeatedly fined by the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to comply with federal environmental laws at its Richmond facilities.

“It’s a smear campaign,” said Arthur Bruce, who has lived on Richardson Bay for seven years. “The RBRA wants to destroy a culture under the guise of environmentalism—all at the behest of wealthy landowners who don’t want to look at anchor-outs because they think we’re bad for real estate investments. This is a war on the poor.”

The RBRA claims the anchor-outs destroy the indigenous eelgrass, subaquatic vegetation, which certain animals rely on for food and habitat. Small fish hide in it, while others lay eggs in it. Fishing birds looking for food also depend on the eelgrass.

Whatever the real reason, if all goes as the RBRA plans, the anchor-outs will soon be banished from living on Richardson Bay. However, this group of mariners, unlike their former unfortunate neighbors whose boats were destroyed, will have access to housing on land, courtesy of the State of California.

State Senator Mike McGuire secured $3 million in funding for the RBRA’s three-year subsidized housing program, which will be administered by the Marin Housing Authority (MHA). The county also kicked in $344,680 to provide short-term case management for the anchor-outs.

Successfully housing the mariners relies on a multi-pronged approach and partnerships with other agencies, according to Brad Gross, the RBRA’s executive director. The goal is to move about 17 households a year from their boats into housing at scattered sites across the county.

“The program is designed to last for 12 months,” Gross said. “During that period, the Marin Housing Authority will be seeking federal vouchers for these people. As they transition out and into an actual Section 8 voucher, we’ll bring another person into the program.”

Additionally, social workers contracted by the county will work with the mariners to help them adjust to life on land and provide other wrap-around services as needed.

Some anchor-outs, especially those who have lived on the water for years, are dealing with issues that make housing on land somewhat appealing. Aging, declining health and deteriorating boats make life on the anchorage more difficult.

However, a chief concern among the boat dwellers is what will happen after the program terminates. Some say they’ve long been on the county’s waiting list for Section 8 vouchers. They’re scared to leave their boats, only to end up homeless after a year in the RBRA’s temporary housing.

Gross is adamant that the mariners will stay housed.

“I have assurance—the MHA says they never put somebody out on the street,” Gross said.

Marin County Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters, who is also president of the RBRA board of directors, concurs.

“The program is intended to be a long-term solution,” Moulton-Peters told the Pacific Sun.

One can hardly blame the mariners for their skepticism. The RBRA doesn’t always act in their best interests. Stories abound about the agency intimidating them and violating their civil rights, especially the female anchor-outs.

A young woman is facing criminal charges for pepper spraying the harbormaster, who unannounced pulled up alongside her boat in the isolated open waters. She says his presence terrified her.

Then there’s Robyn Kelly, an anchor-out who went ashore to spend Thanksgiving with her family. While she was gone, the harbormaster seized and destroyed her boat. That was in 2019, and Kelly is still unhoused today, taking refuge in a San Rafael homeless shelter.

Kelly’s experience isn’t uncommon. The RBRA crushed Sunny Yow’s boat, and she now lives in her vehicle. A handful of other anchor-outs remain unhoused since their vessels were seized and destroyed by the agency.

Yet, both Gross and Moulton-Peters said only people currently living on the water are eligible for the RBRA’s housing program, provided they meet certain criteria.

Shel Snyder recently received notice that she does qualify for housing, and she’s considering it. Her mother is sick, and she feels the timing is right for her to live in a stable home on land.

To give Snyder a bit more incentive to accept, the harbormaster just placed a notice on her boat stating that it’s marine debris. If she doesn’t remove the vessel from the anchorage within 10 days, the RBRA will do it for her.

Long-time anchor-out Peter Glazer plans on hanging tough, telling the Pacific Sun he won’t be leaving Richardson Bay anytime soon. The sailor has lived on a boat, on and off, since 1992, and has witnessed a lot of conflict.

“The RBRA is the master of sabotage,” Glazer said. “They’ve been fighting us for years. We don’t want them breaking up our community.”

San Rafael legal settlement keeps residents in their homes—for now

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
San Rafael legal settlement keeps residents in their homes—for now

A settlement reached last month between the City of San Rafael and a mobile home park owner requires the park to remain open for the next decade, ending 16 months of litigation.

But residents, who own their homes and rent the lot underneath, remain fearful of becoming homeless. At first blush, their fears seem unfounded.

After all, the RV Park of San Rafael, home to about 90 primarily low-income residents, won’t be closing in October, as previously stated by the owners.

“The city has a continuing interest in affordable housing,” said attorney Michael von Loewenfeldt of Wagstaffe, von Loewenfeldt, Busch & Radwick, a firm representing the City of San Rafael. “A bargain was struck that provides the residents with a longer-term certainty than they might have had even if we won the lawsuit. The park could have closed this year or next.”

San Rafael negotiated other important tenant protections, too. A rent hike cap stays in place for current residents, limiting the annual increase to 75% of the local Consumer Price Index.

Residents who paid a contested rent increase of $100 per month from November 2021 through June 2022 will receive a refund.

The park must withdraw pending notices of termination, considered the first step in the eviction process. And all notices to fix violations of park rules are reset, giving affected residents a new 30 day-period to correct the cited problems with their homes.

So, why are the tenants of the RV Park of San Rafael still quaking in their boots?

Residents say they’ve been harassed and intimidated since Harmony Communities, a controversial company that owns and manages dozens of mobile home parks, took over the park in July 2021.

The company has also been involved in litigation with residents in other parks. A Fresno attorney grew so frustrated with Harmony’s tactics that she tweeted about founder Matt Davies’ criminal convictions for drugs and felony assault with a deadly weapon. As a result, Davies did time and agreed to surrender his real estate license.

Harmony’s actions against the San Rafael residents have run the gamut—from name-calling to a mass tenant eviction in February—according to residents and attorneys. Others included hiking rents far more than the max allowed by local law and issuing more than 70 violation notices for minor problems with homes, such as protruding awnings.

Adding insult to injury, Harmony reported the residents’ inconsequential violations to a state agency governing mobile home parks, triggering inspection after inspection.

While the San Rafael settlement agreement remedies most of these issues, at least for the time being, residents understand it can’t stop Davies from continuing an aggressive strategy. And Davies isn’t just managing the RV Park of San Rafael anymore. In February, he and other Harmony principals purchased the park, according to testimony Davies provided in a Marin courtroom last month.

“Harmony and Matt Davies have given the tenants every reason to be terrified,” said Josh Sullivan, managing attorney for Legal Aid of Marin, which is representing some residents. “It’s not like Blair Witch Project terror—Matt Davies is real.”

Last month, Sullivan won a case on behalf of a couple that Harmony was trying to evict. The couple, who has lived in their modular home at the RV Park of San Rafael for more than two decades, was up to date on their rent. Years ago, they hired a contractor to install a kitchen, but failed at the time to get the necessary sign offs from the state agency governing mobile homes.

The judge ruled against Harmony in the eviction.

However, that’s likely not the end of the couple’s troubles. Although the state has now signed off on the kitchen, the park refuses to provide its approval, which is also required to be in complete compliance.

“Matt Davies has repeatedly made it known that the park is not going to cooperate,” Sullivan said. “In every contract, there’s an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. My clients are on a lease. Harmony is breaching that covenant by refusing to sign off when the state and the tenant agree they’ve remedied.”

Another park resident, Alex Vernimmen, 70, finds himself in a similar situation. Vernimmen, who lives with his 96-year-old mother, was also the defendant in an eviction lawsuit brought by Harmony.

In a settlement reached with the park in April, Vernimmen agreed to pay back rent and get state approval for a cabana he had built 18 years ago. Done and done. But the park has not signed off, causing Vernimmen to miss the deadline to file the legal paperwork.

Vernimmen, who is out of money and can’t afford to pay his private attorney for another legal battle, says he’s suffering from depression because of his experience.

The end game seems to be forcing out the current tenants, who benefit from rent control. Several long-term tenants left the park—and the homes that they owned—before the city and Harmony reached the settlement.

“Some did self-evict,” Sullivan said. “They had vulnerabilities, like immigration status. Landlords that are aggressive know that and are rewarded for their aggressiveness. Harmony is trying to chip away at the close-knit community.”

Sherrie Johnston, Harmony’s chief operating officer, declined to answer any detailed questions from the Pacific Sun. Instead, she sent an email criticizing the paper for its previous coverage of the park and a statement declaring victory in the lawsuit with the City of San Rafael.

At the heart of the lawsuit was the question over whether the RV Park of San Rafael is a mobile home park or an RV park. Legally, it’s an important distinction because mobile home park residents are offered more protections than those living in RV parks.

Mobile homes aren’t actually very mobile. It’s extremely expensive to move them and damage often occurs. Many parks don’t even accept used homes. These factors leave mobile home owners exposed to the whims of park management, prompting laws that allow owners to sell their homes in place and capping rent increases.

The state classifies the RV Park of San Rafael as a mobile home park, regardless of its name. And the city’s settlement agreement doesn’t change this fact, nor did it try.

“In this settlement, the city has agreed that the RV Park of San Rafael is in fact an RV park and is in fact exempt from the rent control ordinance,” Johnston wrote.

However, the city does not agree.

“I do not read those provisions [in the settlement] as agreeing that the Park is an RV Park in any way—although they [both parties] do agree that RVs are not subject to rent control under the City’s ordinance,” said von Loewenfeldt, San Rafael’s outside counsel.

It might be easy to laugh at the Harmony team for their misinterpretations and child-like stubbornness—if they weren’t in control of the homes of thousands of low-income people across California, Oregon and Nevada.

Still, Davies, who sports a man bun in his photo on the company website, doesn’t mind making a mockery of his leadership role. In documents obtained by the Pacific Sun, Davies’ email signature includes his title: “The Dude/El Duderino/His Dudeness.” Multiple news outlets have also reported on the company’s practice of responding to inquiries using a prank name with a sexual reference—”Heywood Jablóm.” 

All of this seems to justify the concerns of the residents at the RV Park of San Rafael.

“Harmony will continue to harass us one by one,” Vernimmen, the park resident, said. “Your fence is too high. Your cabana is not legal.”

Opposition growing against Marin City housing project 

Nikki Silverstein
-
8
Opposition growing against Marin City housing project 

The fight against a controversial affordable housing development planned for Marin City has gained momentum since the for-profit developer made insulting remarks about community members.

The fallout was swift for real estate developer Alexis Gevorgian, of AMG & Associates, who told the Pacific Sun last month that residents of the historically Black neighborhood are communists wanting free handouts. Gevorgian also dismissed concerns that the five-story, 74-unit development with only 24 parking spots will tax the overburdened infrastructure of the densely populated area.

Elected officials and residents across Marin County denounced Gevorgian and the development at 825 Drake Ave., which received county approval in November 2020. The day after the Pacific Sun article was published, Gevorgian turned the reins over to another partner in the project, Caleb Roope of The Pacific Companies.

On April 12, Roope met with the Marin City community for three hours. While Roope apologized for his partner’s behavior, he also blamed Gevorgian for all of the project’s alleged faults: bad design, insufficient parking, unaffordable rents and poor community relations.

Roope has been associated with the project almost since its inception, although he claimed that he didn’t pay attention to the details until after Gevorgian’s significant faux pas. The partners have worked together on 40 projects, and there has never been a problem before, according to Roope.

“I just got involved 10 days ago,” said Roope, whose company is based in Eagle, Idaho. “Normally, all this [the architectural planning and community engagement] is done, and we show up and move forward.”

Many residents and their supporters remain skeptical. 

“Roope is just lipstick on a pig,” said Barbara Bogard, a Marin City advocate.

Efforts are now underway on several fronts to stop the project. Save Our City, a group formed to oppose the development, would like to work out an amicable resolution with Roope and the county, but has attorneys standing by.

Assemblymember Damon Connolly isn’t surprised that Roope wasn’t able to drum up any support.

“I have told the developer in no uncertain terms that they have poisoned the well with this community by demonstrating racial animus and a failure to understand the history and needs of this community,” Connolly said in an email. “…After listening to the community and hearing their perspective, I have significant doubts that this project will move forward.”

The development presents bigger problems than Gevorgian, according to critics. It’s downright dangerous to add 182 new residents—a population increase of 6.2%—to Marin City, a neighborhood rife with serious infrastructure issues.

Not only is 825 Drake Ave. in a state-designated high fire hazard zone, but the area is also prone to flooding. Public safety issues are compounded because there’s only one road in and out of Marin City.

An outright purchase of the property, preferably by the county or a nonprofit, would be the quickest way to put the brakes on the project. Or the county could do a land swap with the developers.

AMG & Associates, Gevorgian’s company, ignored inquiries by a local nonprofit to discuss buying 825 Drake Ave. When the Pacific Sun contacted Gevorgian via text message to ask about the issue, he responded, “I’m no longer involved.”

However, Roope confirmed that Gevorgian’s company still owns the one-acre property, which it purchased for $2.5 million.

Roope says his firm, The Pacific Companies, has a contract with an option to purchase the property from Gevorgian for $2.5 million. But Roope will only buy the property if his financing from multiple sources comes through.The development is projected to cost nearly $57 million.

So far, so good for Roope. The Marin County Board of Supervisors recently approved the issuance of $40 million in tax-exempt state bonds for the project.

But therein lies the rub in selling the property to the county or a nonprofit. Roope competed with other real estate developers for the tax-exempt bonds. If he doesn’t build the 74 affordable housing units, the state will penalize him on future applications to finance other developments, according to Roope.

A 1031 exchange, more commonly known as a land swap, could possibly work for Roope, allowing him to use the state financing on a project located elsewhere in Marin County. Stephanie Moulton-Peters, the county supervisor representing Southern Marin, is interested in the idea. Even so, both parties acknowledge it may be difficult finding an appropriate property where Roope could build a similar housing complex.

“My first choice is to try to figure out how to make this project work,” Roope said in an interview with the Pacific Sun. “Unfortunately, I didn’t have the window on what was happening at the local level, and that’s my fault. What I have now doesn’t really work for the local community and I’ve got to figure out what I can do to make it better.”

Roope is exploring building underground parking, with a goal of providing one parking space for each apartment. Still, he doesn’t know if he can swing it financially.

He also recognizes that the project is too far along to change the size of the building and reduce the number of units. Major modifications to the project could place the financing at risk, which is the reason Roope repeatedly stated during the Marin City meeting that he doesn’t think he can make the community happy.

“There’s also this substantial silent majority of people that…need this housing,” Roope told the Pacific Sun. “On the one hand, I totally get all the concerns in the community, and I’m going to try my very best. On the other hand, I consider one of my jobs to find the people you’re not hearing from and get them housing. That’s how I view my role in solving the housing crisis.”

In the meantime, community members aren’t holding their collective breath for an easy solution. This week, they filed paperwork to prevent the Marin Housing Authority from providing 25 project-based Section 8 vouchers to 825 Drake Ave.

Each voucher is like a bar of gold to the developer because the government guarantees market rate rent for the apartment. The 25 vouchers cover more than one-third of the units in the building, helping the development pencil out financially. 

If the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) approves the vouchers, it equates to $463,728 in annual rental income for the development. 

“That revenue stream helps the financing of the project for sure,” Roope said.

Marin City resident Marilyn Mackel, a retired attorney and Los Angeles County court commissioner, feels confident that HUD won’t release the vouchers for a variety of reasons, including “no sunshine for seniors.” The new five-story building perched on the hillside property will cast a literal shadow over the existing two-story, low-income senior housing complex just 60 feet away.

The development at 825 Drake Ave. will negatively impact the character of the community in other ways, too, which could influence HUD’s decision. The rents, though considered affordable based on the area median income (AMI) for Marin County, are out of reach for most Marin City residents.

The county AMI for an individual is $116,000. However, Marin City’s AMI is just 28% of the county’s figure—$32,847 for an individual—based on the most recent Census Bureau data.

The influx of people with higher incomes could lead to higher rents throughout Marin City, which is home to the largest Black community in the county. This might price some residents out of their homes, leading to gentrification.

Roope says he is looking at the rent structure and hopes to make some adjustments.

However, Marin City has more affordable housing than any other area of the county, which is another fly in the ointment. Last month, state officials rejected the county’s mandated plan for new housing, noting the need for “more housing choices and affordability across greater geographies throughout the county,” to affirmatively further fair housing opportunities.

In other words, stop placing most of the county’s affordable housing in Marin City.

Legitimate questions arise about the county’s motivations and actions with regard to the Drake Avenue development, especially when considering the high concentration of affordable housing that already exists in Marin City.

The county maintains that it was forced to approve the project due to Senate Bill 35, a 2018 state law restricting local governments from rejecting multi-family residential developments that satisfy specific criteria. Unincorporated Marin County is subject to SB 35 because it has not built enough new housing to meet the state-mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which aims to resolve the housing shortage. 

But SB 35 author, Sen. Scott Wiener, opines that “when local communities refuse to create enough housing—instead punting housing creation to other communities—then the State needs to ensure that all communities are equitably contributing to regional housing needs. Local control must be about how a community meets its housing goals, not whether it meets those goals.”

Clearly, Marin City has not been “punting housing creation,” which could have given the county a reason to reject the development.

Even assuming that the county had to approve 825 Drake Ave., it had no obligation to facilitate the project financing. Yet, the county provided a greenlight for the issuance of $40 million in tax-exempt bonds and then bestowed the gift of 25 housing vouchers.

The development kills two birds with one stone for the county. First, the 74-units help the county reach its RHNA goal for housing.

It also provides a solution to “overhousing” at Golden Gate Village, a public housing project in Marin City that is operated by the Marin Housing Authority. Overhousing refers to residents who live in units larger than necessary, which is a violation of HUD regulations.

HUD has been exerting pressure on the local housing authority to find new homes for the residents of about 35 overhoused units at Golden Gate Village. It’s quite convenient that the housing authority allocated 25 housing vouchers to the Drake Avenue project–a huge step in remedying the thorny overhousing issue.

Mackel, the retired court commissioner, believes the county’s actions, along with other issues, provide a strong legal basis for a temporary injunction—effectively stopping the developer from breaking ground until a judge rules on claims brought forth in a lawsuit.

As a last resort, the community is prepared to participate in peaceful civil disobedience to prevent the construction of the building. They hope they don’t have to.

“We’d rather the developer cut his losses and walk,” Mackel said.

Mobile crisis intervention program launches in San Rafael

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Mobile crisis intervention program launches in San Rafael

The “subject down” call came into the San Rafael police dispatcher on Thursday morning at 10:22 a.m. A passerby reported that a man was lying on the ground at the corner of Second and A.

Instead of dispatching paramedics or the police to assess the situation, San Rafael’s new mobile crisis intervention team, Specialized Assistance for Everyone (SAFE), responded to the call. On March 29, San Rafael became the first city in Marin County to launch a mobile crisis program. Several such programs already exist in Sonoma County.

Two civilian first responders, specially trained to provide services for vulnerable community members, found the man prone and groaning on the sidewalk. Priscilla Ferreira and her trainee, La Tasha Knighten, noted the smell of alcohol on the man, but also saw that he had head injuries.

Under gentle questioning from Ferreira, the man explained in Spanish that he had been robbed and beaten the previous evening. Ferreira, who is fluent in Spanish, said that SAFE would take him to the hospital in their rig, and he readily agreed.

However, the man kept falling back down when Ferreira and Knighten tried to help him up. Equipped with police radios and tied-in to the 911 dispatchers, they called for paramedics to transport the man to the hospital.

Within a few minutes, five paramedics from the San Rafael and Central Marin fire departments were on scene. Perhaps it was the presence of the large group or a moment of confusion, but the victim suddenly changed his mind about receiving services.

“I want to die,” he yelled. “Leave me alone.”

Ferreira, who had established a rapport with the man, spoke with him again. He calmed down, cooperated and was soon on his way to the emergency room in the paramedics’ ambulance.

It was a typical call—if there is such a thing for a mobile crisis unit—with the desired outcome.

“He could have just walked away, but we got him the medical attention he needed,” Ferreira said. “It feels good.”

My assignment this particular morning was to observe the San Rafael SAFE team in action. While I wasn’t permitted to accompany Ferreira and Knighten in their vehicle, I did a ride along with Sergeant Justin Graham of the San Rafael Police Department. Graham and I shadowed the crisis response team.

“SAFE is a separate entity,” Graham said. “It’s the fourth leg of public safety in San Rafael, alongside police, fire and medical.”

It is unusual for the police to follow a SAFE team, SAFE director Aziz Majid said. The teams respond alone to 80% of the calls, with the police dispatched only when a safety issue arises. 

After just three weeks, the program is already having a positive impact in San Rafael. The SAFE teams have handled 10 to 14 calls during each 12-hour shift, allowing the overburdened police and emergency medical personnel to focus on situations requiring their expertise.

“We don’t work for the police—we work with them,” Majid said. “Our team doesn’t carry weapons or handcuffs. We have radios and come armed with empathy.”

SAFE primarily serves the homeless community, which accounts for 40% of their calls, and people with mental health and substance use issues. In addition to de-escalating crisis situations, team members provide a variety of services, including transportation, referrals to other organizations and harm reduction methods, such as needle exchanges.

The City of San Rafael signed a three-year contract with SAFE for $750,000 annually, according to Majid. The program currently operates seven days a week, from 8am to 8pm. 

Ferreira and Knighten had responded to two calls prior to helping the man with the head injury. They began their morning by assisting eight homeless people who were being evicted from an unauthorized encampment on private property. Although the campers declined transportation, SAFE gave them clean clothes, food and information about services in the area.

The SAFE duo also went to The Pink Owl, a downtown coffee shop, in response to a public disturbance call. A man known to have mental health issues reportedly entered the shop and accused staff of poisoning his coffee. The man was gone by the time Ferreira and Knighten arrived; however, they checked on the baristas to ensure everyone was OK after the incident.

It wasn’t even 11am, and Ferreira and Knighten were preparing for their fourth call of the day —one that this reporter couldn’t attend. They would be meeting with the Downtown Streets Team, a nonprofit organization with programs for homeless people, to discuss the confidential needs of a specific client.

SAFE launched in Petaluma in July 2021. Since then, it has expanded to Rohnert Park; Cotati; Sonoma State University, making it the first mobile crisis program on a California state university campus; and now San Rafael. All of the SAFE teams are under the auspices of the Petaluma People Services Center, which runs more than 70 human services programs.

Majid, SAFE’s director, likes to say that there is “no call too small” for SAFE. Teams can transport a homeless person to St. Vincent’s for a free meal or hand out bottles of water. Then there are the more challenging calls, like a three-hour family mediation.

“A lot of these calls are mental health or substance related—nonviolent,” Majid said. “Police officers are trained for violent or criminal issues. SAFE provides trauma informed care. We watch gestures and body posture, won’t overact and respect personal space. We sit there, listen, give empathy and take our time on a call.”

SAFE employs 34 people across Sonoma and Marin counties, most working in the field as first responders. The needs are different in each community that SAFE serves. In San Rafael, every shift is staffed with a bilingual, Spanish-speaking person. Bilingual SAFE team navigators follow up with clients and refer them to resources in their area.

All team members have a background in the mental health or behavioral fields. Upon joining SAFE, staff go through two weeks of SAFE classroom training and five weeks of field training.

Recently hired, Knighten, who is completing her field training in San Rafael, has more than 13 years of experience working with youth on probation and managing diversion programs. She’s also attending school to become a licensed therapist.

Ferreira started with SAFE a year ago in Petaluma and has transferred to work in San Rafael’s new program. Her psychology and sociology degrees helped prepare her for the job, as did her experience working with autistic children and at a domestic violence shelter. Ferreira is currently working on her master’s degree in conflict resolution and negotiation.

Majid onboarded to the first SAFE team in Sonoma County as an EMT. The Marin native previously worked at San Quentin teaching financial literacy.

The varied expertise of the team members is beneficial because of the wide range of calls they receive. A team could go from working with a family on a dispute about child custody, to an eviction call, followed by responding to someone attempting suicide.

“Then there are those calls where a person doesn’t want to engage,” Majid said. “We respect that. It might take four or five calls to break the ice and make a connection with someone in need, but we keep trying. As long as we’re building rapport, it’s a success.”

Fairfax under fire for passing renter protection ordinances

Nikki Silverstein
-
10
Fairfax under fire for passing renter protection ordinances

Marin’s chronic housing shortage combined with rising inflation has pushed the rental market to a breaking point. Nowhere is that more evident than in the showdown taking place in Fairfax between renters, landlords and the town council.

The conflict began in November, when the progressive Fairfax Town Council passed two ordinances to protect renters, who account for 37% of the town’s households. Since then, verbal battles have played out during prolonged public comment periods at council meetings. It’s gotten downright disagreeable at times.

Although the council discussed, debated and negotiated the renter protections for eight months at public meetings prior to approving the ordinances, landlords are now demanding that both be repealed. One caps annual rent increases and the other provides strong measures to prevent arbitrary evictions, commonly known as a “just cause” eviction ordinance. 

Landlords have leveled a variety of claims against the council members for voting in the ordinances. Elected officials failed to notify property owners that they were considering renter protections, they overreached their authority as a council and they have caused economic and unintended consequences, according to statements made by landlords at council meetings.

“There’s nothing in those ordinances that I would accept,” Philip Salaverry, owner of a Fairfax duplex, told the Pacific Sun. “The two ordinances combined are 36 pages long, and all of it is terrible for the housing provider.”

The town’s rent stabilization policy limits annual rent increases to an amount equal to 60% of the local CPI or 5%, whichever is lower. The cap is substantially lower than the maximum 10% annual rent increase allowed on units covered by current state law.

Salaverry, a retiree who lives on one side of his duplex, said he had leased the other half to long-term tenants for the past 15 years, never raising the rent more than 2% annually. But the financial risks are too great due to the ordinances, he said, which forced him to remove the unit from the residential market. It will soon be converted into a vacation rental that he will list on Airbnb.

In February, Salaverry co-founded Marin Residents, a political action committee (PAC), to fight the ordinances and educate property owners about rent control and housing issues. The group, which he said is grassroots, was responsible for gathering the 25 signatures necessary to place the issue of repealing the two ordinances on the town council agenda for April 5.

A robust crowd attended the council meeting, with dozens of people commenting during the almost three and a half hours of discussion about the renter protections. In the end, council members declined to bring the requested repeal to a vote. Instead, they voted unanimously to form a subcommittee with the mayor and vice mayor to review the ordinances.

Fairfax’s just cause eviction ordinance appears to be more controversial. Aimed at preventing landlords from evicting renters arbitrarily to benefit from increased rents for future tenants, the ordinance requires property owners to pay punitive damages for violations. It also applies to a broader range of rental dwellings than state law.

The town has scheduled a just cause eviction ordinance workshop, led by an independent facilitator, for May 6. The goal is to involve key stakeholders in a productive conversation about revising the ordinance to make it acceptable to both renters and landlords.

Renters support the workshop, according to Curt Ries, co-chair of the Marin Democratic Socialists of America, the group behind the push for renter protections. However, Ries doesn’t believe that the opposition is willing to come to the table in good faith.

“Most of them are not serious about revising the current ordinances,” Ries said. “The ordinances are very good, very strong. There are minor, but substantive revisions that can be made to address the more reasonable concerns stated by landlords.”

The landlords are crying foul. Michael Sexton, a Fairfax landlord and the other founder of Marin Residents, remains dissatisfied with the council’s actions, or lack thereof. He finds the workshop especially frustrating because it won’t address the rent control ordinance.

“It’s only dealing with half of the ordinances,” said Sexton. “The workshop would have been great eight months ago, but it’s way too little, way too late.”

The town received far more correspondence about the just cause eviction ordinance than rent stabilization, and the concerns were more substantive, Fairfax Mayor Chance Cutrano told the Pacific Sun. The workshop is the most expedient way to reconsider the elements of the just cause ordinance and determine what needs to be mitigated, he explained.

“At this time, the council is only holding a workshop on the just cause eviction ordinance,” Cutrano said.

However, opponents to the ordinances have a Plan B. Keep Fairfax Fair, a PAC established by Marin realtor Michael Burke, is circulating a petition to repeal the rent control and just cause eviction ordinances through a ballot measure.

A total of 588 signatures from registered Fairfax voters must be gathered to place the issue on the ballot, likely in 2024. About 300 signatures were gathered in the first week, Burke told the Pacific Sun.

Burke, whose website states he “specializes in apartment building investments” said his organization wants to rescind the ordinances because property owners had no input.

While renters have speculated that big money is behind Keep Fairfax Fair, Burke denied it. Current donors are mostly medium-sized apartment complexes in Fairfax, he said. To date, no large organizations, such as the Marin Association of Realtors and the California Apartment Association, have made monetary donations, according to Burke. 

Sexton and Salaverry of Marin Residents also said they haven’t received donations from these associations. Still, the group has raised enough money for an ongoing cable television advertising campaign opposing rent control.

Marin Residents and Keep Fairfax Fair don’t rule out that large groups with deep pockets may become involved, especially if the groups are successful in getting their issue on the ballot. In accordance with state campaign finance laws, the PACs will need to disclose their donors in the future.

If the groups gather the requisite number of petition signatures, voters will decide whether to rescind the ordinances. Cutrano is concerned about the possibility of a ballot measure.

“We can continually amend ordinances,” Cutrano said. “That’s the great part about working with an ordinance. You can tweak them as they unfold, and you see how they work in the real world.”

Conversely, ballot measures cannot be revised. The only method to make changes would be another ballot measure in a future election.

Cutrano maintains that the rent control and just cause eviction ordinances are necessary, allowing people with lower incomes, such as artists, musicians, seniors and young families, to remain in Fairfax. The workshop is the most expedient way to reconsider the elements of the just cause ordinance and determine what needs to be mitigated, he explained.

“Fairfax is charming, and we want to protect it,” Cutrano said. “Given the crises that we’re facing—the legacy of fighting against building housing, the lack of funds to create affordable housing, the increasing costs of construction and the rent burdens—the council wants to support our community members.”

‘Shit show’ hearing ends with county letting down Marin City residents again

Nikki Silverstein
-
25
‘Shit show’ hearing ends with county letting down Marin City residents again

A Southern California real estate developer with approval to build a controversial, five-story apartment complex in Marin City heard strong condemnations of the project at a county hearing last week.

“It was a shit show,” developer Alexis Gevorgian, of AMG & Associates in Encino, told the Pacific Sun in an interview.

Indeed, it was. The three-and-a-half hour hearing marked the first opportunity for Marin City residents to publicly share their perspectives with the county board of supervisors about the 74-unit affordable housing development to be built on one acre.

Speaker after speaker cited the dangers of adding another large complex to an already densely populated area. Not only is 825 Drake Ave., the location of the development, in a state-designated high fire hazard zone, but the area is also prone to flooding, and is served by only one road in and out.

Even the five supervisors were critical of the project, which the county approved in November 2020. Supervisor Mary Sackett said that 24 parking spots for 74 units is “ridiculous.” Each supervisor expressed a variety of concerns, with most mentioning the developer’s failure to engage with the community.

No one except Gevorgian, the developer, espoused anything positive about the project. Of course, Gevorgian should be thrilled. The for-profit developer took advantage of state laws that provide incentives for building affordable housing. The project benefited from a streamlined approval process, and it received an 80% density bonus, which added 33 units to the 41 units allowed under the county code.

The supervisors repeatedly stated their hands were tied—no local decisions could be made about the project—due to Senate Bill 35, a 2018 state law which restricts local governments from rejecting multi-family residential developments that satisfy specific criteria. Unincorporated Marin County is subject to SB 35 because it has not built enough new housing to meet the state-mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which aims to resolve the housing shortage. 

Marin City residents and their supporters had hoped last week’s hearing, held to determine whether to approve the issuance of $40 million in tax exempt bonds for the project, would give the supervisors the control they needed to derail the developer.

“Marin County Board of Supervisors, you all have the power,” Marin City resident Felecia Gaston said. “You can vote no.”

During deliberations, Supervisors Dennis Rodoni, Katie Rice and Sackett basically parroted the advice given at the hearing by Marin County counsel Brian Washington. Although Washington acknowledged the board had discretion not to approve the issuance of the bond, he seemed to discourage a “no” vote.  

“You know that decision would be judged on an abusive discretion standard,” Washington said. “You know the case law demonstrates that you have to have a bona fide, legitimate rationale for not doing an approval in a case like this. And you know, SB 35 and some other previous actions the board has taken do narrow the range of discretion in this instance.”

The board dismissed the residents’ impassioned pleas, voting 3-2 to approve the bond issuance from the California Municipal Finance Authority, a state-wide joint powers authority, of which the county is a member. Although Marin County is not issuing the tax-exempt bonds, local elected representatives from the area must provide approval, according to the Internal Revenue Service regulations.

Supervisors Moulton-Peters and Eric Lucan dissented, but for different reasons. Frustration with SB 35 propelled Moulton-Peters into making a fiery statement about voting “nay.”

“This is Marin City,” Moulton-Peters said. “They have the most multi-family housing in any area in the county. This was not where we were supposed to make up our RHNA numbers. It was to happen in other parts of Marin County that have not produced the housing they should have. And I’m angry about this, and the community is angry about this, and they have told us this today.”

Another bone of contention was that the developer couldn’t answer some questions because he didn’t have a current financial statement. Lucan expressed concern that the available financial information on the project is almost nine months old.

“I wanted to see the financials, updated and accurate, to see whether the county, a public entity, should authorize the issuance of tax-exempt bonds that will benefit a for-profit corporation,” Lucan said in an interview. 

For Marin City, which by far has the largest Black population in the county, allowing the behemoth development to move ahead is another step towards gentrifying the community. While the apartments are considered affordable housing based on Marin County’s area median income (AMI), most Marin City residents can’t afford to live there.

In the county, the AMI for an individual is $116,000. However, Marin City’s AMI is just 28% of the county’s figure—$32,847 for an individual—based on the most recent Census Bureau data.

Housing is considered affordable when a person pays no more than 30% of their gross income on the rent or mortgage, including utilities, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The monthly rent at the Drake Avenue development will start at $999 for a studio, which exceeds 30% of the Marin City AMI. This 561 square foot apartment is not “affordable” for the average Marin City resident.

The director of the Marin Housing Authority, Kimberly Carroll, said during the hearing that 25 project-based Section 8 housing vouchers were allocated to the development and preference could be given to Marin City residents. A person with a Section 8 voucher pays only 30% of their income for the apartment and utilities.

Still, there is a waiting list for vouchers, and only families, seniors or disabled individuals with extremely low or very low incomes qualify. Those qualifications exclude many working-class people unable to afford the rent at 825 Drake Ave. 

The typically soft-spoken reverend of Marin City’s First Missionary Baptist Church, Pastor Rondall Leggett, expressed his contempt for the project’s approval during the hearing.

“Truth be told, it’s a rape job,” Leggett said. “And I call it a rape job because any time you force something on somebody without their permission, that’s rape.”

But the harshest words came a day later from Gevorgian. The real estate developer, in an interview with the Pacific Sun, said that he wasn’t happy with the 30 or so Marin City residents who spoke out against the project.

“They’re communists, right?” Gevorgian said. “They just want free handouts. You have 30 people who want to change [the project] and screw it up for 150 to 200 people who will have a life-altering experience, wherein they are leaving overcrowded housing in areas far inferior to this area and [will] be very appreciative.” 

“Those 30 people, they don’t care. It’s all about them. Give me more. Give me more vouchers. Lower our rent. They bring up George Floyd and Jim Crow. I’m just a builder coming into a hornet’s nest. All I want to do is build. You don’t like it, don’t live there,” Gevorgian continued.

With SB 35 and the bond funding lined up, it seems like the large development that Marin City residents don’t want is a fait accompli. State Assemblymember Damon Connolly and Sen. Mike McGuire are making a last ditch effort to bring the developer and the community together. This week, the two state representatives will be meeting with the developer to “insist they work with the community in a sincere and meaningful way,” McGuire said in a statement.

“Resident concerns need to be addressed,” Connolly told the Pacific Sun. “If the developer doesn’t step up, that would be a mistake on his part.”

So far, AMG & Associates, the developer, hasn’t made much effort to engage with the community, except for an email that was sent to eight organizations last year. While the company said they offered to meet with the groups, no meetings took place because of a lack of response.

The Pacific Sun reviewed the list of organizations, which an AMG & Associates representative said was provided by the county. Only two were based in Marin City, with one of those serving the entire county area. 

Paul Austin, who runs a Marin City nonprofit for children, said that the way the developer has treated the community has been “hurtful.” 

“They could have Googled ‘Marin City’ and gotten a better list of community organizations,” Austin said.

The chances of making changes to the Drake Avenue project are slim, since the developer has until May 30 to meet a state deadline requiring that he obtain building permits and issue a “notice to proceed” to the contractor.

In addition, Gevorgian, the developer, indicated to the Pacific Sun that he doesn’t believe the issues raised by the community are legitimate. With regard to flooding, he said, “take another road,” apparently unaware that Marin City has just one ingress and egress.

The fire hazard zone designation and the population density in the small area also caused little concern to Gevorgian. He said that millions of other California homes are similarly situated.

“We are zoned and have the right to build,” Gevorgian concluded.

Residents vow to continue opposing the development. A petition against the project started by a community group, Save Our City, has gathered more than 1,370 signatures.

“We’ll protest arm in arm and block the construction,” said Terrie Green, executive director of Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice, a nonprofit. “We have been fighting with the county about infrastructure issues, and this project is only going to make it worse. All we’re asking is they cut the building height in half, cut the number of units in half and build some parking. Let’s move on.”

Freshman assemblymember pushing hard for constituents’ concerns

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Freshman assemblymember pushing hard for constituents’ concerns

Assemblymember Damon Connolly listened carefully to voters while on the campaign trail last year for a seat in the California State Assembly. Now, 100 days into office, those conversations with constituents have already inspired his decisions on policymaking.

After narrowly winning the November election, squeaking by opponent Sara Aminzadeh with a 3.6% lead, the freshman legislator says he hit the ground running and hasn’t stopped. On Dec. 5, Connolly was sworn in as the representative for Assembly District 12, which covers Marin and southern Sonoma County.

By mid-February, he had introduced 21 bills to the legislative session. It’s a robust number for a new assembly member, according to Connolly.

“A number of my bill ideas have come from local folks and the issues that they identified,” Connolly said during an interview with this publication.

Connolly also launched a new Select Committee on Wildfire Prevention, which he will chair, a rarity for a freshman. Surprisingly, with catastrophic, out of control wildfires causing unprecedented death and destruction in California, no similar committee existed before Connolly suggested it.

During his term, Connolly will preside over hearings on wildfire prevention, and the committee will provide oversight on fund allocation.

The assemblymember is also serving on several high-profile committees, including the Utilities and Energy Committee. Currently, he is participating in hearings on the soaring costs of utility bills.

“’Hold utilities accountable,’” Connolly said. “I hear that all the time from constituents. And particularly now when we’re seeing energy prices rise two to three times higher than usual.”

As a member of the almighty Budget Committee, Connolly has a role in controlling the state’s purse strings. The assemblymember requested an appointment to the Budget Subcommittee 3, which allows him to focus on the climate crisis, resources, energy and transportation.

Other assignments include serving on the Judiciary Committee and the Environmental Safety & Toxic Materials Committee. Connolly seems particularly proud of his appointment as the vice chair of a joint committee.

“I’m one of four freshmen who received a committee chairmanship, so I’m the Assembly leader of the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policy,” Connolly said.

That committee is currently “digging deep” into the California Air Resources Board scoping plan, which was criticized in a January report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office. It’s imperative that the state meet ambitious greenhouse gas reduction goals by 2030 to 2045 and provide transparency on the path to achieving those lofty targets, according to Connolly.

Agriculture also tops Connolly’s concerns. With the North Bay’s unique contributions to California’s 54-billion-dollar ag industry—from the ranches and dairies in West Marin to Sonoma County’s wineries, livestock and crop production—serving on the Agriculture Committee is a natural fit for the assemblymember.

Although Connolly admits that agriculture is a relatively new area for him, he is particularly excited about how some aspects of farming dovetail with his interest in reducing climate change.

“Part of the solution on mitigating climate change, and I have been leading in that regard, is carbon farming, carbon sequestration, the healthy soils program,” the assemblymember said. “One of my bills relates to that.”

Indeed, AB 406, introduced by Connolly, if passed, will provide millions in grant funding for sustainable farmers by including organic farming in the Healthy Soils and California Farmland Conservancy programs.

The assemblymember also authored AB 404 and AB 405. Both ag bills streamline the process of obtaining organic farming certification by removing some of the red tape that puts small and mid-size farming operations at a disadvantage.

Other bills introduced by Connolly run the gamut, demonstrating the demands of running the most populous and wealthiest state in the country. From a bold bill that protects youth from nicotine and tobacco addiction to legislation that places a cap on fire insurance premium increases for seniors, the assemblymember is covering the bases for his constituents.

Connolly’s AB 935 phases in a ban on tobacco use for people born on or after Jan. 1, 2007, similar to the statewide ban on flavored tobacco that was approved by voters.

The needs of seniors are a priority for Connolly. In addition to the cap on fire insurance premiums, AB 582 provides seniors living in a high-risk fire zone with a tax credit to shore up their property against wildfires.

The idea for restricting pesticide spraying by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) came from district constituents, according to Connolly. Too often, Caltrans has sprayed pesticides such as glyphosate, a key ingredient in Roundup, around public highways, even in counties like Marin and Sonoma, which have passed resolutions against the use of such toxic chemicals. Connolly’s AB 99 will ban Caltrans from deploying the pesticides along highways in counties with restrictions against using the poisons.

Saving the whales made it into the assemblymember’s bill package with AB 953. A vessel speed reduction program provides a two-fold benefit by lessening the risk of whale strikes off California’s coast and diminishing pollution from oceangoing vessels.

Marin and Sonoma commuters may soon breathe a sigh of relief if AB 1464 is passed. The bill creates a pilot program to find a fix for the traffic congestion on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. Relieving the headache-inducing gridlock will help decrease pollution, too.

Some of Connolly’s other bills include protections for mobile homeowners and the wetlands; extending healthcare coverage for children with metabolic disorders; restricting the sale of sodium nitrite in high concentrations to prevent teen suicide; and phasing out older, polluting combustion biomass facilities.

The tightening economic conditions will certainly play a role in what the state legislature is able to accomplish in the upcoming sessions. Connolly acknowledges the unpredictability of the state finance system is a problem.

“We rely a lot on the highest income earners, and quite often their income derives from capital gains and investments—as opposed to salary—and that fluctuates,” Connolly said. “It’s been an issue over the years, and we’re seeing it again this year. Tremendously volatile swings make it challenging, and that could very well be an issue we need to take up through the budget.”

In the meantime, the assemblymember plans on continuing his dialogue with constituents. Connolly recently had productive “community get togethers” at coffee shops in Petaluma and San Rafael, and he’s been meeting with environmental groups.

“People who live here have subject matter expertise and they’re engaged,” Connolly said. “It’s been helpful for me, in representing this area, that people are willing to speak and provide ideas on bills. We’re blessed to have an active district.”

Dog Crisis: Local shelters overwhelmed by pooches needing homes

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Dog Crisis: Local shelters overwhelmed by pooches needing homes

Overflowing with dogs, local animal shelters and rescues have put out an urgent call for people to adopt or foster. Purebreds, designer breeds and mutts of all ages and sizes await new homes.

The situation is dire, not just in the Bay Area, but also across the country. As dogs languish for many months at shelters, some face euthanasia to create space for the seemingly never-ending influx of strays and pets being surrendered by their owners. It’s an unsettling trend, especially since the practice of putting down adoptable dogs has declined in recent years.

“Shelters are desperate to get perfectly healthy, behaviorally sound animals out the door because there are more coming in than are exiting right now,” said Anna Harrison, admissions manager at the Humane Society of Sonoma County.

While shelters in Sonoma and Marin counties say they’re not forced to make the difficult decision of euthanizing dogs due to overcrowding, most are at capacity. When kennel space opens up, some of the North Bay facilities take in dogs from struggling shelters in Oakland, Contra Costa County and beyond.  

Large adolescent dogs (LADS) make up the majority of canines needing homes. Sadly, they are staying in shelters for extended periods, even up to a year and longer. Siberian huskies and German shepherds are the two most common breeds filling the available kennels, which is a change from the Chihuahuas and pit bulls that inundated shelters prior to the pandemic.

Lisa Bloch, of Marin Humane, greets Nicky, a German shepherd/husky mix up for adoption. The three-year-old stray was found in Nicasio, California.

“Huskies, for instance, are super cute as puppies—and then they grow up,” said Brian Whipple, operations manager at Sonoma County Animal Services. “It’s a challenge for folks to keep up with the amount of work the breed requires. These are dogs that need a job or a lot of exercise.”

Proper training can go a long way to help keep LADS with their owners, says Virginia Grainger, Marin Humane’s shelter behavior manager. She spoke with the Pacific Sun while working with Billie, a boisterous two-year-old male husky picked up as a stray.

“When they show up at the shelter, we find that these owner surrenders and strays weren’t trained when they were little,” Grainger said.

As Billie entered the play area, he jumped up on people. However, Grainger quickly had him following commands, using treats as positive reinforcement. Within a few minutes, the beautiful boy calmed down, and then gently approached folks for a back scratch and affection.

Pop culture often plays a role in the proliferation of certain breeds. In the early 2000s, Paris Hilton was frequently seen carrying her Chihuahua in a handbag, starting a fashion wave that eventually landed the breed in shelters at record numbers. Some believe Game of Thrones, the hit HBO series featuring dogs that look like huskies, is responsible for the current husky craze.

The pandemic also contributed to the population explosion at shelters right now, says Nancy King, executive director of Pets Lifeline, a Sonoma Valley animal shelter.

“There was a phenomenon in dog adoptions during the pandemic,” King said. “Shelters and rescues couldn’t satisfy the number of people that wanted to adopt. We saw a lot more breeding at that time, including the large dog breeds.”

Now, those untrained LADS are helping to drive an unprecedented increase in abandoned and surrendered dogs. That issue, combined with lower adoption rates, has caused what animal welfare experts deem as a national crisis.

They point to a number of other factors, with the economic downturn and housing topping the list. More than 14% of dogs are surrendered due to housing issues, according to Best Friends Society, a national animal welfare agency.

“In our area, it really comes down to affordable housing and the rental market,” said Whipple, of Sonoma County Animal Services. “This is a tough place to find affordable housing that does allow pets.”

Inflation is also wreaking havoc for pet owners. Pet food prices jumped more than 15% year-over-year, while the cost of veterinarian services went up 10.3%, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data for February 2023.

A nationwide shortage of veterinarians and technicians is another obstacle for dog owners. Some vets aren’t taking new patients. Spay and neuter procedures are booked out months in advance. Even for people who have long-term relationships with their vet, it’s often difficult to get routine appointments for their dogs.

The best way to curb the shelter overpopulation is to ensure that dogs and their people stay together. In Marin and Sonoma counties, many local shelters have programs to help defray costs for pet owners, including free pet food and supplies; low or no cost spay/neuter services; vouchers for vet care; and vaccination clinics.

The laundry list of pet ownership concerns certainly gives pause to anyone considering adopting a pooch. This leads to fewer adoptions, resulting in dogs staying in shelters longer. For some canines, living in a noisy, fast-paced shelter is extremely stressful.

That’s where dog rescues enter the picture. A rescue is typically a nonprofit that pulls dogs from shelters and places them in foster homes.

Muttville, a Bay Area rescue that rehomes senior dogs, is strained under the current overpopulation crisis. Sherri Franklin, Muttville’s executive director and founder, says the rescue is fortunate to have a physical shelter, its own veterinary staff and a large network of foster homes. Still, they can’t keep up with requests coming in from shelters and individuals who are no longer able to care for their dogs.

Jen Coudron, the mutt manager at Muttville, is on the frontline, making the decisions about which senior dogs they can accept. People are frantic to get their dogs into Muttville.

“I’m staring at my intake box, and I know there are at least 50 requests,” Coudron said. “All of them very, very urgent. When I have to turn away a dog, it’s just heartbreaking because I know these people are out of options. But we’re maxed out, and the resources that I normally send people to are maxed out.”

Experts say more people stepping up to foster dogs will help alleviate the pressure on shelters and rescues. A pooch becomes a member of the family during the foster process, which can last from a few days to a few months. The foster parent gets to know the dog’s personality and works with the animal on socialization and training. Sometimes, the foster nurses the dog back to health as they recover from medical conditions or procedures. Mostly, the foster family provides love and stability.

Keri Fennell, Marin Humane’s vice president of shelter operations, says that in addition to needing fosters, they would love to have more volunteer dog walkers at the shelter. But her biggest wish is for people to provide a permanent home for a dog.

“Anyone who adopts helps the cause,” Fennell said. “Adopt, adopt, adopt.”

Correction, March 15, 2023: An earlier version of this program incorrectly stated that Game of Thrones is a Netflix program. In fact, it is a program from HBO.

Frugoli’s follies: upheaval in the DA’s office

Nikki Silverstein
-
10
Frugoli’s follies: upheaval in the DA’s office

Despite serious concerns voiced by Marin County constituents, District Attorney Lori Frugoli remains mum about a plethora of problems plaguing her office.

As Frugoli enters her second term, the DA’s office is experiencing an exodus of employees, a flood of racial discrimination claims and lawsuits by former and current personnel, unexplained delays of criminal investigations into police officer misconduct and a backlog of cases.

Since taking office in 2019, Frugoli has frequently delayed decisions or refused to take action on important issues, all the while ducking the media and the public when they demand answers.

The Pacific Sun asked Frugoli for an interview to discuss these matters. Although she declined to speak with us, she agreed to answer written questions.

The questions presented were mostly general in nature; however, Frugoli prefaced her responses with a tired caveat in an attempt to justify her continued lack of transparency.

“Considering there are [legal] claims regarding the subject of some of your questions and also ethical considerations about how much I can say about current cases, I am limited in my capacity to elaborate right now,” Frugoli said in an email.

Not surprisingly, Frugoli’s responses failed to reveal any new information.

Staff Saga

The loss of experienced prosecutors in the DA’s Office is causing a backlog of cases and questionable practices. More than 36% of the department’s 30 prosecutors have resigned during the last two years. Already, three experienced prosecutors have quit in 2023, following seven departures last year and four in 2021.

Frugoli admits her office is unable to recruit replacements quickly enough to stop the bleeding.

“I can say-yes it is true that some personnel have left our office in recent months,” Frugoli wrote.  “I am deeply concerned about the heavy caseloads and I’m doing everything I can to make sure justice is served in Marin.”

Worse yet, in recent months, past and current employees have filed claims and lawsuits against Frugoli and the county for a variety of alleged violations, including racial discrimination.

“There’s a cesspool of discrimination in the district attorney’s office,” said Charles Bonner, a civil rights attorney representing some current and former employees who have filed claims. “That discrimination has resulted in the termination of two stellar deputy district attorneys, Otis Bruce and Cameron Jones.”

Otis Bruce, Jr. worked for the county for more than three decades and is seeking $12 million in damages in his claim filed in January.

In 2020, Frugoli appointed Bruce, the county’s first Black prosecutor, as the Assistant District Attorney, the number two position in the office. However, just two years later, Bruce alleged Frugoli retaliated and discriminated against him for challenging the “unfair and inequitable treatment” of another Black prosecutor, who was fired last June.

Frugoli placed Bruce on administrative leave in September, taking his badge and gun, and barring him from the office, according to the claim. At the end of last year, Bruce retired and now serves as a prosecutor in the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office.

In November, Cameron Jones, the Marin County prosecutor fired last summer, filed a federal lawsuit against Frugoli and the county for $18 million. According to the complaint, Jones was terminated to cover up the racial and gender discrimination grievance he filed with the county’s human resources department.

A victim witness advocate in the DA’s office, Yolanda Johnson, filed a claim in January for $9 million. Johnson, who is Black, states that “Lori Frugoli’s practice and pattern of racial discrimination created a hostile work environment.”

Several offensive incidents are cited in Johnson’s claim, including that Frugoli ignored her complaints about a photograph depicting a person in black face, which was displayed in an office cubicle.

No Action

Since taking office in January 2019, Frugoli has played Whac-A-Mole with high profile incidents. 

Critics say Frugoli is soft on hate crimes, noting that she declined to file charges against a teen who terrorized Jewish students at Redwood High School on social media. Frugoli also said a man who plastered downtown Fairfax with Nazi propaganda stickers committed no crime.

When two youths threatened on social media to physically harm a Black shop owner in Tiburon, Frugoli consulted with the local police and determined it did not “meet the merits of a hate crime.”

Over the last year, various parts of Marin County have been periodically littered with antisemitic materials. Although Tiburon police collected videos of the perpetrator’s vehicle and license plate, Frugoli again walked away, even as DAs across the country are issuing litter citations and continuing to investigate similar incidents.

‘Mateo’

Another point of criticism is Frugoli’s handling of the criminal investigation into two San Rafael police officers who were caught on camera assaulting a Latino man in July, after stopping him for drinking beer in public. The man, who is being called “Mateo” because he fears retaliation, suffered a concussion, broken nose and other injuries.

Initially, Mateo was arrested, with the two officers filing reports stating that the 5-foot, 130-pound man assaulted Officer Brandon Nail, who is 6 feet two inches and 250 pounds. A few days later, the DA’s office filed felony charges against Mateo.

The charges were dropped three weeks later, after the deputy DA watched the police body camera videos. However, Frugoli made no move to investigate the officers that landed Mateo in the hospital, even after Mateo’s attorney, Charles Dresow, provided the videos to the media and public outrage grew.

Dresow sent Frugoli a letter in September requesting that she investigate or turn the case over to the California Attorney General. Frugoli responded within a day, both in a letter to Dresow and in a press release on the DA’s website, that her office would investigate.

Still, it remains unclear whether Frugoli, a former law enforcement officer who worked for the San Rafael Police Department, is the best choice to lead a criminal investigation into local police officers.

“It’s a significant conflict of interest for the District Attorney’s Office to investigate the police officers,” said Lauren Bonds, executive director of the National Police Accountability Project.

“A prosecutor relies heavily on information from police departments to do their job and there’s an inherent conflict [when a DA investigates a police officer]. The state attorney general or an independent review board would be a better investigatory body.”

In November, Frugoli held a forum in the Canal area, which is a predominantly Latino community. Person after person asked for an update into the investigation. Frugoli kept repeating that she couldn’t speak to San Rafael’s investigation, never mentioning the criminal investigation that she had agreed to conduct.

During the meeting, this reporter asked Frugoli to provide an update on the DA’s investigation. Shockingly, she stated that there was no investigation. When I pressed by citing her letter to Dresow and her September press release, she responded that it is a “review,” not an “investigation.” 

Oddly, Frugoli’s press release does state she is conducting an investigation. Last week, after receiving another letter from Dresow demanding an update, she issued a new press release, stating that her office continues to “thoroughly examine the evidence.”

It has now been more than six months since Frugoli agreed to conduct a criminal investigation into the officers’ conduct, which was documented by video. She has refused to comment on why the process is not yet complete.

As a result of the Mateo incident, the DA has changed one policy. In October, Frugoli informed all Marin law enforcement agencies that when they submit a case to the DA to file charges, if  an officer used physical force to detain or arrest a subject, they must submit all video and audio evidence at the same time. 

While the change is a step in the right direction, it does raise the question of why reviewing available videos prior to filing criminal charges wasn’t already policy. 

Frugoli needs to address the other problems pronto. Clearly, her office is being impacted negatively.  

“I think the turmoil and upheaval in the District Attorney’s Office, combined with the COVID related trial backlog, are creating an incredible amount of pressure on the system,” criminal defense attorney Dresow said. “It’s really making it difficult for everyone.”

Belvedere considers hiring sharpshooters to kill coyotes

Nikki Silverstein
-
30
Belvedere considers hiring sharpshooters to kill coyotes

Well-heeled Belvedere residents turned into an angry mob at a special city council meeting last week about coyotes.

With a rallying cry of “kill the coyotes,” locals made it clear they want the animals removed from their tony town by any means necessary—including paying federal snipers to shoot them. Some residents advocated taking up arms themselves to kill coyotes on their property, saying the canids have snatched pets and it’s only a matter of time before an elderly person or child is attacked.

Despite the best efforts of state and county wildlife experts the city called upon to make a presentation at the Feb. 16 meeting, it became apparent residents didn’t want to hear recommendations on how to coexist with the animals. They even booed one of the presenters when she tried to elaborate on hazing, a method used to scare the coyotes away from humans.

About 25 people spoke during the public comment period, the majority wanting the coyotes destroyed. The four who dissented didn’t live in Belvedere.

“I think you guys need to take action before someone gets killed,” resident David Likas said. “It’s going to be on your head. And one thing to make clear—it is legal to shoot at that predator on your property.”

Actually, it is not legal to shoot at coyotes or other animals in the city, Belvedere Police Chief Jason Wu told the Pacific Sun in an email. Discharging firearms, air rifles and other missile-projecting devices is prohibited by municipal code.

Another speaker complained of being awakened in the middle of the night by the coyotes’ “wild cackling.” Some alluded to the inconvenience they experience because of the coyotes.

“I’m the biggest animal fanatic, but they’ve got to be killed,” resident Laura Gillespie said. “They’ve got to be eradicated, because I can’t let my dog out to enjoy our backyard without watching him all the time.”

Even with no evidence that Belvedere is overrun by coyotes presenting a public safety issue—defined by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife as scratching or biting a human—the five city council members agreed that action must be taken. Since it is illegal to relocate coyotes in California, that leaves two options: learn to safely coexist with the animals or kill them.

At the conclusion of the contentious three and a half hour meeting, the council instructed the city manager to contact the United States Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services “to see what they can do for us.”

The mention of Wildlife Services alarmed those familiar with the agency, which critics call a “tax funded killing machine.” In 2021, Wildlife Services killed almost 1.8 million animals, including more than 64,000 coyotes, although its stated mission is to “provide expertise to resolve wildlife conflicts to allow people and wildlife to coexist.”

Marin County ended its contract with Wildlife Services in 2000, primarily because of public outcry against the agency’s lethal methods, such as neck snares and poison, according to Camilla Fox, founder and executive director of Project Coyote, a national nonprofit based in Larkspur. Other counties have followed Marin’s lead, also terminating agreements with the agency and adopting non-lethal wildlife management programs.

Another concern often cited about Wildlife Services is the accidental killing of non-target animals. Dogs, cats and even bald eagles are among the thousands of unintentional victims killed every year by the agency.

It’s not the first time the City of Belvedere has considered an ill-conceived plan for wildlife management. In 2016, the city council spent months reviewing a deer sterilization program, driven by residents’ complaints about the animals eating landscaping and losing their fear of people. The plan was eventually abandoned.

Belvedere, with a population of less than 2,300, is technically an island, which residents say makes their wildlife situation unique. However, roads connect Belvedere to the Tiburon Peninsula, and coyotes inhabit urban areas throughout the county. 

“This situation is not unique to Belvedere,” Fox said. “Coyotes, and wolves for that matter, coexist with humans in other peninsulas and islands across North America.”

While Fox believes that science-based information will quell Belvedere’s fear that coyotes pose a danger to their children, so far residents aren’t listening. The city began an education campaign last year after receiving reports of coyote sightings. Efforts were stepped up in October when a resident posted on social media that her small dog had been killed by a coyote.

Three attacks on pets have been reported in 2023, Belvedere Police Chief Wu said. Last year, one woman filed a complaint which consisted of anecdotal information regarding “on-going attacks on her animals.”

Wu says there have been no reports of physical contact between humans and coyotes. However, resident Mike Rowe, of Dirty Jobs fame, stated in the meeting that he kicked a coyote in the head after it shot out of the bushes and ran toward his 15-pound dog.

Other claims by residents include sightings of 50-pound coyotes pursuing their large dogs and packs of coyotes roaming the streets. Hazing doesn’t work because the animals no longer fear humans, they say.

A vast expanse exists between scientific knowledge of coyotes and the notions espoused by residents. Western coyotes, on average, weigh 20 to 35 pounds. While a coyote family may be seen together, especially when the parents take pups out of the den to prepare them for life on their own, coyotes here don’t typically hunt in packs.

Sending in the federal sharpshooters could actually backfire on the community, Fox said. A coyote pair stays in a territory and keeps out non-family members. When one of the alpha pair is killed, it provokes “social chaos.”

“The younger coyotes can then start to breed at an earlier age—so within a very short period of time, the local coyote population may increase as a result of lethal control practices,” Fox said.

Coyote attacks on humans are rare, with only two recorded deaths in the United States and Canada, according to the Humane Society of the United States. Most problems occur when coyotes become habituated to being fed, intentionally or unintentionally, by humans. Even then, assertive hazing does shape coyote behavior.  

“We heard a high level of fear against the coyote and a lack of wanting to change practices,” said Marin Humane CEO Nancy McKenney, who attended the city council meeting via Zoom. “I think they should try hazing now—before going to this extreme lethal removal.”

Long-time Belvedere resident Ellie Phipps Price believes that those who spoke at the meeting represent a vocal minority. While the coyotes in the neighborhood have never been aggressive toward her or her dogs, she’s not discounting the experience of her neighbors. 

The community should work together to prevent conflict with the animals by using forceful hazing techniques, removing food sources and keeping unattended pets inside, according to Phipps Price, who also owns a ranch where coyotes are frequent visitors. She is adamantly opposed to hiring Wildlife Services to kill the coyotes.

“I received an email from the city manager that said the city is still in the fact-finding stage,” Phipps Price said. “I hope they take their time because killing the coyotes in Belvedere is not going to be pretty. They’ll die with a lot of pain, trauma and screaming.”

__________________________________

The Marin Coyote Coalition’s webinar, ‘Coexisting with Coyotes,’ can be viewed here.

Listen Up: Michael Krasny behind the mic again

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Listen Up: Michael Krasny behind the mic again

Public radio talk show host Michael Krasny left behind a legion of loyal listeners when he retired from his 28-year stint at KQED’s Forum in February 2021. 

Fortunately, he couldn’t stay away from the microphone for long.

Krasny, 78, who has interviewed VIPs from all walks of life, including Barack Obama, Carl Sagan and Philip Roth, launched a podcast last summer. Grey Matter with Michael Krasny will sound familiar to Forum fans, with each hour-long episode consisting of the host conversing with an “opinion-shaper” and taking questions from the audience. However, there are some differences.

On Forum, the daily call-in radio show, Krasny reached more than 300,000 listeners during the week, the majority in the Bay Area. Grey Matter episodes drop several times a month, with a smaller, but global audience.

“I’ll do a program, a live program, and I’ll have questions from five to six continents,” Krasny said in an interview with the Pacific Sun. “It’s kind of a kick.”

Yet, Krasny doesn’t speak on the phone with his listeners as he did on Forum. The Grey Matter audience members write their questions in real time, and those receiving the most “likes” will make it into the podcast. Krasny calls the process democratic, but admits he misses the call-in aspect of his previous program.

“I loved interacting directly with listeners,” Krasny said. “I’m not hearing their voices like I did on the radio; I’m reading their questions.”

The key aspects of the two programs are the same, according to Krasny, who notes that he works with an excellent team at Grey Matter and conducts in-depth interviews with fascinating guests. Recent podcast episodes have featured documentarian Ken Burns, linguist and New York Times columnist John McWhorter and author Isabelle Allende.

Coincidentally, the podcast originates from a threadbare studio in San Rafael, just a stone’s throw from KTIM, the now-defunct free-form radio station where Krasny’s illustrious talk show career began. In the late 1970s, Krasny pitched Beyond the Hot Tub, a weekly talk show, to San Rafael’s KTIM. The program manager liked the idea, and Krasny hasn’t stopped talking since.

One of Krasny’s most memorable interviews took place at KTIM with Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead. Even though it was years before the internet, Deadheads found out Garcia was there, and a crowd gathered outside the station. But it was what happened inside the studio that Krasny remembers well.

“I was enjoying talking to Jerry, but suddenly he started putting something, some substance up his nose, and I immediately went to a public service announcement,” Krasny recalls. “I said to him, ‘You can’t do that in here.’ And he said ‘OK,’ and then he put everything away.”

Another four decades of radio followed Krasny’s time at KTIM, including eight years at KGO. But it seems that Krasny was best suited for KQED, as he always saw his role as that of a public servant. And he has served the public extremely well, delivering thoughtful, intelligent, substantive interviews with a long list of luminaries.

Not surprisingly, Jimmy Carter was “delightful,” Krasny said. Although he was prepared to dislike Pat Buchanan, instead he found the conservative pundit to be “charming with a high Q Score.” David Byrne of the Talking Heads and writer Gore Vidal were difficult to interview, but for different reasons.

“David Byrne was so creative, but so reticent,” Krasny said. “It was like pulling teeth. Gore Vidal was hard and memorable because he was intoxicated and antisemitic.”

Krasny has interviewed presidents, heads of the United Nations and Nobel Prize winners. Still, he says there is a broad spectrum of people that have moved him. There were ordinary people who were doing extraordinary things, the people in the trenches, as he calls them. Among the most notable was an interview with a group of African American women who took care of crack babies in Oakland.

Interviews with novelists and poets stay uppermost in Krasny’s mind. Literature is “my métier, my first love and passion,” he says. Krasny feels fortunate to have sat down with some of the greatest writers in American and world literature, including Saul Bellow, John Updike, Toni Morrison, Salman Rushdie and Carlos Fuentes.

When Krasny describes his interview with Nora Ephron, he tears up. It was no secret that Ephron had a complex relationship with her sister, and Krasny was having a disagreement with his sister at the time, prompting him to ask a question off-mic.

“I asked Nora, can I get some counsel from you?” Krasny said. “She was very gracious, and we talked about it. However, what stirs me when thinking about this is not only that my sister is now gone, but Nora Ephron was dying of cancer. Her family knew it, but nobody else knew it. And she took the time to talk to me about my sister, and I got some light from her.”

Krasny, too, has provided light to others. Certainly, he is best known as an erudite talk-show host; however, he has influenced people by wearing many important hats over the years. He taught English literature to thousands of San Francisco State University students during his tenure as professor, from 1970 until 2021.

Supposedly retired, Krasny can’t stay away from teaching either. He still teaches a literature course at Stanford University’s continuing education program and hosts an online discussion of five classic novels for the Book Passage in Marin County.

The consummate interviewer is working on a book about a topic he might know better than anyone—interviewing. His previous books include Off Mike: A Memoir of Talk Radio and Literary Life, Spiritual Envy: An Agnostic’s Quest, Sound Ideas and Let There Be Laughter: A Treasury of Great Jewish Humor and What It All Means.

Of course, Krasny also stays well-informed about current events, and says there’s much cause for concern in the world. Climate change, the real possibility of a nuclear weaponry accident and a dearth of leadership top his list. However, he’s optimistic as well.

“Where do we find hope is the big question,” Krasny said. “Where do we find what Emily Dickinson called ‘the thing with feathers?’ There’s a human spirit and there’s a resilience of the human spirit that I’d like to think will help us and the planet. That’s a lot of idealism, but there are passionate and dedicated people working on the issues facing us. That’s where I find hope.” 

Sausalito boatyard maintains maritime history 

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Sausalito boatyard maintains maritime history 

A celebrated Sausalito resident, Freda, turns 138 this year. But one would never know it by looking at her.

Born in Belvedere in 1885, Freda is the oldest sailboat on the West Coast. Saloonkeeper Harry Cookson, who built the beautiful wooden vessel for yachting and racing, named her after his daughter.

Over the years, Freda has passed through the hands of more than 10 owners, and there were times when she fell into serious disrepair. In 2004, it looked like the old gal might not make it after sinking at a San Rafael marina.

Fortunately, Freda was raised and brought to the Spaulding Marine Center in Sausalito, where she underwent an extensive restoration that took more than eight years and over $500,000 in donations. Returned to her former splendor by numerous tradespersons and volunteers, the historic 33-foot sloop went back into the water in 2014.

The Spaulding Marine Center now owns Freda, and she couldn’t have found a more perfect steward. Located on Gate 5 Road at the north end of Sausalito’s working waterfront, the center’s for-profit boatyard helps fund its nonprofit endeavors, which includes Freda’s conservation.

“With proper maintenance, Freda will outlive us,” said Pete Brewster, 36, Spaulding Marine Center’s yard manager. “The center has all of the tools and supplies to work on wooden boats, which makes us pretty unique.”

I met up with Brewster and Sydney Wewerka, 25, the center’s event coordinator, for a tour of the bustling boatyard and boathouse on a rainy morning in early February. 

Preserving the heritage of boatbuilding and restoration is at the heart of the center’s mission, Wewerka said. Its maritime museum, library and small fleet of wooden sailboats give a glimpse into nautical yesteryear.

The center also offers a variety of youth and adult educational programs, such as a sailing summer camp and wooden boatbuilding classes where participants leave with their own sailboat, kayak or paddleboard.

The Friends of Freda is a very popular program, according to Wewerka. Volunteers help keep the yacht in tip top shape and get to sail her.

“We want to give experiences to people who have lived in this area their whole lives and have never been out on the water,” Brewster said.

As Brewster spoke, he kept a watchful eye on a flurry of activity at the water’s edge. A crane had lifted a tall mast, and workers were guiding it back into place on a sailboat. Just a couple of hours before, the mast had been laid across the boatyard to allow workers to service some parts of the boat more easily.

“There aren’t a lot of facilities positioned with a crane to pick masts up.” Wewerka said. “It’s a pretty big operation.”

Several vessels were sitting on blocks in the boatyard, waiting to be worked on. Folly, a wooden sailboat only a few years younger than Freda, was among them. Like Freda, Folly is a racing yacht, although her owner sails her recreationally now.  

Both Brewster and Wewerka are passionate sailors. Brewster grew up boating on the East Coast and got the bug. After spending two years at a wooden boat school in Newport, RI, he landed in Sausalito.

Although Wewerka hails from land-locked Colorado, she sailed small boats on lakes and rivers. After earning a degree in oceanography, she moved to Sausalito. Then she shifted gears.

“I wanted to learn how to work with tools and build things,” Wewerka said. “Those are the things they don’t necessarily teach you in a typical college curriculum.”

Last year, Wewerka graduated from the Spaulding Marine Center’s apprenticeship program. During the 12-month marine technician training, the apprentices took courses in electrical, propulsion and yacht systems. They also worked on wooden boats, as well as vessels made from modern materials, such as fiberglass and composites. 

Many aspects of the center’s comprehensive apprenticeship program are exceptional. Apprentices are paid throughout the program and receive college credit.

Graduates are in high demand by the multi-billion-dollar marine industry. Wewerka had her choice of offers from Bay Area businesses.

“Unfortunately, with shop classes disappearing, students don’t get an introduction to trades anymore,” Brewster said. “The Spaulding Marine Center is helping produce skilled, trained, certified technicians to keep this industry alive.”

Those words would be music to the ears of Myron Spaulding, the boatyard’s founder.

A true Renaissance man, Spaulding, born in 1905, was an accomplished violinist. During the 1920s, he played the violin in silent movie houses and was part of the vaudeville orchestra at Fox Theatre in San Francisco. He earned a seat with the San Francisco Symphony in 1934 and remained there until 1957.

But Spaulding’s true love was boatbuilding. Long-time friend Tom Miller said Spaulding built his first boat in woodshop class at the now defunct San Francisco Polytechnic High School.

“He was a violinist like other people were plumbers,” Michael Wiener, a former manager of Spaulding’s boatyard, said in the documentary Myron Onward. “It was a trade for him.”

Fiddle playing financed many of Spaulding’s nautical ventures, including sailboat racing. He sailed six times in the prestigious Transpacific Yacht Race, winning in 1936 and 1947. Many regard him as the finest sailor on the San Francisco Bay in the 20th century.

However, his most enduring legacy began 1951, when he bought the plot of waterfront land on Gate 5 Road and opened Spaulding Boatworks. The seasoned sailor designed, built and repaired scores of wooden sailboats. Some of his Spaulding 33 class sailboats and custom yachts are still sailing today.

After Spaulding died in 2000 at the age of 94, his widow, Gladys, established a charitable trust to ensure that his beloved boatyard would benefit new generations of sailors.

Brewster, Wewerka and many other local mariners are committed to carrying on Spaulding’s heritage at the center that bears his name. At the same, they’re keeping pace with progress.

While the marine trade has traditionally been dominated by men, half of the participants in the center’s last apprenticeship program were women. Wewerka is pleased to see the change.

“I know a lot of really amazing women that work in the waterfront industry in Sausalito,” Wewerka said. “It’s important for us to offer women space to work at the center.”

They’re also reaching out to people in vulnerable communities by offering scholarships to the center’s youth summer camp. Volunteering opens doors, too.

“The volunteer aspect to Spaulding is great,” Brewster said. “It gives people an opportunity to learn the marine trade in an active boatyard and work on historic boats. We welcome the public to come in and see what we’re doing here.”

Just one pill: fentanyl deaths on the rise in Marin and Sonoma counties

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Just one pill: fentanyl deaths on the rise in Marin and Sonoma counties

Trevor Leopold would have turned 22 on Jan. 30. Instead, he’s “forever 18,” his mother says.

When Greenbrae resident Michelle Leopold received the news that her 18-year-old son died in his Sonoma State University dorm room, she didn’t need to wait for the coroner’s report to know what had killed him.

Although it was November 2019, before most parents had heard of the fentanyl crisis, there was no doubt in Michelle Leopold’s mind that this powerful synthetic opioid was the culprit. Sadly, she was well aware of the dangerous drug because her son’s close friend had succumbed to a fentanyl overdose the previous year.

Indeed, toxicology results confirmed that Trevor Leopold died after ingesting a pill laced with fentanyl. One pill.

He thought he was taking the prescription drug oxycodone, Michelle Leopold said. As it turned out, the fentanyl-laced pill contained no oxycodone at all. Similarly, Trevor Leopold’s friend, who died of a fentanyl overdose in 2018, believed he was consuming Xanax, a prescription benzodiazepine.

“One of the scariest things about this is that so many who end up overdosing don’t know they’re taking something with fentanyl in it,” Dr. Matt Willis, Marin County’s public health director, said in an interview. “It’s kind of like drinking punch that’s been spiked at a party—hard to call it abuse when it’s unintentional. More like a poisoning.”

Melissa Struzzo, manager of the Sonoma County Substance Use Disorder & Community Recovery Services, has the same concern as Willis. 

“There are naive users, who think they’re getting Vicodin or Percocet,” Struzzo said. “They’re not active users and have no tolerance built up for fentanyl. This group has a higher potential for overdose.”

Marin and Sonoma counties, like the rest of the United States, are experiencing a dramatic surge in drug overdoses. Grim statistics reveal the gravity of the crisis, driven by fentanyl.

Overdoses in Marin County have more than doubled since 2018, said Willis. Today, fentanyl is associated with over 50% of OD cases.

The number of fatal ODs in Marin has also increased significantly—more than 100% in the last three years. Every five days, someone dies of an overdose in the county. During 2021 and 2022, 60% of those deaths were linked to fentanyl.

Sonoma County is faring worse, with someone dying every two days from an overdose death, according to the Sonoma County Department of Health. Even more astounding is that deaths involving fentanyl increased by 2,550% from 2016 through 2021.

This increase is responsible for Sonoma County ranking 14th out of 58 in California for the highest drug overdose death rate. Sonoma County is second in the Bay Area for the greatest increase in the OD death rate, while San Francisco has the dubious distinction of landing in the top spot.

Exactly how did fentanyl, a powerful legal synthetic opioid developed in 1959, cause this nationwide crisis? Fentanyl, used as an analgesic during surgery and as a prescription drug to treat severe pain, is easily produced and affordable. 

Unfortunately, fentanyl’s characteristics also make it attractive to the illicit drug market. In recent years, the supply of fentanyl has grown swiftly, with most of it manufactured outside of the United States. The drug’s effect is similar to heroin, and it’s extremely addictive.

“Fentanyl is up to 100 times more potent than morphine,” Struzzo said.

Drug dealers bank on fentanyl’s addictive quality to keep their customers coming back for more. But just two milligrams of fentanyl—a few grains—can kill a person, according to the Drug Enforcement Agency, which prompted the agency to issue a health alert: “One pill can kill.”

Without access to the sophisticated and expensive scientific weights and measures used by a pharmaceutical company, it’s almost impossible for dealers to calculate how much fentanyl they’re putting into a pill or powder. 

And the guy or gal next door may be making those pills, with pill presses for all budgets just a few keystrokes away on Amazon. The presses allow dealers to pump out counterfeit pills that look almost identical to prescription drugs, such as Ritalin, Adderall and oxycodone.

“Fentanyl is now present in most illicit pills and powders,” Willis said. “People overdose from the presence of fentanyl in what’s sold on social media as prescription pills, cocaine or other powders.”

The opioid drug epidemic affects people of all ages, either through intentional or unintentional use. Even infants are brought to emergency rooms with fentanyl ODs.

The issue is daunting and complex; however, Marin and Sonoma have countywide collaboratives to attack the crisis from all sides.  

OD Free Marin has five teams, including intervention, treatment and recovery; youth action; education and outreach; equity action; and the justice system. The Sonoma County Prevention Partnership works on drug policy and advocacy efforts.

Both counties agree that a harm reduction approach is beneficial. For example, many pharmacies in Marin and Sonoma sell Narcan, a medication that can reverse the effects of fentanyl, without a prescription. Schools have Narcan, and staff have been trained to administer it. Some experts recommend that every first aid kit contain the life-saving medication. Substance abuse programs are also key to addressing fentanyl use.

Law enforcement agencies are working on getting dealers off the streets, but it can be difficult when social media platforms make it easy for them to hide. For example, Snapchat, a messaging app, allows users to determine how long their messages remain visible. In addition, dealers use different emojis for each drug they have available, negating the need to write anything incriminating. 

The illicit drug business, especially with inexpensive fentanyl readily available to dealers, is quite lucrative. There’s always a dealer ready to fill the void when another is arrested, according to Willis.

“Public health and law enforcement agree that we aren’t going to arrest our way out of this problem,” Willis said. “Instead, we partner with the justice system using all of the tools at our disposal, including diverting people with low level drug offenses to assessment and ensuring people who are incarcerated have access to addiction treatment.”

Willis, Struzzo and Michelle Leopold say it’s imperative that people understand the dangers of just one pill.

Leopold plans on educating as many people as possible about what happened to her son, with the goal of preventing fentanyl deaths. “People just don’t know,” she said.

Last year, Leopold and her husband hosted Narcan training sessions at the six Ace Hardware stores they own. Although Leopold admits it’s hard, she makes herself available to the media and speaks  at numerous public forums.

“When we got the phone calls about Trevor, I turned to my husband and said, ‘We can’t be quiet about this,’” Leopold said. “There are a lot of us speaking out on behalf of our dead, poisoned children. Hopefully, it’s making a difference.”

Gauging aging: ‘maturity’ isn’t for amateurs

Nikki Silverstein
-
6
Gauging aging: ‘maturity’ isn’t for amateurs

For most of my adult life, I had the good fortune of looking younger than my age. Until now.

I’m not going to tell you how old I am, but it begins with a six and ends with a zero. Healthwise, no complaints. Yet, I suffer—from wrinkles and zits at the same time.

Unbeknownst to me, this phenomenon probably started a while back, although I only realized it a couple of weeks ago, after I picked up my new eyeglasses with a much stronger prescription. With my newly discerning eye(s), I noticed that many of my girlfriends seem to be weathering the sexagenarian tsunami better than me. 

Enter Dr. Faye Jamali, of Belle Marin Aesthetic Medicine in Mill Valley, who enlightens me about some of the non-surgical treatments that my friends might be having. Of course, there’s Botox, a muscle relaxant used to soften lines and wrinkles. But Jamali’s anti-aging tool kit contains far more than that old standby.

Jamali describes a smorgasbord of services available, including injectable fillers to replenish lost facial volume; microneedling, which stimulates new collagen and elastin production to address hollowing and sagging; and laser therapies to improve skin tone and texture.

Maintenance visits are required to keep what Jamali calls a “better rested and more youthful appearance,” because the measures are temporary. Still, Jamali emphasizes that she’s performing medical procedures.

“This isn’t a makeup counter,” Jamali said. “You don’t want to go for a Groupon for these treatments.”

Hmm. Now that I give this more thought, it is my more affluent friends who look decidedly unaged. So, can a reporter afford to look younger?

The price for Botox and dermal fillers depends on the number of units needed. For example, to treat frown lines, the forehead and crow’s feet with Botox, Jamali estimates the cost at $600 to $750. That investment lasts about three months.

Maybe what I need here is an attitude adjustment, so I call my friend who is brutally truthful, Rachel De La Montanya. Also, she’s a hair stylist, and I need to tell her about the new feral gray hairs sticking out from my head at right angles. And my mane is thinning. Double whammy.

First, De La Montanya reassures me that gray hair is a marker of genetics, not age. Hair loss, on the other hand, could indicate an underlying medical condition or simply that I’m old. Off to Kaiser I go.

The good doctor, a man half my age, orders blood work. The following day, he calls to cheerfully provide the diagnosis for my thinning hair: “maturity.” 

Speaking of mature hair, De La Montanya says, “A lot of women are choosing to let their gray hair come in, and they have way less maintenance.” She adds, “Women can achieve that balance of looking good for themselves and feeling comfortable. I honestly don’t understand how women spend as much time as they do in a hair salon. It’s my business, but it’s not my value.”

I could go kicking and screaming into the process of growing old, but where will that get me? My sage father was delighted to age. “It beats the alternative,” he always said.

Sherri Franklin, the founder and director of Muttville, is well-known to dog lovers. In 2007, Franklin, 67, founded the Bay Area nonprofit, which is devoted to rescuing and finding homes for dogs seven years old and up. When it comes to matching senior dogs with people 62 +, she’s the expert.

One of Franklin’s first “senior for senior adoptions” was for a grandfather with early-stage dementia who had to move into a senior living community, where he had become agoraphobic. His family decided to adopt Rocky, a 10-year-old Pomeranian, for the grandfather.

Suddenly, the grandfather was taking Rocky out on walks every morning and getting to know the neighbors by name. By virtue of socializing again, his dementia seemed to diminish, according to the family.

“This is not a one-off,” Franklin says. “I hear stories like this all the time. There is science behind it.”

Indeed, there is. Studies show that having a pooch companion boosts a person’s mood and helps those who are isolated, according to the American Heart Association. In fact, the organization’s website lists more than a dozen other health benefits, including that dog owners are 31% less likely to die from a heart attack or stroke than non-dog owners.

Check. I have a dog. A senior dog, I might add. And with this info, I always will.

Oops. I apologize for using the word “senior,” which sets Dotty LeMieux’s “teeth on edge.”

“I’m on a campaign to get rid of it for anyone not about to graduate—and I don’t mean from this world into the next,” LeMieux, a 74-year-old firecracker, wrote on my Facebook page.

It’s not only LeMieux who’s particular about the terms used to describe humans of a certain age. Pamela Weintraub, an award-winning author, chimed in, too. “Older people” is correct, while “elderly and senior” are both bad.

“What is an “older person?” asks Marcia Thomas, a local artist. “To a teenager, it can be someone over 40. To someone 80, that number could be very different.”

Thomas is decidedly against using subjective words, preferring to identify a specific age range, such as “people over the age of 65.” 

I’m OK with that for the time being. But when I turn 65 and a young person lumps me in with centenarians, I’ll probably whack them with my walker.

Linda Wosskow, spunky and fiercely independent at age 76, has no fear of dying.

“It’s going to come sooner or later,” Wosskow says. “My only concern is that I want to die peacefully and quickly. I don’t want to be dependent and need medical attention.”

Wosskow’s outlook on aging is absolutely refreshing. She travels alone, won’t go out sans lipstick, loves her “silver” hair and has no regrets about her life, although the former dancer sounds wistful when she mentions that she used to have great legs. I’ll bet her gams still look gorgeous.

While there’s a plethora of perspectives about moving into the last decades of life, I’ll close with wisdom from Bay Area sailor Jim Rohrsson, 65, who prefers to stay active and optimistic.

“I get up in the morning and I’m like, ‘Wow. Another day!’” Rohrsson says. “Killing time or being bored? I’m going to wait until I’m dead to do that.” 

The true tale of how a fairy saved a bunny during a flood

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
The true tale of how a fairy saved a bunny during a flood

My assignment this week was to write a piece about the monumental storms that packed a wallop in Marin and Sonoma counties, but I needed a break from bad news. 

Fortunately, I found a heartwarming story about a fairy, a stranded motorist and a bunny on a flooded road during a downpour.

To satisfy my editor, let me get this out of the way: The first 18 days of January delivered more than 22 inches of rain to Marin, while Sonoma County made it onto President Joe Biden’s list of areas eligible for FEMA funds. It was a mess all over the Bay Area, with flooded roads, mudslides, toppled trees and power outages.

Still, none of this discouraged Marcy Berman from braving an atmospheric river last week to transport a domesticated bunny named Lady Gray to a foster home in Muir Beach.

Berman, director of the nonprofit SaveABunny, admits she saw standing water on the road, but thought her truck would plow through it. After all, Lady Gray, a rescued rabbit disabled from severe neglect, required specialized care from the couple at the other end of the flooded street.

A driving miscalculation landed Berman’s truck stuck in the mud on the side of the road, tipping precariously, with the water continuing to rise ever so slightly.

“We were really at a steep angle,” Berman said.

Standing less than five feet tall, Berman considered the depth of the water and her chance of carrying Lady Gray and the bunny’s accoutrements to safety. She decided to stay in her vehicle, where she could keep the heat on for her paralyzed passenger while she called for help. West Marin’s spotty cell service put a kink in that plan.

Two surfers came by and tried to push the truck out of the mud. No go. Then a fire truck rolled up; however, Berman, determined to get Lady Gray to the medical foster home, told the firefighters that she was fine.

Some might question Berman’s stubbornness at this juncture, yet it’s through her tenacity that SaveABunny has rescued 5,000 rabbits over the last 24 years. She wasn’t giving up on this one.

Lady Gray, a rabbit rescued from severe neglect by SaveABunny, munches on nutritious greens.

“I just let go and asked the universe for help,” Berman said. “Ten minutes later, a pretty blonde lady with a lovely accent shows up in an SUV. A fairy.”

Not only did Penny Macphail’s ethereal beauty and Irish lilt inform Berman that her rescuer was otherworldly, but a sign on the SUV confirmed it: “www.goodfairy.org.”

Indeed, Macphail is a real-life good fairy. Although she ventured from her home in Sleepy Hollow on this stormy day to swim with her dog at Muir Beach, Macphail wasn’t surprised to happen upon someone who needed to be saved.

“I run a nonprofit called Good Fairy that matches volunteers with people who need help,” Macphail said. “The funny thing is that I am constantly rescuing people, because once you start looking, you see people in need.”

Good Fairy has helped hundreds of people since its inception three years ago, but Macphail herself attracts those in need. She recently found a five-year-old boy at a gas station after his father accidentally drove away without him. It seems she’s always in the right place at the right time, which is even more remarkable considering she’s disabled with limited mobility.

“I’m seizing the day and making the best of everything I can,” Macphail said.

Together, on the flooded road in the pouring rain, the two women managed to move the bunny and her supplies into Macphail’s SUV and then to the medical foster home.

One will never know whether Macphail appeared because Berman wished for her or because Macphail keeps an eye out for anyone needing help. Either way, both say they wholeheartedly agree with the other line on the sign on Macphail’s vehicle: “I believe in fairies!” 

The sign on MacPhail’s SUV explains why magical moments occur when she arrives.

Anchor-outs living on Richardson Bay fear more than foul weather

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Anchor-outs living on Richardson Bay fear more than foul weather

A local government agency in Marin seems to have a knack for targeting the most defenseless people in a vulnerable community of mariners, including a pregnant woman, seniors and people with disabilities.

During the last six months, at least three mariners living aboard their boats anchored out in Richardson Bay have filed federal lawsuits against the Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) for threatening to seize and destroy their vessels. The basis for the RBRA’s proposed actions is that the boats are marine debris. The boat owners vehemently dispute the claim.

On Jan. 4, hearings for two different cases filed by mariners were held before Judge William H. Orrick in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. While the RBRA retained an outside law firm, the mariners aren’t paying a dime in legal costs. Daniel Knight, who is 65 and disabled, has a pro bono attorney. Robert Roark, 76, is a pro se litigant, meaning he is representing himself.

Both Knight and Roark assert the RBRA, as well as other numerous named and unnamed defendants, are attempting to seize and destroy their boats. Should the RBRA succeed in taking and crushing their homes, the men allege the agency will violate their civil rights and force them into homelessness.

Several constitutional amendments protect Knight and Roark, according to their lawsuits. The Fourth Amendment prevents the government from performing unreasonable searches and seizures, while the Fifth Amendment guarantees the government cannot seize private property without just compensation. The 14th Amendment bars the government from depriving people of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.

Attorney David Breemer, of the Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit legal organization specializing in cases involving constitutional rights, is representing Knight and believes the definition of “reason” will be crucial to the case.

“In a legal search and seizure, generally speaking, a warrant should be obtained—but not always,” Breemer said in an interview with the Pacific Sun. “This is not just a warrant issue. The ultimate issue: What is reasonable? It’s unreasonable to seize property without due process, which is the notice and hearing before they take your property. You can’t give a person 10 days to move out of their residence. And there is no payment for the property offered here.”

Orrick seems to agree with some of Knight’s allegations, as he issued a preliminary injunction against the RBRA, prohibiting the agency from seizing the boat. In addition, he set a trial date for October, indicating he thinks the case has some merit.

Like Knight, Roark also received a 10-day written notice that his boat will be seized. In addition, RBRA Harbormaster Jim Malcolm verbally threatened to take the vessel, Roark said in an interview.

Roark contends he is anchoring out temporarily, until he completes some necessary repairs to his boat. Malcolm provided Roark with an application for a 30-day permit to anchor out in Richardson Bay, but Roark crossed out portions in red. One of Roark’s chief objections is that the permit states the “RBRA harbormaster is authorized to inspect the vessel at any time…”

“Parts of the application are unenforceable as written,” Roark said. “You cannot demand that someone give up their constitutional rights in order to gain a privilege. I’m not going to give away my civil rights for a parking permit.”

The RBRA refuses to negotiate on the terms of the permit and denies that any verbal threat was made to seize Roark’s boat. Orrick has twice declined to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent the agency from taking Roark’s vessel; however, he said that the issue will be dealt with through normal litigation. No date has yet been set.

For years, the RBRA has placed 10-day warning notices on anchored-out boats, mostly with the marine debris claim. If the owner doesn’t remove their property from the Richardson Bay anchorage within the stated period, the boat is at risk of being seized and destroyed. The harbormaster frequently follows through on the notice.

The RBRA hires a marine surveyor to determine whether the boat is marine debris; however, critics say the surveyor usually doesn’t enter the vessel and doesn’t test equipment. The anchor-outs say the RBRA has crushed seaworthy vessels.

For example, in July, the RBRA seized a 32-foot sailboat that it declared was marine debris. The boat’s owner, Kaitlin Allerton, a young woman who has lived on the water in Sausalito for most of her life, left her boat to spend the last few months of her pregnancy on shore. 

Initially, Federal Judge Maxine Chesney granted the RBRA permission to crush Allerton’s vessel, based on photos showing the boat covered in bird droppings, the surveyor’s report and the harbormaster’s inaccurate descriptions of the boat’s condition. While the RBRA had the boat stored at a marina in San Rafael, a crew of Allerton’s friends cleaned the boat. Chesney, who was presented with new photos, reversed her position. The parties subsequently reached an agreement, which included the RBRA returning the seaworthy vessel to Allerton.

Until recently, the boats were towed to the Army Corps of Engineers’ boat crushing facility in Sausalito. The vessels are now brought to other marinas around the bay to be destroyed, presumably because the boat owners have occasionally taken back their property from the Army Corps of Engineers, under the cover of darkness, and dropped anchor again in Richardson Bay.

However, most seized boats never make it back to the water. In 2010, there were 200 vessels anchored out. Then, in mid-2019, a state regulatory agency, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), pushed the RBRA to make haste with removing the boats. The RBRA responded by declaring more boats marine debris and enforcing a 72-hour limit for anchoring in the bay. The previous harbormaster whittled the number of vessels down to 135 by the end of 2020, despite the pandemic and lockdown. Just two years later, the RBRA estimates about 65 boats remain.

Under pressure from the BCDC, the RBRA signed an agreement in 2021 requiring that all boats anchored out in Richardson Bay must be removed by October 2026. With the anchor-out eradication date approaching, the RBRA continues to seize boats, although there is a severe lack of affordable housing on shore.

The RBRA’s attorney, David V. Roth, of Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez, Trester, did not reply to the Pacific Sun’s requests for comment.

For some mariners, leaving Richardson Bay represents the death of a lifestyle, their calling to live on the water. Others say they’ve been forced out of the traditional housing market due to run-away costs for real estate in Marin. With no place to go, and more than 1,100 homeless people in Marin County, they fear they will soon be living on the streets.

Dog Down: Novato police officer shoots neighbor’s dog

Nikki Silverstein
-
72
Dog Down: Novato police officer shoots neighbor’s dog

On a drizzly Sunday morning in September, a tragic series of events unfolded in Petaluma that ended with two dead chickens, a Novato police sergeant shooting a neighbor’s dog and a long list of unanswered questions.

Debate on social media exploded after KGO-TV broke the news in mid-December. An anecdotal survey of comments showed many people in Sonoma County noting that it is legal to shoot a dog when it kills chickens. Meanwhile, most Marin-based commenters opined that shooting the dog was unreasonable and the Novato Police Department should conduct a full investigation.

Sonoma County and state statutes do permit a person to kill a dog that is attacking chickens on their property, regardless of the proximity to homes and people.

In October, the Novato Police Department reviewed a complaint stemming from the incident and announced that no disciplinary action will be taken against Sgt. Nick Frey, the employee who shot and killed his neighbors’ dog.

Still, some Marin residents are concerned about Frey and his behavior, all captured on video.

The Incident

Anna and Phil Henry, both in their 70s, live on a narrow lane in rural Petaluma. Sgt. Nick Frey, a police de-escalation instructor and head of Novato’s SWAT team, and his wife, Jennie Frey, live next door. Although the two properties each cover about two acres, the houses are situated close together.

The Henrys’ grandchildren accidentally let Huck, the couple’s four-year-old Black Mouth Cur, out of their fenced yard on Sept. 18, at about 10:50am. Huck, who weighed 90 pounds, entered the Freys’ partially unfenced property.

The Freys’ Ring cameras captured audio and video of what transpired after the dog arrived.

Upon watching the six videos provided to the Pacific Sun by the Freys’ attorney, Alison Berry Wilkinson, it became apparent that some footage was missing. Wilkinson admitted that additional footage exists; however, she said it was not released due to concerns for the Frey children’s privacy and “threatened litigation” by the Henry family.

The video sequences begin with Huck in the Freys’ yard and the Henry’s grandchildren can be heard trying to lure him home with treats. Soon a chaotic scene developed with Huck, chickens, Anna Henry, and Nick and Jennie Frey.

Huck chased chickens that roamed freely in the Freys’ yard, while Anna Henry pursued and yelled at him.

Nick Frey came into the yard with a handgun. He shouted and cursed.

Anna Henry caught Huck and leashed him, but he had already killed two chickens. Nick Frey stood next to his neighbor and the dog.

“Those are my children’s birds,” Nick Frey yelled.

Suddenly, Huck turned and pulled. Anna Henry, who underwent hip replacement surgery the previous month, fell to the ground and let go of the leash. Huck lunged behind a large tree that obscured much of the camera’s view. Nick Frey, also behind the tree, immediately took several steps to the side, moving away from the dog.

“Nick, kill him,” Jennie Frey screamed. “Goddamnit. Kill that fucking dog.”

Nick Frey fired three shots. The dog dropped to the ground several feet in front of his shooter. Despite all three bullets hitting Huck, he was alive.

After the shooting

Not surprisingly, the Henrys and the Freys don’t agree on what happened before, during or after the shooting. While the Pacific Sun interviewed the Henrys for their perspectives, the Freys’ version of events comes from email exchanges with Wilkinson, their attorney. In addition, Wilkinson provided two written declarations, one by Jennie Frey and the other from Nick Frey.

According to Anna Henry, Huck pulled away from her because he was focused on a chicken that had begun flapping its wings. The dog ran past Nick Frey to get to the bird and was then shot in the back, she said.

Refuting Anna Henry’s claim, Nick Frey said the dog lunged at him, and he felt threatened, which is why he fired his gun.

Phil Henry, who was in his car at the end of the Freys’ driveway when the shooting occurred, had a clear view of the incident.

“I saw Nick shoot Huck as he was running away,” Phil Henry said. “The tree wasn’t in the way for me.”

After the shooting, Anna Henry said she asked Nick Frey to euthanize Huck because he was suffering. But Nick Frey responded that he’s “not touching that dog,” she said. 

Nick Frey said his wife requested he euthanize the dog, but he declined because it would be illegal.

Believing Huck’s death was imminent, the Henrys stayed with him in the Freys’ yard for an hour. But Huck hung on, and the Henrys brought him to a veterinarian, who examined the dog and took x-rays of the gunshot wounds.

Huck could hear, partially lift his head and responded to pain, according to the veterinarian’s report. Gunshot wounds were found at the back of the dog’s head, behind his right ear and over his shoulder. Based on these findings, the Henrys decided to euthanize Huck.

Wilkerson said she would need to see an autopsy, photos and x-rays to determine that the dog was shot from behind. There are “multiple potential explanations” for the dog’s wounds in these areas, including the downward trajectory of the bullets or “the dog started to turn as he heard the first shot fire.”

About 25 minutes after the shooting, while Huck was still alive in the yard with the Henrys, Nick Frey told Sonoma County Animal Services that he shot and killed the dog, according to a report by an animal control officer.

Nick Frey’s written declaration stated he thought the dog was dead because the Henrys had covered Huck with a blanket.

The Beginning

The Henrys say there was only one previous encounter between Nick Frey and the dog, occurring in late June or early July. Huck barked at Nick Frey when he came outside to place his trash in the cans, which are next to the fence separating the two properties. 

“I pulled Huck away from the fence,” Phil Henry said. “Nick said to me, ‘If your dog ever comes over here, he’s not coming back.’”

The Freys’ attorney, Wilkinson, denies her client used those words, but concedes that Nick Frey did say he would kill the dog to protect his family and chickens. However, Wikinson said it wasn’t a threat.

In response, the Henry’s raised the fence two feet and placed lattice work at the top to cut Huck’s view of the neighbor’s yard. After Jennie Frey texted Phil Henry to thank him for increasing the fence height, the Henrys believed the issue was resolved.

Yet, Wilkinson asserts the Freys had encounters with Huck on “multiple occasions.” The dog attempted to scale the fence to get to the chickens and was “aggressive toward Mr. Frey, barking viciously” at him, Wilkinson said.

The Freys only complained about Huck on that one occasion and appeared to know that Huck wasn’t vicious, the Henrys said. Afterall, when the Henrys’ grandchildren lived with them for six months, the Frey children visited and played with the dog, according to Anna Henry.

“We took Huck to the dog park every day and there were never any issues, “Phil said. “Not with people or other dogs.”

Two weeks after the shooting, the Freys put plastic skeletons of a dog and a human lying on the ground holding a leash in their yard, about where Huck was shot, the Henrys said. Already traumatized by the shooting, the family now felt intimidated, according to Anna Henry. 

“It did not occur to me that the placement of those Halloween decorations might cause mental anguish or distress to our neighbors,” Nick Frey said.

The Aftermath

Sonoma County Animal Services found that Nick Frey was within his legal rights to shoot Huck and closed the case within days. The Sonoma County Sheriff’s Officer concurred with the decision, according to an email sent to the Henrys by an animal control officer.

Anna Henry filed a complaint about Nick Frey with the Novato Police Department on Oct. 12, saying that he had used excessive force and “seemed very out of control.”

Novato Police Chief Beth Johnson responded less than two weeks later, stating the department conducted a review and concluded the incident was out of their jurisdiction.

In an interview, Johnson said she “reviewed everything in its totality,” including the videos. The gun used to shoot the dog was not Nick Frey’s service weapon, another factor which distanced the incident from the police department, she said.

“No disciplinary action will be taken,” Johnson said. “There is not a nexus to his employment, and the labor laws are very specific.”

Interestingly, Nick Frey cited a state law and a Novato Police Department policy when he explained his reasons for declining to euthanize the dog. The law and policy both prohibit a law enforcement officer from euthanizing an animal, unless it is a stray or abandoned and “so badly injured that human compassion requires its removal from further suffering and where other dispositions are impractical.”

Since shooting and seriously wounding the dog had no connection to Nick Frey’s employment as a law enforcement officer, then euthanizing the dog shouldn’t either. 

Novato police department policy also states that lying and unbecoming conduct, both on- and off-duty, are causes for disciplinary action. Johnson said she has no reason to believe her employee to be dishonest. There are different perceptions of an emotionally charged event, she said.

Credibility is at the core of the incident, according to Thomas Tiderington, a police use of force expert with more than 42 years of experience in law enforcement, including two decades serving as a police chief. Tiderington believes the shooting was justified but said he can’t determine if it was reasonable. He questions whether Nick Frey stepped away from the dog “to take the shot” or because he felt threatened.

“What did the officer believe in the moment it was occurring?” Tiderington said. “We don’t know exactly what happened. If he felt he was going to be injured by the dog, there’s no way anyone else could dispute that. He covered his bases by saying he felt he was in danger and protecting the chickens.”

Some of the officer’s conduct was unprofessional, Tiderington said. He cited keeping the skeletons on display as the “most outrageous” act.

“I really question the wisdom of the officer about that,” Tiderington said.

Some members of the Novato Police Advisory Review Board (PARB) also have questions. The board is composed of seven residents who are appointed by the Novato City Council to advise on police department policy. 

One concern is the city failed to inform PARB that a complaint had been filed against an officer, although it is required by a city council resolution. Johnson said the board wasn’t told yet because it meets quarterly. However, the last meeting took place three weeks after Anna Henry filed her complaint and a week after Johnson responded to it.

Another issue is that Novato City Manager Adam McGill denied a PARB member’s request to call a special meeting about Nick Frey, according to an email obtained by the Pacific Sun. McGill’s reasoning is that the board could potentially be called upon to review this personnel matter, and members discussing it beforehand would render them ineffective as a “neutral jury.” 

McGill’s logic seems flawed based on one of the prerequisites to trigger a PARB review of a personnel issue. The citizen who filed a complaint about the officer must also file an appeal of department’s determination within 30 days. Then McGill decides whether PARB will review the appeal.

Anna Henry never appealed Johnson’s decision because no one told her she could. It’s not on the generic complaint form and Johnson’s letter didn’t mention it. The 30-day window expired weeks ago.

Without an appeal, a PARB review isn’t triggered, making McGill’s excuse not to schedule the special meeting a moot point. Furthermore, PARB’s rules and regulations permit the board to call meetings and place items on the agenda.

The Future

Meanwhile, it’s been more than three months since the Henrys lost Huck. Their grief is still close to the surface. Anna Henry spoke to the Pacific Sun only once because she can no longer discuss Huck’s death. During several conversations with Phil Henry, he cried.

The only decision remaining for the the Henrys is whether to file a lawsuit against Nick Frey, but they understand it’s a long and emotional process. Still, they want to hold him accountable in some way.

In an interview with the Pacific Sun, the Henrys’ attorney said they could make a case for intentional infliction of emotional distress. 

“Something has to be done about this officer,” Phil Henry said. “I don’t want Huck to have died in vain.”

Larkspur renters concerned the city council is floundering on rent control

Nikki Silverstein
-
4
Larkspur renters concerned the city council is floundering on rent control

It seems the Larkspur City Council is trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to rent control. 

Two council members serving on an ad hoc committee have been hemming and hawing for months about the details of an ordinance for the entire council to consider.

Larkspur City Manager Dan Schwarz has said several times during council meetings that drafting an ordinance isn’t difficult, but the council needs to determine the parameters.

The council has been down this road before. In 2020, they ultimately decided against rent stabilization for mobile home parks after almost a year of reviewing the issue.

Now, rent stabilization for multi-family rental units is on the table, and the need is urgent, according to some Larkspur residents. Since March, people have lined up to speak during the public comment period at city council meetings, the majority pleading for rent stabilization.

Joan Weinberg, 74, sobbed as she told the council about her struggles to meet the substantial rent increase at Skylark Apartments, her home for the last 30 years. And she’s not alone.

As leases come up for renewal at Skylark, a 455-unit complex, tenants are faced with a 10% annual increase, the maximum amount allowed by state law. Many say they can no longer afford the rent and will be forced to leave Larkspur and Marin County.

Pell Development, a family-owned business, built Skylark Apartments in 1969 and retained ownership for more than 50 years. Under Pell’s management, the rent increases were nominal, long-time tenants have said.

That affordability came to a screeching halt in February, when Prime Group, the parent company of Prime Residential, purchased the property from the Pell family for $300 million. The hefty price tag made it the third largest apartment sale during the first quarter, out of approximately 2,200 transactions in the United States, according to statistics cited by Real Page, a real estate industry software company. 

Prime Residential, which owns and operates more than 17,000 multi-family units on the West Coast, immediately began raising rents. Skylark residents, fearing they would be priced out of their homes, quickly formed a tenants association at the end of February.

The 200-member association has partnered with the Marin Democratic Socialists of America to pressure the Larkspur City Council to pass rent control and just cause eviction ordinances, Caroline Njoki, president of the Skylark Tenants Association, said in an interview. In addition, they have received support from Legal Aid of Marin.

Lucie Hollingsworth, an attorney for Legal Aid, said her office has been inundated with calls from Skylark residents since Prime Residential took over.

“People have a valid fear of homelessness,” Hollingsworth said. “Larkspur is losing naturally occurring affordable housing. Rent stabilization would help preserve it.”

Naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) is defined as existing multifamily rental properties that are affordable without public subsidy. When the ownership of a NOAH property turns over, it can displace renters and create instability within communities, according to McKinsey and Company, a management consulting firm.

Skylark was considered a NOAH property until the sale in February. Not only is Prime Residential raising rents for lease renewals, but it is also renovating empty units and jacking up those rents dramatically. The property’s website shows renovated units start at $2,598 for a 588 square foot studio, with a three-bedroom apartment starting at $4,910.

And it’s not just Skylark residents feeling the pain. More than half of Larkspur’s 13,000 residents are renters, according to data from the United States Census Bureau.

Other Larkspur complexes are also raising rents by 10%, says Njoki. Supporters of rent stabilization have been knocking on doors and setting up tables at a shopping plaza to obtain petition signatures. Five hundred Larkspur residents, 400 of them renters, have signed the petition urging the council to pass a rent stabilization ordinance.

Schwarz reported at a council meeting that an ordinance would affect approximately 3,300 renters and 65 properties. Only properties built before 1995 are subject to rent control, based on state law. Single family homes and condos are also exempt.

In August, the city council finally put rent control on the meeting agenda. Of the four members present at the meeting, only Councilmember Kevin Haroff offered his full support for rent control, saying his views have changed over time.

“In the multi-family [rental] area, things have changed,” Haroff said at the meeting. “Landlords and owners alter the dynamics of the market in a way that renters can’t control. To me, that means we have to take action.”

The council decided that Haroff and Vice Mayor Gabe Paulson would serve on an ad hoc committee to review rent stabilization and that the issue would be a standing item on the meeting agendas. Haroff stressed “the importance of acting quickly and robustly.”

At a September city council meeting, Will Madison, chief operating officer of Prime Residential, announced that they had established their own means tested rental assistance program. A single person earning up to $65,000 a year and a family of four earning up to $95,000 a year could qualify for up to a 15% discount. In addition, he claimed that no evictions were in process and dozens of lease renewals with rent increases below 10% had been sent out.

Njoki, the tenant association president, is skeptical of the company’s program as an alternative to a city ordinance. Not all people will apply for Prime Residential’s rental assistance, according to Njoki. For instance, undocumented immigrants wouldn’t be comfortable applying. Njoki also disputes that no evictions are in process at Skylark.

Julie, a Skylark resident, spoke at the September meeting about Prime Residential’s “generous offer” to lower her initial rent increase from 10% to 9.92%. It will save her $24 a year.

For about two months, the ad hoc committee, true to Haroff’s word, seemed to be moving forward quickly. It held separate forums for renters and landlords in September and October to gather information. Also in October, a workshop was held on “options to regulate residential rent increases.”

During the public comment period at the Oct. 2 workshop, a gentleman walked to the microphone and introduced himself as Mike Kibler, litigation counsel for Prime Residential. He stated that his typical forum isn’t a city council meeting, rather it’s a courtroom. Prime Residential will litigate if a rent control ordinance is passed, although that’s not a threat, he said.

Kibler sent a letter to the city manager the following day, reiterating that Prime Residential authorized his firm to sue the city—for $100 million—if the city “moves ahead with implementing any form of local rent control.” 

The letter refers to the numerous Larkspur tenants who have spoken out for rent control as “a few misinformed and self-interested residents.” Ironically, Kibler then opines that a local ordinance “would have a devastating impact on Prime’s anticipated return on investment in Skylark.”

Hollingsworth, the Legal Aid attorney, sent her own letter to the city stating that Kibler’s threats are baseless, noting that he provided no legal authority or precedence for a lawsuit. Courts have supported local rent stabilization ordinances in California, “including rulings that reject an owner’s argument based on return on investment,” Hollingworth said.

Aside from a forum for landlords in mid-October, it appears the ad hoc committee’s progress on an ordinance has stalled. Haroff spoke of proceeding cautiously at the workshop. Councilmember Catherine Way has expressed that the city will have to consider the cost of litigation when reviewing a rent stabilization policy. The issue is no longer a standing item on the  meeting agendas, and another ad hoc committee has been formed to review a city rental assistance program.

The Pacific Sun’s request for interviews with the city council members resulted in a phone interview with Schwarz, who indicated he doesn’t know where the council stands on rent stabilization and the next meeting addressing the issue will be in January.

“The process needs to take as long as it takes,” Schwarz said.

Housing authority board rejects homeownership plan for Golden Gate Village residents

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Housing authority board rejects homeownership plan for Golden Gate Village residents

The Golden Gate Village Resident Council expected the Marin Housing Authority Board of Commissioners to reject their proposal to convert the deteriorating property into a housing co-op managed by residents. They were right.

At the end of a five-hour meeting on Nov. 15, the board voted 5-2 for the Marin Housing Authority’s plan to keep Golden Gate Village, an historic 296-unit public housing complex, under its control.

The two competing plans differed in the financing methods used to pay for the long overdue rehabilitation.

The resident council’s proposed financing would have permitted the property to convert to a Limited Equity Housing Cooperative (LEHC), a homeownership model designed for affordable housing communities. Under the LEHC model, Golden Gate Village residents could have bought in at a low, subsidized price, built limited equity and had the ability to pass on the property to their heirs.

The housing authority’s financing plan uses Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and other loans, which precludes a housing co-op. A limited partnership, including private investors and the Marin Housing Authority, not the residents, would own Golden Gate Village.

Located in Marin City, Golden Gate Village houses about 600 predominantly Black residents who have long complained the property has fallen into serious disrepair. Reports of mold, rodents, plumbing leaks, broken heating, faulty wiring and fire hazards have largely been ignored by the housing authority, prompting some residents to file a lawsuit that is currently wending its way through federal court.

Last year, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) threatened to take over the Marin Housing Authority due to repeated “failing or near failing physical scores” at Golden Gate Village. Under HUD’s direction, the local agency developed a “corrective action plan” for the property’s revitalization.

Even under these circumstances, the seven-member board, composed of the Marin County Board of Supervisors and two “tenant commissioners,” gave the housing authority an overwhelming vote of confidence, as they have repeatedly done in the past.

The resident council is left wondering why only the Marin Housing Authority was permitted to present their plan at the meeting. Both proposals were presented at last month’s meeting, and several board members asked the resident council to clarify some elements of their plan.

Although the resident council prepared responses to the board’s questions, they were informed several days before the November meeting that they would not be allowed to address the board, according to Barbara Bogard, who is a member of the Golden Gate Village volunteer strategy team.

It appears only two members of the board wanted to learn the answers to their questions. Supervisor Damon Connolly, along with tenant commissioner Sarah Canson, cast the dissenting votes.

“I would have liked to have seen the residents’ council at the table and be given the time to flesh out the financing,” Connolly said in an email to the Pacific Sun.

A three-member board subcommittee, consisting of Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Supervisor Dennis Rodoni and Tenant Commissioner Homer Hall, made the decision not to give the resident council time at the meeting, according to Connolly. 

The trio, along with Board President Katie Rice and Supervisor Judy Arnold, approved the housing authority’s proposal, thereby disregarding scores of Marin residents who spoke in favor of the resident council’s plan during a public comment period prior to the vote. 

Remarkably, only two of the 60 speakers supported the housing authority’s scheme. Both are Golden Gate Village residents; one is employed by the Marin Housing Authority.

Golden Gate Village Resident Council President Royce McLemore and countywide supporters of the residents’ plan say racial discrimination guided the board’s decision. As an example, McLemore points to Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters’ recent comment that the residents lack the expertise to run a housing co-op.

“Our plan was to hire a management firm, just like the housing authority’s plan,” McLemore said in an interview. “We have the ability to interview and hire a management firm, and then make sure they do what’s within the contract. Stephanie has no respect for the residents. None.”

Moulton-Peters told the Pacific Sun in an interview on Oct. 27 that she believes “Golden Gate Village residents can manage the property with the management company.” Still, that belief apparently wasn’t enough to overcome her objections to the resident council’s plan, which she outlined in an opinion piece run by the Marin Independent Journal on the day before the vote.

While Moulton-Peters expressed her support of a housing co-op’s benefits, she argued the model doesn’t fit the scale of the Golden Gate Village project and questioned the feasibility of the resident council’s financing plan. In conclusion, Moulton-Peters wrote, “…we must move forward with making the immediate, securely funded improvements to Golden Gate Village.”

However, some aren’t convinced the housing authority’s funding is as secure as Moulton-Peters suggests. Lisa Bennett, a certified public accountant and member of the Golden Gate Village strategy team, says the LIHTC application process is very competitive and there’s no guarantee the housing authority will receive the funding.

A report released last year by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley explains the complexities of the LIHTC program. While it called the program “the most important source of funding for affordable housing in the United States,” it also noted that almost 90% of LIHTC developments in California required weaving together four or more funding sources, increasing costs and often extending project timelines.

These challenges don’t necessarily bode well for Moulton-Peters’ stance that the housing authority’s plan is more secure and expedient. The resident council said their plan, with a mortgage secured by HUD and grants from reputable sources to bridge a financing gap, may have been faster.

Strawberry resident Lori Bamberger, who was formerly the assistant chief of staff at HUD and currently serves as the managing partner at ABK City Advisors, an equitable economic development firm, supports the resident council’s plan for homeownership and self-governance.

Bamberger told the Pacific Sun in an interview that due to Marin’s history of barring Black people from homeownership through racist and discriminatory covenants, it is time to give Golden Gate residents this opportunity.

If the board doesn’t approve of the resident council’s proposed financing, it could explore other  options to convert Golden Gate Village to a homeownership model, according to Bamberger, who also emailed her perspective to Moulton-Peters before the vote.

“It just takes a decision to roll up your sleeves and create a viable financing plan,” Bamberger said.

But it appears the Marin Housing Authority and its board may never have intended to seriously consider the housing co-op plan put forth by the resident council. The resident council and their strategy team maintain they weren’t given equal footing during the process.

The housing authority board formed a revitalization working group, giving the residents the same number of seats as the housing authority.  

A consultant hired by HUD worked with the group on developing a financing strategy, yet based on numerous memos, reports and presentations generated by the consultant, his time was spent creating the housing authority’s plan, leaving the resident council to find a volunteer to assist them.

“The whole working group was a sham,” McLemore said. “But we’re not done yet. We’re going to keep refining our plan and maybe there’s another lawsuit coming.”

Fairfax becomes first jurisdiction in Marin to pass rent control ordinance.

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Fairfax becomes first jurisdiction in Marin to pass rent control ordinance.

Renters in Fairfax breathed a collective sigh of relief last week when the town council approved two ordinances. One caps rent increases and the other provides strong measures to prevent arbitrary evictions, commonly known as a “just cause” eviction ordinance. 

Faced with rising rents and inflation, the Marin Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has been pushing local jurisdictions to approve renter protections, viewing state laws as inadequate, especially for the current economic environment.

“The state’s rent cap is way too high, and its just cause eviction [provision] has loopholes,” Curt Ries, co-chair of the Marin DSA, said in an interview.

The average monthly rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Marin County is now over $2,500, according to Apartment List, an online rental marketplace. Rents rose almost 14% in 2021 but stayed relatively steady in 2022, Apartment List’s data shows.

Under AB 1482, a 2019 law impacting some residential rental units across the state, landlords are allowed to increase rents up to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus 5%, or 10%, whichever is lower, each year. The regional CPI increase was 5% year-over-year for April, triggering a whopping 10% rent increase for Marin renters in units covered by AB 1482. Renters in units not included in the state law may have seen even larger legal increases. 

Given this situation, it’s no wonder that 3,000 Marin residents—650 in Fairfax—have signed the DSA’s petition to support more stringent caps on rent increases and stronger just cause eviction protections.

The Marin DSA is currently urging San Anselmo and Larkspur to pass similar ordinances. And they don’t plan on stopping there.

Larkspur residents may be particularly receptive to renter protections, since more than half of them are tenants. Skylark Apartments, a 455-unit complex purchased by the Prime Group in February, has been aggressively raising rents, tenants say.

Skylark residents, fearing they would be priced out of their homes, quickly formed a tenants association at the end of February. The 200-member association has partnered with the DSA to put pressure on the Larkspur City Council to pass rent control and just cause eviction ordinances, Caroline Njoki, president of the Skylark Tenants Association, said in an interview.

The Marin DSA approached the San Anselmo City Council about renter protections earlier this year, and the organization anticipates presenting the issue to the council again in January, Ries said.

In Fairfax, more than 1,200 households rent their homes, constituting approximately 37% of total town households. Approximately 24% of Fairfax rental households are low income, 12% very low income and 36% are deemed extremely low income.

On Nov. 2, the rent stabilization ordinance received unanimous approval by the five-member Fairfax council. The just cause eviction ordinance passed 4-0, with one council member abstaining from the vote, saying that the ordinance lacked “reasonable kinds of compromises.” Both go into effect on Dec. 3.

The town’s newly adopted rent stabilization policy limits annual rent increases to an amount equal to 60% of the local CPI or 5%, whichever is lower. The new cap is far lower than the maximum 10% annual rent increase allowed on units covered by current state law.

However, an earlier California law, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, exempts single-family homes, condos and units built after 1995 from state and local rent control ordinances. Local just cause eviction ordinances have no such restrictions.

Fairfax’s just cause eviction ordinance applies to a broader range of rental dwellings. This aspect of the law, as well as specified amounts landlords are required to pay for temporary tenant relocations and various punitive damages for landlords, gave pause to property owners and Councilmember Barbara Coler, who abstained from the vote.

“Some of the just cause strengthening is really, to me, fairly burdensome,” said Coler. “The temporary relocation payments, if you have to do a renovation and do a move out…it can be between $8- and $9,000 a month.”

Under the Fairax just cause ordinance, landlords who abuse the Ellis Act, a state law allowing landlords to withdraw a unit from the rental market to “go out of business,” are subject to paying a tenant triple damages if they re-rent the unit within two years. If the landlord wants to re-rent the unit within five years, it must first be offered to the former tenant. Any landlord failing to comply must financially compensate the former tenant for up to six months’ rent.

Lucie Hollingsworth, an attorney for Legal Aid of Marin, believes these measures are necessary. 

“Capping rent increases is only a part of the solution,” Hollingsworth said in a Sept. 27 letter to the town council. “Policies are needed to disincentivize outside investors from displacing Fairfax tenants merely to take advantage of Fairfax’s lack of local tenant protections.”

Indeed, Marin County towns and cities seem to be prime targets for large real estate investors. In a September article about Marin apartment complexes being sold to large investors, The Real Deal noted, “The county [Marin] also does not have the same strict rent control measures that can make owning multifamily properties an onerous proposition in San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley and San Jose.” 

The Fairfax just cause eviction ordinance has financial ramifications for corporate real estate investors and small, local landlords, including, for example, a senior who rents out a room in their home to make ends meet. At public meetings, critics of the ordinance said that these disincentives, aimed at preventing property owners from evicting tenants arbitrarily just to raise rents for future tenants, could cause problems for the landlord who rents out a portion of their home to a tenant. Disliking a tenant is not considered a just cause for eviction. 

Others warned of legal pushback.

“I believe these controls are so far reaching, you’ll most certainly find it challenged in the court,” Michael Burke, a real estate agent with Sotheby’s International Realty in Greenbrae, said at the Fairfax Town Council meeting.

Golden Gate Village residents seek independence from Marin Housing Authority

Nikki Silverstein
-
5
Golden Gate Village residents seek independence from Marin Housing Authority

Royce McLemore, president of the Golden Gate Village Resident Council, is within a few steps of achieving the goal she has been working toward for almost a decade. It has been McLemore’s dream to restore the neglected and decaying public housing complex in Marin City.

Golden Gate Village has been home to McLemore, 79, for most of her life. She has battled for years with the Marin Housing Authority over their failure to provide safe and sanitary living conditions. The apartments are rife with mold, rodents, plumbing leaks, broken heating, faulty wiring and fire hazards, according to residents.

The significance of Golden Gate Village often goes unrecognized. Completed in 1961, Aaron Green, a protégé of Frank Lloyd Wright, designed the 32-acre public housing development for Black people who had built Liberty ships in nearby Sausalito during World War II. Almost 6,000 shipyard workers lived in temporary housing in Marin City; however, white people left after the war, with money in their pockets from their well-paying jobs. Black people also had money but stayed in Marin City because of redlining, the discriminatory practice of preventing them from buying homes in other areas of the county.

Today, Golden Gate Village is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The 296 units house about 700 predominantly Black residents, many of whom are descendants of the shipbuilders. Notably, Golden Gate Village is the only public housing in Marin that accepts children.

In an effort to preserve the historic property, McLemore and the resident council recruited a volunteer strategy team several years ago. The diverse team includes a real estate developer, an attorney, a certified public accountant and other professionals who assisted the resident council in putting together a viable plan to rehabilitate Golden Gate Village.

The Marin Housing Authority’s seven-member board, composed of the Marin County Board of Supervisors and two community members, voted in March to recommend the resident council’s revitalization plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which is overseeing the process.

In fact, HUD is scrutinizing the Marin Housing Authority, after threatening to take over the agency in May 2021, due to repeated “failing or near failing physical scores” at Golden Gate Village. The housing authority is under a corrective action plan, which includes deadlines.

To stay on track for HUD and flesh out the details of the resident plan, the housing authority board voted in March 2022 to form a “working group.” A facilitator was hired, costing the county $110,000. Marin County Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters and an equal number of representatives from the housing authority and Golden Gate Village were appointed to the working group.

The members participated in about 20 Zoom meetings, from May 27-Oct. 28, and agreed on many aspects of the resident council plan. Both the Marin Housing Authority and the resident council concur on using green and sustainable building practices for the property’s revitalization, while also preserving its historic qualities. Ditto for keeping Golden Gate Village affordable for low-income residents.

Unfortunately, two major sticking points, homeownership and project financing, have caused a stalemate between the two factions of the working group. The housing authority decided to present the board with an alternate financing plan, one which effectively blocks residents from a pathway to homeownership in Golden Gate Village.

Two plans now compete for the board’s approval. Both were revealed at a Marin Housing Authority board meeting on Oct. 18, and a final vote will take place at the Nov. 15 board meeting.

The Golden Gate Village Resident Council proposes financing the project with a mortgage, an approach they admit would leave a gap of $26 million. However, a financing consultant working with the group helped them identify reputable funding sources, mostly grants, to bridge the gap.

This financing conforms with a Limited Equity Housing Cooperative (LEHC), a homeownership model designed for affordable housing communities, which is a key component of the resident council’s plan. Under the LEHC, Golden Gate Village residents would establish a nonprofit corporation that owns the buildings and each resident would have the option of buying a share in the corporation, initially at a subsidized price. As shareholders, residents become homeowners, allowing them to build limited equity and pass on the property to their heirs.

Section 8 project-based vouchers held by the residents would help pay for the monthly expenses. The LEHC may also apply for grants for capital improvements and other community needs.

Most importantly, co-op residents would elect their own board of directors and hire a management company to take care of day-to-day operations. No longer beholden to the housing authority, the residents would self-govern for the first time in Golden Gate Village’s 61-year history.

Conversely, the Marin Housing Authority prefers to keep control of Golden Gate Village, which contains more than half of Marin County’s public housing stock. The housing authority plans to finance the renovations through Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, ruling out homeownership for residents. In addition, the housing authority contends the LEHC model presents regulatory problems.

“The resident council’s goals and the approach for a LEHC are at odds with Section 8 Project Based Vouchers requirements in HUD’s regulations,” Kimberly Carroll, executive director of the Marin Housing Authority, said in an email.

Not so, according to Barbara Bogard, who is a member of the working group and the strategy team assisting the resident council. Other public housing developments that have converted to the LEHC model still meet Section 8 requirements, Bogard said.

Golden Gate Village residents don’t trust the housing authority to perform ongoing maintenance of the property after the rehabilitation is complete. The current degraded condition was caused by the housing authority’s neglect, although it has consistently blamed underfunding for the maintenance backlog and inability to make capital improvements. 

“For many years, Congress has failed to fully fund federal housing programs, including the Public Housing Capital Fund and Public Housing Operating Fund,” Carroll said. “…The MHA is dealing with the same challenges that public housing authorities throughout the country are facing.”

While Carroll’s statement is accurate, underfunding is not an excuse for failing to maintain Golden Gate Village. In 2018, Jane Winter, then-executive director of the financially healthy YWCA Apartments in San Francisco, also funded by HUD, brought this to the attention of the Marin Housing Authority in a letter.

“High quality professional affordable housing operators all know HUD funding is not available for major capital projects, and they plan well in advance to secure non-HUD funding for items that go beyond annual maintenance and repair,” Winter wrote.

Examples of such funding were included in the letter, yet the Marin Housing Authority never acted on any of Winter’s suggestions until now. Their proposal presented to the board on Oct. 18 includes one of the recommended financing options.

Both the housing authority and the resident council seem entrenched in their positions, despite months of working group meetings. The Golden Gate Village contingent believes the playing field wasn’t level.

For instance, the working group facilitator silenced McLemore, the resident council president, by turning off her microphone several times during meetings, said Lisa Bennett, a strategy team member who also serves in the working group.

The resident council contends racism has been a component of the meetings as well. Marin County Supervisor Moulton-Peters, a member of the working group, made a racist remark, according to Bogard.

The Pacific Sun verified that Moulton-Peters made the following comment by watching the video from the Sept. 23 working group meeting:

“Running a co-op requires financial, legal and operational expertise,” Moulton-Peters said. “I would want to understand where that expertise lies in the resident population. My sense is if it were in the resident population, then the strategy team would not have been needed. So that’s just a working theory I have. But this is a serious endeavor. I think it’s fair to ask that question, too. Where is the expertise that would run the co-op within the resident population?”

Moulton-Peters told the Pacific Sun in an interview that she did use these words during the meeting and clarified what she meant by the statement.

“I didn’t intend it to be that way,” Moulton-Peters said. “I believe the Golden Gate Village residents can manage the property with the management company.”

If the other housing authority board members agree with Moulton-Peters, then why not let the residents have a housing co-op at Golden Gate Village? 

Marin County is proficient at performative measures rather than making meaningful changes for underserved communities. Last week, the county announced it is “taking black Sharpies to racist language” in real estate deeds, literally crossing out the words that prohibited Black people from purchasing property. While it sounds nice in the press release, it doesn’t provide redress to those impacted by redlining. 

Marin County stole homeownership opportunities from Marin City’s Black residents after WWII. Giving the residents of Golden Gate Village a chance to own property would be a small step towards righting a huge wrong.

__________________________________

Tell the Marin Housing Authority Board of Commissioners which plan you support before they vote on Nov. 15:

Katie Rice kr***@*********ty.org

Stephanie Moulton-Peters sm************@*********ty.org

Damon Connolly dc*******@*********ty.org

Dennis Rodoni dr*****@*********ty.org

Judy Arnold ja*****@*********ty.org

Homer Hall hh***@**********ng.org

Sarah Canson sc*****@**********ng.org

Coyote confrontations increase in Belvedere and Tiburon

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Coyote confrontations increase in Belvedere and Tiburon

By Nikki Silverstein

Some residents of Belvedere believe coyotes on the small island have overstayed their welcome, saying the animals have snatched family pets right out of their yards.

Other complaints about the wild canines in the tony enclave include that they roam the streets in packs, stalk people as they walk their dogs and refuse to back off when faced with efforts to scare them away. 

There’s talk of shooting the coyotes or relocating them. People are scared the next victim could be a child.

A Belvedere woman said she carries a baseball bat when she leaves the house to fend off a potential coyote attack. Another said she brings a bear horn and portable alarms when she goes for a walk.

Folks in Tiburon have the same concerns as their Belvedere neighbors. Lorraine Gemigniani says the area is unique because it’s a peninsula, and there aren’t any predators to cull the coyote packs.

“I saw a coyote running up Lyford with a cat in his mouth,” Gemigniani said. “It’s gotten crazy. There are too many coyotes, and they are in charge. We need a reprieve from what’s going on.”

While Gemigniani is seeking a solution, she doesn’t advocate killing the coyotes. She said that she has spoken to Tiburon Police Chief Ryan Monaghan about the coyotes and plans on contacting Marin County officials, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Marin Humane, which is responsible for the county’s animal control.

“Ideally, Marin Humane hires a group to tranquilize the coyotes or set some kind of humane traps,” Gemigniani said. “Then they load ’em up and move ’em out of here.”

Gemigniani is aware that relocating coyotes is illegal in California. Ditto for shooting coyotes in urban areas of Marin. However, she wants the state relocation laws changed for the Tiburon Peninsula and Belvedere.

Over the summer, people who frequent Peacock Gap Park in San Rafael felt the same fear and frustration that Belvedere and Tiburon residents are now experiencing. Fortunately, the worry abated at Peacock Gap after the Marin Coyote Coalition, a group formed by Marin Humane, Marin County Parks and Project Coyote, educated park users about coyote behavior.

Coyote sightings at the park, which has a children’s playground, and the adjacent golf course are on the rise. Confrontations were reported, including a coyote biting a dog and coyotes surrounding a child.

Parents thought the coyotes were “coming to get our kids,” according to Gina Farr, a wildlife educator who serves on the advisory board of Project Coyote, a national nonprofit advocating for coexistence between wildlife and humans. Farr says it’s more likely the golf course and its restaurant attracted the coyotes from the nearby open space.

“A golf course is a smorgasbord for coyotes, with its supply of water and gophers,” Farr said in an interview. “The restaurant has a dumpster with food.”

The Marin Coyote Coalition recommended that people at Peacock Gap scare the animals away using a method called hazing. While residents often say the animals aren’t responding to hazing, the Marin Coyote Coalition maintains that it works effectively if the proper techniques are used. 

The feedback from Peacock Gap Park visitors  has been positive, according to Captain Cindy Machado, director of animal services at Marin Humane.

Hazing starts by making eye contact with the coyote and acting big, bad and loud, Farr said. Take a step forward, wave your arms around, throw sticks toward the coyote, yell and make noise with an air horn or a whistle. Using the element of surprise, such as opening a pop-up umbrella or spraying the coyote with a hose, will frighten them. Most importantly, people must continue hazing until the animal leaves the area.

“The typical scenario is that you scream at a coyote, and it runs 10 feet, then stops and looks at you,” Captain Cindy Machado, director of animal services at Marin Humane, said. “That pattern is what gets the coyotes into trouble. Keep hazing until they get the message.”

Another common misperception is that coyotes stalk and hunt in packs. Coyotes in the west typically hunt solo; however, they may move in a pack if they find an abundant food supply. Farr said she received a report of three to four coyotes repeatedly visiting a Safeway, where she discovered that outdated rotisserie chickens were routinely placed in an open dumpster.

In the late summer and fall, the animals may appear in groups as the coyote parents begin taking their pups, born in the spring, out of the den to prepare them for life on their own. If the parents have never been hazed, neither have the pups, and they may approach people.

“Their curious response could be misinterpreted as assertive and bold,” Machado said.

Like dogs, coyotes are canines. Although they’re very adaptive to the urban environment, humans can shape their behavior.

The best practice for preventing the animals from hanging around humans should go without saying—don’t feed coyotes, intentionally or otherwise, by leaving pet food, water and unsecured garbage cans outside. Fallen fruit in the yard and even bird feeders, if not kept tidy, can also attract coyotes.

“Coyotes aren’t searching out pets or toddlers,” Machado said. “They’re looking for rats, gophers and fruit, but if unattended cats and small dogs are in their pathway, it’s an easy meal.”

Although many Belvedere and Tiburon residents probably aren’t going to gain an appreciation of coyotes anytime soon, some Marin residents are fascinated by the animals.

Native to California, coyotes were in the region long before European colonizers arrived, according to a study, published in 2018, by James W. Hody of North Carolina State University and Roland Kays of North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences.

In the early 1900s, Marin County hired hunters to kill coyotes, as did livestock ranchers. Yet the intelligent creatures repopulated the area. Coyotes are important to our ecosystem, keeping the rodent population under control.

One coyote can devour 1,800 rodents a year, Camilla Fox, founder and executive director of Project Coyote, told the Pacific Sun in a 2020 interview.

“The Marin Coyote Coalition’s recommendations were developed with hard-core science and years of experience in Marin,” Machado said. “But everyone in the community needs to be on the same page.”

Farr echoes Machado’s sentiments, emphasizing that consistent hazing gives humans power over coyotes.

“If we misunderstand the process, it’s easy to say it doesn’t work,” Farr said. “I’ll bet you right now, it will work.”

___________________________________

For more information about coyote behavior and hazing tips, visit Project Coyote and Marin Humane.

The Marin Coyote Coalition’s webinar, ‘Coexisting with Coyotes,’ can be viewed here.

Novato City Council candidates call for change

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Novato City Council candidates call for change

Two races for open seats on the Novato City Council have inspired five diverse candidates to throw their hats in the ring for the Nov. 8 election.

Rachel Farac and Andy Podshadley compete to represent District 2, a portion of southwest Novato. The seat is open because Councilmember Denise Athas announced in May that she wouldn’t seek reelection after a dozen years of service.

Incumbent Pat Eklund is up against two challengers, Nicole Gardner and Chris Carpiniello, in the District 4 race. While Gardner and Carpiniello are newcomers to the Novato political scene, Eklund has served on the city council for 27 years, including several stints as the mayor. District 4 covers most of the southwest area of Novato.

District 2 Candidates

Podshadley, owner of Trek Winery in downtown Novato, describes himself as fiscally conservative and morally liberal. Although the Novato native has always wanted to run for a position on the city council, this election marks his first time running for office. 

“I’m at a place right now where I have the time and can be an asset to the council,” Podshadley said.

It seems that Podshadley has spent years preparing for a city council seat. His leadership experience in the community includes coaching high school sports and serving as the president of the Downtown Novato Business Association and a committee member on the tourism commission for the Novato Chamber of Commerce.

Novato faces many issues right now, according to Podshadley. If elected, he plans on tackling the city’s $1.5 million deficit, crime prevention, and increasing affordable housing.

“I have two children in their 20s who can’t afford to live in the community they grew up in and love,” Podshadley said. “I’m for affordable in-fill development. We need to mix high-, middle- and low-income housing across all the different areas of Novato, instead of segregating affordable housing.”

The Novato Police Officers Association and the Marin Realtors have endorsed Podshadley.

Podshadley’s opponent, Rachel Farac, is a life-long Marin resident with a record of community service. Farac currently has a position on the county’s Mental Health Board and was previously on the Novato Planning Commission. She served as the chairperson for both groups.

As the mother of a 15-month-old baby and a two-and-a-half-year-old, Farac believes the Novato City Council needs a member with school-age children. Mayor Eric Lucan’s departure this year for his newly won seat on the Marin County Board of Supervisors will leave a void in that arena, according to Farac.

Her top priorities, if elected, include addressing Novato’s budget shortfall, public safety and homelessness. To implement solutions, Farac says the council must nail down where the city’s money is being spent.

“Novato hasn’t updated the annual financial report since [the fiscal year] of 2018-2019,” Farac said. “An updated report is absolutely necessary to make good financial decisions. I’ll work to secure additional funding for programs by obtaining infrastructure and other economic grants from the federal and state governments.”

Farac proposes that the city create a mobile mental health crisis unit, funded through grants, similar to a program on which San Rafael is now working. The goal is for mental health experts to respond to non-violent domestic calls for service, which will decrease the demand on the stretched resources of the police and fire departments.

“The county has a mobile unit right now, but they’re so busy, they’re not helping Novato,” Farac said. “We can utilize the learnings from other cities and counties to establish our own programs.”

The Marin Democrats and North Bay Leadership Council endorse Farac’s candidacy.

District 4 Candidates

Elected to the city council in 1995, Eklund has successfully won seven consecutive elections. As she runs for an eighth term, her opponents say a change in leadership is overdue, especially in light of the Novato budget issues.

Eklund didn’t respond to the Pacific Sun’s requests for an interview. We obtained information about her platform from pateklund.com; however, the budget page doesn’t go beyond the 2017-2018 fiscal year, and no explanation is provided.

Still, her statements on the website about the budget may yield clues about where she places the blame for the current deficit. After a description of the overall financial conditions since 2007, Eklund discusses the city’s tax measures and provides an overview of property taxes since the 1970s.

In conclusion, Eklund states that Novato’s property tax revenues are the lowest of the 11 cities in Marin County and that she didn’t vote for the $69 million budget for the 2017-2018 fiscal year.

Other issues important to Eklund run the gamut, including affordable housing, public safety, downtown revitalization, juvenile crime, seniors and the environment. There are a dozen issues listed, but only the budget page contains in-depth information. The other 11 pages contain no specific plans for solutions.

Challenger Nicole Gardner will bring a unique perspective to city politics. After losing her daughter to a drive-by shooting several years ago, she has received national recognition as an outspoken proponent of gun safety. Locally, Gardner serves on the board of Legal Aid of Marin and the Marin Race Equity Planning Committee.

Gardner cites diversity, equity and inclusion issues as the main reason she’s running. Gardner, who is Black, wants people of color to feel comfortable at the city council meetings and express their concerns.

“In Novato, I don’t always feel included,” Gardner said. “I love Novato, but it could be better with more diversity, more Black-owned businesses and more businesses owned by people from all ethnic backgrounds.”

Lack of transparency with the city budget also concerns Gardner, who plans to have the financial reports updated. Once the line item budget is reconciled, Gardner says she’ll look to increase the police and firefighters’ salaries, enabling them to live in the city they protect.

Other issues she’ll address are mental health care, especially for youth, and removing the police, known as school resource officers, from positions on public school campuses.

The Marin Democrats and Everytown for Gun Safety, a national organization, endorsed Gardner.

Chris Carpiniello, the third candidate vying for the District 4 seat, says he decided to run when he had time on his hands during the COVID lockdown and began attending Novato City Council meetings.

“I was horrified with what they were getting away with,” Carpiniello said.

As the chair of the Marin GOP election integrity committee, Carpiniello advocates for voting with paper ballots only. He believes digital elections are “rigged” and the 2020 election was “illegitimate.”

Like all the candidates, Carpiniello says the city’s budget is a primary problem. 

“I’ll form a committee to get those books reconciled,” Carpiniello said. “We have to reconcile the books to know where we stand.”

Carpiniello plans to increase Novato’s affordable housing stock by lifting many of the building permit regulations, which he says curtail development. Another key goal is to stop the city government from “pandering to every special interest that comes around.”

The Outcome

The two candidates who win seats on the Novato City Council will certainly have challenges and hard work ahead. With each serving a four-year term, they should be able to make a dent in resolving the many issues facing Novato now.

The right to vote is a privilege. Mail in your ballot or get out there on Nov. 8 and make it count.

Human composting now legal in California

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Human composting now legal in California

My father’s cremated remains sit atop a vintage table in my living room, hidden inside a wood urn I purchased from an artist on Etsy. It seems like an antithetical end for a man whose zest for life knew few bounds.

It’s a sure bet he would have chosen to transform himself into nutrient-rich soil, if it had been an option. Now, it is.

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 351 on Sept. 18, legalizing human composting. California joined Washington, the first state in the nation to approve the practice; Colorado; Oregon; and Vermont. 

However, the California Department of Public Health requested and received an implementation date of Jan. 1, 2027, giving the agency sufficient time to consider human composting regulations, according to the office of Assemblymember Cristina Garcia, the author of the legislation.

Advocates point to the environmental-friendly aspects of human composting, especially when compared to other methods of disposition. The statistics associated with traditional burials and cremation are astounding.

Traditional burials in the United States use, on an annual basis, 4.3 million gallons embalming fluid, 20 million board feet of hardwoods, including rainforest woods, 1.6 million tons of concrete, 64,500 tons of steel and 17,000 tons of copper and bronze, according to a study by Mary Woodsen of Cornell University and Greensprings Natural Preserve in Newfield, New York. 

Embalming fluid usually contains formaldehyde, a chemical that has been associated with adverse health effects, putting funeral service workers at risk. And it can leach into the ground, endangering the water supply.

The number of cremations has increased dramatically over the last decade, surpassing burials in this country. Human cremation presents its own set of problems. The EPA reports the process results in emissions of particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide and “hazardous air pollutants” known to cause cancer and other serious health impacts. In 2017, human cremation produced approximately 1.8 tons of mercury, according to the EPA.

Enter human composting, which involves the natural organic reduction of a body, a process somewhat akin to that of a backyard composting bin. It takes about 1/8 the energy of a traditional burial or cremation, says Katrina Spade, founder and CEO of Seattle-based Recompose, the first human composting funeral home in the country.

Human composting was Spade’s brainchild. She was an architecture student when she first began thinking about the end-of-life alternative in 2011.

“When I started out, human composting wasn’t a business idea,” Spade said in an interview with the Pacific Sun. “It was kind of a design exercise and personal exploration.”

Spade spent almost a decade developing the process, raising funds–Handmaid’s Tale author Margaret Atwood was an early investor-and stewarding state legislation in Washington. Recompose accepted its first bodies for human composting in December 2020.

There are now three funeral homes in Washington offering human composting. The two-month process may differ slightly depending on the service provider, but the basics remain the same. A body is placed in a metal vessel surrounded by three cubic yards of plant material, such as alfalfa, straw and wood chips.

Oxygen, dispersed through the vessel, accelerates the growth of microbes, natural organisms that feed on the corpse. Temperature and moisture levels are also key components of the process.

The microbial activity heats the body, although other means may be necessary to maintain a temperature between 130 to 160 degrees Fahrenheit inside the vessel. The high temperature aids decomposition and kills fecal coliform, salmonella and other pathogens. 

Under these optimal conditions, most of the human remains will convert into soil in 30 days. Bones, however, don’t break down easily. Return Home, a funeral home in Washington offering human composting services, is transparent about the procedure it uses to hasten the decomposition of bones.

“During the screening process, we remove bones from the soil, grind them into 1/8-inch shards and then add them back,” Micah Truman, CEO of Return Home, said in an interview with the Pacific Sun. “Bone is hard on the outside and porous on the inside. The smaller pieces of bone allow the microbes to transform them into soil.”

The final 30-day phase, referred to as curing or resting, allows the soil to cool and emit carbon dioxide. The result is one cubic yard of soil, enough to fill the back of a pickup truck. Loved ones can choose to take the entire amount, donate it to a land preserve or a combination of both.

Return Home has composted 90 bodies since it opened in June 2021, with 70% of families taking all the soil, according to Truman.

“The remaining 30% take some or none,” Truman said. “Very few, a minority take none. Two families have done that.”

Truman prefers to call human composting “Terramation,” a term his team at Returning Home coined and trademarked. It has a gentler connotation, indicating one of the challenges facing the human composting industry – the perception of the process.

Representatives of the Catholic Church have denounced human composting for a variety of reasons. Kathleen Domingo, executive director of the California Catholic Conference, said human composting “reduces the human body to simply a disposable commodity,” according to the National Catholic Reporter. 

In the Jewish religion, wrapping the body in a white shroud and burial in a plain pine casket has been the tradition for many generations. Jeremy Kalmanofsky, a Conservative rabbi in New York, rejects human composting, while Rabbi Ted Falcon wants his body composted, according to an article in The Forward, a Jewish publication.

Islamic tradition calls for wrapping the body in a white shroud and burial directly in the soil without a casket. This natural burial is good for the environment and respectful to the deceased, Edward Ahmed Mitchell, deputy executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told the Pacific Sun.

“Although Islamic scholars tells us that certain forms of disposal allowed by California’s new law—such as mechanically ‘grinding, crushing or pulverizing’ a body to turn it into soil—would be considered acts of desecration and hence prohibited under Islamic law, scholars also recognize that every deceased person has the right to be buried in accordance with their own wishes or faith traditions, as long as it does not harm the public,” Mitchell said.

Slade, CEO of Recompose, believes the slow adoption of the human composting process has less to do with religion and more to do with awareness–or lack thereof. As of the end of September, Recompose has composted the remains of 189 people in the 21 months since it opened.

“Even though human composting is out there in the press, relatively few people know that it exists as an option,” Slade said.

Return Home’s CEO, Truman, says the Terramation process is especially interesting to younger people because of their concerns about the planet. Almost 480,000 people follow Return Home on Tik Tok, a social media platform with 75% of its users under the age of 35.

Green burial, better known and more widely accepted than human composting, alisso favored by environmentally-conscious people. Embalming isn’t permitted. The body is placed into a biodegradable container and buried directly in the ground, without the use of a burial vault. Slade says green burial inspired her human composting concept.

Fernwood Cemetery and Funeral Home in Mill Valley offers green burials, as well as traditional burials and cremation. Graves in the green cemetery, located adjacent to the Golden Gate Recreation area, can be marked with a small, natural boulder or nothing at all because each site is mapped by GPS.

“We have more people choosing natural burials over traditional burials and cremation,” Janet DeYoung, Fernwood’s manager, said. “In a natural burial, it takes about two years [for the body] to totally decompose.”

The environmental impact of green burials is land use, which is not an issue with human composting. As DeYoung points out, they don’t disinter the decomposed remains after a green burial.

Another major difference between the two alternatives is price. The cost for a green burial plot in Fernwood starts at $13,500, while Recompose charges $7,000 for human composting and Return Home’s fee is $4,950.

For an additional charge, Recompose and Return Home offer a laying-in ceremony, which allows loved ones to be present when the body is transferred into the metal vault where the composting process takes place. 

Slade and Truman say they’ll open locations in California in 2027, when licensing becomes available for human composting facilities. Some Marin residents will wait until then to consider whether to turn their bodies into fertile soil, although others may not have the luxury of time.

Both Recompose and Returning Home accept bodies from outside Washington. A local funeral home can assist with the transportation arrangements.

Data shows racial inequities in Mill Valley policing

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Data shows racial inequities in Mill Valley policing

Two new reports reach vastly different conclusions about racial disparities during police stops by the Mill Valley Police Department, one stating significant bias exists while the other infers the opposite.

The police department and a community group, Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment (MVFREE), both analyzed detention data collected by the police, including the perceived race of detainees and the outcome of stops conducted from June 1, 2021 through May 31, 2022. The staff report by Mill Valley Police Chief Rick Navarro doesn’t mention racial profiling by officers and makes no recommendations for improvement. MVFREE’s report finds racial bias and provides recommendations for addressing the issue.

The MVFREE number crunchers paint an alarming picture in their report, released on Sept. 26. Their analysis “reveals large and persistent racial disparities in Mill Valley police practices.” In addition, the report states the disparities occur throughout the detention process.

The Mill Valley police detain Black people at 6.5 times the rate of white people, according to the MVFREE analysis. Latinx people don’t fare much better, with the police stopping them at 3.2 times the rate of white people.

And it’s not just the police doing the racial profiling. Members of the Mill Valley community call the police about Black people at almost 20 times the rate of their calls about white people, according to the MVFREE report.

Conversely, the police staff report issued by the chief on Sept. 26, seemingly rejects that racial bias exists within the Mill Valley Police Department. For example, Navarro claims there’s an insignificant amount of data to conclude that Black and Latinx people are stopped at a rate much higher than White people, yet the data set includes 1,776 stops.

“MVPD additionally recognizes that data analysis will be more representative of MVPD’s overall work and perceptions when looking at data collected over a longer period,” the police staff report states, repeating the sentence from last year’s report, which was based on only three months of data collection.

Like other MVFREE members, Frank Shinneman, a retired business executive, takes issue with the Mill Valley police report. Simple math demonstrates the report contains flawed conclusions, such as looking at the daily influx of non-residents who come to Mill Valley as a reason for the increased stop rate of Black people, Shinneman said.

“While the MVPD report does show that Black people constitute 4.9% of the stops but only 1.2% of the residents, it waives any possible profiling conclusion by stating that the daytime in-commute brings in 15,000 people, doubling the population,” Shinneman said in an email. “The report provides no data on the makeup of the races of those 15,000 people. Yet the claim is essentially that if enough of the 15,000 are Black people, the daytime population would be similar to the stop percentage.”

“This can easily be calculated. It would take 1,250 additional daily Black commuters coming into Mill Valley to reach 4.9% of the city’s daytime population, which would then match the percentage of stops. That would be equivalent to 17% of Marin County’s Black residents, who live outside Mill Valley, visiting the city every day. Not too likely.”

The MVFREE report highlights the differences in the actions taken when Mill Valley police officers detain Black, Latinx and white people. Although Black people are searched at 3.12 times the rate of white people, the two groups are equally likely to possess contraband.

Black people are held in a police car during their detention at 3.25 times the rate of white people, and the duration of their detentions averages 36% longer, the MVFREE report states. Latinx people are detained for 20% longer than white people. Paradoxically, the report indicates there is no link between the lengthy detentions of Black and Latinx people and increased criminality.

Edmonson is quick to point out the racial inequity in detentions isn’t just a Mill Valley issue. Study after study has demonstrated that racial disparity in law enforcement is systemic, and frequently stems from implicit bias, rather than a conscious decision on the part of officers.

In contrast, Navarro’s report states that one reason police stops of Black people last longer than those of white people is because there are more passengers in the vehicles driven by Black people, presumably meaning that stops involve talking to each passenger. Still, this doesn’t explain why Black people are held longer in police cars during detention than white people. Nor is there an accounting for why Black people are searched during detention at a much higher rate than white people.

Although numerous studies show that scientists often reach divergent conclusions from the same data set, the variations in these two reports is somewhat surprising. MVFREE and the police chief have been meeting on a regular basis for more than a year to examine racial bias and best practices in policing. Navarro and Tammy Edmonson, a retired attorney and MVFREE member, agree the alliance is beneficial to the Mill Valley community.

“We have developed an active partnership with MVFREE,” Navarro said in an email to the Pacific Sun. “Through this collaboration and others, we have implemented several changes and expanded vital training for our staff. “

While some law enforcement agencies in Marin are resisting pressure for reform or implementing policies under the threat of civil litigation by aggrieved citizens, others are seeking the input of city-sanctioned committees and community groups. Edmonson commended Navarro, who has served as chief for less than two years, for being proactive.

“The police chief reached out to us,” Edmonson said. “From the get-go, the chief took a remarkably collaborative approach. He said, ‘I know it’s an important moment for policing, and I want to work with you.’ It’s resulted in an anti-bias policy that is stronger than in any other police force in the county.”

The new Bias-Free Policing policy implemented by Navarro contains substantial changes to the way Mill Valley police conduct business. California law mandates police officers attend approved refresher courses for racial or bias-based profiling training every five years; however, Mill Valley’s now requires the training every three years.

Another policy shift allows officers to determine, based on their bias training, whether calls for service from members of the Mill Valley community have “a legitimate law enforcement purpose before taking action.” With the MVFREE report showing that calls about Black people are at almost 20 times the rate of calls about white people, the new policy could reduce the number of Black people detained in the city.

Still, Edmonson is concerned about the considerable differences in the analyses contained in the two reports, both of which will be presented to the Mill Valley City Council at a meeting on Oct. 3.

“The purpose of the Chief’s Report seems to be to avoid and deflect from the compelling evidence of racial profiling in the MVPD RIPA [Racial and Identity Profiling] data,” Edmonson said. “This is disappointingly inconsistent with the candor and cooperation we have sought to cultivate in the year and a half that MVFREE and the police chief have been meeting.”

Despite the revelations in the MVFREE report, the group wants to make clear that the purpose of the report is to provide documentation of racial disparities and influence change, not to condemn the police department, Edmonson said.

The data used in the dueling reports was gathered by the Mill Valley Police Department to meet the requirements of Assembly Bill 953, the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015 (RIPA), which requires law enforcement agencies to collect, maintain and report information on vehicle and pedestrian stops to the California Attorney General’s Office.

The legislation also established a RIPA board tasked with “eliminating racial and identity profiling, and improving diversity and racial and identity sensitivity in law enforcement.” The board advises using the “Ratio of Disparity” formula when analyzing the racial disparities in policing.

MVFREE applied the recommended ratio to the vast amount of raw data collected by the Mill Valley police, which allows for weighted comparisons of data from racial groups of varying sizes. It’s an essential component of an accurate analysis because Mill Valley’s population is 85% white, according to 2021 U.S. Census. The police staff report did not use the RIPA board’s ratio.

The question now is whether the Mill Valley City Council, and the police chief himself, will accept the analysis and recommendations in the MVFREE report. 

The city council wasn’t receptive to a 93 page-report, issued in December 2020 by the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Task Force, which offered specific recommendations for systemic change throughout city government, including the police department. Shortly after the task force presented their report, the city council disbanded the group without implementing any of the recommendations.

Many believe the city council established the 22-person DEI Task Force simply as a performative measure to calm a conflict caused by Sashi McEntee, the former mayor. One week after George Floyd’s murder in 2020, McEntee responded to a question about what Mill Valley was doing to show that Black Lives Matter by stating that the council doesn’t “take action on issues that are not of immediate local importance.”

The members of the forsaken task force formed MVFREE, which now has a roster of more than 50 people working on various DEI projects in Mill Valley. MVFREE’s police working group has made the most impact to date, largely due to Navarro stepping up to the plate for police reform.

Despite the progress made under Navarro’s leadership, his report fails to acknowledge the experience of Black people in Mill Valley and throughout Marin County, which is troublesome when the data indicates the distinct possibility of racial profiling.

“This is one year of data,” Edmonson said. “Think about the total number of Black people affected year after year. Think about it. Black people have been saying, ‘It’s happening,’ and white people say they don’t see it. Now, we have the evidence that it is happening right here in Mill Valley.”

The MVFREE and Chief Navarro’s reports will be presented on Oct. 3 at 6:30pm during the Mill Valley City Council meeting.

Read MVFREE’s report at 2022 MVFREE RIPA Analysis & Report.

Read Chief Navarro’s report at https://cityofmillvalley.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=1182&meta_id=85287.

Sausalito’s cannabis dispensary ballot measure stirs controversy

Nikki Silverstein
-
7
Sausalito’s cannabis dispensary ballot measure stirs controversy

My head was spinning after speaking to the supporters and opponents of Sausalito’s ballot initiative on cannabis. And I wasn’t even high.

Sausalito voters will decide on Measure K in the Nov. 8 election. If approved, the initiative repeals the ban on cannabis businesses and allows business licenses for one cannabis retail store and one cannabis delivery service.

Currently, a Sausalito ordinance bars all medical, recreational, commercial and delivery cannabis businesses, although delivery services based outside the city are permitted to drop off products to anyone 21 or older.

A “yes” vote on the measure scraps the city’s current prohibitions on marijuana sales and paves the way for two cannabis businesses. Vote “no” and keep the status quo. Majority vote wins.

While it seems straightforward enough, the initiative has brought out impassioned opponents, including past and present elected officials and a cross-section of Sausalito residents.

The “Measure K is Not OK” folks have a long list of objections, beginning with Otter Brands LLC, the company behind the ballot initiative. The opponents maintain that Otter Brands is Big Cannabis and doesn’t belong in Sausalito, a small city with a population of around 7,200.

One of Otter Brand’s three partners, Conor Johnston, owns Berner’s on Haight, a successful retail cannabis store in San Francisco. Long-time Sausalito resident Karen Cleary is the initiative’s sponsor. Chris Monroe owns CrossFit Sausalito.

Johnston acknowledged in an interview with the Pacific Sun that the three partners and their attorney wrote the 14-page initiative, which contains extremely specific requirements that companies must meet to qualify for either of the two cannabis business licenses that would be up for grabs, provided Measure K passes.

Interestingly, Measure K requires that one owner live in Sausalito; one owner have experience managing, operating or owning a business in the city; and one owner have experience managing, operating or owning a storefront cannabis retail business in California. Sound familiar?

“Measure K seeks to prioritize people with connections to the local community,” said Johnston, who recently moved from Seattle and is now staying in San Francisco before a planned to move to Los Angeles. “We don’t see that as a weakness.”

Perhaps another company might be able to meet those requirements. But the field of qualified applicants will greatly diminish when considering that, prior to April 21, 2021, the business must have submitted a detailed draft development agreement to the city and met individually with at least three current or then-current city council members to express interest in opening a retail cannabis store.

There are other conditions, too, that needed to be met 17 months ago. Without a time machine, it’s virtually impossible for another company to qualify for the retail store license, leaving Otter Brands in the catbird seat. Yet Johnston refused to admit that the initiative shuts out competitors from the process, pointing to a provision in Measure K that states if no company qualifies, a less restrictive set of requirements comes into play.

That scenario could materialize if Otter Brands failed to receive a state license for a cannabis retail store, Johnston said. However, Otter Brands’ partners have worked for almost five years to get Measure K on the ballot, making it hard to imagine they haven’t dotted all their i’s.

Otter Brands won’t be vying for the delivery license, according to Johnston. Under state law, cannabis retail dispensaries can also deliver cannabis goods. Conceivably, there could be two delivery services located in Sausalito.

The ballot initiative also dictates the operation regulations for the cannabis retail dispensary and the delivery service. Sausalito City Councilmember Ian Sobieski opposes Measure K because the council will essentially lose control of determining policy for cannabis businesses operating in the city.

“An important detail everyone should consider—if passed, Sausalito City Council will be prohibited from issuing any tweaks or changes to how retail cannabis is administered in our town,” Sobieski said in an email. “Any unforeseen problems that require changes will have to wait for, and be contingent upon the slow, cumbersome and expensive process of future ballot initiatives. This is no way to manage the affairs of our town.”

Some naysayers object to Otter Brands’ lack of diversity ownership. California’s Proposition 64, which passed in 2016, legalized marijuana use for adults and retail sales. While Prop 64 doesn’t require social equity among marijuana retail store owners, the state encourages it by providing incentives, such as fee waivers and technical support, to people harmed by cannabis criminalization, which includes a disproportionate number of the Black population. None of Otter Brand’s owners are Black.

Sausalito resident Allison Behr is outspoken about her opposition to passing Measure K. Behr said she struggled with marijuana addiction, yet she doesn’t disapprove of marijuana use for adults. One of her primary concerns is that a cannabis retail store may target underage youth.

Johnston’s existing cannabis retail store in San Francisco and its website carry youth-oriented products, according to Behr. She fears an Otter Brands retail location in Sausalito may carry the same goods, such as a popular strain of marijuana called Cookies and backpacks designed to hide the smell of weed from parents and teachers. Still, Behr wouldn’t mind a cannabis storefront in Sausalito if it had sufficient regulations to protect people under 21, but she doesn’t believe Measure K provides such protections.

Behr cited a litany of other objections to the measure and Otter Brands, including an inadequate amount of annual revenue guaranteed to the city, the store’s proximity to schools and parks, and traffic and parking issues.

Measure K provides that the retail store must pay Sausalito $50,000 or 7.5% of net profits in revenues, whichever is greater. Behr is convinced Sausalito will never receive more than the guaranteed minimum.

“It would be easy for Conor Johnston to shelter his net profits so that whatever he pays won’t be more than the $50K minimum,” Behr said.

Johnston scoffs at the accusations. The measure he co-authored requires that the storefront be 1,000 feet from schools, which is more than state law dictates, and no one under 21 will be permitted inside the store, according to Johnston. In addition, the measure states that the selected retail store commits to providing $300,000 in community benefits over the first five years, which could include donations to nonprofits.

Behr remains unconvinced. Cannabis retail is complex and has many cons, especially with the way Measure K is written, according to Behr.

“We need to educate our community about cannabis and this initiative,” Behr said. “People need to make a choice based on the facts.”

San Rafael police officers under fire and investigation for use of force 

Nikki Silverstein
-
10
San Rafael police officers under fire and investigation for use of force 

Two San Rafael police officers are under investigation after one of them beat and bloodied a local gardener during questioning about an open container of beer.

The violent incident took place in late July and was captured on the officers’ body-worn cameras. A police report indicates the man was arrested and booked into the Marin County Jail on the same day, facing charges for a felony, obstructing and resisting an officer, and three misdemeanors, including battery on an officer. The following day, the case was turned over to the Marin County District Attorney’s Office.

The Pacific Sun’s deep dive into eight videos recorded by several officers at the scene, police reports of the incident and other documents, revealed a disturbing picture. In addition to the beating, there are questions about the conduct of officers who arrived afterwards, the police department’s initial lack of transparency and procedures in the DA’s office.

Despite a police report’s claim that an officer was battered by a suspect and its admission of use of force by two officers, the San Rafael Police Department, which frequently issues press releases about arrests, did not inform the public of the event. The DA’s office filed charges against the gardener on Aug. 2.

However, the man’s attorney, Charles Dresow, told the Pacific Sun in an interview that the DA’s office filed those charges before watching the body cam videos. After viewing the videos on Aug. 22, an assistant DA dropped the charges on Aug. 26.

Dresow sent a letter to District Attorney Lori Frugoli on Sept. 7, requesting that she open an investigation or refer the matter to the California Attorney General’s Office. Later that day, Frugoli issued a statement that an investigation by her office was underway.

The incident quickly became worldwide news when portions of the videos went viral after KGO-TV broke the story on Sept. 1. During the station’s news report, viewed more than a million times on YouTube, reporter Dan Noyes dubbed the gardener “Mateo.”          

We will also use the name Mateo because Dresow has requested the media not identify his client, who fears for his safety. The community has adopted the name as well. During marches, demonstrations and public comments at last week’s city council meeting, residents from around the county have demanded “Justice for Mateo.”

Two protestors at a demonstration calling for Mazariegos and Nail to be fired from the police department. San Rafael City Hall, Sunday, September 4. Photo by Nikki Silverstein.

It all began on Wednesday, July 27, at 6:52pm, when San Rafael Police Officer Daisy Mazariegos confronted three men who had open containers of beer on a barren section of Windward Way in the Canal area. After instructing the men to sit on the curb, in English and Spanish, Mazariegos remained in the street and questioned Mateo, body camera footage shows.

All three men cooperated, and Mateo responded respectfully and reasonably to Mazariegos, according to Saul Godinez, a San Rafael resident who interpreted the Spanish portions of videos for the Pacific Sun. Mateo explained that the three friends had gathered to drink after work.

Officer Brandon Nail arrived two minutes later, just as Mazariegos asked the three men for their IDs. The situation devolved rapidly when Mateo stood up to retrieve his identification from his pocket.

A frame-by-frame review of Mazariegos’ and Nail’s body cam videos shows that, in less than 60 seconds, a series of aggressive maneuvers by both officers resulted in Mateo lying face down on the pavement in a pool of his own blood with his hands cuffed behind his back. Mateo was arrested and placed in the back of a police car.

This video contains graphic content. The footage, showing the two officers using force against Mateo, was taken from Officer Daisy Mazariegos’ body camera on July 27, 2022.

Corporal Oscar O’Con and three other officers then arrived, each wearing a body camera. Some officers, including Nail and Mazariegos, are smiling. Laughter is heard.

The two other men, still sitting on the curb, are issued citations for having an open container in public, which is an infraction, and released. But Mateo remained in the police vehicle for more than 50 minutes before an officer was instructed by O’Con to transport the bloodied man to the hospital, and then jail.

Dresow is outraged by the content of the videos, and Mazariegos’ and Nail’s reports. Indeed the reports are baffling, with some of the two officers’ accounts almost identical, yet not entirely accurate.

“Officer Mazariegos’ immediate aggressive tone towards my client was quickly escalated into physical violence by Officer Nail,” Dresow said. “The officers then weaponized the criminal justice system against my client by filing false police reports.”

Mazariegos’ report, written on the day of the arrest, lists Nail as the “victim,” due to his “injuries.” Mateo is identified as the suspect, despite the report noting that he is 5 feet tall and 130 pounds, while Nail is 6 feet two inches and 250 pounds.

The report also states that as Nail took Mateo to the ground, Mateo placed the officer into a headlock. At the scene, body cam videos show Mazariegos repeatedly saying that Mateo is “drunk.” She doubled down in her report, stating Mateo slurred his words and showed other signs of being under the influence. Mazariegos’ assertions are not evident in the videos, and Godinez, the interpreter, said Mateo didn’t slur when speaking.

Inexplicably, Mazariegos’ report states that hospital personnel indicated Mateo’s x-rays and CAT scan came back clear. The Pacific Sun, however, independently verified that Mateo was diagnosed with a broken nose and concussion.

Nail’s report states Mateo attempted to put him in a headlock, but he pushed Mateo away. Mateo then struck Nail several times on the left side and back of his head, according to the report. Again, the videos do not show these actions.

Both Mazariegos and Nail said in their reports that when Mateo grabbed onto Nail’s vest, the officer punched him in the nose. The videos show Nail took him down, and for a fraction of second some of Mateo’s fingers hooked onto the officer’s vest.

Mazariegos, who finished field training in May, is still on her probationary period. Nail has been on the force for almost three years, after a two-year stint in the Sausalito Police Department. Both are now on paid leave from the department, police spokesperson Lt. Scott Eberle told the Pacific Sun.

The department’s decision to pay the officers while they are on leave was frequently criticized by speakers during public comment at the recent city council meeting. However, the City of San Rafael’s attorney, Rob Epstein, explained in an email that the police department does not have an option of placing officers on unpaid leave.

San Rafael Police Chief David Spiller told the Pacific Sun he intends to find out what happened during and after the incident.

“An independent investigation will look at all of the officers involved,” Spiller said.

On Friday, Sept. 9, the city announced it had hired Paul Henry, of Independent Investigative Consultants, a former Santa Rosa police officer, to conduct the investigation. The choice is controversial.

“The selection of Mr. Henry, who while a police lieutenant, was heavily involved in the Santa Rosa Police Department’s justification of the Andy Lopez killing, is shockingly insensitive and displays a lack of empathy towards the Latino community,” Dresow said.

Dresow sent a letter to the city attorney, Epstein, on Sept. 13, outlining four other concerns about Henry. To address the concerns, Dresow requested that the city appoint a co-investigator, chosen by Mateo, to work alongside Henry and co-author the report.

Interestingly, District Attorney Frugoli, whose office is conducting an investigation into whether any crimes were committed by Mazariegos and Nail, is also a former police officer. Frugoli worked at the San Rafael Police Department and the Santa Rosa Police Department.

The publicity surrounding the incident is taking its toll on morale in the police department, according to Spiller. In addition, the police station is receiving “very angry, very hateful phone calls.”

“I’m committed to hearing and addressing the concerns of the Canal community and policing effectively,” Spiller said. “My role is to lead the organization, address shortcomings and move forward in a positive way.”

Spiller’s task might be easier once the two investigations have concluded and more information is provided to the public. Until then, Mazariegos and Nail are considered innocent until proven guilty.

The Bay Area’s algal blooms are wreaking havoc for fish

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
The Bay Area’s algal blooms are wreaking havoc for fish

The Bay Area is experiencing a harmful red tide, which peaked in August, yet still lingers in September.

The tell-tale signs are tea-colored water, foul odors and dead fish. Check, check and check.

A phytoplankton, named Heterosigma akashiwo, is the culprit behind this phenomenon. Heterosigma akashiwo is usually found as a cyst set into the bay’s sediment. Under certain conditions, the cyst becomes a mobile organism and blooms. Often called algal blooms, they release toxins and cause the discoloration of the water.

The continued proliferation of the bloom is dependent upon warm water, around 59-68 degrees Fahrenheit, a lot of sunlight, clear skies and lack of wind, according to Aundi Mevoli, a field investigator and policy advocate at San Francisco Baykeeper, a nonprofit dedicated to the health of the bay and its tributaries.

“The bay is rich with nutrients,” Mevoli said. “If you put fertilizer on plants, it helps them grow.”

Some nutrients are flushed into the water from the 40 sewage treatment plants in the Bay Area. Although most of the solid material is filtered out, the effluent released into the bay contains nitrogen and phosphorus, two of the three primary nutrients used in commercial fertilizer.

Still, Mevoli says it’s not yet conclusive whether the sewage treatment effluent is directly correlated with red tides. The nutrients can’t be filtered out until the infrastructure is updated, which will cost billions of dollars. The sewage is a source of great concern to people who work to protect the bay.

“We don’t want this to be the new normal,” Mevoli said.

Red tides, first documented in Japan during the 8th century, sometimes occur naturally. However, scientists say the incidence of red tides is increasing around the world. Extensive research is being conducted, but scientists haven’t definitively determined whether humans are contributing to the frequency of red tides.

The occurrence of red tides has been predicted due to the warming of the water and wastewater, according to Levi Lewis, PhD, a fisheries ecologist at the University of California, Davis.

“Climate change is causing increased water temperature,” Lewis said. “The fertilizers from agriculture and wastewater disrupt and destabilize bodies of water. It’s supercharging the system. These could be the causes of the red tide—or not.”

The current red tide has negatively impacted the bay’s sturgeon population, which is a species of concern, Lewis said. The State of California monitors the white sturgeon because it’s vulnerable to fishing mortality. There are restrictions on how many a person can keep in a year.

Another type of sturgeon found in the bay, the North American green sturgeon, is endangered. No fishing for this type of sturgeon is permitted, as it is under conservation measures.

“We don’t know the percentage of sturgeon we lost,” Lewis said. “There are the dead fish that we’re seeing, but we don’t know how many are dying in murky water. Sturgeon can live for decades and grow very large. Losing a large number is like losing an old growth forest. It’s a tragic and unparalleled loss.”

Both Mevoli and Lewis advise that people and pets stay out of the water during the red tide because it can cause skin rashes and respiratory problems. But what about the people who make their living in the water?

Nathan Rea, a Sausalito resident, is a scuba diver who cleans the growth that accrues underneath boats. With the red tide so prevalent, Rea didn’t get into the water for about a week-and-a-half.

“The red tide makes visibility more difficult,” he said. “We usually get three to four feet of visibility, but it was down to six inches [last month].”

While the bay had red tides in 2002 and 2004, Lewis said the current one is different.

“This is unprecedented in the San Francisco Bay,” he explained. “A lot of the folks studying the system for a long time are devastated to see the loss from this red tide.”

Hollywood descended on Sausalito to film mini-series

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Hollywood descended on Sausalito to film mini-series

Did Sausalito forsake its homeless residents for Hollywood?

On Aug. 15, Sausalito closed its city-sanctioned homeless camp, which was located on the tennis courts at the corner of Marinship Way and Testa Street. Days later, a film production crew rolled into town and set up its base camp on the opposite corner of the intersection, just 105 feet from the former homeless encampment.

Curious timing.

Anthony Prince, attorney for the Sausalito Homeless Union, doesn’t think the encampment closure and the arrival of the film crew occurring almost simultaneously is a coincidence. The union is concerned that the city’s insistence on the homeless residents leaving by Aug. 15 may be linked to an existing agreement with the film production company.

The Sausalito Homeless Union and the City of Sausalito were involved in a lawsuit, which was settled on Aug. 5 after the city agreed to pay $540,000 to house 30 homeless people for approximately six months. Prince said the city began to harden its position on the Aug. 15 deadline when the two parties were close to an agreement. The city said the entire settlement would be at risk unless the union went along with the date, according to Prince.

“The city was adamant they would not change that date, even when it was demonstrated that there wasn’t enough time to find people housing,” Prince said. “Twice I requested an extension after the agreement. They said ‘no,’ and refused to reveal a reason.”

Sausalito Mayor Janelle Kellman told the Pacific Sun that the film crew had nothing to do with the deadline to move the encampment.

However, Kellman said the city has known since March that an Apple+ mini-series, The Last Thing He Told Me starring Jennifer Garner, would be setting up a base camp and filming in Sausalito.

It also appears the film production company was aware of the homeless camp’s existence.

“When they later heard the tennis court was emptied, they requested to set up their equipment in Marinship Park,” Kellman said. “The City of Sausalito denied that request.”

Of course, the city couldn’t allow the production’s base camp in Marinship Park because it’s contaminated with fecal matter and closed until the restoration is complete.

Prince says the rushed closure of the encampment pushed people into motel rooms, which has used a significant portion of the housing assistance funds received from Sausalito. If the city had given the union more time, the money could have been better allocated to durable housing, according to Prince.

On Aug. 29, Prince notified the city that they were required to preserve evidence of its relationship to the filming production company. That could signify a legal battle is once again brewing.

“The deadline of Aug. 15 was separately negotiated with Mr. Prince and again, had absolutely nothing to do with a film crew,” Kellman said.

Marin Municipal Water District slow to replace leaky tanks

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Marin Municipal Water District slow to replace leaky tanks

Lyle Christie, completely frustrated, called the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) in early July to voice an interesting complaint.

“I’d like to report a gross misuse and waste of water, about one million gallons a year, and the culprit is you,” Christie said he told the agency.

It wasn’t the first time he contacted MMWD to air his grievance about the profusely leaking redwood water tank a few hundred feet from his San Rafael home. That would have been over a year ago, Christie told the Pacific Sun in a July interview.

During Christie’s initial call, he said MMWD told him the water tank on Bret Harte Road, dubbed the Courtright Tank, is “redundant” and they would take care of it. However, month after month, throughout the statewide drought, it continued to leak.

To make matters worse, the leak saturated the ground next to the tank and created puddles of water. Next came the mosquitoes, according to Christie. He and his wife wrapped themselves up in blankets when they were outside in the evenings.

“Vector Control did a test for larvae and mosquitoes in the ground where it was swampy,” Christie said. “Larvae are proliferating.”

Neighbors told Christie, who moved into his home in 2020, that the redwood tank, which is almost 50 years old, has been leaking for the past decade. During that time, MMWD would “hammer in redwood slivers” to try to stop the water leaks, according to Christie.

Recently, a neighbor placed a kiddie pool under the biggest leak in an attempt to put the otherwise wasted water to good use. The collected water was shared with nearby residents for their gardens.

In a surprising move, MMWD objected and removed the pool catching the water.

“They told us, ‘You’re stealing water,’” Christie said. “The neighborhood was up in arms.”

Another neighbor, a water engineer specialist with the State of California, calculated the tank was losing two to three gallons per minute, which equates to more than a million gallons annually. That’s the figure Christie gave to the MMWD in his recent complaint.

The MMWD employee who took the report said he would speak to the “upper ups,” Christie said. The neighbors decided to give MMWD a week to take some kind of action. Nothing happened.

Finally, on July 10, Christie took the neighborhood’s concerns to Nextdoor, a social media website, by posting a video of water gushing from the bottom of the tank and puddling in the grass. The video was accompanied by a summary of the situation.

Over the next couple of days, the post received 83 comments, with many Marin residents writing that they were outraged about the water waste and would also contact MMWD. One person, who doesn’t live in the neighborhood, emailed Larry Bragman, a member of the MMWD’s board of directors.

Bragman responded to the woman within minutes that he was “on it.” A follow-up email from Bragman said that the Courtright Tank replacement was on the agenda for a meeting scheduled on July 15.

Three days before that meeting took place, an MMWD crew arrived to repair the redwood tank. Christie posted a new video on Nextdoor the following day to show that the water had stopped flowing from the bottom of the tank and the ponding appeared to be gone. Christie credited social media for helping to resolve the issue.

It seemed like that was a wrap. MMWD had fixed the leaks and was discussing replacing the tank. Story over. Well, kind of.

We contacted Christie again last week to check-in. While the largest leak had been remedied, water was still escaping from other areas of the Courtright Tank. A visit to the site revealed shims and wedges had been inserted into the redwood in several places.

“It’s better,” Christie said. “You should have seen it before.”

The process to replace the Courtright Tank has been accelerated, Crystal Yezman, MMWD’s director of engineering, told the Pacific Sun in an Aug. 26 interview. 

The project was advertised on July 14, according to MMWD’s website, just four days after Christie’s post on social media. On Aug. 16, the board of directors awarded the contract to D & D Pipelines, Inc., a general engineering contractor based in San Francisco.

The construction is expected to begin in September and conclude in November, at a total cost of $277,000, including MMWD’s own labor costs for the project design and construction management.  

Instead of installing a new tank, MMWD plans to add 520 feet of pipe to connect the service area to another larger one, which serves 540 customers and gets its water supply from the Bret Harte Tank. Fortunately, that tank is made of steel and has a 500,000-gallon capacity.

Removing the 50,000-gallon Courtright Tank wasn’t a priority because it’s relatively small, serving 108 customers. When addressing issues in their system, the MMWD considers criticality.

“Risk is the probability of failure and the consequence of failure,” Yezman said. “If a small asset fails, there’s a small consequence. A larger asset might not have as much risk, but could have a much larger consequence if it fails.”

MMWD has been slowly replacing the redwood tanks in its system because the wood degrades over time. There were 50 and now there are six, including the Courtright Tank, Yezman said.

Christie’s post about the estimated million gallons a year leaking from the redwood tank was alarming to the public. However, Yezman pointed out that in a seven-year period, MMWD has saved 2 million gallons of water a day, with two full-time employees devoted to its leak detection program.

MMWD uses audio equipment to locate leaks underground and finds a leak approximately once every day. With 930 miles of pipes, it takes 18 months to go through the system.

“We do have to provide a water loss report to the state,” Yezman said. “We’re at about 10% loss, which is normal.”

Still, none of this explains why the redwood Courtright Tank wasn’t repaired sooner or maintained on a regular basis. Once MMWD sent out a crew, the water leaks were substantially reduced in less than a day.

Tyler Silvy, a senior communications specialist at MMWD, said during an interview with the Pacific Sun that he couldn’t find the timeline of complaints about the Courtright Tank.

Both Yezman and Silvy maintain that reports of wasted water are taken seriously. But Yezman was quick to say that although the rest of California is experiencing a severe drought, Marin is not.

“The water district of Marin has adequate water storage levels,” Yezman said. “We’ve lifted local emergency conservation. With the hydrology of our Mt. Tam watershed, it doesn’t take much rain to fill it. Marin is kind of magical the way it’s situated with the watershed, which is probably why the Native Americans revered the mountain so much.”

Hopefully, MMWD respects Marin’s precious water as much as the Native Americans—and the Courtright Tank neighbors.

Anchor-out’s boat saved from destruction

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Anchor-out’s boat saved from destruction

A federal judge recently changed her ruling in a case, giving hope to a pregnant woman whose boat was scheduled to be destroyed by a local government agency.   

In a July hearing before U.S. District Court Judge Maxine Chesney, Kaitlin Allerton was denied a preliminary injunction, which cleared the way for the Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) to crush the 32-foot sailboat that she had lived aboard for the better part of the last four years. 

A series of events prompted Allerton, 28, to submit new evidence to the court in August. In a surprising move, Chesney reconsidered her previous decision in a hearing on Aug. 19 and granted the preliminary injunction, now preventing the RBRA from demolishing Allteron’s vessel, the Silver Bow.

Allerton initially filed the legal action after the RBRA, a joint powers authority of Mill Valley, Tiburon, Belvedere and Marin County, seized her boat from Richardson Bay on July 12 and towed it to the San Rafael Yacht Harbor. The RBRA harbormaster, Jim Malcolm, stated in an email that her boat would be destroyed the following week.

While the RBRA contended in court that the boat was marine debris, Allteron insisted the Kendall 32 was a rare boat in good condition, making it valuable. Furthermore, she said photos of the Silver Bow, submitted to the court by the RBRA, looked bad because she had failed to clean up the sea gull waste after she moved onto land for the last few months of her pregnancy.

Although the judge originally agreed with the RBRA, a few days after the hearing, Allteron’s friends, who also live aboard boats in Richardson Bay, went to the San Rafael Yacht Harbor and began scrubbing the Silver Bow. Michael Ortega led the group of people working on Allerton’s vessel, which included Arthur Bruce.

The San Rafael police were summoned to the yacht harbor to remove the folks working on the Silver Bow, according to Bruce.

“The registration has Katy [Allerton’s] and Michael [Ortega’s] names on it,” Bruce said. “An officer asked Malcolm if he could produce documentation that the RBRA owns the vessel and he couldn’t. The police let us stay.”

Louis Tenwinkel, a long-time mariner and shipwright, surveyed the Silver Bow at the yacht harbor and provided Allerton with a declaration that he found the boat to be valuable. That document and photos of the clean boat turned the tide for Allerton, despite objections from the RBRA’s attorney.

“It could go to a marina now the way it looks,” Chesney said.

Allerton received another gift last week—she gave birth to a healthy baby boy.

A story of affordable housing, corporate greed and good ol’ American grit

Nikki Silverstein
-
6
A story of affordable housing, corporate greed and good ol’ American grit

This is the second part of a two-part series. Read part one here.

Dozens of homeowners may soon lose their Marin homes. Not to foreclosure or wildfire or rising sea levels.

Residents of the RV Park of San Rafael say they will lose their affordable housing due to the greed of Harmony Communities, a property management company hired last summer by the long-time owner of the park, Donna Chessen, who is in her mid-80s.

Harmony, which owns or manages 33 properties in California and Oregon, is threatening to close the San Rafael park, displacing the homeowners and their families—in total, more than 100 people. Residents recently received an unsigned letter from Harmony, which stated, “The reality is the land is worth much more than operating an RV park for affordable housing.”

Harsh words, especially from a company that touts their dedication to affordable housing. Matthew Davies, founder of Harmony Communities, “is trying to solve one of the most pressing issues of our time: lack of affordable housing,” according to his company’s website.

On Aug. 1, Davies’ company sent eviction letters to one-third of the San Rafael park’s residents.

The basis for Harmony’s mass eviction is related to health and safety code violation letters issued to 15 park residents by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on July 19 after a June 28 inspection of the park by an HCD employee.

The Pacific Sun obtained copies of the HCD letters, which showed some violations could be addressed by simply removing an awning, while others would require more work, such as moving a structure six feet from a neighboring one. The department gave the residents eight weeks to correct any violations, with the deadline looming this week. The HCD’s goal is park safety, but the agency doesn’t require the eviction of residents for non-compliance.

Yet, a Pacific Sun review of 15 letters Harmony sent to residents with violations, showed the eviction proceedings began more than three weeks prior to the HCD’s correction deadline. What’s the hurry? 

The eviction notices included a copy of the HCD violation notice, which could have confused some residents, by making it look like the public agency is endorsing the evictions.  

Since Harmony took over the park, residents say they dread opening their mailboxes for fear of receiving another eviction notice, a new set of restrictive park rules or the official park closure letter. Five families recently left their homes behind, defeated by the constant pressure from Harmony, according to other park residents.

Enham Leveille, regional manager for Harmony Communities, disputes the residents’ claim, instead placing the responsibility for the vacancies with the HCD.

“These vacancies are the result of a California state agency (the Department of Housing and Community Development) inspecting the resident-owned structures that were on these lots, and finding serious health and safety violations which could cause injury, illness or death for the structures’ inhabitants or the other residents of the park,” Leveille said. “These lots are now vacant because a public agency enforced the state’s health and safety laws.” 

It’s curious that Harmony has left these lots vacant, while at the same time crying poor to justify a recent attempt to raise the rents by 18%.

The park residents are likely being used as pawns in Harmony’s battle with the City of San Rafael. Last year, Harmony raised the monthly rent from $550 to $650—almost seven times higher than allowed by the city’s rent stabilization ordinance. To force Harmony to comply with the ordinance, the city filed a lawsuit and won a preliminary injunction, stopping the $100 a month rent hike per space. The litigation continues.

Harmony’s basic contention in the ongoing legal proceedings is that the RV Park of San Rafael isn’t a mobile home park, since most of the vehicles in the park are RVs, and therefore residents are not subject to the mobile home rent stabilization ordinance.

However, Civil Code Section 798.3(b)(2) defines a trailer or other recreational vehicle as a mobile home if it occupies a mobile home site in a park for nine or more continuous months. The homes in the San Rafael park meet that definition, according to a 2004 Marin Superior Court ruling, before Chessen even bought the property.

While the City of San Rafael is able to fight Harmony on violating the rent stabilization ordinance, the city’s attorneys do not represent the park residents. The RV Park of San Rafael houses low-income families, disabled persons, immigrants and seniors—vulnerable people who are in need of legal representation.

Alex, 70, has lived at the RV Park of San Rafael for 22 years. Although Alex is disabled, he’s the primary caregiver for his 95-year-old mother, who lives with him.

“I’m being harassed by Harmony,” Alex said. “They sent me four letters that I have to be out of here. We don’t have the resources to go anywhere.”

If the park closes, the homes owned by the residents, in most cases, will become virtually worthless. Mobile homes aren’t, in fact, very mobile. They’re expensive to move and are easily damaged in the process. Vacancies in mobile home parks are scarce, leaving mobile homeowners at the whim of park owners, who can ratchet up rents. These are some of the reasons 86 cities, including San Rafael, and nine counties in California have rent stabilization ordinances for mobile home parks.

Some residents have been scraping together small amounts of money to consult with Bruce Stanton, a leading attorney in California mobile home law. Until Harmony or Chessen give official notice about the park closure, the residents are left in legal limbo.

“The park owner has been acrimonious to the city,” Stanton said in an interview. “And the city is going to come down hard. The owner is like a wounded animal, lashing out in every direction.”

In the same letter to residents that threatened the park closure, Harmony condemned the City of San Rafael for failing to work with the company on raising rents. Harmony can request a rate increase higher than allowed by the ordinance but, oddly, hasn’t done so.

“The headline here is that the city’s actions are about to put 45 low-income households into an extremely precarious situation,” Leveille, Harmony’s regional manager, wrote in an email. “The city has driven the park to the brink of insolvency and now 45 San Rafael households are about to be scrambling to find housing.”

Harmony’s letter about the closure didn’t provide a timeframe or process. However, Leveille disclosed some specifics last week to the Pacific Sun.

“The official closure process will be initiated in 7 to 10 days,” Leveille said on Aug. 15. “[Chessen’s] understanding of California state law is that the process will take approximately one year, so we expect the park to close in 2023.” (As of the Pacific Sun’s Aug. 23 print deadline, Harmony had not begun the process.)

Still, the residents aren’t giving up that easily. They are organizing, scheduling informational meetings with experts and meeting with tenants’ rights organizations. We’ll be watching this David versus Goliath story.

San Rafael residents fight to keep their affordable homes

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
San Rafael residents fight to keep their affordable homes

In tony Marin County, where the median home price hit $1.5 million in July, Beverly Mason and David Potts recently bought a new home for just $110,000. That’s not a typo.

Mason and Potts made it to mecca, Marin style—they found affordable housing. Or so they thought.

For the last two decades, Mason has lived in the RV Park of San Rafael, a mobile home community with 45 spaces, which was established in 1952. Her partner, Potts, moved in with her five years ago.

After a fire destroyed their first manufactured home, Mason and Potts didn’t think twice about purchasing a new mobile home and moving it right into the same affordable park, where they enjoy living in the tight-knit neighborhood with seniors, working folks and young families.

However, since last year, the couple’s dream of living peacefully in their community has turned into a horror film, complete with hostilities, threats, name-calling and even intimidating “thugs,” hired by the park’s management company, according to some residents.

In July 2021, Harmony Communities, a company that owns and manages mobile home parks across the country, was hired to manage the RV Park of San Rafael, owned by Donna Chessen. Harmony scheduled a meeting with residents, just days before taking over the park, to discuss improvements and new rules.

Melissa Lawley, a regional property manager for Harmony, arrived at the meeting and began going over the new rules and policies, which had been sent to residents previously.

Mason, who had read through the packet before the meeting, said she asked Lawley questions about proposed changes that might affect the current residents. Lawley indicated that no rent increases were planned, and most residents would be “grandfathered in,” meaning changes wouldn’t apply to them.

Still, the residents felt the meeting was somewhat hostile. Lawley was overheard asking another resident, “Who is that bitch?” as she gestured to Mason, several residents who attended the meeting said. 

While some residents felt relieved after the meeting that they could remain in the park, their optimism came to an end a few days later when Harmony hit all the residents with an 18 percent increase in their monthly rental fees, equating to another $100 per month for most people.

In Mason’s case, Harmony attempted to increase her rent by $600 a month, which she believes was in retaliation to the questions she posed to Lawley at the meeting. It was later reduced to $100 a month.

A letter from Harmony explained that the park was operating at a deficit and the rental increases would “staunch the bleeding.” The residents reluctantly began paying the increased rent.

People unfamiliar with mobile home parks might suggest Mason, Potts and their neighbors simply move their homes to another park. Unfortunately, they can’t for a variety of reasons. 

With affordable housing in short supply, mobile home parks rarely have vacancies. And the name mobile home is somewhat of a misnomer because the homes aren’t actually very mobile and it’s an extremely pricey proposition to move them. Damage may easily occur if the home is moved after it’s been installed at a location. The final nail in the coffin is that many mobile home parks don’t accept used homes.

That leaves a mobile homeowner in a bit of a pickle. Enter the government. States across the country have passed laws to protect mobile homeowners. In 1978, California enacted the Mobilehome Residency Law, which allows a mobile homeowner to sell their home to a qualified buyer. The MRL also allows for cities to enact rent control ordinances, which San Rafael did years ago.

The San Rafael Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance gives park owners the right to raise rents by 75 percent of the local Consumer Price Index each year. In this case, the RV Park of San Rafael could increase the monthly rent by $15—not $100 as they attempted to do. However, if the park’s owners aren’t making a “fair and reasonable return,” they are permitted to file a request with the city to increase the rent beyond what is provided for in the ordinance.

For some reason, neither Harmony Communities, nor Donna Chessen, who has owned the park since 2006, have gone through the proper process to ask for a rent hike.

Harmony Communities threatens to close a San Rafael mobile home park on West Francisco Blvd., displacing 45 families.

With the RV Park of San Rafael refusing to back down from the rent increase, the City of San Rafael’s attorney, Robert Epstein, wrote a letter to Harmony Communities on Aug. 9, 2021, to explain the city’s law. Epstein also included an informative 2004 ruling from a Marin County Superior Court judge which states the RV Park of San Rafael is subject to the City of San Rafael’s rent control ordinance for mobile home parks.

In fact, in the 2004 case, it was the same question, same court, even the same mobile home park. Yet, Harmony and Chessen believe the ruling shouldn’t apply to the RV Park of San Rafael.

While it’s true that most of the homes in the RV Park of San Rafael are technically RVs, and RV parks are subject to different ordinances than mobile home parks, the RV Park of San Rafael is a mobile home park under the city’s law. The RVs are mostly immobile and can’t relocate. Some have been in the same place for decades. Then, there’s California’s pesky MRL that states a park is a mobile home park when a home occupies a space for nine consecutive months or longer—whether that home is an RV or a mobile home.

Of note is that all the current residents of the RV Park of San Rafael have lived there from five to 40 years, which is obviously more than nine months. But who’s counting? Certainly not Harmony and Chessen.

Both the City of San Rafael and Chessen filed lawsuits last December regarding the identical issue from the 2004 suit. A federal court judge dismissed Chessen’s case. A Marin Superior Court judge so far has agreed with San Rafael and stopped the $100-per-month increases for now. The litigation is continuing.

Harmony’s responses haven’t really surprised anyone. The company has begun to send residents multiple eviction notices and an “informal” letter stating they intend to close the park at an unspecified date in the future because “the reality is the land is worth much more than operating an RV Park for affordable housing.” Park residents who are able to read the letters try to translate for their neighbors who aren’t fluent in English and don’t understand the demands and threats.

“Harmony refuses to translate the letters into Spanish and Vietnamese,” Potts said. “They said it’s too much trouble. Some people have just packed up and left the homes they owned.”

Mason said that in her 20 years at the park, she’s never seen vacancies before. There are currently five.

If Harmony acts upon its threat to close the park, it must go through a process that will include compensating residents. By evicting people or simply making life stressful, the park could empty through attrition. But if folks stay, Harmony has a plan.

And so do the residents.

Pick up next week’s Pacific Sun to read part 2.

Marin City History

Nikki Silverstein
-
2
Marin City History

80th anniversary festivities uncover forgotten stories from the community’s rich legacy

Felecia Gaston has been Marin City’s unofficial historian for more than three decades, collecting oral histories and memorabilia from some of the community’s first residents—Black people who helped build World War II ships at Marinship.

The relics, as well as thousands of documents and newspaper articles dating back to Marin City’s inception in 1942, fill an entire room in Gaston’s office. All the materials she’s gathered and pored over for years served as her inspiration for Marin City 80, a celebration of the community’s 80th anniversary.

Gaston teamed up with Jahi Torman, a musician and writer, to produce Marin City 80 events that reveal the relatively untold and fascinating history of the county’s Black population. As part of the festivities, two exhibits and a play are opening in San Rafael this month.

The Bartolini Gallery is hosting The Legacy of Marin City – A California Story, which covers the first 20 years of Black history in Marin City. The exhibit features never-before-seen photographs and memorabilia from the Black shipyard builders, including a suitcase with a story to tell.

After the United States entered World War II in December 1941, 30 shipyards sprang up almost overnight in the Bay Area to produce ships and tankers for the war. People were recruited from around the country to fill jobs at the new shipyards. Thousands of Black people, many escaping the racist Jim Crow laws in the South, answered the call, including Annie Small.

In 1943, Small boarded a crowded, segregated train in Shreveport, La., and headed for the West Coast. Finding there were no seats left, she placed her suitcase on the floor and sat on top of it for the three-day trip.

Like other Black people, including women, Small became a shipbuilder at Marinship, which was established in 1942 on Sausalito’s waterfront. Marinship produced 93 Liberty ships and tankers before the war ended and, at its peak, employed 20,000 workers, according to Marin author Eric Torney’s book, Marinship (Images of America).

Small worked as a welder and lived with her family in Marin City, an unincorporated area of Marin County, where the federal government quickly constructed temporary housing in 1942 for about 6,000 Marinship workers. Marin City was racially integrated, with Black and white people living side-by-side, just as they worked shoulder-to-shoulder at Marinship.

However, Marin City’s housing integration ended when the wartime shipyard closed in 1946. Most white people left Marin City with money in their pockets from their well-paying jobs at Marinship. Black people had money, too, but they stayed in Marin City because of redlining, the discriminatory practice of preventing them from buying homes in other areas of the county. Renting outside of Marin City was also next to impossible.

Housing is the subject of another Marin City 80 exhibit, The Legacy of Marin City – A Housing Story, at the Marin Civic Center. The exhibit delves into the housing discrimination experienced by Marin City residents for decades and pays tribute to those who chose to stay and the people who supported them.

Redlining wasn’t the only problem facing Marin City’s Black population. There was a contingency that didn’t want Black residents anywhere in the county, including Marin City. Gaston found documentation that Marin County leaders discussed the future of Black people in Marin City as early as 1943, two years before the war ended.

“They were asking ‘What are we going to do with the Black people?’” Gaston said.

But the Black shipyard workers weren’t going back to the Jim Crow South—not during the war and not afterward. In the years after Marinship closed, the shoddily built temporary housing rapidly deteriorated, leaving the residents living in poor conditions.

“The exhibit has images of the temporary housing,” Gaston said. “Wooden sheds with kerosene lamps and kerosene stoves. Cold air came through the wood. There were no sidewalks, and the ground was mud and puddles.”

HOUSING CRISIS A Marin City woman, circa 1960, standing in front of a temporary home built for World War II shipbuilders in 1942. Photo by Emme Gilman, courtesy of Anne T. Kent California Room, Marin County Free Library.

Black-owned businesses existed in the community, according to Gaston. There was a shopping area, including a market, candy store and more.

Year after year, the former shipyard workers and their families lived in the dilapidated homes. Then, a force to be reckoned with entered the county political scene.

In 1952, Vera Schultz, a strong advocate for Marin City, became the first woman elected to the Marin County Board of Supervisors. Schultz had a vision for Marin City: establish an integrated community again by replacing the ramshackle temporary buildings with affordable housing.

The Marin City 80 housing exhibit honors Schultz, who fought an uphill battle with some fellow supervisors serving on the board. Ultimately, she won. Schultz secured funding for new housing in Marin City and played a significant role in the development of Golden Gate Village, a public housing complex that opened in 1961. 

After spending 15 years in the substandard temporary housing, Marin City residents finally had new homes, although it took decades for the neighborhood to become racially integrated. Today, the community of more than 3,100 people is 33 percent white and 22 percent Black.

Another Marin City 80 event opening this month is The Spirit of Joseph James – From Marinship to the California Supreme Court, a play, directed by Torman, about the remarkable life of Joseph James, a Black man who was a successful singer and actor. During World War II, James worked as a welder in Marinship and had an unfortunate experience.

The United States government, desperately in need of workers after the country entered World War II, ordered all wartime shipyards to operate without racial discrimination. However, a labor union, the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders and Helpers of America, had other ideas.

The union had a “closed shop” agreement with Marinship, which meant that skilled workers must be members of the Union to be employed at the shipyard. “Negro” workers weren’t permitted to join the union but were forced to pay dues to an auxiliary unit. Many refused, including James, who filed a lawsuit in Marin County, on behalf of himself and 1,000 other shipyard workers, against the union and Marinship for violating the United States order against discrimination.

The case was eventually heard by the California Supreme Court. Thurgood Marshall, who later became the first Black justice to serve on the United States Supreme Court, was one of the attorneys representing James. In February 1944, James and the other workers won the lawsuit.

Marin City 80 also published a cookbook, “Grandmothers Feed Us Love,” curated and edited by Gaston. The 49 recipes came from Marin City women who were born before 1942. Anyone with a hankering for a traditional Black meal, spiced with Southern flavor, should order a copy of the cookbook, which includes recipes for salmon croquettes, Louisiana fish stew and Mama Ruby’s German chocolate cake with coconut pecan frosting.

A partnership with Dominican University, a private university in San Rafael, that began several years ago was instrumental in producing many of Marin City 80’s activities and books. Student interns began by archiving Gaston’s collection of documents and newspapers from the last 80 years and graduated to curating the exhibits and assisting with the cookbook and a Marin City commemorative book debuting in the fall.

On Labor Day, Marin City 80 is hosting an all-day concert, Blues ’n’ Soul Party in the Park, featuring blues, jazz, gospel, zydeco and soul music. The concert is also the kick-off for the Marin City Historical and Preservation Society.

Torman calls Gaston Marin City’s “culture keeper,” and he credits her for making Marin City 80 and the Marin City Historical and Preservation Society possible.

“Shipyard workers and the original pioneers of Marin City entrusted Felecia with their artifacts and oral histories,” Torman said. “From that legacy, we show the residents’ beauty, resilience and ability to thrive against incredible odds.”

_________________________________

Join in the Marin City 80 Festivities

Exhibit: The Legacy of Marin City, A California Story at the Bartolini Gallery in the Marin Center, 10 Avenue of the Flags, San Rafael. Aug. 20–Nov. 1, 10am to 5pm. Free admission.

Exhibit: The Legacy of Marin City, A Housing Story at the Marin Civic Center, 1st and 3rd floors, 3501 Civic Center Drive, San Rafael. Aug. 20–Nov. 1, 10am to 5pm. Free admission.

Play: The Spirit of Joseph James – From Marinship to the California Supreme Court at the Showcase Theater in the Marin Center, 20 Avenue of the Flags, San Rafael. Two performances on Aug. 27 and 28 at 2pm. Ticket price is $20. Purchase at tickets.marincenter.org.

Cookbook: Grandmothers Feed Us Love is available at Book Passage in Corte Madera and Sausalito Books by the Bay.

Labor Day Concert: Marin City 80 Blues ’n’ Soul Party in the Park, 100 block of Drake Avenue, Marin City, Sept. 5, 11am to 7 pm. Free admission.

For more information on Marin City 80, visit marincity80.com.

Sausalito agrees to pay $540,000 to homeless encampment residents

Nikki Silverstein
-
9
Sausalito agrees to pay $540,000 to homeless encampment residents

The City of Sausalito and the Sausalito Homeless Union reached a settlement agreement on Friday, ending more than 18 months of extremely contentious litigation.

Under the terms of the agreement, Sausalito will pay $540,000 to the Sausalito Homeless Union. From that fund, 30 homeless people will receive $18,000 each to be spent on housing or housing related expenses. All the recipients are current or former residents of the city-sanctioned encampment, which is now located on the Marinship tennis courts.

“It was difficult to pick 30 people,” Anthony Prince, attorney for the Homeless Union, said. “We had to systematically determine who is most in need of housing. Not everyone is going to get the assistance they deserve. But most of the people who were at Dunphy Park and then moved to Marinship Park are included in the settlement.”

The agreement requires the funds to be distributed directly to the homeless individuals. The 30 people will have agency to decide what type of durable housing is suitable for them and their families.

The City of Sausalito will be appointing a housing coordinator to work with the Homeless Union to connect people to housing. After everyone is housed, the city plans to shut down the encampment.

“I am confident we have paved a humane course of action that allows each person’s unique needs to be met,” Sausalito Mayor Janelle Kellman said in a press release issued by the city. “This agreement will allow us to help folks restore their lives in a way that is far more compassionate and safer than the unfortunate circumstance of living outdoors.”

The city has spent more than $1.5 million in expenses related to the homeless encampment, mostly on legal fees and a controversial organization to manage the camp.

There is no gag order on the parties regarding the terms of the agreement. The names of the 30 people receiving the funds will not be a part of the public record; however, those individuals are free to share the information.

Surprisingly, the settlement agreement does not address the city’s anti-camping ordinance, which was the catalyst for homeless people to establish the Sausalito chapter of the Homeless Union and file the lawsuit. The ordinance, passed by the city council in February 2021, bans homeless people from sleeping on public property, except at the city-sanctioned encampment in Marinship.

Once the encampment is closed, where will homeless people be permitted to sleep in Sausalito? Nowhere, unless the city changes the ordinance, which doesn’t appear likely to happen.

“Our [the Homeless Union] position is the ordinance is unlawful and unconstitutional,” Prince said. “The parties are in agreement that the settlement does not resolve those concerns.”

The ordinance violates Martin v. Boise, a 2018 decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which states cities must allow homeless people to sleep on public property unless it can provide them with an appropriate alternative shelter option, according to Prince. There are far more homeless people in Marin than shelter beds.

Prince acknowledges the ordinance was an important issue for the Homeless Union and that they didn’t get everything they wanted from the settlement agreement.

“We’re not happy about that, but we didn’t see any alternative, Prince said. “It was a necessary compromise on our part to get housing for the people the homeless union represents.”

The new president of the Sausalito Homeless Union, Arthur Bruce, said he’s one of the 30 recipients. He believes the funding is a good first step to stabilize people and help them get back on their feet.

“I’m beyond delighted because it will allow me to spend more time with my children and provide better for them,” Bruce said.

Novato and the Novato Homeless Union reach a settlement agreement

Nikki Silverstein
-
3
Novato and the Novato Homeless Union reach a settlement agreement

Without fanfare, the City of Novato and the Novato Homeless Union reached a settlement agreement last week, ending almost a year of litigation in federal court.

The agreement allows the city-sanctioned homeless encampment in Lee Gerner Park to remain for at least two more years and struck down restrictive language in a camping ordinance, which was the catalyst for the Homeless Union to file the lawsuit, Anthony Prince, attorney for the Homeless Union, said.

Prince provided details for other important aspects of the agreement, including the establishment of a city-run committee to work on housing and homelessness issues in Novato. Two members of the Homeless Union will serve on the committee, alongside city officials and community representatives. 

While new people haven’t been permitted to move into the camp since October, under the agreement, homeless people will now be able to fill vacant spots. The encampment, which has the capacity for 18 people, offers homeless people some stability and a safe place to camp. Case managers can visit regularly and connect the campers with services.

The police may enter the camp only when performing law enforcement functions. If a problem arises, camp residents will be allowed to have a Homeless Union representative present during interactions with the city and its agents.

The camp will remain city-sanctioned, and Novato Mayor Eric Lucan said the city estimates spending $200,000 to $300,000 annually for services such as port-a-potties, mobile showers and janitors.

The city and community are “mostly pleased” with the outcome of the settlement, Lucan said. The goal now is to house the homeless folks in the camp. Five people living in Lee Gerner Park have been housed since the camp was established.

“At a high level, it’s very clear that we need more housing options for the many people that are unhoused,” Lucan said. “There’s a real need out there, and it got compounded by COVID. Homelessness is a complicated issue for a lot of cities and it’s ongoing.”

The Novato Homeless Union is also happy with the settlement, according to Jason Sarris, the organization’s president. Sarris, who received housing last month after a dozen years of living on the street, was the first homeless person to pitch a tent in Lee Gerner Park in November 2019. Others soon followed, despite protests by some community members.

“It wasn’t planned or staged—it was a way for me to sleep without being criminalized,” Sarris said, referring to Martin v. Boise, a 2018 decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which allows homeless people to sleep on public property unless a city can provide them with an appropriate alternative shelter option.

The city is still bound by Martin v. Boise, Prince said, but it can make reasonable restrictions on where homeless people are permitted to camp. Under the agreement, the city will remove a laundry list of places where camping isn’t permitted, which was included in the city ordinance that launched the legal battle.

However, the restrictions in the ordinance remain unchanged, according to Lucan. No camping is permitted within 50 feet of critical infrastructure.

Rather than focusing on the restrictions, Sarris is looking forward to serving on the new housing and homelessness committee and helping people in the camp. Sarris aims to ensure all the folks currently in the camp, and those who will live there over the next two years, are connected to services and eventually housing.

“It’s not just something you check off your list,” Lucan said. “We have to continue to work to find housing and the support that people need.”

Sausalito finally begins negotiating settlement with the Sausalito Homeless Union

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Sausalito finally begins negotiating settlement with the Sausalito Homeless Union

After 18 months of contentious litigation between the City of Sausalito and the Sausalito Homeless Union, both parties have confirmed they are in the process of negotiating a settlement.

The Homeless Union filed the lawsuit in federal court in February 2021, just days after the Sausalito City Council passed a restrictive anti-camping ordinance in response to a new homeless encampment that sprang up near a downtown park.

The ordinance also required moving the campers from the visible waterfront location to a city-sanctioned camp in Marinship Park, located in a light industrial area. Nineteen people currently live on the Marinship tennis courts, down from a high of about 45.

The encampment population has dwindled in recent months due to attrition and the city’s policy of preventing new people from moving in. Police Lieutenant Stacie Gregory, who said last month that she spends 75% of her time on the encampment, is often seen on the tennis courts directing city staff to remove a tent after someone has moved out.

There have been no exceptions—not even for John Burke, who is undergoing experimental chemotherapy treatments for cancer. Burke says he needs a place to live because his former home, a boat anchored out in Richardson Bay, was seized and crushed by the Richardson Bay Regional Agency while he was in the hospital.

The police have escorted Burke out of the encampment on several occasions. When Burke moved into a recently vacated tent, Gregory and her crew removed it after he left for a chemo appointment. 

With the camp shrinking in size, it’s unclear why Sausalito has now decided to engage in settlement discussions with the Homeless Union. Until now, the city has used a take-no-prisoners approach with the litigation, the encampment and the homeless residents. Most efforts by the Homeless Union to negotiate even small issues have been rebuffed. 

Sausalito Mayor Janelle Kellman has shed no light on what precipitated the change in tactics.

“The City of Sausalito is engaged in confidential settlement negotiations with the Sausalito Homeless Union as part of the pending litigation,” Kellman said. “The city is not permitted to reveal the content of those discussions.”

Anthony Prince, attorney for the Homeless Union, has always been straightforward about what his clients are seeking from Sausalito. It boils down to people getting people housed.

“The city has to pay for durable housing for everyone in that encampment,” Prince said. “We’re getting close to an agreement, I think. There are still some things to work out, but I am cautiously optimistic.

While Sausalito’s budget is currently running at a deficit, which City Manager Chris Zapata attributes to “unplanned expenses related to homelessness” and pension costs, last week the city council approved an expenditure of $745,461 for encampment management services from Five Keys, a nonprofit organization.

That vote almost derailed settlement negotiations, according to Prince. Indeed, having an outside contractor manage the camp has been problematic for the Marinship residents in the past.

Urban Alchemy, a San Francisco-based nonprofit, performed those duties on and off since February 2021. Most of Urban Alchemy’s employees were formerly incarcerated, having “served life sentences in prison,” according to its website.

In June, the Sausalito campers alleged that Urban Alchemy staff had sexually exploited homeless females, used and distributed drugs on the job, and stolen property from the campers. The city refused to terminate the contract with Urban Alchemy early, even though it was scheduled to end two weeks later.

Five Keys also hires formerly incarcerated people. Prince believes the city’s approval to enter into a contract with Five Keys was intended to frighten and intimidate the campers, despite the fact that the organization has a solid reputation.

“We’re against that company having anything to do with the camp,” Prince said. “Since Urban Alchemy left, the camp is more peaceful than it’s ever been.”

This month, the city hired licensed security guards from a private firm to watch over the encampment. The campers say the guards treat them with respect.

Sausalito has repeatedly indicated that it wants to close the camp. Alex Merrit, an attorney representing the city, brought up the topic at a hearing in federal court last month. A city staff report issued last week about hiring Five Keys states the contract “is to speed unhoused persons to housing and close the temporary Marinship shelter.”

Since the encampment’s inception in late 2020, 10 people have been housed by the County of Marin and one through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Sausalito hasn’t provided any housing, although it has spent more than $1.5 million on expenses related to the encampment, mostly for legal fees and Urban Alchemy.

The county, which receives state and federal funding to provide services and housing for homeless people, has a long waiting list for permanent supportive housing and Section 8 housing vouchers. Yet, Sausalito’s leaders claim Five Keys will be able to hurry housing for the campers by collaborating with the county.

The county is engaged with homeless people in Sausalito and across Marin, according to Gary Naja-Riese, director of Marin County’s Division of Homelessness. The department provides regular updates to Sausalito on the status of its work in the city.

“We have 89% engagement through outreach or case management with the people in the Sausalito encampment,” Naja-Riese said. “That means there’s two people we’re not engaging with right now.”  

Still, the city council authorized paying Five Keys almost $750,000 for six months of services. A city staff report stated the cost will be subsidized by a $500,000 allocation from Marin County. The mayor also made an announcement at the city council last week about the funding and confirmed it in an email to the Pacific Sun.

However, the county has not allocated $500,000 to Sausalito, Naja-Riese said. The county recently submitted a joint proposal to the state for $1.5 million. If awarded, Sausalito, San Rafael and Novato would each receive $500,000 for encampment expenses in their cities. There has been discussion of the county providing matching funds, though it is predicated upon receiving the state money and requires approval by the board of supervisors.

It appears Sausalito is counting its chickens before they’re hatched, which isn’t wise when the city already has a budget deficit. That’s not the only problem besetting the city right now. 

The Sausalito police department is having personnel issues. Chief John Rohrbacher and Captain Bill Fraass are out of the office indefinitely, according to a source who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Kellman, Sausalito’s mayor, said Lieutenant Stacie Gregory is the acting chief and declined to provide additional information. 

Hopefully, Sausalito can secure funding to work out the settlement that Prince wants for his clients—chiefly, housing. After housing is found for the people on the tennis courts, the city intends to close the camp. Then, what’s next? Is Sausalito going to build a border wall to keep other homeless people from entering the city limits?

Martin v. Boise, a 2018 decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, states cities must allow homeless people to sleep on public property unless it can provide them with an appropriate alternative shelter option. There are far more homeless people in the county than shelter beds.

Sausalito’s current anti-camping ordinance does not permit homeless people to sleep on public property, except at the city-sanctioned encampment in Marinship. Once it’s closed, should the city choose to enforce the ordinance, there will be nowhere for a homeless person to sleep, which certainly violates Martin v. Boise. 

Nothing prevents other homeless people from filing lawsuits to challenge the ordinance. If Sausalito is sued again over the issue, city officials will have been hoisted by their own petard.

Marin County finally takes steps toward implementing a sheriff’s watchdog group

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Marin County finally takes steps toward implementing a sheriff’s watchdog group

The Marin County Civil Grand Jury recently recommended the county create an independent sheriff’s oversight board with subpoena power, and proceedings subject to the Brown Act, to improve accountability and community trust in the sheriff’s office.

In its report titled “Sheriff Oversight: The Time Is Now,” the grand jury states that a civilian oversight board, along with the leadership change in the sheriff’s office, “presents a rare opportunity to reset relations between the Sheriff’s Office and the communities it serves.”  

Assembly Bill 1185, state legislation which passed in September 2020, allows counties to establish sheriff’s oversight boards with subpoena power. Although activists and citizens have lobbied the Marin County Board of Supervisors to implement AB 1185, it has been slow to respond.

Robert Doyle, who served as Marin County sheriff for more than 25 years, retired two weeks ago. The former sheriff opposed a transparent public oversight board with teeth—subpoena power—and had previously stated that as an elected official, he only answered to the board of supervisors during the budgeting process.

Undersheriff Jamie Scardina is running unopposed in November to replace Doyle. Although Scardina also has resisted the idea of a citizen oversight board, he told the Pacific Sun that if it is created, the sheriff’s office would participate in the process as outlined by the board of supervisors.

However, Scardina is wobbling on the issue of policy changes in the sheriff’s office, which was recommended repeatedly in the grand jury’s report. It indicated that law enforcement agencies across the country have made policy changes in recent years, yet there has been little change in the sheriff’s office.

“We are not an organization that needs substantial change, but we will make organizational change along the way as long as it best serves the Sheriff’s Office and the community,” Scardina said in an email.

Obviously, the grand jury disagrees. The report provides concrete examples of the need for change, specifically pointing to sheriff’s office activities in unincorporated Marin City as justification for establishing a watchdog group.

Delving into the history of injustice experienced by Black residents in Marin City and two recent incidents, the grand jury’s report states there is a “strained” relationship between the community and the sheriff’s office.

Marin City was founded in 1942, when the federal government constructed temporary housing for the men and women building WWII Liberty ships in nearby Marinship. Both Black and white families lived in the community together. After the war ended, white workers bought homes. Black families remained in Marin City because of the county’s redlining policy, which prevented them from buying property.

Newspapers from the late 1940s chronicled alleged racial discrimination against Black residents, the report stated. Other incidents over the decades have reinforced the community’s distrust of the sheriff’s office, which continues today.

The report noted that Marin City currently has a population of 3,126 and 35% of residents are Black or multiracial, a much higher percentage than anywhere else in the county. Since Marin City is unincorporated and has no police department, the sheriff’s office remains responsible for law enforcement in the community.

Residents say the sheriff’s office uses Marin City as a training ground for new deputies, resulting in over-policing practices, which include “excessive stops, arrests, citations, and warnings,” according to the report. Short-term patrol assignments, under two years, make it difficult for residents and deputies to develop relationships.

Two recent incidents further eroded residents’ negative perception of the sheriff’s office. In November 2019, approximately 60 Contra Costa and Marin deputies descended on Marin City looking for suspects in an Orinda shooting. Ultimately, they arrested two individuals, according to the grand jury report.

The operation began at 7:45am, just in time for children on their way to school and adults going to work to witness the invasion of their small community by “armored vehicles and dozens of heavily armed law enforcement officers, many in tactical gear.” School officials reported that children arrived traumatized from the incident and many needed counseling. The sheriff’s office canceled an engagement at Tamalpais High School to speak with students about the incident and the talk was never rescheduled.

Doyle, the then-sheriff, continued to state that the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office led the raid and the Marin County Sheriff’s Office merely assisted. The grand jury agreed that this was true; however, it criticized the sheriff’s office for failing to address concerns raised by the community.

The second incident detailed by the report occurred two days before the November 2020 election. Hundreds of vehicles participating in a pro-Trump caravan stopped at the Marin Gateway Shopping Center shopping at around 11:30am.

Some Marin City residents went to the shopping center parking lot, where the Trump supporters greeted them with racial epithets. In return, eggs were tossed at caravan vehicles. Traffic was snarled in the community, and citizens complained they felt intimidated when trying to use the voter drop box located at the shopping center.

After the event, the sheriff’s office told the public that it only received notice of the Trump caravan a few minutes before the vehicles arrived. However, the grand jury obtained records that showed the sheriff’s office was informed of the caravan at least four times, beginning at 7:13am, more than four hours before the Trump supporters came to Marin City.

Both incidents demonstrate the need for a sheriff’s oversight board with subpoena power, according to the report. The board is a forum that would allow citizens to express their concerns and the sheriff’s office to explain its perspective. An oversight board could also “conduct a full investigation” into how the sheriff’s office handled the Trump caravan incident..

The grand jury isn’t the only entity calling for a sheriff’s oversight board. The Marin County Board of Supervisors tasked the Human Rights Commission with finding a way to implement AB 1185. The Human Rights Commission formed a two-person committee to recommend a path forward.

“The committee is recommending an inspector general and a citizen’s oversight board with subpoena power,” Jeremy Portje, a member of the committee, said. “We are looking to create a subcommittee with citizens to iron out details.”

Supervisor Damon Connolly said he has met with Portje and engaged other community members about the issue. All have spoken passionately about the need for AB 1185. Connolly says the goal is to have the AB 1185 oversight board in place by the end of this year and appoint members in early 2023.

“The Board [of Supervisors] has set aside $150,000 as part of the new budget and is continuing to work with the sheriff’s office, the Human Rights Commission, stakeholders and community members on developing a framework for AB 1185,” Connolly said.

Anything could happen before the supervisors vote on the issue. Still, Portje is optimistic, confident even, that Marin will soon have a sheriff’s oversight board.

“Everything is pointing to now,” Portje said. “The time is now. The time is right.”

Sausalito threatens to close the city-sanctioned homeless encampment

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Sausalito threatens to close the city-sanctioned homeless encampment

The City of Sausalito’s outside counsel has created a stir in the homeless encampment at Marinship Park by saying he’s intending to file a motion in federal court to close the camp down permanently.

The city-sanctioned encampment is under a court order, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen, to remain open. That same order prevents homeless people from camping anywhere in the city, except for Marinship.

In the past several months, the Sausalito police have barred new people from entering the homeless encampment, now located on the Marinship tennis courts. Catch-22: They can’t sleep in the designated encampment, and they can’t legally sleep anywhere else in the city.

Individuals have filed lawsuits against the city over the issue. Chen ruled against Sausalito in most cases. The city is now providing newcomers with vouchers for motels located outside of Sausalito.

The number of homeless people in the camp has dwindled from a high of about 45 people to 20. And the remaining folks aren’t happy. There are two women in wheelchairs living on the tennis courts. A man with cancer, who is receiving experimental chemotherapy treatments, was denied entry.

Sausalito officials have repeatedly told campers the city is working with the county to try to find housing. A few people received Section 8 housing vouchers, though they are quick to say Sausalito didn’t help them obtain the vouchers. 

Robbie Powelson, a member of the Sausalito/Marin Homeless Union, believes Sausalito is waging psychological warfare against the campers. He may be right.

The Sausalito City Council contracted with Urban Alchemy, a controversial nonprofit that hires former convicts, to manage the camp. Even after allegations surfaced that some Urban Alchemy employees had sexually assaulted vulnerable homeless women and brought drugs into the camp, the city refused to cancel the contract before it expired in late June.

Chen is possibly giving Sausalito’s high-priced attorneys a preview of how he will rule on a motion to close the camp. The judge continues to bring up Martin v. Boise, a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which states cities must allow homeless people to sleep on public property unless it can provide the folks with shelter.

Last week, Chen ruled against Sausalito in a motion it filed to dismiss a case brought against them by Arthur Bruce, a homeless man. After the city refused to allow Bruce on the tennis courts, he purchased a parking sticker to sleep in his car at the tennis court parking lots. The police revoked it. Chen ordered the city to issue a new parking sticker to Bruce and the case will continue to wend its way through court.

The City of Sausalito has spent over $1.5 million on the encampment, although much of the money has gone to Urban Alchemy and legal fees, rather than on services for the campers. The former and current Sausalito mayors have repeatedly told the Pacific Sun the city is compassionate toward its homeless residents. Perhaps they could find a way to demonstrate it.

How enterprising women from the 1930s saved the Marin Art and Garden Center property

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
How enterprising women from the 1930s saved the Marin Art and Garden Center property

Thanks to the foresight of a group of “Marin housewives” more than 75 years ago, the Marin Art and Garden Center in Ross was recently added to the National Register of Historic Places, an official list of America’s historic places worthy of preservation.

The center joins a prestigious collection of 53 landmark sites in the county on the National Register, including the Mount Tamalpais Mountain Theater, the Marin County Civic Center and the Green Brae Brick Kiln.

Although several of the buildings on the property are from the 19th century, the National Register listing is for the period from 1945 to 1962, with two main areas of significance: cultural history and design history, according to center executive director Antonia Adezio.

The cultural history started with the remarkable women referred to as “Marin housewives” in court documents. They were actually skilled environmentalists who founded garden and conservation organizations dedicated to saving Marin’s natural resources from development.

Due in large part to the efforts of the organizations’ founding members, including Caroline Livermore, Sepha Evers, Portia Forbes, Helen Van Pelt and Gladys Smith, the majority of Marin County remains predominantly open space. They worked on preserving Mount Tamalpais, Stinson Beach, Point Reyes and Angel Island. In addition, they spearheaded a campaign to ban billboards in Marin County, and the Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance in 1938 to remove all erected signs and prohibit new ones.

Also focused on preventing suburbanization in Marin, which started after the Golden Gate Bridge opened in 1936, Livermore and her partners may have been among the region’s first NIMBYs. They didn’t want the area populated with too many homes.

With development interest increasing, owners of Marin’s large estates and agricultural land began dividing their properties into smaller lots for new housing. When the lovely 11-acre Kittle estate in Ross was subdivided into more than a dozen parcels and put on the market, the women set their sights on preserving the property and keeping the estate buildings intact.

Livermore, who helped found the Marin Garden Club and the Marin Conservation League, used her own finances for the $5,000 down payment to purchase the estate, with its lush magnolia trees, a creek and several unique outbuildings that survived a fire responsible for burning the main house to the ground. Along with other members of the organizations, Livermore aimed to create a center for community use and provide a permanent place for garden and conservation clubs.

In 1945, the women accomplished their lofty goal of purchasing the Kittle property and setting up a nonprofit to run the Marin Art and Garden Center.

“What these women did was really brilliant,” Adezio said. “And they did it with very little resources, even putting their personal cash in to buy the estate. In Marin and across the United States, conservation-minded people banded together to try to save green and open space.”

The design history began in 1945, when the center’s board of trustees commissioned new buildings and landscaping and hired the leading architects in the Bay Area, including Gardner Dailey and Donn Emmons, of Wurster, Bernardi and Emmons, and landscape architects Thomas Church and Robert Royston. 

“Each of them is significant in their own right,” Adezio said. “Their work is still here. The suite of buildings and the landscaping we have are intact.”

With World War II just ending, building materials were in short supply, which prompted simple designs in the Bay Region Modern–Second Bay Tradition. This local form of mid-century modern styling featured clean lines, glass walls and wood panels.

The application process for the listing on the National Register spanned about a year and a half; however, it took years to gather the documents and necessary information to put together a comprehensive narrative on why the center should be included.

Volunteers and staff worked diligently on securing the listing, which entailed interaction with three government agencies. The process began with the California Office of Historic Preservation, which helped the center’s supporters identify what they needed. Next, the State Historical Resources Commission reviewed the nomination to ensure that the site was eligible. Last October, the commission gave the green light. Finally, the United States Department of the Interior reviewed it and approved the listing on June 6.

And it may not have happened at all if a neighbor hadn’t gone dumpster diving.

Gary Scales, a neighbor and former trustee of the center, noticed a cleanup taking place on the property and items being thrown in the trash. When he stuck his head in the dumpster, he found some very important documents, including the meeting minutes from the period of significance in the National Register listing—1945 to 1962.

“How does that happen?” Adezio said. “With a nonprofit that’s had generations of people involved, the chain of command and memory is sometimes lost. People move on, things slip through the cracks. We were lucky Gary rescued it.”

The center’s history is rich, even if some of it isn’t included in the listing. The county fair took place on the property from 1946 to 1970. It began as the Marin Art and Garden Fair, which included arts and crafts displays, outdoor installations of gardens, archery contests and Uncle Sam walking around on stilts. The fair raised enough money to keep the Marin Art and Garden Center going.

Today, the center earns its keep in other ways, with a robust calendar for weddings and private events. A nature-inspired preschool is on the grounds, and a family-friendly summer concert series takes place every Thursday in July.

Over 100,000 people a year visit the center, which doesn’t charge admission. Folks stroll through the gardens, curl up on a bench with a book and play chess.  On Aug. 3, the center’s 77th anniversary, there will be a celebration for the National Register listing. Details are not yet available.

“The listing gives us cause to celebrate and look at how we preserve the property,” Adezio said. “The Marin Art and Garden Center is a backyard for people.”

Marin City advocates raise drinking water concerns—again

Nikki Silverstein
-
1
Marin City advocates raise drinking water concerns—again

As the crow flies, Marin City is less than seven miles from Ross. Yet Marin City residents have a significantly lower life expectancy than Ross residents.

For example, the Robert Wood Foundation collaborated with the federal government to calculate life expectancy by census tract. In Ross, a person can expect to live 91 years, while in Marin City, the age is 80.

The people of Marin City want answers about the causes of the disparity. A local organization, Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice, is determined to get to the bottom of the issue.

The group’s members suspect contaminants in Marin City’s drinking water could be a factor in the decreased life expectancy because residents have complained about poor-tasting, smelly and discolored tap water for years. In 2019 and 2020, the Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice surveyed 280 community members, who answered open-ended questions about the water quality and other issues in Marin City.

The survey results are unsettling. Drinking water is a top concern, along with flooding and industrial contamination. Most respondents said they are worried about their tap water, and 76% indicated they drink bottled water at home.

These findings prompted Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice to work with the San Francisco Estuary Partnership to conduct tap water testing in 16 homes. Members of Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice were trained by SimpleLab, a marketplace for accredited water quality testing laboratories, to collect clean water samples from the tap. Each sample collection was carefully monitored by the local group, which also took responsibility for the chain of custody to the lab.

A total of 48 tap water samples were collected and analyzed for more than 150 contaminants. With half of the test results back from the lab, Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice has drawn some preliminary conclusions.

A group of bacteria, total coliform, was detected in some of the tap water samples. Although not all coliforms are harmful, fecal coliform and E. coli can cause illness and even death in humans. The presence of total coliforms is used to determine water quality, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Chemical substances known as analytes that were found in the water samples included chloroform, chlorine, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid and more, the Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice said. Maria Ramos-Chertok, an attorney and volunteer with the group, said the levels of many of the chemicals exceed California’s detection limit for purposes of reporting.

The group raised their concerns with the Marin City Community Services District, an elected body representing unincorporated Marin City, which in turn contacted Congressman Jared Huffman.

The community now has Huffman’s attention. On Wednesday, June 22, he brought together more than 20 people for an invitation-only meeting to discuss safe drinking water in Marin City. 

Representatives from an array of federal, state and local agencies attended, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, California State Water Resources Control Board, the Marin Municipal Water District and Marin Health and Human Services.

James Muller is the principal program manager of the San Francisco Estuary Partnership, the agency that helped Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice with the tap water testing. Muller is holding out for more results. For now, he believes the total coliform found in the tap water is the result of a sampling error because the test is very sensitive to these contaminants specifically.

More information and analysis is expected soon.

The Marin Municipal Water District, after being informed that coliform was found in the tap water, began testing Marin City water from a station out on the street. The testing has been conducted every weekday since late May and no coliform has been detected; however, they haven’t yet conducted tests at the tap inside a home.

The maximum contaminant level, or MCL, is a regulatory standard for the maximum allowable amount of a contaminant in the water. Contaminants are permitted in drinking water as long they are under an amount determined by state and federal regulations. Another measure, although not a regulatory standard, is California’s public health goals. Those figures, which are set by the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, are the level of chemical contaminants in drinking water that don’t pose a significant health risk.

“Through a regulatory lens, we’ve found no exceedances,” Muller said. “But if we look through the lens of the public health goals, what are the synergistic effects over a lifetime of use of this water? We haven’t seen that science come out. Maybe none exceed MCLs, but there are a lot of contaminants in the Marin City water.”

Paul Sellier, operations director at the Marin Municipal Water District, is confident the drinking water in Marin CIty is safe, clean and healthy, as is the rest of the county’s water.

“The system doesn’t allow us to provide different drinking water to different communities,” Sellier said.

Terrie Green, executive director of Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice, says the water pipes in Marin City are likely the culprit. Greenbrae, Ross and San Rafael have new pipes, and Mill Valley’s water pipes are being replaced now. Green is adamant that Marin City needs them, too.

“Our people are dying…,” Green wrote in a text message.

The oldest water pipes in Marin City date back to 1959, although pipes can last 70 to 100 years, according to Sellier. Now 63 years old, the pipes are nearing the end of their life span, yet Marin Municipal Water District has no plans to replace them anytime soon.

“In Mill Valley, my water has never been discolored, never had a bad taste and it doesn’t smell,” Ramos-Chertok said. “What’s that about? You can say the Marin City water is pristine all day and all night, but if what comes out of your tap is discolored and has a bad taste, it’s not pristine.”

Cynthia Koehler, who serves on the Marin Municipal Water District Board, said the agency is concerned. It has offered to do water quality testing at the meter and the tap concurrently, which will help determine whether the contaminants are coming through the agency’s pipes or pipes that are the responsibility of homeowners. There is no date set for the testing, but it is anticipated that it will start within a month or two.

Green wants the testing conducted by an independent company. Regardless of the outcome, she wants the six miles of water pipes in Marin City replaced.

Like Green, many people in the community don’t trust government agencies, which stems from years of broken promises and discrimination. Marin City began as a temporary home for shipbuilders in World War II. When the war ended, white people bought homes in the county. Black people were prevented from owning homes in certain areas through a process known as redlining. In Marin County, they simply weren’t permitted to buy property.

While there has been some progress since then, systemic racism still exists in Marin. The county has the dubious distinction of being the most racially segregated county in the Bay Area. Just three years ago, the Sausalito Marin City School District received the first California desegregation order in 50 years. There is still a long way to go to build trust.

Perhaps it could start with those six miles of new water pipes.

Marin County Public Defender draws from personal experience

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Marin County Public Defender draws from personal experience

Marin County Public Defender David Sutton experienced a rough childhood in San Francisco’s Western Addition. By high school, he had managed to get himself into some trouble. It probably saved him.

Raised by a single mother diagnosed with bipolar disorder, Sutton and his sister spent time in foster homes or staying with family. When he was eight years old, his sister was permanently removed from the home. 

“My mother had pretty significant mental health issues,” Sutton said. “Oftentimes, she would be voluntarily or involuntarily hospitalized.”

His father left when Sutton was six months old. As a child, Sutton never knew him.

In the mid-’90s, prompted by Sutton’s wayward behavior after entering high school, his mother sent him to live with an uncle who was a police officer in Riverside County. Influenced by his strict uncle, Sutton toed the line.  

Sutton’s aunt, who was a labor and employment attorney, also provided motivation. He began to realize he had other options in life, including becoming a lawyer.

“A lot of my aunt’s guidance, specifically through undergrad and law school, helped keep my eyes on the prize,” Sutton said. “I have no doubt that I wouldn’t be a public defender but for adults intervening throughout my life and throughout my career.”

Early in law school at the University of San Francisco, Sutton considered working at a large law firm to earn the big bucks because “poverty sucks,” he said. Yet, he abandoned those plans and chose instead to work as a public defender.

For Sutton, it boils down to doing meaningful work. Helping people justifies logging in 60 to 80 hour weeks. Sutton harkens back to his rocky, impoverished youth as his inspiration.

“The reason I became a public defender is to help individuals who have experienced the same things that I have or are dealing with the same kind of mental health issues that my mother dealt with,” Sutton said. “That became my calling—really trying to effect change for individuals who find themselves in dire situations and may not have had the mentorship or the intervention I did. It’s my way of honoring my background and who I am, while also making sure that I’m paying forward the opportunities that I was afforded.”

Sutton’s route to lead the Marin County Public Defender’s Office was circuitous. In the summer of 2006, and continuing throughout most of law school, he worked as an intern in the department. After a short stint in Alameda County’s public defender’s office, Sutton returned to the Marin office as a misdemeanor attorney, but only stayed for about a year-and-a-half.

Lured to Los Angeles in 2010 by an offer from the largest federal public defender’s office in the country, Sutton remained there for 10 years, working his way up the ladder. Eventually, he became the trial chief, managing dozens of attorneys.

Still, Sutton has always considered the Bay Area his home. Last year, when Marin came knocking at his door to manage the public defender’s office, he didn’t think twice.

“Given the opportunity to return to Marin and steward the office that basically gave me my start, I jumped at it,” Sutton said. “I built what I think is an extremely strong legal foundation—a foundation for public defense—to come back and lead the office.”

The Marin County Public Defender’s Office has always provided excellent legal services, according to Sutton. Today, he’s building on that base with the 42-person department he manages.

“We’re staying on the cutting edge and pushing the envelope with litigation,” Sutton said. “We’re addressing our client’s needs after they’re released from jail or prison by ensuring they’re not repeat clients. We’re addressing housing, using Clean Slate events to get rid of historical convictions and looking at the decarceration of current inmates through changes in the penal code.”

Another goal of the department is to keep people out of handcuffs in the first place and help change their stations in life. Sutton works to find funding sources to support those efforts. 

People who can’t afford an attorney are referred to the Marin County Public Defender’s Office. Their cases run the gamut, including felonies, misdemeanors and sometimes infractions, which aren’t criminal offenses. In addition, public defenders represent people when there is an attempt to place them under a conservatorship for allegedly posing a danger to others or being unable to care for their own basic needs. The department also serves juveniles.

The responsibilities of directing the office are plentiful, yet Sutton finds time to carry his own caseload. However, he takes the low-profile cases because he doesn’t believe the lead public defender should be chasing headlines.

“I still love being a lawyer,” Sutton said. “I’m an administrator, but I represent clients as well.”

Sutton sings the praises of the team, emphasizing it’s not just the attorneys keeping the office humming along. From the legal support staff, who are the first contact with the public, to the  drug and alcohol recovery coach, everyone works long hours to ensure that their clients’ rights are protected.

While the Marin County Public Defender’s Office protects their clients’ constitutional and statutory rights through traditional representation on the court floor, it also provides holistic legal representation to the community, according to Sutton. The staff even takes their services outside the office, meeting people where they live. 

“This isn’t just a mission statement, but something that we’re truly honoring,” Sutton said. “What does a trip to the Civic Center mean in your life in terms of timing? Maybe you don’t have a car or you have child care issues.”

Sutton and his team collaborate with the Marin County District Attorney’s Office to address legal issues in the community. The two departments work together on Clean Slate, a program that aims to seal and expunge a person’s prior criminal record, which removes barriers to employment, housing and educational opportunities. 

Although public defenders and district attorneys are often adversaries in court, Sutton says he speaks with DA Lori Frugoli and Assistant DA Otis Bruce on a regular basis. Frugoli includes Sutton on some of her calls and meetings with the community. The two offices try to work out compromises on cases.

The Marin County Jail and the Public Defender’s Office also routinely communicate, especially during the pandemic. 

“The jail captain has been a partner in ensuring that we still have access to our clients, despite Covid outbreaks,” Sutton said. “The Marin County Jail was an early adopter of providing remote meetings with clients.”

It’s clear that the clients, the people his office represents, remain foremost in Sutton’s mind. After all, they’re the reason he chose to become a public defender. 

“I’m a civil servant,” Sutton said. “I serve these individuals and I take that to heart.”

Marin Sheriff agrees to obey the law as part of legal settlement

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
Marin Sheriff agrees to obey the law as part of legal settlement

Marin activists declared victory last week when Marin County and Sheriff Robert Doyle settled a lawsuit which claimed Doyle’s office illegally shared the license plate data and location information of Marin motorists with hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the country.

Under the settlement agreement, the sheriff and his successors must abide by two state laws, SB 34 and SB 54. SB 34 prohibits sensitive data, collected by surveillance cameras, from being transferred to federal and out-of-state agencies, while SB 54 prevents state and local resources from being used to assist federal immigration enforcement.

The sheriff did not admit to any violations in the settlement agreement. Instead, Doyle made admissions that he understands the meaning of the laws and will follow them.

Long-time Marin residents, Lisa Bennett, Cesar S. Lagleva, and Tara Evans, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, filed the lawsuit in October against the sheriff and the County of Marin, alleging public documents showed Doyle was sharing automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) data with at least 424 out-of-state agencies and 18 federal agencies, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.

Since 2010, the Marin County Sheriff’s Office has gathered surveillance information through an ALPR system. It began sharing the data in 2014. The cameras capture images of the license plate and vehicle, as well as GPS data with a time and date stamp.

“This location data contains personal information, revealing where we live, where we work, where we worship and when we go to the doctor’s office,” Matt Cagle, an ALCU attorney involved in the case, said. “The government has the location information for residents and visitors traveling through the county. What we have seen is troubling. ICE has tapped into databases of information like this and used the sensitive data points to locate, target and deport immigrants.”

Keeping ICE out of Marin was a goal of the lawsuit. Doyle is frequently criticized for cooperating with ICE. While it’s within the sheriff’s power to cease collaborations with the federal agency, Doyle has chosen to continue to assist ICE, despite making a few small changes over the past few years.

The sheriff’s staff stopped inquiring about a person’s immigration status and no longer responds to ICE requests regarding release dates for low-level offenders. In addition, the sheriff barred  ICE from entering the jail for inmate transfers but the agency now waits in the parking area for the release of people it wants to take into custody.

Although the sheriff’s office must stop providing the automated license plate recognition data with ICE, it is under no obligation to stop collecting the information and may still share it with other non-federal law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies in California. Doyle declined an interview request but did release a statement.

“The Marin County Sheriff’s Office is pleased with the settlement of [the] ACLU lawsuit,” the statement says. “We have evaluated the policies and procedures surrounding the use and sharing of information from our ALPR system and made changes to ensure no information is shared with out of state agencies unless allowed per the terms of the settlement agreement.”

It’s unclear what Doyle might be referring to when he states that his office won’t share information with out of state agencies unless allowed by the settlement agreement. Both the settlement agreement and SB 34 prohibit any sharing of the data with out of state agencies.

The ACLU considers the collection and distribution of the data to be problematic because it’s not always known how the data is used, according to Cagle. It could violate individuals’ privacy and civil liberties, especially for those in marginalized groups, such as immigrants or people of color.

“The information could be used to identify stolen vehicles,” Cagle said. “Or it could be used to identify folks at a protest.”

It would be nice to know exactly what the sheriff’s office is doing with the data it collects from Marin residents and visitors. In 2020, Doyle recorded 821,244 scans of license plates and specific location information with the ALPR readers.

What’s even more interesting is how few vehicles are detected that may have been involved in a crime. Out of all the license plate images gathered in 2020, only 216 “hits” were found, a mere 0.02%. 

“There are aspects of ALPR that make it look like it’s not a very effective means of surveillance,” Lisa Bennett, one of the activists who filed the lawsuit, said. “Very few [scans] actually lead to anything. So why is the sheriff surveilling an entire population?”

Marin activists have been calling for a sheriff’s oversight committee with teeth – subpoena power. AB 1185, state legislation passed in 2020, gives the Marin Board of Supervisors the power to create a committee to hold the sheriff’s office accountable for its policies and actions.

“This lawsuit settlement is one great argument for an oversight committee,” Bennett said. “It was not only an acknowledgement that the sheriff needs to change his practices, but it also cost the county $49,000 – the amount included in the settlement agreement to pay for [the plaintiffs’] legal fees.”

Another activist, Cesar Lagleva, who was also a party to the lawsuit, agrees wholeheartedly. He encourages all Marin residents to support AB 1185 by writing to the Marin County Board of Supervisors.

“We have enough evidence to suggest there needs to be accountability in the sheriff’s office,” Lagleva said. “These practices have had a disproportionate negative impact against BIPOC and poor residents here in Marin County.

Until an oversight committee is established, it’s up to community activists to keep close watch over the sheriff’s office, Cagle said. It’s important to ensure  the sheriff follows SB 34 and SB 54 and other laws designed to protect our immigrant neighbors and community members. 

The ACLU hopes the outcome of the Marin lawsuit will send a warning to all agencies in California that are violating the law by sharing ALPR data with out-of-state and federal law enforcement. Police departments in Tiburon and several areas in San Diego stopped the practice after the lawsuit was filed.

“We don’t have any other active cases right now,” Cagle said. “Basically, this should be putting other California law enforcement agencies on notice that it is illegal to share location information collected by ALPR with out of state and federal agencies. The law is clear and these public agencies need to get in line and comply if they’re not already.”

Bennett says the heart of the matter with the lawsuit is the privacy issue, which affects all residents.

“What if an undocumented woman from Texas wants to drive to California for an abortion and Texas wants to know from us is she in your state?” Bennett said.  “We don’t want them to know that. This has implications not just for undocumented immigrants but for anyone who values their privacy.”

How a Marin County Woman Found her Birth Parents

Nikki Silverstein
-
0
How a Marin County Woman Found her Birth Parents

We all count our blessings during the holiday season, with family usually topping the list. After a remarkable journey, an adopted San Rafael woman found her birth mother and an entire extended family, giving her yet another reason to feel thankful.

Wendy Gallagher, 54, grew up in Sausalito, knowing her parents adopted her as an infant. No one knew that her birth mother, coincidentally, lived just two blocks away at the time.

In 1965, Mary Lynn, a single woman, worked at a real estate firm in San Francisco. That summer, she unexpectedly became pregnant and decided to give her baby up for adoption through the Children’s Home Society in San Francisco. Margaret and Dr. Clifford Raisbeck adopted Wendy in April 1966, when she was three weeks old.

Wendy spent an idyllic childhood in a large Sausalito home with her parents and three siblings. Her eldest brother, 10 years her senior, was her parents’ only natural child. They also adopted a boy in 1963 and another girl, after Wendy, in 1967.

“It was paradise growing up,” Wendy said. “Our house was on a half-acre with a swimming pool and a treehouse. On the Fourth of July, my dad would drive his 1911 Model T in the Sausalito parade and then we’d have a big party at our house.”

Unfortunately, Margaret passed away in 1991, when Wendy was only 25. After her death, Wendy’s adopted brother and sister searched for and found their birth families. Their father was supportive; however, Wendy sensed his discomfort during photo sessions with her siblings and their birth relatives.

Wendy had little interest in finding her birth parents, though as a child, she sometimes wondered if she might receive a birthday card from them. None ever arrived.

Her curiosity about her birth parents’ health information increased as she grew older, especially when she married and had children. Her daughter was immunocompromised, causing her to contemplate whether it was a genetic trait from her side of the family.

After her father died in 2013, Wendy thought more about searching for her birth parents. Still, she did not act.

In the fall of 2015, while attending one of her daughter’s tennis matches, Wendy chatted with another parent about her growing desire to find her birth parents. The woman suggested she check out 23andMe, a genetic testing company. A customer simply places a saliva sample in a tube, sends it to the company and waits a few weeks for the DNA results. The 23andMe online database then provides the names of family members also registered with the company.

“For $100, I found 900 relatives,” Wendy said.

Most were distant relations, except for Mike, a first cousin living in Oregon. Coincidentally, he was also adopted. The two cousins, who share 15.6 percent of their DNA, corresponded and learned that neither knew anything about their birth parents.

Even more determined to locate her birth parents, Wendy sent away for her adoption records from the Children’s Home Society. In April 2016, eight pages arrived from the nonprofit agency, but the report did not reveal her parents’ names. The actual birth record containing that information was sealed by the state.

She learned from adoption records that her mother grew up in Kansas, spoke two languages and had one sister. Her father was an only child.

From these facts, Wendy and Mike deduced their mothers were sisters. Wendy spent many hours on the internet and made several visits to the Marin Civic Center with her clues, yet she gleaned no new information. In effect, she had reached a genealogical dead end.

Wendy discussed her dilemma with her brother-in-law, who worked on computers. As if by fate, his roster of clients included Phyllis Garrett, a genealogist in Novato. Wendy hired her in May 2016 to find her birth parents.

It was the best $400 Wendy ever spent, because the following month, Phyllis sent her a photo of her maternal grandmother.

“I felt like I was looking in the mirror,” Wendy said.

Phyllis identified and contacted Wendy’s birth mother over the summer. Mary Lynn was excited about the prospect of reconnecting with her daughter. Unfortunately, there were roadblocks finding her birth father.

After more than 50 years apart, the mother and daughter began a tentative relationship, communicating through email and Facebook for several months. Wendy gained a younger half-sister and half-brother, who she also contacted online.  

Mike, too, received good news. Mary Lynn’s sister, Patsy, was indeed his mother.

“It was very cool. Like reading a spy novel,” Mike said after learning about his birth mother. They were soon in touch, as well.

Wendy made the trip to Texas in November 2016 for a joyful family reunion. She had never even spoken on the phone with her newfound relatives, yet there she was, meeting her mother, sister and brother for the first time.

“There’s a lot to nurture versus nature,” Wendy said. “My adoptive mother was detailed, neat and organized. Always on time. That’s nurture, because I’m the same way.”

“My birth mother and I have the same mannerisms and dimples,” she continued. “One of my half-sister’s daughters is the spitting image of my daughter at that age.”

Wendy and Mary Lynn discovered they both love to travel and have visited the same places. They enjoy doing puzzles, always drink Diet Coke and never drink coffee. And, that autoimmune disease that plagued Wendy’s daughter when she was younger? Wendy’s half-brother had it, too.

The relationship between the birth relatives has grown steadily. In 2017, Wendy’s new extended family traveled to San Rafael for Christmas and met her adoptive family.

“I have three siblings and a step-sister who I’m close to,” Wendy said. “That’s my family, the people who raised me and took care of me. My birth mother, half-sister and half-brother, they’re a wonderful bonus.”

Wendy recommends using the genealogy websites and the services of a genealogist to anyone seeking their birth family. In fact, she now has 1,500 relatives on 23andMe.

“I would do it all over again,” she said. “It’s amazing what you can find out from a vial of spit.”

Recovery Fund Offers Lifeline to Nonprofit Marin Arts Groups Impacted by Pandemic

Charlie Swanson
-
0
Recovery Fund Offers Lifeline to Nonprofit Marin Arts Groups Impacted by Pandemic

As the North Bay heads into the holiday season, Marin County recently graduated from “red” to “orange” status in regards to Covid-19 risk, allowing some businesses to reopen for the first time, while others can expand their operating capacity.

Still, the pandemic’s impact on Marin County’s economy, and especially the impact on nonprofit organizations and arts organizations, has been severe. According to a statewide Covid-19 Arts & Culture Sector Impact Survey, California’s creative sector has suffered the highest job losses of any industry due to the widespread cancellation of performances, events and other educational offerings, as well as venue closures. In addition, a majority of creative workers do not qualify for safety-net protections such as paid family leave, disability insurance, paid sick leave or worker’s compensation.

Even with the reduced risk status, many Marin County arts and music venues are still closed or only open at limited capacity or by appointment only, meaning it could be a blue Christmas financially for Marin creatives and nonprofits.

To help offset the pandemic’s economic downturn facing Marin creatives, the Marin Cultural Association (MCA) has launched an Arts & Culture Recovery Fund that will provide Marin County nonprofit arts organizations a way to stay afloat. The recovery fund gathers together a variety of grants and a broad array of funders, and nonprofit organizations can apply online for a grant until November 11. Grant awards will be announced December 18 following review by a community grants panel.

“Our local artists and arts organizations are struggling to survive the cancellation of programs and services,” said Gabriella Calicchio, Director of Cultural Services and Executive Director of MCA, in a statement. “We are incredibly thankful for the initial funding from the CARES Act, the California Arts Council, and the Marin Community Foundation, which allows us to support those organizations left most vulnerable by the pandemic.”

Recovery fund grants will be designed to further one or more of the goals of the Marin Arts & Culture Plan, which was adopted by the Marin County Board of Supervisors in May 2019. Those goals include advancing and enriching Marin’s arts organizations for sustainable and accessible cultural offerings.

In particular, the recovery fund’s first set of grants will be focused on Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) organizations and those supporting BIPOC communities throughout Marin. All applications go through a diverse panel of Marin artists and arts leaders, who will evaluate each nonprofit’s severity of need and cultural benefit to the community.

Formed in 2015, Marin Cultural Association–a nonprofit under the umbrella of the county’s department of cultural services–is leading the development of a comprehensive arts and culture master plan for Marin that was born out of data that showed diminishing performance and exhibit opportunities in the county, especially for low-income and minority communities. Before the pandemic, MCA annually presented over a dozen art exhibits by local creatives as well as performing showcases. Now, with the recovery fund, MCA hopes to keep the arts culture alive in Marin County until Covid-19 is eradicated.

Get more info on the Arts & Culture Recovery Fund and apply online at Marincultural.org.

Local Bands Dress Up for Virtual Halloween Concert

Charlie Swanson
-
0
Local Bands Dress Up for Virtual Halloween Concert

Petaluma’s historic Phoenix Theater looks stunning right now, thanks to a new paint job. The roof is also in fine form after being replaced earlier this year, and the sprinkler system is almost installed and up to the city’s codes.

Unfortunately, the inside of the Phoenix Theater is effectively closed to the public due to Covid, and the popular concert venue and teenage hangout has been unable to host events since March.

Nonetheless, in keeping with tradition, the venue will present its annual Halloween Covers Show this Saturday, Oct. 31. The only difference is that this year’s concert will be virtual, with several local bands and artists dressing up as classic rock groups and performing their songs for the camera instead of a live audience. The concert will be available to view on YouTube at 8pm on Oct. 31.

“The show is very cool, and it existed long before we hosted it,” says Jim Agius, talent buyer for the Phoenix Theater and co-host of the venue-based podcast Onstage with Jim & Tom. “It was a fixture at one of the punk houses in Santa Rosa. In 2016, we offered to take it and we hosted it, and from there we put our own spin on it.”

The annual Halloween Covers Show is one of the North Bay’s biggest yearly parties, and the participating bands and artists go above and beyond to embody the classic bands they are covering; perfecting the clothes, the between-song banter and more.

“All of the things I love about Halloween are represented in this show,” Agius says. “It gets a great variety of people from all sorts of different musical corners.”

In past years, local bands have performed as everything from AC/DC to the Spice Girls, and this year’s virtual lineup is another varied assembly of musical genres and artists.

Seven bands appear at this year’s online concert. Marin County’s young rock star Matt Jaffe—with bleached blonde hair—embodies Lou Reed and leads a Velvet Underground set. Marin natives The Happys don socks (and nothing else) to perform as the Red Hot Chili Peppers. Young Sonoma County punks Kurupi take on Rage Against the Machine, and local performer Kara Ferro sings as Loretta Lynn with a full backing country band. Other sets include Moon Sick performing as Toadies, Dry Ice Queen performing as No Doubt and several young rockers from various local bands performing as The Strokes.

Also in keeping with tradition, this year’s Halloween Covers Show ends with a massive balloon drop.

“It’s a wonderful dot on the exclamation point to end the show,” Agius says. “This year, of course, there’s no audience. It’s very surreal actually to see 800 balloons sitting where the audience would have been.”

Despite its current inability to host live shows, the Phoenix Theater’s nonprofit foundation is staying afloat through the pandemic thanks to private donors and the Paycheck Protection Program.

“It looks like the Phoenix is going to be OK,” Agius says. “Obviously, things can change and who knows how long this is going to go on for, but we’re feeling positive about coming out the other end of it.”

The Phoenix Theater’s Halloween Covers Show debuts on the “Onstage with Jim & Tom” Youtube channel on Saturday, Oct. 31, at 8pm. Find more details at Facebook.com/thephoenixtheater.

Latino Photography Project Presents Inspiring Exhibit in Point Reyes

Charlie Swanson
-
0
Latino Photography Project Presents Inspiring Exhibit in Point Reyes

A regional arts landmark since 1983, Gallery Route One hosts artistic exhibits by member artists as well as exhibitions by guest artists that often address environmental and social issues such as climate change and immigration.

GRO also maintains several arts outreach programs like the Latino Photography Project, which was formed seventeen years ago with the support of the West Marin Literacy Services.

Over the years, the students who participate in the Latino Photography Project have become documentarians for the Latino community of West Marin, and the project often features Latino-Anglo collaboration and cross-cultural learning. The project also regularly exhibits at GRO, and the images on display often tell stories that help bridge the Latino and Anglo cultures in the North Bay.

This weekend, the Latino Photography Project returns to GRO for a new exhibit, “She Inspires Me: Nine Latina Photographers & the Women Who Inspire Them.” The show features portraits of Bay Area women who are in positions of leadership, and the images were taken over the last two years in a documentary-style project produced with the support of the West Marin Fund.

“She Inspires Me” explores the nature of women’s leadership as experienced not only by each photographer, but by the women who inspire them as well.

The images of leading community women include a portrait of Esther Vidrio Tejeda, taken by Ana Maria Ramirez. Esther is a leader and a godmother to many locals from her hometown of Atemajac Mexico, and the photograph captures Esther holding her wedding portrait.

Other contributions to the exhibit include Jessica Oliva’s striking image of Madeline Hope, a West Marin artist and community leader, and Isela Orozco’s portrait of her personal inspiration, Carmen Orozco (pictured).

The photos tell the common story of the external and internal obstacles women continue to face on their paths to empowerment, and how they overcome those challenges to achieve their individual goals.

Essays by the photographers about each of their subjects accompany the black-and-white images, and the text is presented in both Spanish and English. In addition, copies of a commemorative bilingual book containing all of the portraits and their related essays will be available at the gallery. Sales from the book will benefit the project.

“She Inspires Me” opens online and for in-person viewing by appointment on Saturday, Oct. 31. A virtual artist reception and art talk takes place on Sunday, Nov. 1, at 3pm. The show will remain open and online through Sunday, Dec 6.

Two other solo exhibits will also open at GRO for viewing online and in-person on Saturday; as Marie-Luise Klotz presents “Connected Earth” in the center gallery and Jenny-Lynn Hall presents “Diary” in the annex.

Klotz is a photographer and visual artist who specializes in combining environmental photography with fine art, and her work is rooted in the natural world. “Connected Earth” is described as, “An exhibition of photographs which consider the extent to which our planet is deeply connected as a single organism that is whole, but which is frequently perceived by humankind as a collection of separate entities.”

Hall’s abstract paintings are inspired by her daily trips to the ocean and her work often reflects the natural world as well as the nature of time. “Diary” is a new collection of paintings completed during Covid-19’s shelter-in-place ordeal, and Hall’s art documents her recent perception that days seems to blend into each other while irrevocable sociopolitical changes upend our world.

“When looking at one of my pieces, whether monumental or modest in scale, I want you to sense that the particular and universal are accessible to you, and present in every living thing, every person that you see,” Hall writes in her artist statement. “To recognize unfathomable uniqueness while understanding our interconnectedness is an underlying theme in my work, which uses light, texture and dimension to create experience.”

For more information, visit GalleryRouteOne.org.

San Rafael’s Day of the Dead Celebrations Go Online

Charlie Swanson
-
0
San Rafael’s Day of the Dead Celebrations Go Online

For more than three decades, San Rafael has marked the Mexican holiday of Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) with colorful cultural events that bring out the entire community.

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, San Rafael’s 32nd annual Dia de los Muertos will be held online and on social media sites like YouTube and Facebook throughout the entire month of October, culminating in a car procession through San Rafael’s Canal neighborhood on November 1.

“Our annual event is such a wonderful coming together of the many diverse members of our community. We didn’t want to lose that during this year that we can’t gather in person,” Catherine John, Chair of the 2020 organizing committee, says in a statement. “Our event’s presence on the web, social media, and live streaming video aims to connect community members in an uplifting and humanizing way. These values are intrinsic to any Day of the Dead celebration.”

San Rafael’s Dia de los Muertos celebration is working together with partners such as the City of San Rafael and the Albert J. Boro Community Center, and the organizing committee is made up of a wide swath of artists, business owners and community members such as Douglas Mundo, Executive Director of the Multicultural Center of Marin.

“This year, we are pleased to welcome our new partners: San Rafael Downtown Business Improvement District, Downtown San Rafael Arts District and Art Works Downtown, among others,” Mundo says in a statement. “Together, we have organized for the entire month of October a series of art workshops, face painting tutorials, and altar displays in local businesses in Downtown San Rafael and the Canal. We will also have cultural presentations, live music and for the first time ever a talent show for local youth.”

Upcoming online highlights of the Day of the Dead celebrations include art workshops, cooking demonstrations, talks and other ceremonies happening every day through October.

On Thursday, Oct. 22, participants will learn how to make ‘Pan de Muerto’ with Mexican-based Chef Ana Garcia of La Villa Bonita Culinary Vacation retreat. On Saturday, Oct. 24, Bay Area-based Ballet Folklórico Mexicano de Carlos Moreno presents a virtual Dia de los Muertos musical performance.

Following that, on Sunday, Oct. 25, traditionally dressed Catrinas (the skeleton figures that symbolizes the Day of The Dead) lead a virtual tour of downtown San Rafael, where local artists are displaying their Day of the Dead altars in storefronts and businesses this month. The next day, Monday, Oct. 26, Ernesto Hernandez Olmos (pictured), a Marin-based artist originally from Oaxaca, leads a workshop on the significance of Day of the Dead altars.

Other virtual highlights of San Rafael’s Dia de los Muertos includes The Center for Domestic Peace in San Rafael hosting a solemn but uplifting ceremony on Oct. 30 to remember the lives lost to domestic violence in the Bay Area this past year. The next day, Oct. 31, Mill Valley’s O’Hanlon Center for the Arts virtually hosts local artist Zoe Harris in a talk about art related to the Day of the Dead.

San Rafael’s Dia de los Muertos concludes on Sunday, November 1 with the festive car procession through the Canal community. The traditionally decorated cars will meet at the Marin County Health & Wellness Center and the car procession will begin at 6:00 pm and will be broadcast live on social media.

Find the San Rafael Dia de los Muertos full schedule of events at dayofthedeadsr.org.

Mill Valley Film Festival Returns, Outdoors and Online

David Templeton
-
0
Mill Valley Film Festival Returns, Outdoors and Online

The California Film Institute, producer of the annual Mill Valley Film Festival, is no stranger to outdoor cinematic experience. Two or three times a year, at the nonprofit’s jewel-box Christopher B. Smith Rafael Film Center in downtown San Rafael, movies are screened al fresco—often projected onto the walls of a nearby building or inflatable screen. In the past, the company hosted massive outdoor screenings at the Cushing Memorial Amphitheatre on Mount Tamalpais, including a presentation of The Sound of Music which drew more than 1,000 attendees.

For that matter, the festival—known around the world for the largeness and lushness of its awesome annual galas—has celebrated the art of the movies, and the filmmakers responsible, in countless outdoor environments, from open-air shopping malls and sprawling mansion grounds to party yachts sailing on the San Francisco Bay.

But it took a worldwide pandemic to inspire the popular 11-day, fall season extravaganza to finally feature a drive-in movie theater.

In addition to a jam-packed virtual showcase of films, tributes, forums and interviews which allow fans to catch over 100 movies in the safety of their homes, the 2020 Mill Valley Film Festival (Oct. 8–18) will produce one big drive-in movie screening every evening for 10 out of 11 nights at Marin Civic Center’s Lagoon Park, in San Rafael. That’s a beautiful setting for a drive-in movie, the quintessentially American experience that first became popular in the 1950s and all but disappeared—until now.

Riding a recent wave of drive-in pop-ups that emerged across the country in the wake of the Covid-19 shutdown, the Mill Valley Film Festival is putting its own spin on the classic American attraction.

It all materializes with the world premiere of Blithe Spirit, a sexy and supernatural romantic comedy from director Edward Hall (founder of the British all-male Propeller Theater Company). This movie, adapted from the classic Noel Coward play, features Dan Stevens (Downton Abbey, Beauty and the Beast), Isla Fisher (Confessions of a Shopaholic), Leslie Mann (Knocked Up, Blockers) and Dame Judy Dench, who will also feature in one of the festival’s Tribute Programs, where she will be interviewed virtually on Friday, Oct. 16, at 7:30pm. Blithe Spirit, about a mystery writer who ends up in a wacky triangle between his new wife and the ghost of his dead one, gets a second watch-from-your-car screening on Friday night.

The rest of the line-up at the Lagoon is an array of Oscar-bait dramas, thrilling documentaries, heart-lightening concert films and anniversary screenings.

On Saturday, Oct. 10 at 7:30pm, director Gia Coppola’s (Palo Alto) frenetically paced excoriation of popular internet celebrity madness, Mainstream, screens. This film stars Andrew Garfield as a bizarre web-prophet—discovered/created by would-be filmmaker (Maya Hawke)—who dreams of fame and gets … more than she bargained for.

Next up are the historical drama Ammonite, by Francis Lee, and God’s Own Country, featuring Kate Winslet and Saoirse Ronan in the story of 19th century paleontologist Mary Anning and the young woman she is hired to tutor (Sunday, Oct. 11). The following night, on Oct. 12, Robert DeNiro, Morgan Freeman and Tommy Lee Jones return to comedy in the darkly hilarious 1970s Hollywood spoof The Comeback Trail. Directed by George Gallow (Midnight Run), it’s the story of a schlock movie producer (DeNiro) in serious debt to a murderous mobster (Freeman), who comes up with a way to score a quick insurance payout when he casts an over-the-hill Western actor (Jones) in his new movie, and plans to have him “accidentally” killed on set. Based on Carter Sickel’s acclaimed novel by the same name.

Director Braden King’s The Evening Hour (Tuesday, Oct. 13) is a gorgeously filmed examination of a small mountain community in peril, as a mining company threatens to literally crumble the town’s existence.

Take Me to the River New Orleans (Wednesday, Oct. 14), by Martin Shore, is a work-in-progress musical performance/documentary that stands as a sequel to Shore’s 2014 film Take Me to the River, which was set in Memphis. Moving from the streets of the Big Easy to the recording studios, the film captured the final performances of the Neville Brothers and Doctor John.

Oscar-winner Frances McDormand appears in Chloé Zhao’s Nomadland (Oct. 15) as a woman who hits the road in her van, along with several hundred other roamers who travel the American Southwest living outside the norms of so-called “society.”

Marking the 40th anniversary of the release of Star Wars, Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, the single-best Star Wars movie of them all (go ahead, fight us) gets its own drive-in movie screening (naturally), on Friday, Oct. 16 at 7:30pm.

And closing out 2020 will be the drive-in movie presentation of the Telluride fav The Bee Gees: How Can You Mend a Broken Heart (Saturday, Oct. 17), by director Frank Miller. It’s a massive, disco-drenched documentary about the iconic ’70s band, including the full story of how they turned falsetto-singing ensembles into the sexiest thing since The Four Seasons.

In addition to its outdoor presentation, Broken Heart will be offered as a streaming option—as are the vast majority of this year’s offerings—for festival watchers to view at home. Other drive-in titles simultaneously available for streaming include Take Me to the River New Orleans  and The Evening Hour.

Of the 100-plus films and shorts being offered this year, the drive-in movies are the closest to “normal,” in-person movie-going activities. Every other event will take place in the MVFF’s virtual Streaming Room, which functions as an access pass to watch most films or activities between their initial screening time/date and midnight on the festival’s closing night.

Included in the film festival are the popular filmmaker Tributes and Spotlights, which boast some heavy-hitters this year. Connected, in most cases, with films being premiered, the lineup of stars who will be joining in conversation (some pre-taped, some live) include Viola Davis (Oct. 10, 6pm), Delroy Lindo (Oct. 11, 6pm), Kate Winslet (Oct. 12, 6pm), Regina King (Oct. 13, 6pm), Sophia Loren (Oct. 15, 6pm), Aaron Sorkin and the cast of his upcoming The Trial of the Chicago 7 (Oct. 17, 6pm), and of course, the aforementioned Judi Dench (Oct. 16, 6pm). But can we say just one more time … Sophia Loren!

She’ll discuss her legendary life and her upcoming film (her first in over a decade) The Life Ahead, based on the acclaimed novel The Life Before Us, by Romain Gary. Though it won’t screen at the festival (it’s appearing this fall on Netflix), there are well over 100 other streaming choices for fans to choose from this year.

One good thing about a streaming film festival is that seats tend not to sell out. Unless those seats are in your car, and it’s a drive-in movie at the lagoon, where space is definitely limited and some screenings are, indeed, selling out.

Sold-out shows? At the Mill Valley Film Festival?

Some things don’t change—even during pandemics.

For the full lineup and ticket purchases, visit MVFF.com.

School District Emails Reveal Details of Hasty Name Change Process

John Geluardi
-
28
School District Emails Reveal Details of Hasty Name Change Process

When Tamalpais Union High School District superintendent ordered the name Sir Francis Drake removed from the San Anselmo school on July 28 and temporarily re-named the 70-year-old institution “High School #1327,” it ignited a firestorm. 

Administrators were immediately accused of acting illegally by violating the Brown Act, the state law which requires public officials and agencies to obey certain open meeting requirements. 

But that’s only half the story. 

If the sudden name change wasn’t shocking enough, community members soon discovered the renaming would cost $430,000, a fact that was at first kept secret by Superintendent Tara Taupier and the Tamalpais Union High School Board of Trustees. State law requires the renaming funds come from sources other than taxpayer funds.    

Emails obtained from the district through a public records request show district officials rushed to rename Sir Francis Drake High School over the summer break while public pressure mounted. 

Teachers and administrators rushed during their summer vacation to pressure teachers to sign a “commitment statement” supporting the name change, while several teachers conspired to recruit and fund students to deface the school. Which occurred on July 27, days before staff  removed school signage on July 29.

The process began picking up speed in early July when school board members began pressuring Drake administrators to move as quickly as possible to avoid public objections and political fallout.

“We have a parcel tax in November, potentially,” wrote Trustee Cynthia Roenisch in a July 2 email. “And some may create friction if date (board approval of new name) is too far in future.”

Sociology teacher Dan Freeman took the lead on convincing teachers to sign a commitment statement. “If the community sees a wave of educators, many of who[m] the community knows and trusts, it makes a clear statement,” Freeman wrote in a July 8 email to Drake teachers. “I believe it increases the likelihood that others will follow.”

Freeman also prescribed a strategy of persuasion. “Our goal is unanimous support for the statement and we want to make sure everyone receives a personal appeal to add their name.”

Ultimately, 115 of the school’s 127 teachers signed the commitment statement.

One teacher wrote that she was uncomfortable with the pressure and several others were worried that an expensive renaming process during shaky economic times would put jobs at risk and hurt education programs, particularly for students of color.    

One teacher, speaking to the Pacific Sun on the condition of anonymity, said that if Drake, located in a wealthy district, receives a large grant for a non-educational project, the school would likely have difficulty getting future grants for needed education programs.

In a July 15 email, Freeman, who is a member of the school’s site council, suggested painting over campus signage and other emblems. In another email, English teacher Kendall Galli offered to organize students to carry out the hasty re-branding. “Like right now,” Galli wrote in an email. “Let’s tarp the ship with a camel colored tarp… and tarp or prime the back of the dugout…”

Several teachers advised against the defacing, but 12 days later school signs and logos were papered over and Taupier, the district superintendent, used the incident to invoke emergency authority, which she claimed allowed her to unilaterally remove the school’s name and replace it with a number.

“I felt it was time to remove the signage and pirate symbols at Drake,” Taupier said in a July 29 email to school board members after staff removed the school signage. “I was hoping to get our communication out prior to the news coverage but social media moved faster than I did.”

Art of Bolinas: West Marin Museum Goes Online

Charlie Swanson
-
0
Art of Bolinas: West Marin Museum Goes Online

Founded in 1983, the Bolinas Museum hosts Marin County’s premier collection of the art and history of coastal Marin, presenting exhibits and hosting events that express the rich, diverse array of local artists and crafters.

Free to the visitors who come from near and far to enjoy the small West Marin charm of Bolinas, the museum features five galleries and a courtyard that display both classic and contemporary works of fine art, photography, sculpture and more. To provide this free experience, the museum hosts special fundraising events throughout the year, most notably the annual Benefit Art Auction and Party each September, which provides nearly half of the museum’s annual operating costs.

This year, like everything else in Marin, the Bolinas Museum’s party plans were canceled in the wake of Covid-19. Instead, the museum’s 28th annual auction and party are moving online for a virtual fundraiser that includes online bidding as well as several other offerings that culminate in a virtual live auction on Saturday, Sept. 12.

The benefit auction is currently online, and visitors to the Bolinas Museum’s website can register to bid now as part of that auction and purchase virtual tickets to the upcoming live-auction night. Registration also enters visitors into the museum’s first-ever “Week of Giving,” featuring daily prize drawings taking place Sept. 6–12.

The “Week of Giving” is the museum’s way of thanking the public for their continued support, and daily prize giveaways will include a limited-edition framed print of Gertrude Southworth’s 1901 Bolinas Beach photograph (pictured), a handmade sail bag from local designer Susan Hoff, organic products from Bolinas’ own Amanda Ross Skin Care, a $250 gift certificate to Bolinas Hardware and more. Everyone who registers to bid, purchases a ticket to the virtual live auction or donates to the online auction is entered into the drawings.

The Bolinas Museum is also raising funds to secure a rare and extraordinary photograph, “Earthrise Seen for the First Time By Human Eyes,” photographed by astronaut William Anders during the Apollo 8 mission on Dec. 24, 1968. Renowned photographer and Bolinas resident Michael Light worked with NASA archives to create the large, dramatic black-and-white image of the Earth rising over the Moon as part of his first book and exhibition project, “Full Moon,” in 1999. This photograph was one of many recently featured in the Bolinas Museum’s 2018 exhibition “Cosmic Wonders,” and Light has offered to donate the historic photograph to the museum’s collection if the museum can raise at least $10,000 before Sept. 15.

Every dollar counts, and the museum is asking generous patrons to digitally raise those virtual auction paddles as part of the online fundraising efforts that will allow the museum to continue presenting cultural events and exhibits, as well as maintain its collection of over 3,000 historical photographs, archival materials and items of historical significance from the times of the coast Miwok to present day, and over 250 artworks by coastal Marin artists from the late 1800s onward.

Bolinas Museum’s Benefit Art Auction runs now through Sept. 15, with a virtual live auction on Sept. 12 at 6:30pm. Register and bid online now at Bolinasmuseum.org.

Marin Sanctuary Marks 75 Years of Arts and Gardens

Charlie Swanson
-
0
Marin Sanctuary Marks 75 Years of Arts and Gardens

Even in picturesque Marin County, the Marin Art & Garden Center stands out. The 11-acre property in the town of Ross is an oasis of floral beauty and historic buildings, and the nonprofit organization that owns and operates the center hosts year-round events and programs on the grounds, including performances from resident theater company the Ross Valley Players.

This summer, as the country stays shut down due to Covid-19, the Marin Art & Garden Center remains open to visitors on foot or on bicycle who are welcomed to safely enjoy the spacious gardens for some much-needed respite. This month, the center celebrates its 75th anniversary, and Marin Art & Garden Center Executive Director Antonia Adezio hopes the grounds remain a fixture of Marin for many years to come.

“We’ve been here for 75 years and the world is a very different place, of course,” Adezio says.

The gardens were originally formed at the end of World War II by the women members of the Marin Conservation League, who also helped save Angel Island and Tomales Bay, among other Marin locales.

“(The Marin Conservation League) were very committed to the natural environment and the environment for people in the North Bay,” Adezio says. “We have that legacy, and there’s also the legacy of the groups that have come together to present programming and arts at the center, and that tradition is alive and well today.”

Working with the center for five years, Adezio is the nonprofit’s first professional executive director for many years, and she is helping raise the center’s profile along with expert horticulturist and garden manager Steven Schwager.

“He’s really taken hold of the gardens,” Adezio says. “People who come and see it now say, ‘I’ve been visiting here for 30 years and it’s never looked like this.’ And they’re right.”

Still, the massive property runs on a tight budget, and Adezio describes the nonprofit running the grounds as a small organization that does a lot with a little.

“We’re working to build our team and keep developing the garden for people to come and enjoy it but also to learn from it,” she says.

In light of the 75-year anniversary, Adezio invites Marin residents to look at the Marin Art & Garden Center with new eyes and to revisit the distinctive and charming gardens and buildings that were designed by mid-century master architects such as Thomas Church.

As the gardens remain open for foot traffic, the organization is also bolstering its presence online with its virtual art exhibition, “Rooted in Wonder,” featuring a video tour of works by painter Frances McCormack and interdisciplinary artist Miya Hannan. 

“We have seen that during the pandemic it’s become more important to have a place like the gardens, and people are appreciating that they’ve been able to stay open and let people spend some time in nature,” Adezio says. “We want people to know that we are still here for them, they can visit and we hope to be able to gather again before long.”

Marin Art & Garden Center is located at 30 Sir Francis Drake Blvd., Ross. Open daily, foot traffic allowed sunrise to sunset, parking lot is available 10am to 4pm. Free admission and parking. maringarden.org.

North Bay Protests Continue to Call for Social Justice

Charlie Swanson
-
0
North Bay Protests Continue to Call for Social Justice

It’s been one month since George Floyd’s death on May 25, after Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd’s neck for more than eight minutes.

In the weeks that have followed, a nationwide movement of protest against police brutality and social and racial justice has spread to all 50 states.

The North Bay’s ongoing protests and rallies have hit major cities like Santa Rosa and San Rafael, as well as the smaller locales such as Healdsburg and Mill Valley, with events honoring Black lives, celebrations of Pride month and other socially conscious movements.

This month-long wave of protests is not slowing down, and the final week of June is packed with a schedule of peaceful events in Marin, Sonoma and Napa County.

The gatherings get started today, Thursday, June 25, with a Mill Valley Peaceful Protest beginning at 1:30pm. The protest march will kick off at the Safeway parking lot at 1 Camino Alto, and move down Miller Ave near Tamalpais High School, before traveling downtown to Old Mill Park. The event encourages participants to bring Black Lives Matter signs, and guest speakers are slated to appear. Face coverings are required and water and snacks will be provided.

Also today, June 25, the Spahr Center hosts a Rally for LGBTQ+ and Racial Justice at 4:30pm in downtown Fairfax. The Spahr Center is Marin County’s only nonprofit serving the LGBTQ community and everyone in the county living with and affected by HIV. Today’s rally takes a stand against incidents of racism and transphobia that has occurred in Fairfax recently.

Notably, 17-year-old transgender teen Jasper Lauter was verbally harassed last Saturday in Fairfax by a man and a woman who were also harassing a Black Lives Matter bake sale. The incident was caught on video and shows the man and woman mocking and insulting Lauter, who posted the video to his Twitter account.

Today’s Rally for LGBTQ+ and Racial Justice begins at the downtown steps in Fairfax and participants are asked to wear face coverings and follow social distance guidelines. Following the rally in Fairfax, the Spahr Center is leading a caravan of cars to San Rafael, where a peaceful gathering to stop racism is happening at 1050 Court Street.

Other North Bay protests planned for the week include a Black Lives Matter Meet-up on Friday, June 26, at Walnut Park in Petaluma. The protest begins at 1pm and participants are to wear all black. Protest signs are encouraged and face coverings are mandatory.

On Saturday, June 27, Santa Rosa’s Junior College campus once again becomes the scene for a major protest event. The Cycle for Life will be peaceful Critical Mass-style bike protest that plans to ride from the SRJC lawn on Mendocino Avenue through town to Old Courthouse Square in a yet-to-be-determined route of approximately six miles. Non-bikers can also attend, and the event kicks off with a protest sign-making session on the SRJC lawn at noon before the 1pm ride and march.

Once the ride is over, speakers, performers, and vendors will be on hand in Old Courthouse Square to keep the event going strong into the evening. The Cycle for Life will support Black Lives Matter and Pride, and the family-friendly event is also requiring social distancing and face coverings to be mindful of Covid-19.

Also on Saturday, June 27, the Bake Sale for Social Justice is back on in Fairfax, happening at 100 Bolinas Road near the Fairfax Community Farmers Market from 4pm to 6pm. All money raised at the bake sale will be donated to the Equal Justice Institute, The Spahr Center and Trevor Project. Organizers ask that people wear a mask and follow state social distancing guidelines.

Sunday, June 28, begins with Pride Is a Protest, a rally and march in Napa organized by The Peoples Collective for Change. Meeting at Napa’s City Hall at 10:30am, the rally is in honor of LGBTQ demonstrators who essentially founded the gay rights movement with the Stonewall Riots, which took place in New York City beginning on June 28, 1969.

The Napa protest will also stand in solidarity with black, brown and Indigenous people, and PCC Napa hopes to demonstrate that LGBTQ people and their allies are committed to racial and social justice.

Also on Sunday, June 28, Fairfax Parkade is the setting for an afternoon Anti-Racism Rally to reimagine public safety and stop the spread of racism locally. The rally begins at the Parkade lot between Sir Francis Drake Blvd and Broadway Boulevard at Noon with a community discussion and guest speakers and performers.

Sunday, June 28, wraps up with an evening Black Lives Matter Vigil at Mill Valley City Hall. The event begins at 9pm and is followed by a movie screening, and organizers ask participants to bring blankets and sleeping bags in addition to face coverings.

Guide Dogs for the Blind Has the Good News You Need

Charlie Swanson
-
0
Guide Dogs for the Blind Has the Good News You Need

It seems difficult to find any uplifting headlines in the news these days, and the coronavirus pandemic is not making things any easier for many who have already faced down fires, floods and other woes in the North Bay recently.

Fortunately, there is still good in this world. Case in point: Dogs exist.

No one knows the positive power of puppies better than the folks at San Rafael’s Guide Dogs for the Blind, and the organization aims to spread that positivity with a new Puparazzi Photo Contest.

The online contest is an interactive fundraiser, letting users submit their favorite photos of their guide dogs from GDB or just their favorite pooch. Users then vote for their favorite photos with a small donation that benefits GDB, and winners can earn a spot in GDB’s 2020-2021 calendar.

Head over to the contest’s website, and check out the complete rules and regulations. The contest runs from April 2 to 16. Vote now and vote often to support Guide Dogs for the Blind and those they serve.

These Local Theaters Will Screen Films In Your Home

Charlie Swanson
-
0
These Local Theaters Will Screen Films In Your Home

While movie theaters remain closed during the shelter-in-place ordeal, local film purveyors are taking to the web to screen movies for those who are hunkering down at home.

In Marin County, the Smith Rafael Film Center is closed, though the theater is thriving online with the Rafael@ Home series featuring several films available to rent and stream at home, including Brazilian genre-bending, award-winner Bacurau and breakout drama Saint Frances. Films coming to the rental series includes intimate documentary Once Were Brothers: Robbie Robertson and The Band and local filmmaker Nancy Kelly’s acclaimed Thousand Pieces of Gold.

Downtown Larkspur’s historic art deco Lark Theater is also closed in the wake of Marin County’s sheltering order, and they’ve responded with their own Lark Streams service. The nonprofit venue is working with top film distributors to develop the online programming, which currently includes Academy Award-nominated Polish film Corpus Christi and the supernatural comedy Extra Ordinary coming soon.

In Sonoma County, the Alexander Valley Film Society’s Shelter in Place Series is gaining an audience with several offerings such as online filmmaker webinars, home screenings and a weekly Wednesday Film & Food series that encourages combining the at-home screening with local takeout. Upcoming online events include a Film Noir Q&A and Discussion with film critic and Barndiva owner Jil Hales on Sunday, April 5, at 2pm. AV Film Society is even hosting online educational classes for kids who are sheltering, with a film editing course happening right now.

In Napa County, the Cameo Cinema, closed for the time being, has been busy curating its own Virtual Cinema with several titles to rent, including some hard-to-find international films such as acclaimed Romanian crime comedy The Whistlers and  German historic thriller Balloon.

Click these links above to find out how to rent the movies from each theater/ film group. You’ll be taken to their websites to purchase and watch the film, with a portion of ticket sales helping to support each group.

Where California Stands with Coronavirus Testing Right Now

Pacific Sun
-
0
Where California Stands with Coronavirus Testing Right Now

By Rachel Becker and Ana B. Ibarra, CalMatters

Coronavirus testing has been plagued by confusion, delays and chaos, with the number of available, usable tests far outstripped by the need.

The situation, healthcare providers and experts say, has impaired their ability to know how many people have the virus—but a significantly larger number, they suspect, than that confirmed by state and federal officials.

Gov. Gavin Newsom says, however, that help is on the way, from university medical centers, private labs, the tech sector and more.

So where are we on this? Who can get tested and where exactly should you go? If you do get a hold of a test, is it going to cost anything? Here’s what you need to know.

How many tests does Calif. have?

On Sunday, Newsom said California has conducted 8,316 tests, and has the capacity to run just short of 9,000 more. On Monday evening, he said that the state’s 19 public health labs have increased tests “by a few hundred” over the previous 24 hours. Still, he said, “That clearly is not enough.”

By Tuesday, the number of public health labs conducting testing had increased to 21. And the state has also turned to academic medical centers as well as private companies to fill in those gaps. UC San Francisco, UC Los Angeles, UC San Diego, and Stanford University are all offering tests for the novel coronavirus—and UC Davis is currently racing to get three different types of tests online.

Nam Tran, associate professor and senior director of clinical pathology at UC Davis, said one of the tests that runs on an SUV-sized instrument created by Roche Diagnostics should come online within weeks and is expected to churn out 1400 results per day.

He called it a “game changer.”

As for private firms, Quest Diagnostics has been running 1,200 tests a day out of its lab in San Juan Capistrano, Newsom said Monday—and could ramp up to 10,000 tests per day across the country with the addition of another laboratory by the end of this week.

Should I get tested? 

Californians are still facing delays, or no tests at all. And a surge of demand for testing supplies—including swabs, kits for extracting the virus’s genetic material, and personal protective equipment for healthcare workers—threatens efforts to scale up tests.

At a time of limited resources, testing should be reserved for people with moderate to severe symptoms and for those with underlying health conditions, said Michael Romero, a program manager with Placer County’s public health emergency preparedness team.

Symptoms can show up between two days and two weeks after exposure to the virus, and include fever, cough, and trouble breathing, according to the CDC.

“Our guidance is if you have mild symptoms, just stay home, testing would help you know whether you have it or not, but it wouldn’t change anything,” because there is currently no treatment, he said.

Can I get tested?

One challenge is the patchwork of guidance about whom to test first across California’s counties, private testing companies, and health systems, according to Kat DeBurgh, executive director of the Health Officers Association of California.

Guidelines may vary by county because of the uneven spread of the coronavirus, and local public health departments are required to approve the tests run through their labs, DeBurgh said. She’s calling for more guidance from the state about whom to prioritize, she said, to help with the crush of calls that local public health officers are triaging.

In Los Angeles, for instance, the public health lab “will test specimens from high risk patients requiring a rapid public health response if they test positive,” according to guidance from the county. Any other patients with fever and symptoms of a respiratory illness who may have been exposed should be tested by a commercial lab instead.

At Kaiser Permanente, clinicians decide who to test, spokesman Marc Brown told CalMatters in an email. Tests are only available to Kaiser members with a doctor’s order.

Priority goes to hospitalized patients as well as people with symptoms who also have additional risk factors such as being over 60, heart or lung disease, or being immunocompromised. Anyone exposed to someone with a confirmed or suspected case of the virus, or who recently traveled somewhere affected by it, will also be prioritized.

Where can I get tested?

People should first check with their doctor to ask whether they’re collecting specimens, said Romero with Placer County. If their doctor is not doing testing, they can try calling their local urgent care. Romero said people should not go to the emergency department just for testing. That is what would cause unnecessary over-flooding in the ER, he said.

Some counties, such as Los Angeles and San Diego, ask that people who do not have a primary care provider call the county’s 2-1-1 line for information on where they can find providers with tests. Sutter Health, for example, asks that its patients schedule a video visit with a doctor to check whether they meet testing criteria. If they do, then doctors make arrangements with patients about specific locations where they can go for testing.

Some health systems have also opened drive-through testing for its members.

Are tests free? What if I’m uninsured?

Earlier this month, Newsom announced that all screening and testing fees would be waived for about 24 million Californians. That includes co-pays and deductibles for a hospital and doctor office visit associated with the test. But if a person is sick and needs further treatment and care, that cost is not required to be waived.

Newsom’s order does not apply to people who work for large employers and whose private health plans are regulated by the federal government. That said, an emergency coronavirus response bill pending in Congress would require that testing and all related fees be covered by all forms of insurance without out-of-pocket costs for the patient.

The California Department of Public Health has said that people who are uninsured and have symptoms should contact their county for information on how to get tested.

Some health clinics, like the AltaMed group in Southern California, are waiving test fees even for patients who are uninsured, but again, tests are only given to people who are showing symptoms. Also, clinics can help enroll patients in any available county program that may cover fees, and clinics themselves often charge on a sliding scale, which means costs are based on a person’s ability to pay.

Testing through the Verily screening pilot program screening in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties is a philanthropic effort and also free to the public.

What’s the deal with Verily’s triage? 

Confusion has dogged the rollout of a triage site aimed at directing concerned Californians to testing. At first, President Donald Trump said Friday that “Google has 1,700 engineers working” on a screening website that would be “very quickly done.”

In fact, it was Verily, the life sciences subsidiary of Google’s parent company Alphabet, behind the effort, and the site was not a nationwide screening tool but one specifically for Californians in the Bay Area. Newsom announced the triage website on Sunday, where people can fill out a questionnaire and schedule an appointment at one of two test sites in Santa Clara and San Mateo.

So far, demand outstrips availability: 174,000 people visited the website in the first day since it opened, Newsom said Monday. 174 people filled out the questionnaire. Fifty people signed up for specific appointments—and 30 people actually showed up. Newsom said he expects testing to grow by 200 to 400 tests per site, and in a press briefing on Tuesday, he projected the Verily mobile test sites had conducted 320 tests that day.

Newsom said the whole idea is to expand these mobile test sites beyond the Bay Area. “The good news is operationally, things went fairly well, not perfectly, but fairly well.”

What will this test actually tell me?

The current test for the novel coronavirus looks for the virus itself by sniffing out the virus’s genetic code. These tests can tell you if you have an active infection. What they can not tell you is whether you’ve been infected and recovered.

“Something that is missing from our knowledge of this virus is how many people are exposed to it,” said Philip Felgner, director of the vaccine research and development center at the UC Irvine School of Medicine. That data is key for understanding the breadth of the outbreak, and just how lethal it really is.

How can we track the virus?

Researchers across the world are working on developing another kind of test—one that looks for signs of the immune response to the virus, called antibodies. This kind of test—a serological test—would allow scientists to search out people who have recovered from less severe or asymptomatic cases of the virus who never ended up in a hospital.

That could help scientists identify chains of viral transmission, home in on hotspots of the outbreak, and would be a first step towards a fuller understanding of why some people recover more readily than others. STAT has reported that the CDC is working on developing two of these tests, and Science has reported that scientists in Singapore used a serological test to track the outbreak.

Here in California, Felgner at UC Irvine has teamed up with a company called SinoBiological to create tests that can hunt for antibodies to nine different infectious agents including other coronaviruses like ones that cause SARS and MERS, as well as viruses that lead to similar symptoms, like influenza.

Felgner and a research institute in San Francisco called Vitalant intend to validate these tests and other, similar ones, by running them with leftover samples of donated blood from Seattle. Another test will look for the kinds of antibodies that can neutralize infections, giving a sense for how effective the immune response actually is.

Michael Busch, director of the Vitalant Research Institute, clarifies that these tests aren’t to screen the blood. “We don’t screen blood purposefully for this virus, it’s not a transfusion transmissible agent,” Busch said.

The goal, instead, is to survey communities to find out just how far the virus spreads, and for how long. “What it does show you is how many people were infected,” Busch said. That changes the calculus for what we understand about how often the virus causes severe symptoms, or kills people—and where exactly to be looking for it.

CalMatters.org is a nonpartisan media venture explaining policies and politics.

Stay Home

Will Carruthers
-
0
Stay Home

News breaks quickly these days.

In an address on Sunday afternoon, Gov. Gavin Newsom strongly recommended that all bars, wine tasting rooms, nightclubs and breweries in the state close for the coming weeks. Additionally, Californians older than 65 and those with preexisting conditions—the demographics most vulnerable to COVID-19—should quarantine themselves, Newsom recommended.

On Monday, seven Bay Area jurisdictions, including Marin and San Francisco counties, issued a “shelter-in-place” order, effective until at least Monday, April 7. The order comes as the number of reported cases in the Bay Area continues to increase. 

By Sunday, March 15, there were 258 confirmed cases of COVID-19 with four deaths within the seven jurisdictions covered by the order. The number in the Bay Area accounts for more than half of the total cases in California.

Moreover, according to a press release announcing the decision, public officials expect the current number of laboratory-confirmed cases to “increase markedly” as more test kits become available in the coming days and weeks.

The order, which is available in full at the Marin County Health and Human Services’ website (coronavirus.marinhhs.org), includes some exemptions for “essential” activities and businesses.

Business exemptions include healthcare operations, grocery stores, gas stations, banks, hardware stores and plumbers and some other service providers.

“While the goal is to limit groups congregating together in a way that could further spread the virus, it is not a complete social shutdown,” Dr. Matt Willis, Marin County’s public health officer, said in a statement announcing the decision. “You can still complete your most essential outings or even engage in outdoor activity, so long as you avoid close contact.”

Economic Impacts

The spread of the virus and related business closures are revealing deep, often unexamined economic inequalities in the country. So far, it’s not clear whether government efforts to patch the holes will be anywhere near adequate.

In an effort to mitigate one of the expected impacts of lost wages, several statewide groups are pushing government agencies to implement protections for renters during the crisis.

San Francisco implemented a temporary moratorium on evictions on Friday, March 13, and lawmakers are considering similar legislation at the state level. (The San Francisco legislation specifies that rent payments are delayed until the end of the crisis, not forgiven.) Multiple activist groups are asking local governments to take a similar step but, so far, they have not.

On Monday, the Sheriff’s departments in San Francisco and Alameda County announced they would not enforce eviction orders during the COVID-19 crisis.

On Monday evening, Newsom passed the issue back to local governments. He signed an executive order which “authorizes local governments to halt evictions for renters and homeowners, slows foreclosures, and protects against utility shutoffs for Californians affected by COVID-19.” 

Crucially, the order does not require local jurisdictions to halt evictions and mortgage payments and “does not relieve a tenant from the obligation to pay rent.” Instead, it eases the way for local government to pass temporary eviction bans of their own.

Research shows that even the threat of eviction causes negative mental and physical health impacts.

Furthermore, if evicted, families and workers could wind up living on the street, adding to the state’s already-large population of shelterless people.

Volkswagen Presents Warren Miller’s Timeless

Pacific Sun
-
0
Volkswagen Presents Warren Miller’s Timeless

Year after year, ski and snowboard enthusiasts of all ages look forward to the coming of winter. This fall, Warren Miller Entertainment (WME) confirms that the joys of winter are eternal with its 70th full-length feature film, Timeless, presented by Volkswagen.

Much of the world has changed since Warren Miller started making ski films in 1949, but the passion of snowriders across the globe has stayed the same. Timeless emulates the enduring spirit of winter and gives a deserving nod to the past seven decades of ski cinematography while focusing on the future. Get ready to kick off your winter with a cast of fresh faces, inspirational locales, plenty of laughs and camaraderie, and a classic blend of the new and old.

“It’s incredible, looking at the fact that this is number 70,” says narrator Jonny Moseley. “Every year I still get that same feeling I got when I was a kid watching ski movies. I enjoy watching them now more than ever, and that is what Timeless celebrates.”

From the mountains of British Columbia, across the steeps of the Colorado Rockies, to the rooftop of the European Alps, Timeless explores winter stoke across the globe. Along for the ride are more new athletes than ever before, including female phenom and Jackson Hole’s 2019 Queen of Corbet’s, Caite Zeliff, Olympic mogul skier Jaelin Kauf, Baker Boyd, Connery Lundin, Austin Ross, and Canadian World Cup ski racer, Erin Mielzynski. Plus, returning to the screen are industry veterans Rob DesLauries, Lorraine Huber, Tyler Ceccanti, Marcus Caston, Amie Engerbretson and Forrest Jillson, as well as ski legend Glen Plake.

Timeless will premiere in Northern California on November 6 and play many venues through November 26. All ski and snowboard fans, young and old, are invited to come together to carry on the legacy of the official kickoff to winter. Film attendees will enjoy lift ticket deals and gear discounts from WME resort and retail partners. Plus, all moviegoers are entered into nightly door prize drawings and the national sweepstakes to win gear, swag, and ski trips. Volkswagen presents Warren Miller’s Timeless is more than a ski and snowboard film, it’s an experience 70 years in the making.

Warren Miller’s “Timeless” Official Trailer | Presented by Volkswagen from Warren Miller Entertainment on Vimeo.

Featured Athletes
AJ Oliver | Glen Plake | Brenna Kelleher | Jim Ryan | Austin Ross | Forrest Jillson

Cam Fitzpatrick | Caite Zeliff | Rob DesLauriers | Kit DesLauriers | Grace DesLauriers
Tia DesLauriers | Jess McMillan | Ryland Bell | Morgan Hebert | Rob Kingwill | Baker Boyd
Ian Morrison | Marcus Caston | Aurélien Ducroz | Mattias Hargin | Erin Mielzynski
Tyler Ceccanti | Amie Engerbretson | Connery Lundin | Jaelin Kauf | Lorraine Huber
Christian Løvenskiold | Cooper Branham

Film Destinations
British Columbia | Wyoming | Colorado | France | Switzerland | Austria

North Bay Shows

This post has been sponsored by Warren Miller Entertainment. If you’d like to sponsor an existing or future post, please contact our advertising team.

Super Soy Me

James Knight
-
0
Super Soy Me

Like any typical chump, I planned to start an ambitious new diet on New Year’s Day. Fine, the day after New Year’s Day.

The diet was strict, but had just one simple rule: Eat food, mostly frozen, as much as I want, on a $100 per week budget. And here’s the kicker: Eat only food that’s made by Amy’s Kitchen, the privately held natural foods manufacturer based in Petaluma. Yes, it was a bold plan.

Day 1: I load a frozen, gluten-free tofu scramble breakfast wrap in the microwave oven, starting the day’s calorie count at 300. At lunch it’s a chili mac bowl, 420 calories, and later a spinach pizza pocket sandwich, 280 calories. Dinner brings a longtime favorite to the table; veggie loaf with mashed potatoes, peas, and carrots. But those 340 calories don’t feel like enough, so I round out the evening with a spinach pizza snack, and 380 additional calories.

Day 2: I’m a little hungover. Ugh, what happened?

The Perils of a Cruelty-Free Diet

I’m on this diet partly to see if man can live on Amy’s alone. While it’s a controlled experiment, it’s not an inhumane experiment, so I did not forswear the enjoyment of a few glasses of wine with dinner, before dinner, or after dinner. Besides, eliminating the beverage variable might have skewed the results, right? Instead, I opt for certified organic wine, in the spirit of Amy’s Kitchen, whose listed ingredients are nearly all prefaced with “organic,” save the sea salt and black pepper.

The problem: after unpacking five frozen meals from five cardboard cartons, I’d only packed in 1,720 calories on that first day. No doubt the wine hit a little harder because that’s well below the 2,000 daily calories that nutrition labels are based on, or the recommended 2,400 calorie diet of a moderately active male of my age, and weight.

Ah, that weight. The other reason for the diet was to lose a little of it. I demur from saying what that weight is, lest some readers then wish to knock me around a bit, but suffice it to say that I feel like the image of some kind of corpulent, late career Orson Welles. (More like Audrey Hepburn, remarked a more portly friend a few years back. That smarts a bit, but then again—such style!) What’s that about body image self-acceptance? Stuff self-acceptance in a cheeseburger. I demand to get back that flat belly that I haven’t seen since age 29, and I’ll try any diet in that service. The allure of Amy’s is the quick and easy calorie counting, printed right on the box, and de facto portion control. The convenience of simply reheating frozen food, too, leaves more time for that moderate activity.

Lesson learned, on to Day 2: Country bake breakfast, 420 calories; veggie sausage, 55 calories; brown rice and vegetables bowl, 260 calories; meatless Italian sausage, mushroom and olive pizza, 930 calories. Yes, I know the pizza is supposed to be three separate servings, but the day’s total is only 1,665 calories. Yet I feel stuffed. Might be because I’m not used to consuming so many carbohydrates (see the surprise tally at the end of the article), and that’s a criticism I’ve heard of products like Amy’s: organic or not, isn’t it too high in sodium, too stuffed with carbohydrates, like other processed snack foods? When I announced my dietary goal to someone at the company (who shan’t be named), in fact, the response was: “But what about vegetables?”

In an era when consumers are being advised to eat whole foods, and lower on the food chain, Amy’s occupies an interesting space in between the good reputation of organic foods and the bad rap on processed foods. Frozen foods have taken some heat since the “TV dinner” days of my childhood, when, notwithstanding mom’s cooking being the best, it was a special treat to have those tin foil tray dinners once a week. Meanwhile, Amy’s Kitchen, launched by Rachel and Andy Berliner in 1987 (the original conceit was that they couldn’t find any time-saving convenience foods that were of homemade quality, after the birth of their daughter, Amy, who is now a co-owner in the company), has puffed up from one pot pie sold in what used to be called “health food” stores in Northern California and Oregon, to 260 products sold in megastores the likes of Target, in 29 countries. Revenue in 2017 totaled $500 million.

Can they stay true to home-cooked ideals at such a scale? I’ve got to get behind the kale curtain, and see how the organic tofu sausage is made.

Amy’s, Can You Hear Me?

Day 3: I’ve had no luck trying to contact the public relations desk at Amy’s, so, fueled only by their breakfast scramble, 360 calories, and veggie sausage, 55 calories, I set out by bicycle for the company headquarters in Petaluma. Am I helping to offset the carbon footprint of these packaged meals, or is their economy of scale inherently more efficient than my home stovetop? Will there someday be fewer veal crates, like the ones that I’m passing by on Stony Point Road, because of vegetarian options like Amy’s provides? These are things I think of on my ride. Besides that biking in heavy traffic sucks veggie meatballs.

It wasn’t enough. On Lakeville Highway, a few blocks short, and fatigued, I have to turn back or else miss the last SMART train back to Santa Rosa until late afternoon.

Breakthrough at the Drive-Thru

I get a new idea on the train, remembering the Amy’s Drive-Thru restaurant in Rohnert Park. It’s a long shot, but at the very least, after ordering a single veggie cheeseburger and fries (alas, I am not asked to “super-size” my order to the signature double patty “Amy” burger), I can ask for any kind of help at the register. I’m in luck—Dave Wolfgram, president of Amy’s Drive-Thru Restaurants, is working on his laptop a few tables over. He seems genuinely concerned and promises to hook me up with HQ.

Although this joint is as bustling as it was on my first visit over three years ago (“Understanding Amy’s,” Sept. 9, 2015), Amy’s has rolled out their takeover of the fast food nation at, well, an organic pace. An outpost in SFO (Amy’s “fly-thru”?) is scheduled for July, with a Corte Madera drive-thru opening in 2020.

How the Organic Tofu Sausage is Made

I’m in! I meet Paul Schiefer for a tour of Amy’s flagship production facility, which has been located on Santa Rosa’s Northpoint Parkway since the early days. Schiefer, who is a nephew to the Berliners, grew up with the business, and is now senior director of sustainability.

On the way to the dressing room where I’ll don a smock, hairnet and beard net, I’m already distracted by a novel sight: two vending machines in the break room are stocked with Amy’s entrées. They’re sold to employees for just $1 to $1.50. But the Blue Sky organic cola in the adjacent vending machine, Schiefer admits, isn’t as popular with employees as Pepsi. No strict diets here: there’s a Frito-Lay option, too.

Workers are everywhere on the plant floor, monitoring computer screens, carting multi-level tray carts here and there. Look, there goes my old friend, the lentil loaf! Over there, veggie sausage, destined for a country bake. In one room, which is as big as most winery cellars I see, pinto beans cascade in an industrial waterfall, while a worker tends to a steaming kettle perched high in the middle distance.

A smaller room houses one of the largest tofu making facilities on the West Coast, according to Schiefer. Here are whole soybeans, soaked and removed of fiber, which goes to a dairy. Then, hot soy milk pours forth, and further down the line, blocks of fresh tofu, some 9,400 pounds per day, are cut and sent on to their rendezvous with organic oats, organic bulgar wheat and organic onions and more to, yes, make the tofu sausage.

On the kettle deck, an enchilada sauce has just been made—we see it later on down the line, where freshly frozen entreés clank off the conveyor belt. Tomato sauces are made from fresh tomatoes. Vegetables such as broccoli may be fresh, or flash frozen, since there are only two harvests a year from their supplier. “We’d rather get it all fresh, in season, than go to the ends of the earth to bring it in,” says Schiefer.

In the burrito room, bean and cheese filling plops onto tortillas, made fresh in the room next door, in a way that my minder from the marketing department doesn’t wish me to photograph. But it’s all hand work after that. One employee tells me, still folding while turning away from the assembly line to explain, that she’s been honing her technique for 21 years, shaping the filling, and folding six or more ways in a flash of hand movements I can hardly follow.

One thinks of frozen foods as the ultimate deracinated, non-local product. But here, I have the dissonant revelation that, at least for the North Bay, this is truly local. All this time, my frozen bean burrito (and another 160,000 of them per day) has been hand-rolled just across town. (Soups are made in Idaho, however; pizza in Medford, Ore.)

The Results

At the end of a week, I had to stop the experiment. Not necessarily because I felt “over stuffed” on just 1,940 calories, as I noted on Day 6, or “strangely tired” on Day 7. My weight jumped up at first, but I ended up a few pounds lighter. Still, I would have been willing to carry out a more rigorous one-month experiment. But if I didn’t bust my waistline, I busted my budget: $140 for seven days.

I should note that the company does not endorse an all-Amy’s diet. Instead, they offer meal plans on their website incorporating fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts, and smoothies, most with just one Amy’s product per day. That said, I felt that I might have had a real serving of veggies with their Asian-inspired entrées, like the dumplings in savory Hoisin sauce, and for a frozen food, they tasted fresh enough. And in the harvest casserole bowl, there’s surely close to a half-cup of sweet potatoes, kale, and Swiss chard—it’d be hard to excuse all that quinoa otherwise.

According to Schiefer, I’m correct in my assessment that while the frozen food business is stagnant in general, Amy’s is bucking the trend, and has been growing faster than the category for years. Still, some of the traditional tray-style dinner styles have been pulled off the line: RIP, Southern meal, chili and corn bread, and good ol’ veggie steak and gravy.

All told, I ate not more than 1,700 calories per day. The protein count averaged 67 grams daily, not bad, and carbohydrates actually averaged less than the Daily Value, at 200. But sodium indeed hit more than 3,200 milligrams per day, higher than the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendation of less than 2,400, but a little under the average American’s intake. Amy’s does offer low sodium versions with less than half that of the typical entrée.

The next week I flipped a 180 and launched an ultra-low-carb diet of meat, cheese, and vegetables for the next month. I felt pretty good on it. And I gained back five pounds.

Warren Miller’s Face of Winter

Pacific Sun
-
0
Warren Miller’s Face of Winter

Winter is just around the corner, and Warren Miller Entertainment is ready to kick off the season with its 69th installment ski and snowboard film, Face of Winter, presented by Volkswagen. The late, great Warren Miller built his legacy capturing the essence of winter magic, and today that legacy launches the start of the ski and snowboard season every year. In the 69th feature film, celebrate the man who became known as the face of winter throughout the industry, and the places and people he influenced along the way.

This year, new and veteran athletes come together to pay tribute to the man who started it all, including Jonny Moseley, Marcus Caston, Seth Wescott, Forrest Jillson, Kaylin Richardson, Dash Longe, Anna Segal, Michael “Bird” Shaffer, and featured athletes of the U.S. Cross Country Ski Team, including gold medalist, Jessie Diggins. Watch as they visit some of Warren’s favorite places from Engleberg to Chamonix, British Columbia to Alaska, Chile, Iceland, New Zealand and more.

“The film is for anyone whose life (whether they realize it or not) was impacted by Warren Miller,” says WME Managing Director Andy Hawk. “We are all the face of winter—from the athletes to the audience to the locals in far-off destinations or even at our home mountain. Warren recognized this, and this year’s film celebrates that.”

All fans, young and old, are invited to come together and carry on the tradition of the official kickoff to winter during the 2018 national tour. Film attendees will enjoy lift ticket and gear savings from Warren Miller resort, retail, and other brand partners. And, all moviegoers will be entered to win nightly prizes like swag and ski vacations.

[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ProI36TvP6k[/embedyt]

Sponsors of the 2018 Warren Miller Tour
Volkswagen, Mount Gay Rum, L.L. Bean, Helly Hansen, Marmot, Switzerland Tourism, Ski Portillo, K2, Black Crows, Marker Dalbello Völkl USA, Blizzard Tecnica, and SKI Magazine.

Featured Athletes
Dash Longe | Jim Ryan | Forrest Jillson | Jess McMillan | Simon Hillis | Kaylin Richardson
Dennis Risvoll | Michael “Bird” Shaffer | Camille Jaccoux | Bruno Compagnet
Brennan Metzler | Francesca Pavillard-Cain | Amie Engerbretson | Jonny Moseley
Anna Segal | Kevin Bolger Paddy Caldwell | Sophie Caldwell | Jessie Diggins
Simi Hamilton | Ida Sargent | Marcus Caston Johan Jonsson | Rob Kingwill | Seth Wescott

Film Destinations
Alaska | British Columbia | Chamonix | Chile | Iceland
New Zealand | Switzerland | Washington

Local Shows
Wed., Nov. 7, 7:30pm – Palace of Fine Arts Theatre, San Francisco Buy Tickets
Thurs., Nov 8,  7:30pm – Palace of Fine Arts Theatre, San Francisco Buy Tickets
Fri, Nov. 16 7:30pm – Castro Theatre, San Francisco. $19pp. Buy Tickets
Sat, Nov. 17 8:00pm – Marin Center, San Rafael. $19pp. Buy Tickets
Fri, Nov. 23 7:30pm – Mystic Theatre, Petulma. $19pp. Buy Tickets

EVERYONE ATTENDING RECEIVES A FREE LIFT TICKET TO MOUNT SHASTA SKI PARK, PLUS TWO FOR ONE OFFERS FROM SQUAW VALLEY-ALPINE MEADOWS AND JACKSONHOLE! TICKETS ARE NOW ON SALE AT SPORTS BASEMENT.

This post has been sponsored by Warren Miller Entertainment. If you’d like to sponsor an existing or future post, please contact our advertising team.

Assault on Democracy: Novato Provides No Facts to Justify ‘Urgency Ordinance’

The Novato City Council called a special meeting and passed an urgency ordinance last week. With the wild weather warnings in Marin lately, one might think it had to do with a tsunami, tornado or atmospheric river.  Good guesses based on the purpose of an urgency ordinance: California law states a city may enact such an ordinance for “the immediate...
Read more

Fenced In: Federal Judge to Decide Future of Tomales Point Tule Elk Herd

After confining a herd of tule elk behind a fence at Tomales Point in Point Reyes National Seashore for 46 years, the park began removing the enclosure on Dec. 3 to allow the animals to roam free.  A restraining order forced the park to cease its efforts three days later. The whiplash chronology of last week’s events started Monday with Point...
Read more

Meditation Mess: Spirit Rock Sued for Discrimination

The former executive director of Spirit Rock Meditation Center filed a lawsuit against the renowned Marin nonprofit in June. Spirit Rock fired back two months later by filing a counter lawsuit. Allegations in the two lawsuits don’t seem to align with the spiritual organization’s mission of providing its flock with “teachings to manifest wisdom and compassion in all aspects of...
Read more

Officials in Marin Consider Camping Bans for Homeless People

Sausalito banned camping on public property in 2022 after it closed the only homeless encampment in the city. Fairfax and Novato are considering similar measures. Advocates for the homeless fear that if Fairfax and Novato adopt anti-camping policies, it could create a domino effect throughout Marin’s municipalities. In a county where shelters remain perpetually full, these bans could leave no...
Read more

Mining Minutiae: Marin’s Trivia Master Celebrates 40 Years

Pop the Champagne cork and raise a glass to Marin’s most learned man, Howard Rachelson. The brain behind the Pacific Sun’s “Trivia Café” and quizzes around the county celebrates his 40th year in the miscellaneous facts biz. Even after four decades, Rachelson effusively expresses his passion for trivia contests. Not only does he research and write all the questions for...
Read more

Marin Provides Support for Survivors of Suicide Loss

Sophia Balestreri lost her son to suicide in 2009.  “It’s unlike any other type of death,” she said. “It’s sudden. It’s shocking. People want to know why, and especially when it’s somebody young.” While Balestreri and her family struggled with the devastating loss, she sought out personal health and wellness resources. Services existed yet were difficult to find. Balestreri realized she...
Read more

Long-Awaited Sheriff’s Oversight Ordinance Approved

The Marin County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a controversial and long-awaited ordinance last week to initiate independent civilian oversight of the sheriff’s office. On Nov. 5, the supervisors gave a final nod to the ordinance and adopted it, which seemed a fait accompli despite some members of the public urging the board to reject it. The ordinance establishes a nine-member...
Read more

Tenants v. Landlords, Marin Rent Control Measures on the Ballot

With the election less than a week away, rent control and just cause eviction protections remain hot topics for Fairfax, San Anselmo and Larkspur voters. All three municipalities have ballot measures to decide on the two issues. Rent control sets the amount a landlord can raise rents, often tied to the local Consumer Price Index increase. However, not all rentals...
Read more

$40 Million Gone After Judge Rules Against Marin City Housing Project Developer

A Marin County Superior Court judge dealt a blow to the developer of a planned affordable housing project in Marin City, invalidating $40 million in tax-free bond revenue for the development. After a tentative ruling on Oct. 8, Judge Stephen Freccero issued the final order on Oct. 16, both times siding with Save Our City, a Marin City group that...
Read more

San Rafael Nonprofit Covers AP Exam & College Application Fees

When the nonprofit Karma Club opened last year at Northgate Mall in San Rafael, students streamed into the safe and comfortable teen center to socialize, have a snack and do their homework. And they keep coming back. Sally Newson, founder and executive director of Karma Club, knew a need existed in Marin for a nurturing after-school space for teens, not to...
Read more

Marin Homeless Union Accuses Novato of ‘Sneak Attack’

Another brouhaha has developed between Novato and the Marin Homeless Union. This one is over the city's recommended resolution to close a sanctioned homeless encampment and a proposed ordinance that would essentially ban all camping on public property. At least for the moment, the City of Novato won’t move forward with either.   Both issues appeared on the City Council’s Sept. 24 agenda....
Read more

San Rafael evicts disabled homeless man for second time, gets sued again

Mark Rivera has spent the last few years living in a tent alongside a public parking lot in San Rafael, forced into homelessness by chronic disabilities, he said. Like most homeless people, Rivera, 65, wants a home. He longs for a small yard because he misses the companionship of a dog, he said during an interview.  Mostly, Rivera talked about San...
Read more

UPDATED: Developer buys second property to reduce size of Marin City housing project

Marin County announced last week that the developer of a controversial five-story, 74-unit affordable housing project in Marin City has purchased a property near Tam Junction, with the goal of splitting the number of units over the two sites. The new plan calls for 42 units at 825 Drake Ave., Marin City, and 32 units at 150 Shoreline Hwy., Tam...
Read more

DA accepts judge’s decision to drop case against ex-cop

A Marin County Superior Court judge dismissed the remaining charge against a former San Rafael police officer accused of assaulting a local gardener. The ruling last week by Judge Kevin Murphy ended the criminal case against Daisy Mazariegos, who faced a felony charge of assault by an officer under color of authority. That charge carried a sentencing enhancement for causing...
Read more

Stonewalled: When public officials refuse to speak to press

"Transparency" is a big buzzword for governments now. From the White House to tiny town councils, transparency means that the government conducts its business openly and without secrets. Marin constituents can read all about the transparency of their local municipalities with a few keystrokes. Our cities, towns and the county reference the concept on their websites. As a reporter, my job...
Read more

Homeless heroes save victims of encampment fire

It happened wicked fast, said the victims of last week’s fire at a Novato homeless encampment. The flames ripped through nylon tents, destroyed personal possessions and even damaged one man’s prosthetic leg—all in a matter of minutes. Miraculously, none of the 15-or-so occupants of the city-sanctioned encampment in Lee Gerner Park were injured when the fire, allegedly arson, broke out...
Read more

Marin stays course assisting Binford Road’s unhoused people

Part two of a two-part report. Read part one here. Just the mention of Binford Road evokes strong reactions from folks in Marin County—positive, negative and sometimes downright caustic.  Many consider the RV homeless encampment a shining example of government working compassionately to provide much needed services to people down on their luck. Others see it as a blight on their...
Read more

Rescued, Sausalito sea lion sculpture returns home

Sausalito sea lion sculpture lifted by crane to reinstall
A crowd gathered last week at sunrise to watch the dramatic homecoming of Sausalito’s beloved but accident-prone sea lion sculpture. Plucked by a crane from the back of a pickup truck on Bridgeway, the newly restored bronze sculpture floated through the air and returned to its rocky nest just off the southern shoreline of Sausalito.  “The sea lion is a symbol...
Read more

Marin group serving homeless people reaches crossroads

A chaplain from The Street Chaplaincy in Marin offers spiritual support to a homeless person in San Rafael.
For more than two decades, professionals from The Street Chaplaincy have walked throughout Marin, providing spiritual care to homeless people. Now, The Street Chaplaincy needs some care and guidance of its own. The vital organization based in San Rafael faces major changes in its leadership, staff and financial structure. Nick Morris, who has led The Street Chaplaincy since 2018, will soon...
Read more

Come to the Table: strangers meet to dine with open minds

The late celebrity chef Anthony Bourdain once said, “You learn a lot about someone when you share a meal together.” That’s exactly the purpose of Come to the Table, a monthly free event where an unlikely group of guests eat dinner and spend time getting to know one another. Each event hosts 50 people for dinner, with half hailing from...
Read more

Fact Check: County points out reporter’s error, admits its own policy flaw

Last month, I received an email from the county telling me that I made a mistake in an article. Indeed, I erred. Typically, the Pacific Sun would run a correction, and that would be that. But Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency, didn’t ask for a correction. We spoke at length about the situation, agreeing that it...
Read more

Another incarcerated person dies in Marin County Jail cell

An incarcerated man died in the Marin County Jail early this morning, marking the fourth in-custody death since August. He has been identified as Derrek Leeds, 43, of San Rafael. A deputy performing a routine check of jail cells found an individual in need of medical care at about 2:09am, according to a press release issued by the Marin County...
Read more

Store harassed homeless people with loud music, lawsuit claims

A court order put the kibosh on a San Rafael tire store “blaring loud music” from speakers pointed at the adjacent homeless encampment. “Blaring” and “loud” aptly describe the noise I heard when Arthur Bruce, a homeless advocate, called me from the camp on Sunday, just before 7pm. In fact, I had to turn my phone volume down because the...
Read more

Remembering ‘The Serial’ writer, Cyra McFadden

In November 1975, Cyra McFadden’s “The Serial,” a weekly satirical column capturing Marin’s self-indulgent ’70s, premiered on the pages of the Pacific Sun. “The Serial” quickly gained popularity, spawning a best-selling book and an underappreciated film. McFadden focused “The Serial” on the idiosyncratic lives of a fictional middle-class Mill Valley family, leaving no ’70s trend unturned. Deft descriptions of open marriage,...
Read more

Developer agrees to reduce size of controversial Marin City housing project

Marin County struck a deal with an affordable housing developer to reduce the size of a hotly contested five-story, 74-unit project planned in Marin City. Though not yet inked by the Idaho developer or the county, the agreement calls for no more than 42 units at 825 Drake Ave. in Marin City, with the remaining units to be built at...
Read more

New legal battle emerges from San Rafael cops’ use of force

A legal battle has erupted because the City of San Rafael says it needs a witness’ help to prevent ex-cop Brandon Nail from getting his job back. Police Chief David Spiller terminated Nail last year. Julio Jimenez Lopez, the witness, wants his testimony in the employment arbitration proceeding between Nail and the city kept confidential. San Rafael refuses. Consequently, Jimenez...
Read more

What’s cooking with Novato’s Curtis Aikens

Celebrity chef, author, athletic coach, master gardener, literacy advocate and diabetes educator—Curtis Aikens Sr. is a Renaissance man. I spent a couple of days last week getting to know Aikens, who is instantly likable. We met at the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Academy in Marin City, where he’s transforming a neglected garden and teaching children how to grow fruits,...
Read more

Autistry Studios Creates Community for Autistic Adults

My wonderfully offbeat friend, Ken Pontac, has told me for a dozen years about a magical place in San Rafael called Autistry Studios. Last week, I finally visited. Pontac, who recently began working there, wasn’t kidding. Somehow, it seems too mild to say that I was absolutely enchanted by every person I met and delighted by each piece of art...
Read more

Marin County Jail’s new program aims to reduce recidivism

The young woman felt compelled to steal from Rite Aid, Safeway and other stores, partly because she knew selling the merchandise would help provide for her two sons. It’s hard to say whether Deja Munson, 25, possesses much talent for thievery. While admitting to stealing regularly, she also seems to get caught frequently enough, spending almost four of the last...
Read more

Employees say no deal on offer from Marin Housing Authority

Despite meeting for months, the Marin Housing Authority and its 30 unionized employees have yet to reach a labor agreement. The contract between the Marin Housing Authority (MHA) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) 1021 expired on Dec. 31. Both sides have engaged in bargaining sessions since November. At last count, they’ve sat down at the table 18 times to...
Read more

County disbanding commission focused on ending discrimination

The Marin County Board of Supervisors placed the Human Rights Commission on “pause” three months ago, suspending its operations. This week, the board unanimously approved beginning the process to “sunset” the group. A scenic-sounding euphemism for shutting it down doesn’t make the pill any easier to swallow. With Marin ranked as California’s third most racially disparate county in the 2023...
Read more

BREAKING NEWS: Fired San Rafael cop standing trial for felony assault wants job back

Brandon Nail, a former San Rafael police officer who will soon stand trial on criminal charges, has appealed his termination from the police department and is seeking reinstatement. A confidential binding arbitration hearing is scheduled this month to determine whether Nail will get his job back. The City of San Rafael is defending its decision to oust Nail, who was...
Read more

ICE in Marin: sheriff defends cooperation with immigration authorities

Marin County Sheriff Jamie Scardina continues his discretionary cooperation with federal immigration law enforcement despite pushback from the county supervisors and community members. In 2023, the sheriff’s office provided the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with information about 13 people booked into the county jail for serious or violent felonies, down from 33 people in the previous year, Scardina...
Read more

Back to the news: Johnny Colla on recording “We Are the World”

Almost 40 years ago, dozens of ’80s icons gathered overnight in a Los Angeles studio to record “We Are the World,” the hit single that has raised more than $80 million to provide humanitarian relief in Africa. The fundraising vinyl record was the brainchild of Harry Belafonte, who wanted to help fight famine in Ethiopia. The song was recorded on...
Read more

Sheriff’s oversight ordinance fundamentally flawed, says watchdog group

After years of discussion and debate, Marin County has finally unveiled a proposed ordinance that could soon lead to civilian oversight of the sheriff’s office. But a watchdog group is already sounding the alarm that the ordinance is “fundamentally flawed.” Assembly Bill 1185, state legislation enacted in January 2021, allows counties to establish an oversight commission, an inspector general position...
Read more

North Bay nonprofit removes deadly ghost nets from Great Pacific Garbage Patch

Mary Crowley prefers not to use the term “garbage patch” when referring to the tons of plastic littering the Pacific Ocean and killing marine life. “Patch sounds small,” Crowley said. “People mistakenly think of it as a big clump of garbage.” Small, it’s not. There are 79,000 metric tons (87,100 U.S. tons) of plastic afloat in the area from California to...
Read more

Nonprofit serving LGBTQ+ and HIV communities suspends all programs

The Spahr Center, a nonprofit organization serving Marin’s LGBTQ+ and HIV-affected communities, announced Friday that it is suspending services indefinitely due to ongoing financial issues. Most of the staff members were laid off on Thursday, according to an email from the organization. The Ryan White HIV services will continue operating for another week as clients are transitioned to the County...
Read more

Rocket science: Sausalito’s mayor designed missiles for the Army—the good kind

In preparation for the Pacific Sun’s spotlight on Sausalito this week, I jotted down a list of captivating people to profile. Well-known musicians, writers, artists and restaurateurs who live and work in the picturesque village quickly came to mind. Then my thoughts turned to Sausalito’s new mayor, Ian Sobieski, who began his tenure on the City Council three years ago,...
Read more

Nightmare on Pine Street II: Sausalito flip-flops on approval of controversial project

Home—that safe, familiar, comfortable space offering respite from the world—often evokes deep emotions.  In Marin, where home sweet home is a huge monetary investment, proposed renovations can draw battle lines among neighbors. Ask Jake Beyer and his wife, Georgia Glassie Beyer, who live on Pine Street in Sausalito. Just over a year ago, the couple submitted design plans to the city...
Read more

Three people died while in Marin County Jail’s custody during last six months

An incarcerated individual died in their cell at the underground Marin County Jail last week. It’s the third in-custody death since August, indicating an unusual spike. In the 10-year period from 2013 through 2022, five incarcerated people died—four by suicide and one from Covid. Of note, no in-custody deaths took place during the five years from 2016 through 2020.  Community activists...
Read more

Local government agency behind schedule to remove mariners anchored in Richardson Bay

The Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) issued a press release this month to recognize 2023 as a “banner year.” Many people living aboard boats anchored in Richardson Bay dispute that statement. While the RBRA celebrates milestones reached last year, including a 27% decrease in “boats illegally anchored in Richardson Bay,” mariners still living on the anchorage say they’re worried about...
Read more

Fierce competition at national fencing tournament in Bay Area

When I heard a four-day national fencing tournament was coming to the Bay Area, I thought watching a few bouts might make for an entertaining morning. Instead, the tournament was exciting, peppered with political intrigue, fierce competition and strong camaraderie. The field of competitors included Olympic medalists and hopefuls, veteran fencers in their 50s to 80s, teens, international fencers and...
Read more

‘The Lion King’ rolls out red carpet for Marin City children

When Felecia Gaston, director of the nonprofit Performing Stars, says she wants to bring 40 low-income kids from Marin City to see a live performance of The Lion King, she makes it happen. And when Miss Felecia, as the children call her, decides to fill the entire day with activities that even adults would envy, she dials up VIPs from...
Read more

Judge takes 10 days to review criminal case against ex-cops, perhaps struggling with decision

Two former San Rafael police officers accused of beating a local gardener will soon learn whether they’ll be standing trial on felony charges. Last week, after closing arguments in the preliminary hearing—a proceeding to determine if there is enough evidence for a case to go to trial—Marin County Judge Beth Jordan stated that she would render her decision on Dec....
Read more

UPDATED: Everybody poops, yet stingy San Rafael stymies sanitation

Editor’s Note: This article was updated with additional information on Monday, Dec. 11. Homeless people cite many challenges when it comes to living outside. Lack of public restrooms is always a chief concern. For about nine months, the City of San Rafael has repeatedly refused to pony up for porta-potties and handwashing stations at a homeless encampment on the Mahon Creek...
Read more

Marin sheriff installing license plate readers amid concern of eroding civil liberties

The Marin County Sheriff’s Office will soon install new surveillance cameras throughout unincorporated Marin County to keep a record of the coming and going of vehicles.  Supporters believe these automated license plate recognition (ALPR) cameras will help reduce or deter crime, with opponents citing concerns about the erosion of civil liberties. Last week, the Marin County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved...
Read more

50 days in Gaza, released hostages have local ties

On Oct. 7, a pineapple farmer opened his door to Avigail Idan, a three-year-old girl covered in blood. Quickly, he ushered the little girl, his wife and their own three children into the home’s safe room. With his family and their young charge locked indoors, the farmer, Avichai Brodutch, who is training to be a nurse, left his home to...
Read more

Marin scientist shaking up Stanford’s stem cell research scene

Royce McLemore, a Marin City leader and activist, couldn’t stop smiling when we chatted about her 21 grandchildren, one in particular. “My granddaughter is the first Black stem cell research scientist from Marin County,” McLemore declared proudly. “How do you know?” I asked. “Do you know another one?” McLemore replied. Good point. Until last week, I didn’t know any stem cell research scientists—of...
Read more

Loneliness Epidemic: Help for Seniors Just a Call Away

The U.S. Surgeon General recently issued an 82-page advisory about an epidemic that’s not talked about much—loneliness.  Approximately half the adults in this country report feeling lonely, and the phenomenon began before the COVID pandemic. “Loneliness is far more than just a bad feeling—it harms both individual and societal health,” Surgeon General Dr. Vivek H. Murthy said. It makes sense that loneliness...
Read more

Marin teen vying for prestigious international science award

If this were a radio show, I’d cue “Rocket Man” by Elton John or maybe David Bowie’s “Space Oddity.” Then I’d launch into the narrative of a brilliant Marin teen promising millions of people around the world, “I’ll make you love space,” and in about 60 seconds, he actually does. Bayanni Rivera, 18, has a knack for breaking down complicated astronomy...
Read more

Federal judge limits San Rafael’s homeless camping ordinance

Another lawsuit pitting homeless people against a city in wealthy Marin County is now in full swing. This time, San Rafael occupies the hot seat. A recent order by a federal judge has substantially diminished the impact of San Rafael’s restrictive homeless camping ordinance. In addition, the city must perform administrative tasks that may be challenging for officials to manage...
Read more

Nightmare on Pine Street

The Beyers are the kind of family most people want living next door. For years, they lived harmoniously with their neighbors on a quiet block of Pine Street in Sausalito. Now, they say some of their neighbors want them out. To be sure, several neighbors are unhappy with the Beyers’ plans to renovate their traditional one-story cottage to a modern three-story...
Read more

Criminal defendant Daisy Mazariegos gives birth, hires new defense attorney

A brief hearing today resolved issues about how the criminal case against two former San Rafael police officers will move forward after the untimely death of defense attorney Christopher J. Shea last week. The case left off early last week in the middle of the preliminary hearing. Shea represented Daisy Mazariegos, an ex-cop who is charged with assault under color...
Read more

Defense attorney dies, leaving uncertainty in police use of force case

The criminal case against two former San Rafael police officers took a tragic turn when one of the defense attorneys, Christopher J. Shea, died last week. He was 57. Family, friends and colleagues expressed their distress and sorrow at the sudden loss of Shea, a seasoned criminal defense attorney who also spent more than a decade as a prosecutor in...
Read more

BREAKING NEWS: Christopher Shea, defense attorney for former San Rafael cop, dies at 57

Christopher J. Shea, a criminal defense attorney and former Marin County prosecutor, died on Thursday. He was 57. Earlier this week, the seasoned attorney spent two days in a Marin County courtroom representing his client, former San Rafael police officer Daisy Mazariegos, in a preliminary hearing. Shea, who grew up in the Bay Area and received his law degree from the...
Read more

Documents reveal San Rafael cop had previous credibility issues

The Marin County district attorney knew that San Rafael police officer Brandon Nail had credibility issues long before he beat and bloodied a local gardener during questioning about an open container of beer, according to an internal police memo. This is just one of many disclosures in the 89 documents, audio files and videos related to the City of San...
Read more

San Rafael releases investigative reports on police use of force

Reporter's note: At the conclusion of this article, the three investigative reports into three San Rafael officers involved in the use of force incident are provided in their entirety. The videos of the incident are also unedited and contain violence and profanity. After almost six months of delays, the City of San Rafael released the investigative reports into the police...
Read more

Love of dogs continues for iconic star of Lassie TV show

What does a tiny toothless senior pooch living out his golden years in Santa Rosa have in common with Lassie, the most famous Hollywood dog of all time? Both canines captured the heart of Jon Provost, the actor who played young Timmy Martin on the Lassie television series from 1957 to 1964. Provost was already a veteran actor when, at...
Read more

Marin County sheriff says lawmakers need to make changes to prevent profiling

A local watchdog group is again raising concerns about the Marin County Sheriff’s Office, saying the law enforcement agency refuses to address its high incidence of racial profiling. Marin County Sheriff Jamie Scardina disputed the department’s need to make policing policy changes when I interviewed him last week. While Scardina said that he didn’t have time yet to review a...
Read more

San Rafael homeless campers sue city over restrictive ordinance

In another David versus Goliath story, San Rafael is paying two outside law firms to defend the city against a lawsuit resulting from a restrictive homeless camping ordinance passed in July. Residents of “Camp Integrity,” a homeless encampment on the Mahon Path in Central San Rafael, say they were compelled to file the legal action because the city’s ordinance...
Read more

Former San Rafael cops appear in court to face felony charges

The two former San Rafael police officers looked appropriately somber as they walked through the corridor outside of Courtroom C in the Marin County Civic Center last week. Twice this month, they have appeared before a judge to face two felony charges each—assault by an officer under color of authority and making false statements on police reports. On both court...
Read more

Marin City group rejected offer to reduce size of housing project

The developer of a controversial Marin City affordable housing project says he will break ground in about 90 days, despite opposition from the local community. Legal and moral issues are at stake, according to Save our City, the group campaigning to stop the five-story, 74-unit apartment building from going up in Marin City, a densely populated community in an unincorporated...
Read more

The abandonment of Marin’s Poor Farm and Cemetery 

On a bright, warm August day, I trudged through waist-high grass searching for any trace of the hundreds of graves in a Lucas Valley field. The neglected meadow doesn’t resemble a cemetery—not a mausoleum, a columbarium or even a headstone in sight. I wasn’t sure whether I was in the right area, although a roadside sign indicated that I had...
Read more

Celebrity secrets and what we owe the dead

Two weeks ago, the Pacific Sun and the Bohemian published an article (“A Local Remembers Sinéad,” July 27) about singer and activist Sinead O’Connor, who died last month at age 56.  The writer identified herself as a night shift caregiver to O’Connor, seemingly having no qualms about revealing her association with a “secret client.” O’Connor, the writer said, had undergone...
Read more

Home sweet home: help for Marin homebuyers

Every year, when the Pacific Sun is putting together the Best of Marin issue, I take stock of how fortunate I am to live here.  World-class photographers, best-selling authors and award-winning filmmakers capture a corner of the county here and there. But those of us experiencing her unrivaled beauty every day are blessed. And yet, not everyone who calls Marin home...
Read more

No place to go: San Rafael continues with plan to displace homeless people 

Part Two of a two-part report. Read Part One here. Last week, San Rafael capitulated to residents complaining about homeless encampments by passing an ordinance that severely curtails camping. The new rules don’t come close to resolving the issues raised by people who say they are upset about crime, fires, trash and human waste at the camps. Instead, the ordinance will...
Read more

Tent tension: San Rafael further restricts homeless camping

Part one of a two-part report. Read part two here. The City of San Rafael is playing Whac-A-Mole with homeless encampments on public property. Unfortunately, it’s a zero-sum game, and everyone knows who ends up losing. Anyone can participate. Check out the easy rules: 1.  Residents complain about the presence of an encampment because homeless people are scary to see and...
Read more

Charges Dropped: Allegations against ex-cops wreak havoc in Marin justice system

The Marin County District Attorney’s Office has dismissed criminal charges in at least 10 cases that would have relied on the testimony of two former San Rafael police officers who now stand accused of crimes themselves. Other criminal defendants have been offered attractive plea deals for serious offenses because their cases involved the two ex-cops whose honesty is now in...
Read more

(Un)welcoming Waters: Sea otters poised for comeback to Marin and Sonoma counties

Flippers down, sea otters win the blue ribbon in the cutest critters contest. And to think, in the 18th and 19th centuries, man hunted sea otters to near extinction for their luxurious fur, which contains more hairs per square inch than any other mammal. The sea otter slaughter lasted about 150 years. By 1911, when the animals became protected under...
Read more

BREAKING NEWS: Criminal charges filed against San Rafael cops involved in “Mateo” assault

Marin County District Attorney Lori Frugoli filed criminal charges today against two former San Rafael police officers who beat and bloodied a man during questioning about an open container of beer. Brandon Nail and Daisy Mazariegos were both charged with two felonies, including assault under color of authority and making false statements in a crime report. The DA’s criminal complaint...
Read more

Guaranteed income of $1,000 a month changed the lives of Marin moms and their families

A couple of years ago, I heard about the launch of a fascinating program in Marin. A group of 125 low-income moms would receive $1,000 a month for two years to spend on whatever they wanted. No strings attached. I opened my calendar, flipped forward 24 months and made a note to call the organizer in May 2023, when...
Read more

Lacking transparency: San Rafael adds insult to injury in police ‘use of force’ case

Almost 11 months have passed since the unprovoked use of force by two San Rafael police officers landed a Latinx gardener in the hospital with severe bodily injuries. The July 27 incident, caught on the officers’ own body-worn cameras, consisted of a series of aggressive maneuvers to take down Julio Jimenez Lopez during questioning about an open container of...
Read more

UPDATED: San Rafael police officer involved in violent beating out of a job

Editor’s Note: This article was updated with additional information on Tuesday, June 13, at 1:30pm. It’s not much of a surprise that one of the two officers involved in the unprovoked bloody beating of a local gardener no longer works for the San Rafael Police Department. After all, Daisy Mazariegos was still on her probationary period as a new employee when...
Read more

Marin City pastors stage “intervention” with private developer over unwanted housing project

In front of a room crowded with concerned residents, two Marin City pastors had a come-to-Jesus meeting last month with an Idaho real estate developer who is planning a controversial affordable housing project. Rev. Rondall Leggett and Rev. Floyd Thompkins did not mince words. If developer Caleb Roope, CEO of the The Pacific Companies, proceeds with the five-story, 74-unit apartment...
Read more

Tick Talk: Blood-sucking arachnids spread disease in Northern California

What the heck is that thing in the photo? A hazelnut? A small dumpling with eight legs? Perhaps an odd seed pod? Nope. Behold the engorged tick, swollen with blood stolen from its host. Not only do the little suckers feast on our vital red fluid, but they can also leave behind parting gifts, including the bacteria that causes Lyme...
Read more

‘Posh’ Marin and its homeless residents capture attention from tabloids

Marin County became the hot tabloid topic this month with three sensational stories splashed across the pages of the New York Post and the Daily Mail. The trio of articles scream about “posh” Marin allowing hundreds of “vagrants” and “tweakers” to live in recreational vehicles on Binford Road in Novato, bringing crime, drugs and devastation to the area. The New...
Read more

Richardson Bay anchor-outs consider offer of housing on land

A new program launched this month offers subsidized housing on land for people currently living aboard boats anchored off the shores of Sausalito. Most of the scrappy sailors, known as “anchor-outs,” don’t want to leave the free anchorage and their nautical lifestyle to become landlubbers. But the promise of long-term housing seems to be softening the blow, at least for some....
Read more

San Rafael legal settlement keeps residents in their homes—for now

A settlement reached last month between the City of San Rafael and a mobile home park owner requires the park to remain open for the next decade, ending 16 months of litigation. But residents, who own their homes and rent the lot underneath, remain fearful of becoming homeless. At first blush, their fears seem unfounded. After all, the RV Park of...
Read more

Opposition growing against Marin City housing project 

The fight against a controversial affordable housing development planned for Marin City has gained momentum since the for-profit developer made insulting remarks about community members. The fallout was swift for real estate developer Alexis Gevorgian, of AMG & Associates, who told the Pacific Sun last month that residents of the historically Black neighborhood are communists wanting free handouts. Gevorgian also...
Read more

Mobile crisis intervention program launches in San Rafael

The “subject down” call came into the San Rafael police dispatcher on Thursday morning at 10:22 a.m. A passerby reported that a man was lying on the ground at the corner of Second and A. Instead of dispatching paramedics or the police to assess the situation, San Rafael’s new mobile crisis intervention team, Specialized Assistance for Everyone (SAFE), responded...
Read more

Fairfax under fire for passing renter protection ordinances

Marin’s chronic housing shortage combined with rising inflation has pushed the rental market to a breaking point. Nowhere is that more evident than in the showdown taking place in Fairfax between renters, landlords and the town council. The conflict began in November, when the progressive Fairfax Town Council passed two ordinances to protect renters, who account for...
Read more

‘Shit show’ hearing ends with county letting down Marin City residents again

A Southern California real estate developer with approval to build a controversial, five-story apartment complex in Marin City heard strong condemnations of the project at a county hearing last week. “It was a shit show,” developer Alexis Gevorgian, of AMG & Associates in Encino, told the Pacific Sun in an interview. Indeed, it was. The three-and-a-half hour hearing marked the first...
Read more

Freshman assemblymember pushing hard for constituents’ concerns

Assemblymember Damon Connolly listened carefully to voters while on the campaign trail last year for a seat in the California State Assembly. Now, 100 days into office, those conversations with constituents have already inspired his decisions on policymaking. After narrowly winning the November election, squeaking by opponent Sara Aminzadeh with a 3.6% lead, the freshman legislator says he hit the...
Read more

Dog Crisis: Local shelters overwhelmed by pooches needing homes

Overflowing with dogs, local animal shelters and rescues have put out an urgent call for people to adopt or foster. Purebreds, designer breeds and mutts of all ages and sizes await new homes. The situation is dire, not just in the Bay Area, but also across the country. As dogs languish for many months at shelters, some face euthanasia to...
Read more

Frugoli’s follies: upheaval in the DA’s office

Despite serious concerns voiced by Marin County constituents, District Attorney Lori Frugoli remains mum about a plethora of problems plaguing her office. As Frugoli enters her second term, the DA’s office is experiencing an exodus of employees, a flood of racial discrimination claims and lawsuits by former and current personnel, unexplained delays of criminal investigations into police officer misconduct and...
Read more

Belvedere considers hiring sharpshooters to kill coyotes

Well-heeled Belvedere residents turned into an angry mob at a special city council meeting last week about coyotes. With a rallying cry of “kill the coyotes,” locals made it clear they want the animals removed from their tony town by any means necessary—including paying federal snipers to shoot them. Some residents advocated taking up arms themselves to kill coyotes...
Read more

Listen Up: Michael Krasny behind the mic again

Public radio talk show host Michael Krasny left behind a legion of loyal listeners when he retired from his 28-year stint at KQED’s Forum in February 2021.  Fortunately, he couldn’t stay away from the microphone for long. Krasny, 78, who has interviewed VIPs from all walks of life, including Barack Obama, Carl Sagan and Philip Roth, launched a podcast last summer....
Read more

Sausalito boatyard maintains maritime history 

A celebrated Sausalito resident, Freda, turns 138 this year. But one would never know it by looking at her. Born in Belvedere in 1885, Freda is the oldest sailboat on the West Coast. Saloonkeeper Harry Cookson, who built the beautiful wooden vessel for yachting and racing, named her after his daughter. Over the years, Freda has passed through the hands of...
Read more

Just one pill: fentanyl deaths on the rise in Marin and Sonoma counties

Trevor Leopold would have turned 22 on Jan. 30. Instead, he’s “forever 18,” his mother says. When Greenbrae resident Michelle Leopold received the news that her 18-year-old son died in his Sonoma State University dorm room, she didn’t need to wait for the coroner’s report to know what had killed him. Although it was November 2019, before most parents had heard...
Read more

Gauging aging: ‘maturity’ isn’t for amateurs

For most of my adult life, I had the good fortune of looking younger than my age. Until now. I’m not going to tell you how old I am, but it begins with a six and ends with a zero. Healthwise, no complaints. Yet, I suffer—from wrinkles and zits at the same time. Unbeknownst to me, this phenomenon probably started a...
Read more

The true tale of how a fairy saved a bunny during a flood

My assignment this week was to write a piece about the monumental storms that packed a wallop in Marin and Sonoma counties, but I needed a break from bad news.  Fortunately, I found a heartwarming story about a fairy, a stranded motorist and a bunny on a flooded road during a downpour. To satisfy my editor, let me get this out...
Read more

Anchor-outs living on Richardson Bay fear more than foul weather

A local government agency in Marin seems to have a knack for targeting the most defenseless people in a vulnerable community of mariners, including a pregnant woman, seniors and people with disabilities. During the last six months, at least three mariners living aboard their boats anchored out in Richardson Bay have filed federal lawsuits against the Richardson Bay Regional Agency...
Read more

Dog Down: Novato police officer shoots neighbor’s dog

On a drizzly Sunday morning in September, a tragic series of events unfolded in Petaluma that ended with two dead chickens, a Novato police sergeant shooting a neighbor’s dog and a long list of unanswered questions. Debate on social media exploded after KGO-TV broke the news in mid-December. An anecdotal survey of comments showed many people in Sonoma County noting...
Read more

Larkspur renters concerned the city council is floundering on rent control

It seems the Larkspur City Council is trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to rent control.  Two council members serving on an ad hoc committee have been hemming and hawing for months about the details of an ordinance for the entire council to consider. Larkspur City Manager Dan Schwarz has said several times during council meetings that drafting an...
Read more

Housing authority board rejects homeownership plan for Golden Gate Village residents

The Golden Gate Village Resident Council expected the Marin Housing Authority Board of Commissioners to reject their proposal to convert the deteriorating property into a housing co-op managed by residents. They were right. At the end of a five-hour meeting on Nov. 15, the board voted 5-2 for the Marin Housing Authority’s plan to keep Golden Gate Village, an historic...
Read more

Fairfax becomes first jurisdiction in Marin to pass rent control ordinance.

Renters in Fairfax breathed a collective sigh of relief last week when the town council approved two ordinances. One caps rent increases and the other provides strong measures to prevent arbitrary evictions, commonly known as a “just cause” eviction ordinance.  Faced with rising rents and inflation, the Marin Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has been pushing local jurisdictions to approve renter...
Read more

Golden Gate Village residents seek independence from Marin Housing Authority

Royce McLemore, president of the Golden Gate Village Resident Council, is within a few steps of achieving the goal she has been working toward for almost a decade. It has been McLemore’s dream to restore the neglected and decaying public housing complex in Marin City. Golden Gate Village has been home to McLemore, 79, for most of her life. She...
Read more

Coyote confrontations increase in Belvedere and Tiburon

By Nikki Silverstein Some residents of Belvedere believe coyotes on the small island have overstayed their welcome, saying the animals have snatched family pets right out of their yards. Other complaints about the wild canines in the tony enclave include that they roam the streets in packs, stalk people as they walk their dogs and refuse to back off when faced...
Read more

Novato City Council candidates call for change

Two races for open seats on the Novato City Council have inspired five diverse candidates to throw their hats in the ring for the Nov. 8 election. Rachel Farac and Andy Podshadley compete to represent District 2, a portion of southwest Novato. The seat is open because Councilmember Denise Athas announced in May that she wouldn’t seek reelection after a...
Read more

Human composting now legal in California

My father’s cremated remains sit atop a vintage table in my living room, hidden inside a wood urn I purchased from an artist on Etsy. It seems like an antithetical end for a man whose zest for life knew few bounds. It’s a sure bet he would have chosen to transform himself into nutrient-rich soil, if it had been an...
Read more

Data shows racial inequities in Mill Valley policing

Two new reports reach vastly different conclusions about racial disparities during police stops by the Mill Valley Police Department, one stating significant bias exists while the other infers the opposite. The police department and a community group, Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment (MVFREE), both analyzed detention data collected by the police, including the perceived race of detainees...
Read more

Sausalito’s cannabis dispensary ballot measure stirs controversy

My head was spinning after speaking to the supporters and opponents of Sausalito’s ballot initiative on cannabis. And I wasn’t even high. Sausalito voters will decide on Measure K in the Nov. 8 election. If approved, the initiative repeals the ban on cannabis businesses and allows business licenses for one cannabis retail store and one cannabis delivery service. Currently, a Sausalito...
Read more

San Rafael police officers under fire and investigation for use of force 

Two San Rafael police officers are under investigation after one of them beat and bloodied a local gardener during questioning about an open container of beer. The violent incident took place in late July and was captured on the officers’ body-worn cameras. A police report indicates the man was arrested and booked into the Marin County Jail on the same...
Read more

The Bay Area’s algal blooms are wreaking havoc for fish

The Bay Area is experiencing a harmful red tide, which peaked in August, yet still lingers in September. The tell-tale signs are tea-colored water, foul odors and dead fish. Check, check and check. A phytoplankton, named Heterosigma akashiwo, is the culprit behind this phenomenon. Heterosigma akashiwo is usually found as a cyst set into the bay’s sediment. Under certain conditions, the...
Read more

Hollywood descended on Sausalito to film mini-series

Did Sausalito forsake its homeless residents for Hollywood? On Aug. 15, Sausalito closed its city-sanctioned homeless camp, which was located on the tennis courts at the corner of Marinship Way and Testa Street. Days later, a film production crew rolled into town and set up its base camp on the opposite corner of the intersection, just 105 feet from the...
Read more

Marin Municipal Water District slow to replace leaky tanks

Lyle Christie, completely frustrated, called the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) in early July to voice an interesting complaint. “I’d like to report a gross misuse and waste of water, about one million gallons a year, and the culprit is you,” Christie said he told the agency. It wasn’t the first time he contacted MMWD to air his grievance about the...
Read more

Anchor-out’s boat saved from destruction

A federal judge recently changed her ruling in a case, giving hope to a pregnant woman whose boat was scheduled to be destroyed by a local government agency.    In a July hearing before U.S. District Court Judge Maxine Chesney, Kaitlin Allerton was denied a preliminary injunction, which cleared the way for the Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) to crush the...
Read more

A story of affordable housing, corporate greed and good ol’ American grit

This is the second part of a two-part series. Read part one here. Dozens of homeowners may soon lose their Marin homes. Not to foreclosure or wildfire or rising sea levels. Residents of the RV Park of San Rafael say they will lose their affordable housing due to the greed of Harmony Communities, a property management company hired last summer by...
Read more

San Rafael residents fight to keep their affordable homes

In tony Marin County, where the median home price hit $1.5 million in July, Beverly Mason and David Potts recently bought a new home for just $110,000. That’s not a typo. Mason and Potts made it to mecca, Marin style—they found affordable housing. Or so they thought. For the last two decades, Mason has lived in the RV Park of San...
Read more

Marin City History

80th anniversary festivities uncover forgotten stories from the community's rich legacy Felecia Gaston has been Marin City’s unofficial historian for more than three decades, collecting oral histories and memorabilia from some of the community’s first residents—Black people who helped build World War II ships at Marinship. The relics, as well as thousands of documents and newspaper articles dating...
Read more

Sausalito agrees to pay $540,000 to homeless encampment residents

The City of Sausalito and the Sausalito Homeless Union reached a settlement agreement on Friday, ending more than 18 months of extremely contentious litigation. Under the terms of the agreement, Sausalito will pay $540,000 to the Sausalito Homeless Union. From that fund, 30 homeless people will receive $18,000 each to be spent on housing or housing related expenses. All the...
Read more

Novato and the Novato Homeless Union reach a settlement agreement

Without fanfare, the City of Novato and the Novato Homeless Union reached a settlement agreement last week, ending almost a year of litigation in federal court. The agreement allows the city-sanctioned homeless encampment in Lee Gerner Park to remain for at least two more years and struck down restrictive language in a camping ordinance, which was the catalyst for the...
Read more

Sausalito finally begins negotiating settlement with the Sausalito Homeless Union

After 18 months of contentious litigation between the City of Sausalito and the Sausalito Homeless Union, both parties have confirmed they are in the process of negotiating a settlement. The Homeless Union filed the lawsuit in federal court in February 2021, just days after the Sausalito City Council passed a restrictive anti-camping ordinance in response to a new homeless encampment...
Read more

Marin County finally takes steps toward implementing a sheriff’s watchdog group

The Marin County Civil Grand Jury recently recommended the county create an independent sheriff’s oversight board with subpoena power, and proceedings subject to the Brown Act, to improve accountability and community trust in the sheriff’s office. In its report titled “Sheriff Oversight: The Time Is Now,” the grand jury states that a civilian oversight board, along with the leadership change...
Read more

Sausalito threatens to close the city-sanctioned homeless encampment

The City of Sausalito’s outside counsel has created a stir in the homeless encampment at Marinship Park by saying he’s intending to file a motion in federal court to close the camp down permanently. The city-sanctioned encampment is under a court order, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen, to remain open. That same order prevents homeless people from...
Read more

How enterprising women from the 1930s saved the Marin Art and Garden Center property

Thanks to the foresight of a group of “Marin housewives” more than 75 years ago, the Marin Art and Garden Center in Ross was recently added to the National Register of Historic Places, an official list of America’s historic places worthy of preservation. The center joins a prestigious collection of 53 landmark sites in the county on the National...
Read more

Marin City advocates raise drinking water concerns—again

Drinking water tests
As the crow flies, Marin City is less than seven miles from Ross. Yet Marin City residents have a significantly lower life expectancy than Ross residents. For example, the Robert Wood Foundation collaborated with the federal government to calculate life expectancy by census tract. In Ross, a person can expect to live 91 years, while in Marin City, the age...
Read more

Marin County Public Defender draws from personal experience

Marin County Public Defender David Sutton experienced a rough childhood in San Francisco’s Western Addition. By high school, he had managed to get himself into some trouble. It probably saved him. Raised by a single mother diagnosed with bipolar disorder, Sutton and his sister spent time in foster homes or staying with family. When he was eight years old, his...
Read more

Marin Sheriff agrees to obey the law as part of legal settlement

ALPR surveillance camera
Marin activists declared victory last week when Marin County and Sheriff Robert Doyle settled a lawsuit which claimed Doyle’s office illegally shared the license plate data and location information of Marin motorists with hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the country. Under the settlement agreement, the sheriff and his successors must abide by two state laws, SB 34 and SB...
Read more

How a Marin County Woman Found her Birth Parents

Texas Family Photo Marin County
Wendy Gallagher, 54, grew up in Sausalito, knowing her parents adopted her as an infant. No one knew that her birth mother, coincidentally, lived just two blocks away at the time.
Read more

Recovery Fund Offers Lifeline to Nonprofit Marin Arts Groups Impacted by Pandemic

As the North Bay heads into the holiday season, Marin County recently graduated from “red” to “orange” status in regards to Covid-19 risk, allowing some businesses to reopen for the first time, while others can expand their operating capacity. Still, the pandemic's impact on Marin County's economy, and especially the impact on nonprofit organizations and arts organizations, has been severe....
Read more

Local Bands Dress Up for Virtual Halloween Concert

Petaluma’s historic Phoenix Theater looks stunning right now, thanks to a new paint job. The roof is also in fine form after being replaced earlier this year, and the sprinkler system is almost installed and up to the city’s codes.Unfortunately, the inside of the Phoenix Theater is effectively closed to the public due to Covid, and the popular concert...
Read more

Latino Photography Project Presents Inspiring Exhibit in Point Reyes

A regional arts landmark since 1983, Gallery Route One hosts artistic exhibits by member artists as well as exhibitions by guest artists that often address environmental and social issues such as climate change and immigration. GRO also maintains several arts outreach programs like the Latino Photography Project, which was formed seventeen years ago with the support of the West Marin...
Read more

San Rafael’s Day of the Dead Celebrations Go Online

For more than three decades, San Rafael has marked the Mexican holiday of Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) with colorful cultural events that bring out the entire community. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, San Rafael's 32nd annual Dia de los Muertos will be held online and on social media sites like YouTube and Facebook throughout the entire...
Read more

Mill Valley Film Festival Returns, Outdoors and Online

The California Film Institute, producer of the annual Mill Valley Film Festival, is no stranger to outdoor cinematic experience. Two or three times a year, at the nonprofit’s jewel-box Christopher B. Smith Rafael Film Center in downtown San Rafael, movies are screened al fresco—often projected onto the walls of a nearby building or inflatable screen. In the past, the...
Read more

School District Emails Reveal Details of Hasty Name Change Process

When Tamalpais Union High School District superintendent ordered the name Sir Francis Drake removed from the San Anselmo school on July 28 and temporarily re-named the 70-year-old institution “High School #1327,” it ignited a firestorm.  Administrators were immediately accused of acting illegally by violating the Brown Act, the state law which requires public officials and agencies to obey certain open...
Read more

Art of Bolinas: West Marin Museum Goes Online

Founded in 1983, the Bolinas Museum hosts Marin County’s premier collection of the art and history of coastal Marin, presenting exhibits and hosting events that express the rich, diverse array of local artists and crafters. Free to the visitors who come from near and far to enjoy the small West Marin charm of Bolinas, the museum features five galleries and...
Read more

Marin Sanctuary Marks 75 Years of Arts and Gardens

Even in picturesque Marin County, the Marin Art & Garden Center stands out. The 11-acre property in the town of Ross is an oasis of floral beauty and historic buildings, and the nonprofit organization that owns and operates the center hosts year-round events and programs on the grounds, including performances from resident theater company the Ross Valley Players. This summer,...
Read more

North Bay Protests Continue to Call for Social Justice

It’s been one month since George Floyd’s death on May 25, after Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd's neck for more than eight minutes. In the weeks that have followed, a nationwide movement of protest against police brutality and social and racial justice has spread to all 50 states. The North Bay’s ongoing protests and rallies have...
Read more

Guide Dogs for the Blind Has the Good News You Need

It seems difficult to find any uplifting headlines in the news these days, and the coronavirus pandemic is not making things any easier for many who have already faced down fires, floods and other woes in the North Bay recently. Fortunately, there is still good in this world. Case in point: Dogs exist. No one knows the positive power of...
Read more

These Local Theaters Will Screen Films In Your Home

While movie theaters remain closed during the shelter-in-place ordeal, local film purveyors are taking to the web to screen movies for those who are hunkering down at home. In Marin County, the Smith Rafael Film Center is closed, though the theater is thriving online with the Rafael@ Home series featuring several films available to rent and stream...
Read more

Where California Stands with Coronavirus Testing Right Now

Coronavirus testing has been plagued by confusion, delays and chaos, with the number of available, usable tests far outstripped by the need.
Read more

Stay Home

News breaks quickly these days. In an address on Sunday afternoon, Gov. Gavin Newsom strongly recommended that all bars, wine tasting rooms, nightclubs and breweries in the state close for the coming weeks. Additionally, Californians older than 65 and those with preexisting conditions—the demographics most vulnerable to COVID-19—should quarantine themselves, Newsom recommended. On Monday, seven Bay Area jurisdictions, including Marin and...
Read more

Volkswagen Presents Warren Miller’s Timeless

Year after year, ski and snowboard enthusiasts of all ages look forward to the coming of winter. This fall, Warren Miller Entertainment (WME) confirms that the joys of winter are eternal with its 70th full-length feature film, Timeless, presented by Volkswagen. Much of the world has changed since Warren Miller started making ski films in 1949, but the passion of...
Read more

Super Soy Me

Like any typical chump, I planned to start an ambitious new diet on New Year’s Day. Fine, the day after New Year’s Day. The diet was strict, but had just one simple rule: Eat food, mostly frozen, as much as I want, on a $100 per week budget. And here’s the kicker: Eat only food that’s made by Amy’s Kitchen,...
Read more

Warren Miller’s Face of Winter

Winter is just around the corner, and Warren Miller Entertainment is ready to kick off the season with its 69th installment ski and snowboard film, Face of Winter, presented by Volkswagen. The late, great Warren Miller built his legacy capturing the essence of winter magic, and today that legacy launches the start of the ski and snowboard season every...
Read more
123...638Page 1 of 638
3,002FansLike
3,850FollowersFollow
Pacific Sun cover
CURRENT ISSUE & ARCHIVES
Pacific Sun cover
Pacific Sun cover
CURRENT ISSUE & ARCHIVES
Newsletters Subscribe Advertise Contact Us Letter to the Editor Press Release Obituaries Find a Paper Distribute Pacific Sun Vote for Best Of
win free stuff
Features Local News News Upfront
Arts Culture Food & Drink Movies Music Theater
Astrology Columns Editor's Note Letters Opinion Spirit
Arts & Culture Beauty, Health & Wellness Cannabis Everyday Services Family & Pets Home Improvement Recreation Restaurants Romance Shopping
All Upcoming Events Today's Events Submit an Event Promote Your Event

FOLLOW US

Copyright © Weeklys All rights reserved.

OUR PUBLICATIONS

ADVERTISING Advertise Legal Submit an Obituary Legal Notices Fictitious Business Name (FBN) Statements Doing Business As (DBA) Notices Trustee Sale Notices Order to Show Cause for Change of Name

COMPANY INFO Job Opportunities Journalism Awards Privacy Policy

Support Local Journalism