Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 DECISION REGARDING INVESTIGATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S GAS DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES RECORDS

ABSTRACT: Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the DECISION REGARDING INVESTIGATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S GAS DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES RECORDS document copy is embedded. Summary Today‘s decision finds that Pacific Gas and Electric Company failed to comply with applicable law and regulations in maintaining accurate records of its natural gas distribution system. These inaccurate records were relied on for locating and marking underground facilities in anticipation of excavation. The inaccurately mapped and consequently inaccurately marked facilities led to excavators damaging the distribution system in several instances. Release of natural gas, service interruptions and, in one case, significant property damage resulted. Today‘s decision first separates the violations into systemic failures and isolated mistakes in an otherwise compliant system, and imposes substantial fines for systemic failures and graduated fines for the isolated instances. Total fines of $25,626,000 are assessed for the systemic violations and incidents found in today‘s decision. With the Citation previously assessed for the Carmel incident, the total fine imposed on Pacific Gas and Electric Company for distribution system incidents is $36,476,000. This proceeding is closed.
Carmel proposed fines of up to $651 million, with supporting calculations. Carmel also recommended linking executive compensation to safety objectives, appointing independent monitors for PG&E‘s system, and ordering PG&E to compensate Carmel for its expenses.
The City requested reimbursement from PG&E for its expenses. The Commission‘s policy choice to decline to use its equitable powers to order PG&E to reimburse governmental entities for their litigation costs was set forth in D.15-04-024 at 168-170. The City has presented no reason to depart from that policy choice.
The City also recommended linking executive compensation to safety performance; a similar proposal was also examined and found duplicative or unsupported in D.15-04-024 at 167. Finally, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea sought appointment of an independent monitor. That proposal was also considered in D.15-04-024 at 155– 60, where the Commission authorized another $30 million in reimbursement for experts for SED in addition to the $15 million awarded in Rulemaking 11-02-019, and otherwise denied the requested independent monitor.
Finally, the parties agree that the fines ordered in today‘s decision may not be included in regulated revenue requirement nor recovery sought from ratepayers in any manner.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Within 30 days of the effective date of this order Pacific Gas and Electric Company must pay a fine of $25,626,000 by check or money order payable to the California Public Utilities Commission and mailed or delivered to the Commission‘s Fiscal Office, 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 3000, San Francisco, CA 94102. Write on the face of the check or money order ―For deposit to the General Fund per Decision 16-08-020.‖
2. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) shall convene, support, and report on a meet and confer process to consider and develop additional remedial measures necessary to address the issues identified in today‘s decision. The objective of this process will be a comprehensive compliance plan that includes all feasible and cost-effective measures necessary to improve PG&E‘s natural gas distribution system record-keeping. The participants shall begin their review with Exhibit E to Decision 15-04-024 to evaluate those remedial measures to determine whether more or different requirements are needed for the gas distribution system. All parties to this proceeding shall be invited to participate as well as all parties to the most recent general rate case and Investigation 11-02-016. The Commission‘s Safety and Enforcement Division shall participate and monitor this process. No later than 120 days after the effective date of this order, PG&E shall file and serve its initial compliance plan.
3. Investigation 14-11-008 is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated August 18, 2016, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL PICKER
President
MICHEL PETER FLORIO
CATHERINE J.K. SANDOVAL
CARLA J. PETERMAN
LIANE M. RANDOLPH
Commissioners
Date of Issuance 8/26/2016
DECISION REGARDING INVESTIGATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S GAS DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES RECORDS

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING ADMITTING EXHIBIT CA-47 INTO THE RECORD AND DENYING THE OFFICE OF RATEPAYER ADVOCATES’ MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF TESTIMONY FROM THE RECORD

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING ADMITTING EXHIBIT CA-47 INTO THE RECORD AND DENYING THE OFFICE OF RATEPAYER ADVOCATES’ MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF TESTIMONY FROM THE RECORD document copy is embedded. During the evidentiary hearings held on May 26, 2016, California-American Water Company (Cal-Am) introduced and marked for identification Exhibit CA-47, titled “Agreement of California-American Water Company, Citizens for Public Water, City of Pacific Grove, Coalition of Peninsula Businesses, Division of Ratepayer Advocates, Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority, Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, and Planning and Conservation League Foundation, on Pre-Construction Activities Related to Certain Pipeline Facilities” (Exhibit CA-47). All parties involved signed the Agreement on July 31, 2013. IT IS RULED that Exhibit CA-47 is moved into the record as of May 26, 2016, and the Office of Ratepayer Advocate’s motion to strike portions of the transcript is denied.
FILED 8-30-16
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING ADMITTING EXHIBIT CA-47 INTO THE RECORD AND DENYING THE OFFICE OF RATEPAYER ADVOCATES’ MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF TESTIMONY FROM THE RECORD

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING DENYING WATER PLUS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING DENYING WATER PLUS’ MOTION TO DISMISS document copy is embedded. Summary On March 30, 2016, Water Plus filed a Motion to Dismiss the Proceeding of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (Motion). This ruling denies the motion to dismiss because: (1) the motion does not state the law supporting the ruling requested; (2) triable issues of material fact remain; and (3) even interpreting the facts in the manner most favorable to Water Plus, Water Plus would not be entitled to judgment as a matter of law. IT IS RULED that Water Plus’ motion to dismiss is denied.
FILED 8-30-16
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING DENYING WATER PLUS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING REJECTING COALITION OF PENINSULA BUSINESSES’ AMENDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO CLAIM INTERVENOR COMPENSATION

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING REJECTING COALITION OF PENINSULA BUSINESSES’ AMENDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO CLAIM INTERVENOR COMPENSATION document copy is embedded. Party intending to claim intervenor compensation): Coalition of Peninsula Businesses, an unincorporated association of Monterey County Hospitality Association, Monterey Commercial Property Owners Association, Monterey County Association of Realtors, Chambers of Commerce of Carmel, Monterey Peninsula and Pacific Grove, Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula, and the Santa Clara-Monterey District of Associated General Contractors of California. IT IS RULED that: 1. The Notice of Intent filed by the Coalition of Peninsula Businesses is rejected.
FILED 8-30-16
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING REJECTING COALITION OF PENINSULA BUSINESSES’ AMENDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO CLAIM INTERVENOR COMPENSATION

Saturday, August 27, 2016

Friday, August 26, 2016

City Administrator Chip Rerig: FRIDAY LETTER, August 26, 2016

FRIDAY LETTER August 26, 2016
Improved Community Planning and Building Applications and Handouts
Carmel Beach (south end)
Holman Highway 68 Roundabout Update
Highway 68 Roundabout weekly notifications:
www.tamcmonterey.org/programs/highway-projects/highway-68-roundabout/
City Staff Recruitment
Board and Commission Recruitment
Monthly Tourism Revenue Mixed
Centennial Friday 'Fact'

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S RESPONSE PURSUANT TO RULE 14.4(D) OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE TO THE APPEALS OF THE SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AND CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

ABSTRACT: Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S RESPONSE PURSUANT TO RULE 14.4(D) OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE TO THE APPEALS OF THE SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AND CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA and APPENDIX A PG&E’s Measures to Continue to Improve Gas Distribution Recordkeeping and Promote Safety and APPENDIX B  PG&E’s Responses to Proposed Remedial Measures document copies are embedded. 
INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Rule 14.4(d) of the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) hereby submits this joint response to the Appeals of the Presiding Officer’s Decision (POD)1 filed by the Safety and Enforcement Division and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Third, PG&E explains why SED’s and Carmel’s proposals for calculating higher fines for specific incidents, including the Carmel incident, are inappropriate. SED’s and Carmel’s alternative proposals largely involve a mechanical application of fines at the top of the statutory range, while giving no consideration to the fact-specific criteria that must be considered under the Public Utilities Code and Commission precedent when determining an appropriate penalty. PG&E submits that the decision in this proceeding should consider the evidence of record and the relevant criteria for assessing a penalty—including factually comparable precedents, the relative severity of the incidents, PG&E’s commitment to continuous improvement, and the objective measures demonstrating PG&E’s general compliance with regulations.
Fourth, PG&E explains how SED and Carmel misconstrue the evidentiary record and the POD’s findings in challenging the fine imposed regarding the De Anza leak repair records.
CONCLUSION PG&E has an unwavering commitment to continuously improving not only its gas distribution system recordkeeping practices but also the safety of its distribution system, and complying with all applicable rules, regulations, and statutes. PG&E is also committed to continuing to work with the Commission to pursue these important goals. The many initiatives PG&E has undertaken to build state-of-the-industry infrastructure, achieve recordkeeping best practices, and minimize the risk of incidents on its gas distribution system demonstrate the durability and sincerity of PG&E’s commitment. 
PG&E acknowledges that more work remains to be done and that, at times in the past, its conduct has not measured up to the high expectations that the Company sets for itself. PG&E intends to continue doing exactly what it has been doing—focusing on safety, finding and fixing issues as they arise, and searching for innovative, effective, and technologically advanced solutions to the challenges that remain.
For the reasons stated above, PG&E submits that the arguments advanced on appeal by SED and Carmel for increasing the penalties imposed in the POD are unsupported by or contrary to the evidence of record, inconsistent with the governing legal standards, and accordingly should be rejected by the Commission. PG&E looks forward to working cooperatively with SED and the Intervenors in the meet-and-confer process to identify and consider further opportunities to continue improving its recordkeeping and other practices to better serve the public and promote the safety of its system.

Pg&e Company's Response i.14!11!008 7-18-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd
FILED 7-18-16
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S RESPONSE PURSUANT TO RULE 14.4(D) OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE TO THE APPEALS OF THE SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AND CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
PG&E’s Measures to Continue to Improve Gas Distribution Recordkeeping and Promote Safety
APPENDIX B
PG&E’s Responses to Proposed Remedial Measures

Court of Appeal Opinion DISPOSITION Marina’s request for judicial notice, filed on January 20, 2016, is denied. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE, CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent. A145604 (San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. CGC13528312):

ABSTRACT: RE: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE, CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent. A145604 (San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. CGC13528312) Court of Appeal Opinion Humes, P.J., concurred Margulies, J. and Banke, J., filed 8/18/16. DISPOSITION Marina’s request for judicial notice, filed on January 20, 2016, is denied. California-American’s request for judicial notice, filed on February 9, 2016, is granted. The judgment is affirmed. Appeal Nos. A146166 and A146405 shall remain stayed until 30 days after the issuance of the remittitur in this case. The opening briefs in those stayed cases shall be due 40 days after the issuance of the remittitur in this appeal.
Court of Appeal Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE,
CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent.
A145604
(San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. CGC13528312):

NOTES:
1st Appellate District
Case Summary

Trial Court Case:
CGC13528312
Court of Appeal Case:
A146166
Division:
1
Case Caption:
California-American Water Company v. Marina Coast Water District
Case Type:
CV
Filing Date:
08/20/2015
Case Summary

Trial Court Case:
CGC13528312
Court of Appeal Case:
A146405
Division:
1
Case Caption:
California-American Water Company v. Marina Coast Water District
Case Type:
CV
Filing Date:
09/23/2015
Cross Referenced Cases:
California-American Water Company v. Marina Coast Water District
California-American Water Company v. Marina Coast Water District

Case Summary

Trial Court Case:
CGC13528312
Court of Appeal Case:
A145604
Court of Appeal Opinion:
[PDF] [DOC]
   
Division:
1
Case Caption:
California-American Water Company v. Marina Coast Water District
Case Type:
CV
Filing Date:
06/30/2015
Oral Argument Date/Time:
07/06/2016   09:00 AM

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING REGARDING AGENDAS AND EX PARTE BAN RELATIVE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 WORKSHOP AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION HEARING

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING REGARDING AGENDAS AND EX PARTE BAN RELATIVE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 WORKSHOP AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION HEARING document copy is embedded. On September 1, 2016, the Commission will hold a workshop and a public participation hearing at the Sunset Center (Carpenter Hall), San Carlos Street at Ninth Avenue, Carmel-by-the-Sea, California. IT IS RULED that a workshop and public participation hearing will be held on September 1, 2016, as described in the body of this ruling. The ban on ex parte communications in this proceeding does not apply to the workshop, but does apply to the public participation hearing.
FILED 8-19-16
ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING REGARDING AGENDAS AND EX PARTE BAN RELATIVE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 WORKSHOP AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION HEARING

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 E-MAIL RULING CORRECTING ERROR IN PPH START TIME

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the E-MAIL RULING CORRECTING ERROR IN PPH START TIME document copy is embedded. IT IS RULED that the correct time for the start of the September 1, 2016 public participation hearing is 3:00 p.m.
FILED 8-22-16
E-MAIL RULING CORRECTING ERROR IN PPH START TIME

Friday, August 19, 2016

City Administrator Chip Rerig: FRIDAY LETTER, August 19, 2016

FRIDAY LETTER August 19, 2016
Clean-up around City Facilities
Scenic Road Pathway Improvements
Downtown Parking
Our Wildlife Neighbors are coming to Town
Holman Highway 68 Roundabout Update
Do the new parking rates at Bruno's include a wash and wax?
Police Department Picks New Patrol Vehicle
Landscaping in the Commercial District
THANK YOU!

MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP. Attorneys for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Proposed Fines of $651,000,000; California Public Utilities Commission Orders Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) To Pay Fine of $25,626,000. City Requested Reimbursement from PG&E for Its Expenses, Recommended Linking Executive Compensation to Safety Performance & Appointment of an Independent Monitor: DENIED

ABSTRACT: Between October 2014 and June 2016 (as of the latest Check Register), City legal expenditures related to the natural gas explosion in Carmel-by-the-Sea, March, 2014, and, separately, a formal penalty consideration case against PG&E relating to recordkeeping associated with the utility’s gas distribution infrastructure (BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Investigation 14-11-008), amounted to a total of $440,396.45 to MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP., resulting in a $10,850,000 Citation assessed for the Carmel incident and total fines of $25,626,000 for the systemic violations and incidents, for a the total fine imposed on Pacific Gas and Electric Company for distribution system incidents of $36,476,000.

TIMELINE

MARCH 3, 2014 – AUGUST 18, 2016


MARCH 3, 2014: Carmel – March 3, 2014 A natural gas explosion destroyed a house located in the city of Carmel-by-the-Sea. Prior to the explosion, a PG&E welding crew was preparing to tie-in the gas distribution main along 3rd Avenue into the newly installed plastic main on Guadalupe Street. The crew welded a tapping tee onto a two-inch steel distribution main on 3rd Avenue, and did not know that the steel distribution main had an inserted and unmapped 1¼-inch plastic line, which was damaged by the welding and tapping process which caused the natural gas to escape the plastic main. Natural gas migrated into the residential structure and later resulted in an explosion.

OCTOBER 9, 2014 – NOVEMBER 18, 2014: CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA LEGAL EXPENDITURES
Steven R. Myers Attorney MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON 555 12TH STREET,
SUITE 1500 OAKLAND CA 94607
For: Carmel-by-the-Sea
Emilie E. De La Motte Attorney At Law MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER & WILSON
Britt K. Strottman Attorney MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON

129212 10/9/2014 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP $918.75 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-LEGAL
Vendor Total-> $918.75

129431 11/18/2014 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP $10,212.70 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-LEGAL
129431 11/18/2014 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP $7,220.28 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-LEGAL
129431 11/18/2.014 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP $4,450.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-LEGAL
129431 11/18/2014 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP $1,870.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-LEGAL
Vendor Total----> $23,752.98
TOTAL: Contract Spend $24,671.73

NOVEMBER 20, 2014: CPUC ISSUES $10.85 MILLION STAFF CITATION TO PG&E; COMMISSIONERS OPEN FORMAL CASE TO EVALUATE PG&E’S GAS DISTRIBUTION RECORDKEEPING
Docket #: I.14-11-008
SAN FRANCISCO, November 20, 2014 - The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today issued a $10.85 million staff Citation to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) for a natural gas explosion in Carmel-by-the-Sea in March, and, separately, opened a formal penalty consideration case against PG&E relating to recordkeeping associated with the utility’s gas distribution infrastructure.
Citation Date: November 20, 2014
Citation#: ALJ-274 2014-11-001
$10,850,000.00: State Treasury to the credit of the General Fund

JANUARY 22, 2015-JUNE 30, 2016: CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA LEGAL EXPENDITURES
Steven R. Myers Attorney MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON 555 12TH STREET, SUITE 1500 OAKLAND CA 94607
For: Carmel-by-the-Sea
Emilie E. De La Motte Attorney At Law MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER & WILSON
Britt K. Strottman Attorney MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON

129847 1/22/2015 MEY04 (MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP) $24,360.64 professional services- PG&E Incident $ 49,032.37

130324 3/19/2015 MEY04 (MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP) 1,188.44 Prof fees-PG&E $ 50,220.81

130554 5/1/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 8,643.50 PG&E GAS EXPLOSION LEGAL/PROF SERVICES
130554 5/1/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 11,115.00 PG&E GAS EXPLOSION LEGAL/PROF SERVICES
130554 5/1/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 16,683.19 PG&E GAS EXPLOSION LEGAL/PROF SERVICES
130554 5/1/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 499.25 PG&E GAS EXPLOSION LEGAL/PROF SERVICES
130679 5/29/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 16,259.38 PG&E GAS EXPLOSION LEGAL/PROF SERVICES $ 103,421.13
Vendor Total -----> 53,200.32

130853 6/26/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 12,706.75 PROF FEES:PG&E GAS EXPLOSION 116,127.88
Vendor Total -----> 12,706.75

131156 8/20/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 2,178.75 FY 15-16 PROF FEES RELATING TO PGE GAS EXPLOS 6/14
131213 8/27/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 33,768.43 FY 15-16 PROF FEES RELATING TO PGE EXPLOSION 3/14 152,075.06
Vendor Total -----> 35,947.18

131505 10/2/ 2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 17,654.65 PROF LEGAL SERVICES. PG&E MATTER 3/3/14 AUG BILL
Vendor Total-----> 17,654.65

131815 11/24/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 8,765.00 PG&E EXPLOSION PROF SERVICES
131815 11/24/ 2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 787.75 PG&E EXPLOSION 3/3/14 PROF SERVICES
131815 11/24/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 41,951.44 PG&E EXPLOSION PROF SERVICES 221.233.90
Vendor Total-> 51,504.19

132052 12/29/2015 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 15,643.95 PG&E EXPLOSION MARCH2014 NOVEMBER PROF SERVICES 236,877.85
Vendor Total--·> 15,643.95

132230 1/27/2016 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 22,612.40 PG&E GAS EXPLOSION PROF SERVICES FOR DEC2015 259.490.35
Vendor Total - - > 22,612.40

132915 5/11/2016 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 121,031.60 PG&E 2014 EXPLOSION-PROF SERVICES FOR JAN 2016
132!H5 5/11/2016 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 38,999.77 PG&E 2014 EXPLOSION-PROF SERVICES FOR FEB 2016
131915 5/11/1016 M£YERS/NAV£ PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 15,918.00 PG&E 2014 EXPLOSION-PROF SERVICES FOR MARCH 2016
Vendor Total -> 177,949.37

JUNE 1, 2016: PRESIDING OFFICER’S DECISION
Total fines of $24,310,000 are assessed for the systemic violations and incidents found in today’s decision. With the Citation previously assessed for the Carmel incident, the total fine imposed on Pacific Gas and Electric Company for distribution system incidents is $35,160,000.

133222 6/30/2016 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 2,596.73 APRIL 2016 PROF SERVICES RE: PGE 2014 EXPLOSION
133222 6/30/2016 MEYERS/NAVE PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP 360.00 PROF SERVICES MAY 2016 RE: PGE 2014 EXPLOSION
Vendor Total----> 2,956.73
TOTAL: $415,724.72

AUGUST 18, 2016: MODIFIED PRESIDING OFFICER’S DECISION REGARDING INVESTIGATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S GAS DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES RECORDS
Total fines of $25,626,000 are assessed for the systemic violations and incidents found in today‘s decision. With the Citation previously assessed for the Carmel incident, the total fine imposed on Pacific Gas and Electric Company for distribution system incidents is $36,476,000.

EXCERPTS;
Appeal of the Presiding Officer’s Decision
SED and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea filed appeals of the Presiding Officer‘s Decision on July 1, 2016. PG&E filed its response to both appeals on July 18, 2016. The grounds on which each party contended that the Presiding Officer Decision was unlawful or erroneous are analyzed below. Where noted in today‘s decision, the Presiding Officer‘s Decision has been revised in response to the appeals. In all other respects, the appeals are denied.
In today‘s decision, we add the omitted $50,000 Carmel fine to the total fine and revise the De Anza missing records per-day fine from $834.95 to $1,000 per day. The additional De Anza amount of $1,266,000 plus $50,000 brings the total fine to $25,626,000, as compared to the total fine of $24,310,000 in the Presiding Officer‘s decision.
5.1. Corrected Sum of Fine Assessed
SED47 contends and PG&E48 agrees that the sum of fines assessed on page 55 of the Presiding Officer‘s Decision incorrectly omits the $50,000 fine for PG&E‘s service failures to City of Carmel-by-the-Sea. This error has been corrected in today‘s decision.
5.2. Total Fine Amount and Carmel Incident
SED argued that the Presiding Officer Decision erred in setting the fine too low and that the fine for the Carmel incident should be increased by $20.73 million.  As set forth above, the Commission had previously upheld a citation of $10.85 million for that incident and SED did not dispute the Presiding Officer‘s Decision holding that an additional fine of $10.8 million should be assessed against PG&E for failing to prevent recurrences of leaks caused by unmapped plastic inserts (the cause of the Carmel explosion).
SED argued the Proposed Decision erred in adopting a fine of only $21.65 million and an additional fine of $20.73 million should be imposed. PG&E stated that a total fine of $42.38 million would be “disproportionate to the harm that resulted” and “unprecedented.”
SED cited to no Commission precedent with a fine of this magnitude for similar violations nor aggravating circumstances that would justify such a departure from Commission precedent. SED has shown no error or unlawful determination in the Presiding Officer‘s Decision.
5.5. Per Incident Fines and Additional Incidents
SED argued that the maximum fine for each incident should be imposed and that additional incidents should be included.  PG&E responded in opposition that the Commission has discretion to tailor the fines to specific facts of each violation and that additional incidents are not within the scope of this proceeding.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea also contended that the Commission was without discretion to decide, based on the specific facts of each violation, whether to apply Public Utilities Code § 2108 to uncorrected violations.
In its Appeal, SED acknowledged that the Commission has the discretion to decline to impose daily fines pursuant to § 2108.55 PG&E agreed with SED and cited to D.15-04-024.56
We find that the additional incidents were outside the scope of this proceeding and that the Commission has substantial discretion to tabulate and impose fines based on the specific facts of each violation. SED and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea have demonstrated no error in the Presiding Officer‘s Decision.
5.6. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Other Requests
The City requested reimbursement from PG&E for its expenses. The Commission‘s policy choice to decline to use its equitable powers to order PG&E to reimburse governmental entities for their litigation costs was set forth in D.15-04-024 at 168-170. The City has presented no reason to depart from that policy choice.
The City also recommended linking executive compensation to safety performance; a similar proposal was also examined and found duplicative or unsupported in D.15-04-024 at 167. Finally, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea sought appointment of an independent monitor. That proposal was also considered in D.15-04-024 at 155– 60, where the Commission authorized another $30 million in reimbursement for experts for SED in addition to the $15 million awarded in Rulemaking 11-02-019, and otherwise denied the requested independent monitor.
Finally, the parties agree that the fines ordered in today‘s decision may not be included in regulated revenue requirement nor recovery sought from ratepayers in any manner.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea brought the unique perspectives of local government and first responders to this proceeding. The efforts of the City to bring forth these perspectives added greatly to the development of a complete evidentiary record and assisted the Commission in discharging its duties.

REFERENCE:
Decision on Fines and Remedies to Be Imposed 04-09-15
Date of Issuance April 9, 2015
DECISION ON FINES AND REMEDIES TO BE IMPOSED ON PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE OPERATION AND PRACTICES OF ITS NATURAL GAS TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PIPELINES

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 MODIFIED PRESIDING OFFICER’S DECISION REGARDING INVESTIGATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S GAS DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES RECORDS

ABSTRACT: Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the MODIFIED PRESIDING OFFICER’S DECISION REGARDING INVESTIGATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY’S GAS DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES RECORDS document copy is embedded
Summary
Today‘s decision finds that Pacific Gas and Electric Company failed to comply with applicable law and regulations in maintaining accurate records of its natural gas distribution system. These inaccurate records were relied on for locating and marking underground facilities in anticipation of excavation. The inaccurately mapped and consequently inaccurately marked facilities led to excavators damaging the distribution system in several instances. Release of natural gas, service interruptions and, in one case, significant property damage resulted. Today‘s decision first separates the violations into systemic failures and isolated mistakes in an otherwise compliant system, and imposes substantial fines for systemic failures and graduated fines for the isolated instances. Total fines of $25,626,000 are assessed for the systemic violations and incidents found in today‘s decision. With the Citation previously assessed for the Carmel incident, the total fine imposed on Pacific Gas and Electric Company for distribution system incidents is $36,476,000. This proceeding is closed.
Conclusion
For the violations of federal and state law and regulations set forth above, PG&E shall pay a total fine of $25,626,000.
Violation
Amount of Fine
Failure to Minimize Possibility of Recurrence – Plastic Inserts

$10,800,000
Failure to Analyze and Minimize Possibility of Recurrence – Missing DeAnza Records

$12,052,000
Failure to Provide Safe and Reliable Service – Milpitas 1

$ 1,974,000
Specific Incidents
$ 750,000
Service failure to City of Carmel-by-the Sea
$ 50,000
TOTAL
$25,626,000
 Appeal of the Presiding Officer’s Decision 
SED and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea filed appeals of the Presiding Officer‘s Decision on July 1, 2016. PG&E filed its response to both appeals on July 18, 2016. The grounds on which each party contended that the Presiding Officer Decision was unlawful or erroneous are analyzed below. Where noted in today‘s decision, the Presiding Officer‘s Decision has been revised in response to the appeals. In all other respects, the appeals are denied.
In today‘s decision, we add the omitted $50,000 Carmel fine to the total fine and revise the De Anza missing records per-day fine from $834.95 to $1,000 per day. The additional De Anza amount of $1,266,000 plus $50,000 brings the total fine to $25,626,000, as compared to the total fine of $24,310,000 in the Presiding Officer‘s decision.
Corrected Sum of Fine Assessed
SED contends and PG&E48 agrees that the sum of fines assessed on page 55 of the Presiding Officer‘s Decision incorrectly omits the $50,000 fine for PG&E‘s service failures to City of Carmel-by-the-Sea. This error has been corrected in today‘s decision.
Total Fine Amount and Carmel Incident
SED argued that the Presiding Officer Decision erred in setting the fine too low and that the fine for the Carmel incident should be increased by $20.73 million. As set forth above, the Commission had previously upheld a citation of $10.85 million for that incident and SED did not dispute the Presiding Officer‘s Decision holding that an additional fine of $10.8 million should be assessed against PG&E for failing to prevent recurrences of leaks caused by unmapped plastic inserts (the cause of the Carmel explosion).
SED argued the Proposed Decision erred in adopting a fine of only $21.65 million and an additional fine of $20.73 million should be imposed. PG&E stated that a total fine of $42.38 million would be “disproportionate to the harm that resulted” and “unprecedented. “
SED cited to no Commission precedent with a fine of this magnitude for similar violations nor aggravating circumstances that would justify such a departure from Commission precedent. SED has shown no error or unlawful determination in the Presiding Officer‘s Decision.
Per Incident Fines and Additional Incidents
SED argued that the maximum fine for each incident should be imposed and that additional incidents should be included. PG&E responded in opposition that the Commission has discretion to tailor the fines to specific facts of each violation and that additional incidents are not within the scope of this proceeding.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea also contended that the Commission was without discretion to decide, based on the specific facts of each violation, whether to apply Public Utilities Code § 2108 to uncorrected violations.
In its Appeal, SED acknowledged that the Commission has the discretion to decline to impose daily fines pursuant to § 2108.55 PG&E agreed with SED and cited to D.15-04-024.56
We find that the additional incidents were outside the scope of this proceeding and that the Commission has substantial discretion to tabulate and impose fines based on the specific facts of each violation. SED and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea have demonstrated no error in the Presiding Officer‘s Decision.
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Other Requests
The City requested reimbursement from PG&E for its expenses. The Commission‘s policy choice to decline to use its equitable powers to order PG&E to reimburse governmental entities for their litigation costs was set forth in D.15-04-024 at 168-170. The City has presented no reason to depart from that policy choice.
The City also recommended linking executive compensation to safety performance; a similar proposal was also examined and found duplicative or unsupported in D.15-04-024 at 167. Finally, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea sought appointment of an independent monitor. That proposal was also considered in D.15-04-024 at 155– 60, where the Commission authorized another $30 million in reimbursement for experts for SED in addition to the $15 million awarded in Rulemaking 11-02-019, and otherwise denied the requested independent monitor.
Finally, the parties agree that the fines ordered in today‘s decision may not be included in regulated revenue requirement nor recovery sought from ratepayers in any manner.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea brought the unique perspectives of local government and first responders to this proceeding. The efforts of the City to bring forth these perspectives added greatly to the development of a complete evidentiary record and assisted the Commission in discharging its duties.
NOTE: Under Pub. Util. Code § 1802(b)(2), state, federal and local governmental agencies are not eligible for intervenor compensation, and recent legislative attempts to expand intervenor compensation to government entities were unsuccessful. (See, Senate Bill 1364 (Huff, 2012) and Senate Bill 1165 (Wright, 2012).) 
Cities, counties and other governmental agencies regularly participate in Commission proceedings with no expectation of compensation for their litigation expenses. In many cases they have made very significant contributions to important Commission decisions, and have received no compensation.

Wednesday, August 17, 2016

California Coastal Commission APPROVED AS SUBMITTED City of Carmel-by-the-Sea LCP Amendment No. LCP-3-CML-16-0005-1 Part A (Affordable Housing Incentives) & SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE FOUND, de Novo Hearing CONTINUED Appeal No. A-3-CML-16-0057 (Henderson, Carmel-by-the-Sea)

ABSTRACT:  On August 10, 2016, the California Coastal Commission APPROVED AS SUBMITTED City of Carmel-by-the-Sea LCP Amendment No. LCP-3-CML-16-0005-1 Part A (Affordable Housing Incentives) and SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE FOUND, de Novo Hearing CONTINUED Appeal No. A-3-CML-16-0057 (Henderson, Carmel-by-the-Sea).

CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT
15. LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAMS (LCPs).
Public hearing and action on request by City of Carmel-by-the-Sea to amend the Implementation Plan’s incentives for affordable housing, including by establishing new standards for density bonuses in areas with Core Commercial and Residential/Commercial land use designations, for "Bonus Density" allowances within the R-4 zoning district, and for "Floor Area Bonus" allowances for R-4 and Commercial zoning districts. (KK-SC) APPROVED AS SUBMITTED

16. NEW APPEALS.
d. Appeal No. A-3-CML-16-0057 (Henderson, Carmel-by-the-Sea) CORRESPONDENCE
Appeal by Commissioners Shallenberger and Howell of decision by City of Carmel-by-the-Sea granting permit with conditions to Wellington Henderson Jr. for construction of 8-ft.-tall, 63-ft.-long upper bluff wall with faux bluff facing and drainage and landscaping improvements on bluffs fronting 26336 Scenic Rd., along Carmel Beach in Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey County. (MW-SC) SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE FOUND, de Novo Hearing CONTINUED
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
Appeal No. A-3-CML-16-0057 (Henderson, Carmel-by-the-Sea)
Appeal by Commissioners Shallenberger and Howell of decision by City of Carmel-by-the-Sea granting permit with conditions to Wellington Henderson Jr. for construction of 8-ft.-tall, 63-ft.-long upper bluff wall with faux bluff facing and drainage and landscaping improvements on bluffs fronting 26336 Scenic Rd., along Carmel Beach in Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey County. 

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Mission Trail Nature Preserve Mountain View Avenue Entrance Project: (Photographic) PROGRESS REPORT WEEK ONE


View to the West, Toward the Mountain View Avenue Entrance, Mission Trail Nature Preserve


                                                                         Close-Up

Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve (FOMTNP): An Official City Support Group

ABSTRACT: At the October 2, 2012 City Council meeting, Council Member HILLYARD moved to approve a Resolution designating the Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve (FOMTNP) as an official City support group on the condition they meet the Support Group policy requirements, seconded by Council Member BEACH and carried by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BEACH; HILLYARD; TALMAGE; THEIS & BURNETT
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
The City Council Agenda Item Summary, prepared by Mike Branson, City Forester, including FOREST, PARKS, AND BEACH DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT, and Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve A Report on Proposed Projects for Mission Trail Nature Preserve To Further Implement Carmel's General Plan and MTNP Master Plan (October 2013) (“Blue Book”), document copies are embedded. The “Blue Book” states, in part, as follows:
Introduction:
Mission Trail Nature Preserve (the "Preserve") was designated by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (the "City") as a nature park in 1979. Subsequently, the Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan, including a special section concerning the Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden, (the "Master Plan"), through an extensive process, was developed and adopted as a part of the General Plan of the City. The Master Plan appears as Appendix H to the General Plan of the City as updated, most recently, in 2003. Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve ("FOMTNP"), as an informal organization to support the Preserve, was formed in 2009. Recently, FOMTNP was formally incorporated as a non-profit corporation. Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve has been recognized by the City as an official volunteer support group.One of the reasons behind formation of Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve was the board's collective realization that comprehensive implementation of the Master Plan by the City had not taken place. In its role as a support group of the City, and in order to provide the City with a comprehensive account of matters needing attention in the Preserve, the board of directors of FOMTNP conducted, over a period of months in 2013, a series of workshops in which it reviewed the current status of the Preserve against the background of the concepts expressed in the Master Plan. Through this process, the board identified numerous items and issues, which, in its judgment, should receive the attention of the City, if the vision of the Master Plan is to be realized. The result of this special effort is the following compendium of projects and key issues to consider in planning and implementing this recommended list of top priorities. This report is presented in hopes of inducing the City to undertake the full realization of the vision of the Master Plan, including establishing time lines and budgets for its implementation.
Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve
Members Gallery
Joyce S. Stevens:
 Born in Seattle, Washington, Joyce spent her formative years in Anchorage, Alaska; high school in Juneau Alaska; Bachelor of Architecture, 1954, University of Washington; some post graduate at Harvard University; worked for private architectural firms in Alaska, 1954 to 1957; architect with the Air Force until 1962; staff architect at Fort Ord from 1962 to 1985; retired in 1985. She has three architectural licenses from Washington, Alaska and California. Joyce has lived in Carmel since 1962 and has a grown daughter, Robin Moran.
She is a founding member of the Alaska Chapter of American Institute of Architects and is active in the Monterey Bay AlA Chapter 20 for the past twenty years. Joyce was an active member of the Ventana Chapter of Sierra Club from 1970 to 1995; on the Executive Committee from 197 4 to 1977; led outings from mid 1980s to 2007. Co-founded: Monterey Bay Dunes Coalition 1985; Hatton Canyon Coalition 1989; Fort Ord Parkland Group1991; Monterey Pine Forest Watch 1992 (currently president); Carmel Open Space Task Force 1995; Fort Hunter Liggett Natural Resources Group 1996; Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve 2009; Friends of Jack Peak Park 2011. On the Board of Directors of Big Sur Land Trust for 9 years, president in 1997.
Karen Ferlito: Karen lives in Carmel-by-the-Sea with her husband, Hugo Ferlito, DDS, overlooking the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. A resident since 1989, Karen has devoted time to various organizations including Friends of Carmel Forest (past and present), The Big Sur Land Trust (9 years, 2 years as Chair), The Big Sur International Marathon (1994-present), Monterey County Landwatch, Monterey Pine Forest Watch, Carmel Forest and Beach Commission (1994- 2000, 2012-present), The Statewide Pitch Canker Taskforce and Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.
An Ohio State University graduate with a B.A. in education, Karen is the mother of three grown children. Karen was active in Santa Catalina parents' organizations and Friends of Carmel Unified Schools when her children attended local schools.
Marsha McMahan Zelus:Marsha Zelus is a community volunteer and former teacher. She grew up in Fresno and started coming to Carmel with her family as a child. She graduated from University of Southern California with a B.A. and University of California-Berkley with a teaching credential. Marsha then moved to Australia for 17 years where she taught high school English and History while raising two sons.
In 1989 Marsha moved back to Carmel. While her sons attended local schools, she was involved in parent activities and was on the Board of Trustees for (Chartwell School. She joined the American Red Cross-Carmel Chapter (now part of the Monterey Bay Chapter) and remains an active Disaster Volunteer. She was on the Carmel Beach Task Force Committee. Marsha also served 9 years on the Big Sur Land Trust Board of Trustees and continues to serve on the finance Committee. Last year she completed the training to become a docent at Point Lobos State Preserve.
Gary Girard: A 37-year resident of the Carmel area, has practiced landscape architecture on the Monterey Peninsula since 1971. He has worked on a wide variety of civic and commercial projects, including Del Monte Shopping Center, the Highlands Inn, Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula and the City of Seaside. In addition, he has planned and designed hundreds of private gardens throughout the region, the majority of which are in the City of Carmel and surrounding areas and Pebble Beach. As a community volunteer, he worked closely with Harriette Rowntree to preserve the memorial garden recognizing the work of the pioneering native plant authority and advocate, Lester Rowntree. He also served the City of Carmel as a member of the Carmel Forest and Beach Commission for seven years and as a board member for the Carmel Area Wastewater District in 2007-2008.
Gary received his B.A. in Landscape Architecture from California State Polytechnic University at Pomona in 1968; he also received his department's Outstanding Student award for that year. After training in two large landscape architecture firms in Southern California, Gary and wife, Maureen moved to Carmel where Gary worked for five years with Richard Murray and Associates. The Girards raised three daughters in Carmel and were active volunteers at all levels, from Bay School to Carmel High School; Maureen recently retired from the faculty at MPC, where she taught for more than 25 years.
Because he maintains a vital interest in preserving native habitat in Mission Trail Nature Preserve, Gary is an active member of the Friends of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and can be seen tending the Rowntree Memorial garden adjacent to the Hatton Road entrance to the Preserve.
Greg D'Ambrosio: Raised and educated in the Illinois suburbs outside Chicago, Greg earned a B.S. degree in Forestry and a B.A. degree in Urban Planning with a focus in landscape design from Southern Illinois University. Graduating in 1970, he migrated west settling in Carmel that same year.
In the fall of 1971, he was hired as Carmel's City Forester and continued in that position until 1983. In the spring of that year, he was appointed to the position of Director of Administrative Services/Finance Director and then Assistant City Administrator. Greg held interim leadership posts in most of the city's departments over the years, helping develop and shepherd new and diverse services for the residents and businesses of the community. He also served as interim City Administrator.
Throughout his career he has focused his attention and expertise on expanding and improving the environmental resources of the village, its urban forest, beach, public open spaces, parks, trails and pathways.
He has been a staunch advocate for the preservation of our village and has been instrumental in writing many of the guidelines, ordinances, master plans and management programs that protect Carmel's iconic qualities.
In retirement Greg has become a volunteer with the MEarth, Hilton Bialek Biological Habitat and the Carmel Unified School District involving students in environmental restoration projects throughout the greater Carmel area.
He is a board member of the Carmel Area Waste Water District, Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden and a past board member of the Friends of Carmel Forest and the Carmel Residents Association.
Randell Kent Bishop: Randell is a Carmel native son attending Sunset School and Carmel High School and then moving on to the California College of Arts and Crafts and Sonoma State where he earned his secondary teaching credential. He was a secondary teacher and a garden designer. He is a member of the Big Sur Land Trust, the California Nature Conservancy and Life member of the Sierra Club. For the past 28 years Randell has resided part time in the United Kingdom restoring three cottages and gardens.
Lucinda "Cindy" Lloyd: Born, raised and educated in Carmel. Cindy attended UC Davis and Hartnell College Nursing School graduating in 1977 achieving honors as class Valedictorian, President. She retired from Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula in 2010.
Cindy has been a certified Master Gardener since 2008. Along with other Carmel residents passionate about protecting Mission Trail Nature Preserve, Cindy was instrumental in preventing the proposed sale of the Martin Meadow from 1986 through 1989.
Among other activities, Cindy was a past member of Carmel Community and Cultural Commission, is a volunteer gardener and Treasurer of the Carmel Woods Neighborhood Association.

Resolution Designating Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve as an Official City Support Group 10-02-12
City Council Agenda Item Summary
Name:
Consideration of a Resolution designating the Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve (FOMTNP) as an official City support group.
Meeting Date: October 2, 2012
Prepared by: Mike Branson, City Forester
Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve
A Report on Proposed Projects for Mission Trail Nature Preserve To Further Implement Carmel's General Plan and MTNP Master Plan
(October 2013)

REFERENCE:
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
October 2, 2012

VIII. ORDERS OF COUNCIL


E. Consideration of a Resolution designating the Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve (FOMTNP) as an official City support group.

City Forester Mike Branson presented the report.

Mayor Burnett opened the meeting to public comment at 7:29 p.m.

Skip Lloyd spoke as a member of the FOMTNP and gave an overview of the group.

Joyce Stevens outlined a resource booklet she developed about Mission Trail Nature Preserve.

Cindy Lloyd, Ron Bishop, Greg D’Ambrosio, Mary Anne Lloyd, Bill Doolittle, Joanne Ratcliffe and Elinor Laiolo spoke to the issue.

Mayor Burnett closed the meeting to public comment at 7:58 p.m.

Council Member HILLYARD moved to approve a Resolution designating the Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve (FOMTNP) as an official City support group on the condition they meet the Support Group policy requirements, seconded by Council Member BEACH and carried by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BEACH; HILLYARD; TALMAGE; THEIS & BURNETT
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE