About Cambria

Part One in a Series

San Luis Obispo County has no polar bears stranded on mini icebergs, no melting glaciers, no sinking island nations, no dissolving coral reefs – all effects caused by the growing  instability of our climate. This doesn’t mean San Luis Obispo County will escape the effects of climate change. Although most of the more drastic effects are being seen and felt at the poles and the equator, environmental changes in the more temperate zones of the planet are becoming more noticeable.

Last Wednesday I attended an very intriguing workshop hosted by the Local Government Commission (LGC) in San Luis Obispo: SLO Climate Change Adaptation Workshop. LGC partnered with the National Center for Conservation Science & Policy (NCCSP) and Susanne Moser Research & Consulting in collaboration with the City and County of San Luis Obispo to develop and implement climate change adaptation strategies for the region through a grant from the Kresge Foundation. The strategies will help local leaders, decision-makers, and governments prepare for the impacts of climate change in a way that provides benefits across multiple sectors and systems. Our goal is to develop strategies that cohesively consider economics, health, culture, social needs, infrastructure, ecosystem services, and natural resources.

Last week’s daylong event included presentations on the effects and potential needs for adaptation to changes in San Luis Obispo County and breakout sessions where participants discussed the priorities for our county as we plan for the future.  An abbreviated list of some of those in attendance:

David Church, Executive Officer, SLO LAFCO

Judy Corbett, Executive Director, Local Government Commission

Adam Hill, SLO County Supervisor

Ellen Carroll, Environmental Coordinator, SLO County Planning

Larry Allen, Air Pollution Control Officer, APCD

Ron De Carli, Executive Director, SLOCOG

Joy Fitzhugh, Legislative Analyst, SLO Farm Bureau

Marni Koopman, Ph.D., Climate Change Scientist, National Center for Conservation Science and Policy

Andrew Christie, Chapter Director, Sierra Club

Jan Marx, Council Member, SLO City Council

Chuck Stevenson, AICP, Long Range Planning for SLO County

Ray Weymann, Retired Astronomer

Michael Winn, Chair, WRAC and board member of Nipomo CSD

Paavo Ogren, Director, SLO County Public Works

Don Maruska, Strategy & Fisheries Policy Advisor, SLOSEA

Jerry Bunin, Government Affairs Director, Home Builders Association Central Coast

Maggie Macro, Initiating Team, Transition Paso Robles (one of about half a dozen Transitions members who were there)

Among the many others were residents of a number of communities and green business/energy folks. I was encouraged to see so many staff from many local non profit organizations and government agencies like SWAP, SLO County Housing Trust Fund, Caltrans, Creston Area Advisory Body, Los Osos CSD, Economic Vitality Corporation, ECOSLO, Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, Cal Poly, Cuesta, CA fish and Game, and planners from the cities of Atascadero, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles and Morro Bay.

The morning presentations set the stage and helped build a shared foundation of information about changes that are predicted for this county and what adaptations might be required. Starting with the Importance of Adaptation, a look at adaptation and the connection to City and County mitigation work, SLO Climate Change Projections, Climate Change Impacts on SLO Socioeconomic Systems and a review of the Top Socioeconomic Issues and Strategies.

Briefly, the top 10 concerns for species and ecosystems under climate change:

1. Water withdrawals from groundwater basins and rivers are an urgent issue, regardless of climate change, but will become much more
   severe of a challenge under climate change. Workshop participants identified monitoring and regulation of water withdrawals as necessary. Changes in pricing, types of crops, and residual dry matter from land use practices were all recommended. Water conservation measures are urgently needed to reduce competition for water and retain supplies for protected species and important natural processes.
2. Connectivity of fish and wildlife habitat is vital under climate change, yet development is quickly reducing opportunities for connectivity. Longterm region-wide planning is non-existent. Planning for connectivity will require communication and collaboration across land ownership boundaries, incentives for climate change easements on private property, regional analysis of potential buffers and corridors, regional scale climate change consideration in all development decisions, and a better understanding of how and where species will move.
3. Sedimentation in rivers, streams, and estuaries is problematic and likely to get worse with more fires, increased storm intensity, and continued land use practices that lead to erosion. Sedimentation will have negative impacts on riparian and water delivery systems, both of which are already stressed by general drought and overdraft. Land use controls, incentives, newly developed best practices, and prescribed fire were all recommended to reduce sedimentation. Monitoring and adaptive management should be implemented to keep sedimentation rates within historical bounds, if possible.
4. Loss of riparian, wetland, and marsh ecosystems greatly reduces the resilience of the landscape to climate change. These ecosystems are disproportionately important as breeding grounds for fish and wildlife, habitat for rare species, flood abatement that protects nearby infrastructure, water filtration, water infiltration to groundwater storage, and oases during drought. These ecosystems should be protected, restored, and created across the County ASAP.
5. Sea level rise is a huge concern due to its potential to impact marine and terrestrial ecosystems, coastal development, tourism, recreation, and agriculture. Rather than armoring the coast, the coastline should be allowed to be dynamic in state. One suggested approach was rolling easements. Relocating some developments would be necessary, thereby allowing the sandy beaches, dunes, rocky intertidal zone, estuaries, and bluffs to shift over time but still persist. Persistence of these features is vital to tourism, fish and wildlife populations, local fisheries, recreational opportunities, public safety, and quality-of-life for residents. A statewide or regional policy will need to be developed specific to sea level rise and coastal armoring.
6. Loss of oak woodlands from increased fire, drought, and invasive species is of great concern. Reducing current stressors to oak woodlands, such as overgrazing and frequent fire, may allow this important vegetation type to be more resilient to climate change. Educating private landowners about climate change projections and best management practices in oak woodlands, as well as providing them with incentives to retain healthy oak woodlands on their property, would help. Propagating more drought tolerant varieties of oak may also be an option.
7. Many important strongholds for threatened and endangered species are not protected and are not included in critical habitat designations. Critical habitat needs to be revisited and revised to include these areas as well as buffers for climate change range shifts. Some species are already in perilous condition and climate change is likely to cause extinction. It will be important to identify which species can be managed for persistence and which ones are too costly to maintain. Revisiting critical habitat will assist in this determination.
8. Planning should be carried out on a watershed scale, with all major land use players brought to the table, including ranchers, agricultural producers, county planners, the Forest Service, BLM, USFWS, conservation organizations, and others. Planning is currently done in a piecemeal fashion, and regulation is insufficient and unenforced. Planning for development, agriculture, natural ecosystems, and other interests needs to be done collaboratively and through a long-term, climate change lense. Enforcing current laws and regulations (CWA, ESA, local regulations) that affect land and water management is an important first step towards increasing the resilience of species and ecosystems to climate change.
9. Monitoring of species and ecosystems needs to be increased to detect trends early on and adjust management quickly in an adaptive  management approach. Careful planning and thought will need to go into designing monitoring strategies. A central clearinghouse that makes data available from all monitoring and surveying efforts, would be especially useful and could lead to more informed, timely, and sophisticated management efforts.
10. Keeping options open and taking advantage of opportunities. San Luis Obispo County has more options than other areas. Much of the coastline is undeveloped, thereby making marsh and wetland migration possible. Climate change may make marginal farmland available for conversion to coastal wetlands or native grasslands. Topographic complexity provides climate change refuges for species across the County as they shift to new areas. Many areas are currently available for providing buffers and connectivity for natural ecosystems (primarily on private land), but these areas could be lost to development if new policies and approaches are not quickly instituted with climate change in mind.

Upcoming posts will summarize the presentations (and have the MP3s available for download) and the results of the afternoon discussions on priorities. Most of the research is in documents available on the Local Government Commission website.

From the North Coast Advisory Council email maven (aka Marty Main):

Hello Everyone:

We want to alert you that John Busselle, SLO County planner, will update the NCAC (North Coast Advisory Council) on the Vacation Rental Ordinance recommended changes to the amendments. If you remember, the Board of Supervisors requested the 5-yr review of the Ordinance. In July 2009, the staff report presented a list of suggested recommendations that would update the Ordinance to be more enforceable in their opinion. We, the residents, presented many of our concerns at that time. And staff actually took some of these suggestions under advisement and incorporated them into their report for recommended changes. The Supervisors listened and then requested staff to go back and rework some of the issues under discussion.

A copy of the ’09 staff report with the original recommendations for changes to the Ordinance is available. John Busselle will be reporting on the updates to these recommendations. Note, the Board has not voted on any changes to date; but is simply gathering information.

The NCAC meeting will be held July 21st at 6:30 pm in the Rabobank meeting room.

Please attend to know what changes the county plans. Also, it is important to give feedback. We, the residents of Cambria, are the only ones who know if these proposed changes will improve the quality of our neighborhoods with regard to the vacation rental home business. The county can make suggestions; but we need to let them know what will work and what are the real issues.

Again, July 21st, NCAC meeting, 6:30 PM, Rabobank meeting room. Please attend.

From an article by DANIEL LOPEZ, staff writer in a recent edition of the Monterey County Herald:

A guide to assist in planning and operating future seawater desalination plants beside the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary was released Monday.

The 20-page document prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Marine Fisheries Service addresses some of the most common project concerns, including site selection, construction and operational impacts, plant discharges and intake systems.

The final draft was published after three years of work with the California Coastal Commission, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and several other state and local entities.

“The guidelines are designed to protect the sanctuary’s unique and sensitive environment, while also addressing the practical challenges surrounding water supply along the Central Coast,” said Paul Michel, sanctuary superintendent.

The sanctuary stretches along 276 miles of coastline — from Rocky Point in Marin County to Cambria — and encompasses more than 6,000 square miles of ocean.

Read the rest of the news story by clicking here.

Read the report by clicking image

If you missed the forum on water alternatives on March 16, 2010, you can now view it here on aboutcambria.com (in four parts). Use this link or the link in the header menu. If you were there, watch it again! Thanks to Steve Figler for the video.

93428, cambria

Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) is pursuing desalination as a supplemental supply for their customers. As in Cambria, there is vigorous debate over whether that is an appropriate solution for Marin.  In August,  James Fryer, Environmental Scientist and author of Sustaining Our Water Future wrote a paper entitled Water Supply Reliability and Catastrophic Planning Considerations that Cambrians may find interesting and familiar.

Fryer writes

There is a clear lack of consensus on the need to move forward with further effort and investment in developing a desalination facility. Continued investment in desalination with the present lack of consensus  will result in further conflict with a large portion of ratepayers which will create a diversion from focusing resources on viable water supply reliability and infrastructure improvements that have widespread consensus.

Fryer suggests the MMWD Board and a specially formed Citizen’s Advisory Council  work on resolving some specific policy issues:

What is the future water supply deficit and what future growth projections are reasonable for MMWD and NMWD?

Should carbon footprint reduction be used to offset large new energy uses or the existing footprint?

Is the $1,631/af marginal cost use in the MMWD conservation master plan a valid comparison point for conservation planning compared to the $2,900 to $4,400 marginal cost of desalination?

What is the definition of conservation first? Does this really mean simultaneous with desalination?

What is basis of a potential decision to move forward with desalination despite compelling evidence it is not needed?

These issues have significant bearing on water supply reliability planning and each should be specifically addressed before moving forward with a decision on desalination….

But an important question remains, what if Marin experiences a 3+ year severe drought event that far exceeds any drought event on record or detected in the 400 year tree ring analysis of local weather conditions? Is this a potential catastrophic event the MMWD Board should be considering and is it justified to approve a major capital investment of hundreds of millions of dollars for a desalination facility only needed for this type of unprecedented event?

The rest of the paper looks at planning for several different catastrophic events, including  comparison of a full range of relevant possibilities. This would enable the MMWD Board to allocate limited financial resources to preparing for the most likely events, instead of laying out huge sums chasing solutions for events extremely unlikely or completely unprecedented.

In Fryer’s words:

“First, it is important to briefly define and examine each type of catastrophic event. Then the individual events should be ranked for each category of risk and impact. Finally, the four types of catastrophic events should be ranked against each other.”

Read the full paper by downloading it here.

Let’s remember we are not alone in the world. We can learn from other communities – and should.

On November 12,2007, this site was created. The original intention of AboutCambria.com was to provide a way for people to share information about water and sewer rates among the forty or fifty folks who had come together to protest the rate increase of the fall 2007. That first post was titled “Why Did You Protest The Rate Increase?”
The look and direction of the site has changed somewhat over the last couple of years. The focus has broadened to include more than just water and sewer rates and the activities of the CCSD. There is still much more to include here and I hope that Cambrians are able to get the information they want and stay informed about the decisions their community leaders are making on their behalf.
I encourage you to take a stroll through the last two years. At the very bottom of every page are links to each month of the last two years. Simply click the month and all the posts from that month will be listed as links. Find something fun? Leave a comment and I’ll re-post it for all to read.
The last two or three moths here have been rather quiet, mostly because I was very involved in organizing the recent Day of Action on Climate Change with the Cambria Climate Action Group (including being the webmaven for Cambria350.org) and I have a new job. I am working part-time for an arborist in Morro Bay. I’m still getting the hang of the five-day per week job and plan to get back to more writing here at AboutCambria.com now that I’m not busy with the Cambria350.org anymore.
Thank you to all of you who have contributed your thoughts, writing and support over the last two years. Special thanks to those few folks who have helped this site (and me) survive financially. It’s still a struggle and even the new job may not be enough to keep us afloat, but I have no immediate plans to stop trying or to stop keeping my eye on the CCSD, CCHD, county and state leaders and bringing you the information you need to make better decisions about who you elect and how you participate in creating a better community.
See you Monday at the CCSD meeting (12:30pm, Veterans Memorial Hall). Agenda posted here when it’s available.

P.S. You can still donate to the cause. Just click on the little guy right below this post!

Cambria 93428

In October 2005, a group of young Cambrians put on a music festival at the Veteran’s Hall as a benefit for the victims of Hurricane Katrina. The handful of bands that day included The Dreaded Ninth and Pony Farm Showdown and a clear local favorite (and CUHS grad, I think) Port O’Brien.  They got the joint a-jumpin’, as seen from these pictures of the event:

And now, a mere four year later, NPR has picked them for their song of the day! Today! Take a listen at NPR’s All Songs Considered.’

Port O’Brien was earlier included in a “Showcase of Great Unknowns” that All Songs Considered produced in May 2008.

Another feather in our cap. Congrats to the musicians!

Port O’Brien: Joy At The Edge Of Sorrow Port O’Brien offers an unromantic but soulful look at the time its members have spent toiling in isolation with the wind at one’s back. “Sour Milk / Salt Water” is the most literal interpretation of the musicians’ hands-on experiences, even in its production: All the reverb and the backwards-guitar melodies are non-computerized and organic, made by playing tapes in reverse, and barely touched in final mastering.

Song: “Sour Milk / Salt Water” | Artist: Port O’Brien | CD: Threadbare | Genre: Folk

The on again-off again plans to move the operations and ambulances of the Cambria Community Healthcare District (CCHD) to the Cambria Community Services District Fire Station on Burton Drive are off once again. Trustee Lemming reported that the August 31 meeting of the  ad-hoc co-location committee has started off well, but gradually turned sour. The ad-hoc committee is made up of CCSD Directors Clift and Sanders, CCHD Trustees Lemming and Headding and the head administrators of both districts, Tammy Rudock and Don Melendy. Fire Chief Miller also attended the committee meeting.

The CCHD trustees also heard from Administrator Melendy on the plans during a later part of the meeting. According to Melendy, there were a number of problems with the proposed plan, among them:

• insufficient private space at the fire station for CCHD crews needing “safety naps” so they can be sharp and awake when it counts
• disagreement over issues of sharing employees and chain of command
• an overall sense that the CCSD was unwilling to meet the Healthcare District halfway or be flexible
• the CCSD wanted the move to happen by this October 1

In the end, what seemed to influence the Trustees’ decision to reject the plan was that it would not even address the main reason they re-started talks about the co-location: better (or at least equal) service to the community and conditions for staff and money saved from sharing overhead costs and staff resources.  Administrator Melendy pointed out that the move as the current plan suggested would be a net loss for the CCHD, since they would be incurring costs for the move itself.

The Trustees aren’t ruling out co-location and Trustee Bates went as far as to say it was “inevitable” that  would happen someday. But all four Trustees agreed (Kristi Jenkins was absent), not with this plan.

The CCHD also discussed progress on getting an ALS (Advanced Life Support) unit put back onto the Fire Engine. More on that discussion in Wednesday night’s post.

The state of California requires every water agency that serves over 3,000 customers submit a report called an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) in years ending in 5 and 0. In 2005, as the CCSD was completing its UWMP, we became a member of the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC).  As a member of CUWCC, Cambria Community Services District has had access to a wide range of supportive and instructive resources in water planning and management, including excellent support in preparing its Urban Water Management Plan.

All members of CUWCC sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that outlines fourteen best management practices (BMPs) for water conservation and efficiency. To date, more than 350 water agencies have become signatories. The Council also tracks the progress of implementing the BMPs and asks for reports every other year. The MOU and BMPs are not binding on the District, but since the point of CUWCC is to expedite and simplify improved water efficiency, not working toward the goals seems like a waste.

According to the reports available on the CUWCC website, the Cambria Community Services District is not on schedule to meet the targets as recommended for most of the BMPs, with a few not even started. For example, BMP 1 is to implement Water Survey Programs for Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential Customers. Home water surveys involve calculating water use, teaching you to read your water meter, surveying the irrigation system, and showing you simple ways to save water both in and outside the home. In San Fransisco, a survey is estimated to take about 45 minutes. To meet the goal that would keep them on track, the District would have had to complete 55 single family residential surveys and 1 multi-family survey( 1.5% of each). To date, they have completed none.

On the plus side, the District is meeting the goals for auditing and fixing system leaks, all accounts are metered,  read and charged by volume measured and has one staff member (well, 50% of one) assigned as conservation coordinator (Cori Ryan). The next report is due April 2010.

As a member of CUWCC and a community already facing water supply emergencies and a moratorium, shouldn’t we be more focused on these best management practices? Instead, we’ll soon see the rebate programs end as more money is spent on desal lobbyists and attorneys defending against litigation caused by the programs of the Water Master Plan.

Being a member of CUWCC isn’t cheap. In March 2007, the District’s membership dues were 2,252.70.  In 2008 we paid 2,335.90 in fees and $350 registration for a workshop/training conference attended by Cori Ryan. It’s no small fortune, but seems like a waste if we aren’t going to work on it. Does the Board support this membership, the MOU signed by the General Manager and the associated BMPs of the Council? Ms. Rudock is not required to get Board approval to join and sign the memorandum of understanding, but a supportive board could make funding the required programs and staff much easier. After all, the BMPs could all be considered policies – which are the domain of the Board.

Bottom line: Conservation and increased efficiency  may not solve all our water woes here in Cambria, but they are the most cost-effective path toward a more reliable water supply for all CCSD customers and our visitors. The CUWCC is a resource that the District should take better advantage of for our community.

Beginning August  17, day-use parking fees will increase by $2 to $5, and camping fees will increase by $10 – $21 a night. Camping reservations made prior to that date will be honored at the lower price.

Annual Passes will go back on sale immediately at the existing price of $125. In future months,  additional fee and pass increases are possible as State Parks assesses how the partnership program stretches the reduced budget funding to help keep parks open.

A list of specific parks affected is expected to be available next week and I will post any updated information as soon as it is available.

It should be noted that these increases do not raise park revenues enough to cover all the costs. Doing that would require steep increases that would price people out of their public park system. These increases are another tool in the efforts being taken by California State Parks to keep more parks open during this time of budget cuts and employee furloughs.

The department continues to seek support from cities, counties, corporations and nonprofit organizations who may want to sponsor or operate particular parks to help keep them open. Further, park managers have been reducing services and modifying their operations by closing portions of parks and reducing operating hours.

“We have loyal visitors who truly love our parks,” said State Parks Director Ruth Coleman. “We will do our best to maximize the use of additional funds so that parks continue to be available for public enjoyment.”

The map below shows all the State Parks our region.

San Luis Obispo has eleven State Parks.  State Parks in the county of ‘San Luis Obispo‘

Cayucos (State Beach)	San Luis Obispo
Estero Bluffs (State Park)	San Luis Obispo
Harmony Headlands (State Park)	San Luis Obispo
Hearst San Simeon (State Park)	San Luis Obispo
Hearst San Simeon (State Historical Monument)	San Luis Obispo
Los Osos Oaks (State Natural Reserve)	San Luis Obispo
Montaña de Oro (State Park)	San Luis Obispo
Morro Bay (State Park)	San Luis Obispo
Morro Strand (State Beach)	San Luis Obispo
Oceano Dunes (State Vehicular Recreation Area)	San Luis Obispo
Pismo (State Beach)	San Luis Obispo

Learn more about California State Parks on their official website.

Order an annual pass online for $125 any business day before 3pm and it’ll be in tomorrow’s mail.

UPDATE:

Updated fees for parks in SLO County:

Hearst San Simeon State Historical Monument

Hearst Experience Tour (combo) Child Child Entry Guided Tour / Walk $12.00
Hearst Daily Tour Adult Adult Entry Guided Tour / Walk $24.00
Hearst Daily Tour Child Child Entry Guided Tour / Walk $12.00
Hearst Experience Tour (combo) Adult Adult Entry Guided Tour / Walk $24.00
Hearst Evening Tour Adult Adult Entry Guided Tour / Walk $30.00
Hearst Evening Tours Child Child Entry Guided Tour / Walk $15.00

Morro Bay State Park

Morro Bay – Museum of Natural History Child Entry Museum / Park Entry $0.00
Morro Bay – Museum of Natural History Adult Entry Museum / Park Entry $2.00

Oceano Dunes State Vehicle Recreation Area

Oceano Dunes Paid Vehicle Undeveloped Parking $5.00

Pismo State Beach

Pismo Paid Vehicle Developed Parking $10.00

Download the full list of fees for all state parks.