Call to Order and Approval of Minutes of 6-9-21.
Minutes were corrected to spell out SOWWW as Save our Water, Wildlife, and Way of Life. Present: Jini Reynolds, Christine Boyd, Supervisor Glenn McGourty, David Drell, Meredyth Reinhard, Patricia Yis-yarbrough, Sarah Reith, Sattie Clark, Clare F, Ellen Drell, Laura Clein, Marty Clien, Richard Willson, Cathy Monroe, Adam gaska, Laura Diamondstone, Sheila Rogers, Michael Katz, Blaire AuClair, Bree Clotter, Carson-, CHP Ukiah Captain Leonard, Elizabeth Salamone, Marybeth Kelly,Gizmo Henderson, Kitty Loberg, Stephany, Richard, Charles Sargenti, Wayne Sizemore. Meeting was called to order at 5:13 . Change minutes: If no change in the zoning no public hearing is required however fire code as well as uniform building code both require inspection and review currently the planning and building service dep of the county is not forwarding plans to the fire departments- this is a problem because the fire code need to be reviewed Item 7- second to last sentence- “could threaten the road”
Treasurer Katrina Frey motioned to approve. Member Chris Boyd seconded the motion.

The motion passed with the following vote:
7 In Favor 0 Opposed
Abstained 1 Absent Recused
Public Comments
A comment from resident Cathy Monroe came at the end of the meeting: She reported that the Ca. Office of Energy is now under the Ca. Natural Resources Agency with a new Director, Caroly Thomas Jacob. Cathy is researching their role, if any, in the clear cutting being done under power lines (cf. near Road A, etc.).
Report from County and Agencies on Current Events Guest Speaker: Charles Sargenti of Small is Beautiful, and Ellen Drell of SOWWW. 1. What do you perceive is the problem with the new ordinance and how does your referendum seek to correct it? Ellen Drell: I don't like that it's an expansion referendum without any environmental review in the middle of a drought, and with possibilities of fires, without any EIR this seems reckless. There were some (? Reviews doesn’t make sense) which were fine but it did not need to be linked to an expansion. The new ordinance would quadruple possible cultivation area. Charles Sargenti: We think the main problem is with 10% expansion of potential cultivation area; we want to get rid of that footnote. There are other minor issues but it sounds like those are being addressed: rangeland sounds like it's being protected, no new pristine rangeland will be cultivated. We need this new ordinance for small farmers. 2. What can the public expect to happen if your referendum passes? Charles Sargenti: if the board of supervisors falls below on this matter The first thing that happens is a valid petition with signatures will result in the board suspending the ordinance for reconsideration. The county clerk verifies the signatures and then the board can either repeal the 10% rule or put it to a vote, but it will have no effect on the rest of the ordinance. The board is forbidden by law to do anything other than repeal or vote. Ellen Drell: Let’s say it goes to a vote of the people and it passes so it eliminates the ordinance for now but it doesn't leave us with nothing because it provides us with time to enforce the existing ordinances, complete the permitting process, and conduct EIRs, and it gives us time to consider all possible factors as well as regain the trust of the people in the fairness and consideration of the government. It paves a solid path forward. 3. What happens if your referendum is defeated at the ballot or doesn’t gather enough signatures? Ellen Drell: Then the public is forced to struggle with the recklessness of the supervisors to juggle with the growers that have been waiting in compliance, as well as the drought. Charles Sargenti: It means the 10% stays in the ordinance, it shouldn't be there in the first place and it kinda makes us wonder why it's there and why they're so intent on holding it because it was supposed to be removed by the BOS anyway. I really don't think we should be cultivating more than one acre, we might be able to live with 2 acres but we would prefer one acre. 4. What is your strategy after all the signatures have been gathered? Charles Sargenti: If we gather our signatures and the board passes on the 10%, then it's solved. Otherwise we could hear the matter in court. Ellen Drell: If the board is impressed with the outcry it will be repealed; otherwise we are prepared to launch a campaign. 5. What do you see as the “point of no return,” the last opportunity for negotiating with the BOS before the consequences of a successful referendum take over? Is there anything that would make them say we no longer need this referendum? Ellen says there was a time when expansion was not a concern, we were simply concerned with enforcement and permitting. As long as expansion is on the table with public outcry, drought and fires seem irresponsible. Charles says we're always open to negotiating, that's the best path forward. 6. If all the recommendations from RVMAC (in the letter below) are met by the BOS before the deadline to gather signatures, or the election, or the “point of no return," will you withdraw your referendum? Charles believes so. I think so,said Ellan, it was a great letter and it is the essence of the referendum. It included many of the same aspects and could be amendments to the referendum. It's a perfect opportunity to step back and evaluate what the public wants. 7. Can you explain the need for an Environmental Impact Report and why this is or is not going to keep the new ordinance from taking effect? A need for Environmental Impact Report, we as a county need to know the effects on the environment and legacy operators are required to do site specific IERs so it increases the burden on them. This won’t affect the ordinance whatsoever, it was approved under the exemption of the state of CA. Ellen says the supervisors took advantage of a temporary loophole. If it were being discussed today it would definitely need an Environmental Impact Report. This has had no environmental review, McGourty has committed to an Environmental Impact Report after the fact but it would have no meaning because the mitigation of the effects would be in the hands of people who have no data. Citizens that have lived in this environment for decades and could help put together a more appropriate ordinance. Supervisor Glenn McGourty says he first walked into this in January and most of the ordinance was done, he's tried to make changes to make the new ordinance a little friendlier to the community. Most of the grows are illegal, not all of them will make it through. The previous ordinance will not work with the state because there's no room for environmental mitigation which is why the new ordinance isCEQA-California Environmental Quality Act-compliant. He's concerned that so much of what's happened has had so little community input. Neighbors cannot protest or stop, but under the new ordinance notice would need to be shared because it's a land use permit. Water usage would be evaluated because it has such a huge impact on all of the ecosystems. He wants it to be on flat ag-land to minimize erosion and effect on the water table. The new ordinance has some say on private roads. The new ordinance prohibits water trucks due to damage. There's two cannabis industry's here- craft growers, and a processing industry. He wants this to be an industry where people can go to work and be paid living wages state and nation wide. Mendocino county has some opportunity for job growth here. Other than that his views align with Charles and Ellen. Sattie asked if we do an Environmental Impact Report if the schedule of expansion could be delayed or changed? Glen is unsure because he doesn't consider himself a specialist. California raced to get this industry going and Mendocino County didn't do an Environmental Impact Report which he agrees is a big misteak. Sattie asked if there was room for compromise? SupervisorGlenn McGourty assured her that there is always room for compromise, he cares about safety and quality of life in the community. Cannabis Policy Discussion Patricia wanted to reiterate that the RVMAC letter, if those requests are met make the referenda mute. Ellen says that she is part of a group but she feels the letter addresses the most important concerns. Patricia and Sattie agree that the letter encompases the magic concerns. Chris in regards the Environmental Impact Report is wondering if the new ordinance would meet CEQA-California Environmental Quality Act and how it's in compliance? Supervisor Glenn McGourty said that it's a discretionary permit- if things aren't right there is an opportunity to fix them. It allows things to be addressed or flat out refused. The county makes this declaration or to the state of California. Ellen's understanding that if certain negative mitigations are employed that growers are allowed to move forward. No new grows in the rangeland district, those mitigations apply to everyone as long as they are in compliance withCEQA-California Environmental Quality Act. She has only seen approval documentation and she has not seen site descriptions proving compliance. Alex Degrassi, both permit processes make sense but how quickly will the county be able to move on use permits, what is motivating the county? Supervisor Glenn McGourty says they are trying to wrap up the current applications, the motivation behind the expansion is that it's an agricultural crop that needs to be cultivated where there's a market for specific uses. Ellen, the use permit is that it's almost impossible to assess cumulative impact because it's one at a time. We need to have a county wide impact review on what's being set in motion. Other countries have tried to do it one at a time and it's a disaster. The expansion is clearly coming from the larger industry despite the concerns of the public, there are other ways to look at expansion. Kate Marrion recalled Glen talked about the reduction in trucking of water with the exemption of emergencies, what makes an emergency? Glen said that if someone had lost the pipes and had a temporary need for water. This can be restricted and they intend to. Sattie asked if they intended to do an Environmental Impact Report. Glen said we need to have a workshop about generating all the data and information including an Environmental Impact Report to mitigate potential impacts, we’re not finished by a long shot. Sherri was wondering how we will have enough water to support this expansion? Glen said he's been involved in two different water studies and understands that it's critical, he's monitoring ukiah, and he would like to see more information on our water resources before moving on. Stephany asked how we can overhaul the staff needed to take care of the illegal people? Glen said it's a good question, they have considered involving the state to help enforce everything. They are certainly looking for a way. Sara Rieth is wondering what it will take for someone to apply to this new ordinance and what is the target demographic? What kind of money demographic are we trying to attract? Glen said he's unsure but he wants responsible, respectful people that are able to pay the taxes to be able to grow. He doesn't want people taking advantage of the environment and resources. Michael says it sounds like the concerns are about future potential grows- how will this referendum affect current growers? This new permitting process could be at the expense of hundreds of currently operating grows. Glen said yes but he is not as well versed in environmental affects at the moment. Ron is wondering if it would be possible and what it would take to remove that 10% seems to be the sticking point. Glen said this issue will be brought up in august to review and move forward. The 10% is sort of off the table is either 10% or two acres or the smaller of the two. Sattie asked what changed Michaels mind. Michael says we resonate with what the public wants. Ultimately it's because of the concerns for the hundreds of currently operating growers. Hundreds of operators need this ordinance to move forward, we fully believe that we are heading in the right direction. Our biggest concern are those existing operators that have been trying to move forward. Sattie thanked everyone and stated that she learned a lot. She asked for Glen's most recent letter to be made public. Glen said he would send it. Ellen wants to remind the RVMAC that this is a major expansion above what the RVMAC supported. There are small grows getting their licenses right now, it works, it's about expanding and holding them hostage. PG&E Settlement funds allocation. Update from 1st District Supervisor Glenn McGourty. We have been individual board members who have been advocating for how they think funds should be distributed. He read the Redwood Fire Complex Recovery Plan and made recommendations based on that. There are numerical values that need to be addressed so he is working on that and on November 3rd there is a meeting to discuss that. Redwood and Potter Valley look like fire council and hazardous material and chipping. The Redwood Valley wants to be added to the Russian River Flood Control District annexing for a sustainable water supply. The money and documentation is able to be in order but he asks please accept the offer and strongly recommends joining the district for a sustainable water source. Marybeth is winding if the Redwood Valley Fire Department has any money scheduled their way specifically for sirens. Stephany is also concerned about the Redwood Valley Fire Department fire engines and is wondering if any money is destined for that, Glen assured her that plenty of money is destined to fix up the fire station and replace some engines. Shiela, would appreciate it that Glen is listening to communities and to please concentrate on the fact that this money is coming because of the fire that was here. She thanked him. Glen agreed that he is focused on taking care of Redwood and Potter Valley and will address some county needs. Stephany is wondering why Redwood Valley has rejected the annexation with the Russin River Water District. Christine explained that the district itself is also struggling so it wouldn't necessarily guarantee water at such a huge cost. Rates are rising and it's complex. Redwood Valley water issue updates. The Broiler Fire sucked off a lot of water, the infrastructure project punctured a line and we lost some water there but it was corrected. The holding water went down to 12 feet and we had to draw from the lake. There is a meeting tomorrow at 5. There is a GSA meeting tomorrow at 5:30 to ensure funding so we know what's going on and how to maintain it. Marybeth said it would be nice to advertise these meetings. Wick said she would send it out. Adam asked if they had requested for Flowcanna to pay for that water. John said not yet. Fire Preparedness updates. Chris said there was very little emergency notification available for the Broiler Fire. She spoke to the dispatcher supervisor and to Brent Blazer. She found that emergency systems will sometimes kick you off for no reason, so it is our job to regularly check if we are still registered with these systems. A weather radio and a ham radio is a useful tool to stay updated. The Mendocino Alert system anex speaks a lot about how to deal with these disasters. Chris feels specifically that sirens are an important piece of the puzzle to keep people safe. Chris asked Gizmo for updates on chain dragging. Gizmo said he laminated and distributed the posters specifically in Fort Bragg. He also gave away about 30 sets of trailer chain covers. Gizmo said on july 4th he was at the Frontier Days and made sure that the check in booth had these resources. Marybeth said that soon there will be an edition of mowing posters, and multilingual posters. Chris said that compensation from the Broiler Fire is being pursued. A new fire chief is being recruited. Katrina wondered if we can highlight on the website the need to reregister on emergency services. Katrina said that Dolly is doing very well! Supervisor Glenn McGourty thanked everyone for allowing him to speak and for him to hear your concerns.
Cannabis Policy Ad Hoc Subcommittee: Patricia, Sattie Community Members Martha Barra and Sandra Berman may work with the Subcommittee. NOTE: Cannabis subcommittee is ceding their time to be used for Guest Speakers to discuss cannabis referenda above.
Development Review Ad Hoc Subcommittee: Marybeth, Jini, Patricia Community Member Gizmo Henderson may work with the Subcommittee. Discuss building permits and activities. Marybeth said North American Organics what a use permit to continue selling compositing material and to allow alteration to delivery hours specifically including Saturdays. Jini asked for that to be posted on Facebook. Marybeth said she would.
CAP: Interim Community Action Plan and Design Review: Chris, Sattie
Community Members Alex De Grassi and Sheilah Rogers may work with the Subcommittee. MAC approved the Plan 7-15-20. Discussion at next meeting.
Officers and Members Reports and Announcements Discuss, vote, on Secretary duties and compensation. Session open to the public on advice from County Council. The current wage for secretary is 18 the prior secretary had recommended increasing to 22. Sattie supports the increase on the grounds that they want to retain the secretary and that it is skilled work. Adam and Jini agreed. Chris said Stephany mentioned they are looking to draw in young people who need a living wage. Katrina said the treasure supports the monetary aspect. Sattie moved to approve Jini seconded the motion. All in favor. Patricia asked if the rate was the same as for website work, Chris said yes. Chris asked if inviting Brent to the next meeting would be of interest. Sattie agreed. Update on County approval and adoption of MAC bylaws. Chris believes she sent it out, Katrina said she didn't receive them, Chris said she would resend them. Chris proposed the bylaws be on the next agenda. Patricia said that a copy of the bylaws from 2016 are available to download. Katrina asked for a straw pull on who would be at the meeting if it was in person vs on zoom. Chris asked public preference, to which majority wanted to continue on zoom over the next three months. Member Sattie Clark motioned to approve. Vice-Chair Jini Reynolds seconded the motion.

The motion passed with the following vote:
7 In Favor 0 Opposed
Abstained 1 Absent Recused
Adjournment. Next meeting 8-11-21.
Meeting adjourned at 7:15.