May 9, 2001

Marge Kolar

U. S. Fish & Wildlife

Freemont, CA 

Fax 510-792-5828

 

Re:  Opposition to Baylands Refuge Mapping process

Exempt Canalways and Silveira St. Vincent and any other property owners with that request

 

Dear Ms. Kolar:

 

This letter is sent in the interest of clarifying impressions I have developed about the Baylands Refuse process.  I would appreciate any guidance from you if you believe my conclusions are flawed.  Thank you in advance for your response, time and perspective.

 

In following your Baylands Refuge process, I have been confused and troubled by the manner in which the process has been conducted.  Initially, you did not notify landowners that you wanted to put their lands in a refuge.  In that step, you did not even inquire as to whether they wanted to have their land considered for inclusion in a Fish & Wildlife mapping process.  You then apologized to the public and the cities of San Rafael and Novato for failing to notify all of the landowners in a timely manner.  Next you promised to find the correct and up-to-date addresses for the landowners and have some proper and timely public hearings.

 

If I have the right facts, I am saddened and fearful that your process does not reflect the spirit of our country’s bedrock principle of having individuals control their own lands, for which they pay taxes and provide the dirt upon which so many or our people can enjoy their freedom. 

 

If correct, my understanding of how you conducted your procedures gives credence to the belief espoused by many in our community that this Baylands Mapping process may have been instigated by Marin groups who call themselves environmentalists, but who ironically oppose such ecologically sound ideas such as using Marin’s existing train tacks to reduce pollution and provide walk-to-able affordable housing.  Since there is no evidence that first you contacted the cities of Novato or San Rafael or the property owners before starting this process, why would our government on its own put properties into a proposed Baylands Refuge if the property owners desire otherwise?   This concerns me.  As I requested earlier, I would appreciate it if you would please respond to this question.

 

Marin, although affluent, has serious housing, traffic and even revenue generating issues that are of much higher concern than putting a devaluing stamp of ‘Baylands Refuge’ on a piece of property.  Does Marin, with 84% of its land in open space, park and farmland, need more open space?  I respectfully submit that it does not.  It certainly does not need to have additional problems placed on land owners and developers that come with having to rebut the perception of having their land labeled ‘Baylands Refuge.’  It certainly does not need to lose land that could provide jobs and housing.  And it clearly does not need to lose the property tax revenue that results from placing lands in a refuge or devaluing its property by appraising it as such.

 

I look forward to your answer to my question and strongly support you exempting Canalways, Silveira’s and St. Vincent’s property and any other land owners who so desires from being included in your mapping process.

 

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Philip W. Jonckheer

 

Philip W. Jonckheer

417 Laurel

San Anselmo, CA  94960


 

CC:

Gale Norton, Department of Interior

Mel Martinez, U.S. Department of HUD

Julie Bornstein, California Dept. of Housing

Bill Pavao, California Department of Housing

Mike Spear, Regional Director USF&WS

Marshall Jones, USF&WS , Acting Director

Charles Houghton, USFWS Refuge Director

Cathy Osugi USFWS

San Rafael Chamber

San Rafael Dredge Committee       

Congresswoman Woolsey

Senator Boxer

Senator Feinstein

Marin & Sonoma Supervisors

Bay Planning Coalition

Mayor Al Boro & Council Members

San Rafael Planning Department

Assemblyman Joe Nation

North Bay Agricultural Coalition

Novato Council

Pacific Legal Foundation