THE LUCKHAM
COMPANY
1001 BRIDGEWAY, SUITE 201
SAUSALITO, CA 94965
(415) 457-3300 FAX (415)
457-3368
June 14, 2001
Al Boro, Mayor
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Re: Canal dredging Dear Al:
First,
I want to thank you and Dave Bernardi for your prompt action on the sidewalk
issue at Pickelweed Park. I passed Dave’s letter on to a Pickelweed board
member and they are very happy to know that the City of San Rafael is
addressing the problem.
The
real subject of this letter is the problem of dredging the San Rafael Canal.
As
you may already know, last Saturday a meeting of parties interested in the
dredging issue was held at the Pickelweed Community Center. There were 50-60
people in attendance, more than have previously shown enough concern about the
problem to come to meetings. Canal Area resident Bill Jones organized the
meeting. Attendees included representatives from yacht clubs, marine
businesses, canal front homeowners from both sides and the usual representatives
of the Canalways project.
In
contrast to earlier positions taken by some, there appears to be a growing
consensus that we can no longer rely on the congressional budgeting process,
and Army Corp of Engineers, for dredge maintenance, and, that a permanent
solution lies in the creation of a tax district for dredge maintenance.
I
have long held the position that dredge maintenance of the San Rafael Canal is
a matter of local interest with little to justify reliance on federal help.
There are some very clear constituencies involved, including the owners of
canal front homes, marine related businesses, yacht harbors, yacht clubs, and
non-marine related businesses that do,
or could, derive added value
from a lively life on the canal. There are also the government agencies
including the City of San Rafael, County or Mann, and perhaps others.
It
appears to me that time may be ripe to, once again, approach the canal dredging
issue from the perspective of creating an assessment district for the purpose.
This was attempted at least once in the past. It failed, as I understand it,
because there was a perception that the distribution of benefits and burden
were inequitable.
The
first big hurdle, where the benefit and burden are not plainly equal for all
the subject parties, is to develop a plan that a sufficient majority of the
parties consider fair and equitable. As with the creation of any tax district,
there is then the matter of convincing a sufficient number of the subject
parties that passing a tax measure is in their best interest. But, developing a
plan that is perceived as fair and equitable is the key step. There are
consultants who could develop such a plan.
A
consultant(s) would:
o Identify the geographic boundary of a
proposed dredging district parcels
o Identify and classify the parcels subject
o Identify and define canal use criteria
o Identify and define governmental use
o Identify and define budgetary requirements
for maintenance dredging
o Develop 2-3 taxation models that could meet maintenance
dredging needs
o Draft proposed legislation and ballot measure
based on the model(s)
Of
course a hat could be passed among the interested parties to collect money for
that purpose. The problem with doing so is that the burden would not be shared
fairly, and most people would want to see some sort of fiduciary entity created
for the purpose. That just adds to
the time and cost required to accomplish the real mission.
I
would like to suggest that the City of San Rafael take a leadership role in developing
a permanent solution to the maintenance dredging of the San Rafael Canal by hiring a consultant to
develop a couple of alternative models which might become the basis of creating
either a port district or a special assessment district. I expect that the cost would probably not be a great deal
more than has already been spent on past lobbying efforts with the federal
government, and that the result would be more satisfying.
Clearly
the City of San Rafael has an interest in seeing the canal dredged regularly.
Having San Rafael take on this “honest broker” role would enable all the
interested parties to get the bail rolling. And, more importantly, it would
overcome the obstacle of creating a financially responsible entity agreeable to
a diverse set of interests.
If this approach seems to make sense I would like to
arrange a small meeting with representatives of some of those interests, as
well as appropriate city staff, to talk about how we might proceed.
Thanks for your
consideration.
Sincerely,