FireWise member shows support for the MWPA
I am writing in response to a recent letter to the editor expressing opposition to the upcoming San Rafael-San Anselmo Fuel Reduction Zone Project by Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority.
This project is one of the agency's measures to reduce wildfire risk in Marin. MWPA was created by taxpayers to finance projects that diminish wildfire threats by creating fire breaks and decreasing fuel. This project along the San Rafael-San Anselmo border was an outgrowth of input by local residents who expressed concern about high-risk conditions in our area. Input came from my local FireWise group, part of a national fire prevention organization designed to educate communities. It is supported by the MWPA.
MWPA responded to our concerns by developing a tailored plan to reduce the identified risks through direct action funded by the agency. To us, this is a textbook example of responsive government.
The author of the letter expressed a legitimate concern about the project's use of certain herbicides. To address that issue, MWPA will utilize a nonaerosol chemical applied directly to eliminated tree stumps to prevent regrowth; surrounding areas will be unaffected. Absent such treatment, targeted vegetation would survive and regenerate.
The author also criticizes MWPA for not spending enough on “home hardening” efforts. This critique seems misguided. MWPA has a robust home inspection program and also engages in significant public education efforts. Both help homeowners understand improvements needed to harden their homes and reduce wildfire risk.
Importantly, these improvements are not the responsibility of MWPA; the onus is on homeowners for implementation. And MWPA even offers grants to help with such improvements. MWPA's role regarding home hardening is to help homeowners understand what projects are needed; homeowners themselves must actually accomplish these tasks.
MWPA is carrying out the tasks the voters intended.
— Scott Pinsky, San Anselmo the comment period on the draft EIR process, cited numerous deficiencies with that document. Citing deficiencies is too often a mere prelude to a legal challenge to the city's ultimate certification of the final EIR. That action must be taken prior to considering any approval of the project.
While California Environmental Quality Act lawsuits can be quite expensive, it's their ability to delay projects for lengthy periods of time that make them attractive to project opponents. For developers, project delays equal major project financial costs that can kill off a project.
Unfortunately, while California has passed legislation intended to address the state's affordable housing crises, it has not yet done anything to address the use (or abuse) of CEQA and the associated lawsuits to kill projects. Unless
and until that is done, the state's housing goals will likely, unfortunately, remain largely hamstrung.
The state is long overdue to meaningfully reform CEQA.
— Bill Ramsey, San Rafael