Bay Area Monitor June/July 2007

League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund

Bay Area Monitor Volume 32, Number 6 June/July 2007

A Bimonthly Review of Regional Issues

Who’s Feeling the Water Pinch?

By Elizabeth Anders After witnessing the dramatic media coverage of our recent dry winter, you’d think that water agencies up and down the WATER CONSERVATION TIPS state would be asking for more conservation in the coming S Take shorter year. In the Bay Area you’d be wrong. In fact, though we’ve showers. had one of the driest rainy seasons on record, only some Bay S Operate clothes Area water agencies are asking customers to conserve more. and dish washers The reason for this isn’t political or ideological; it’s the result with full loads only. of a smorgasbord of complicated conditions. So, not all of our S Check for local water agencies are feeling the pinch—yet. water leaks, pipe Though they generally call for conservation, the Santa Clara breaks, or clogged Valley Water District, the Solano County Water Agency, and sprinklers. To the Zone 7 Water Agency are asking for no new conservation check for leaks, These low-flow showerheads measures from their customers at this time. Their water turn off all water are available for free to taps inside and storage and water capturing ability simply hasn’t been unduly customers of EBMUD as part of outside your home. a wide range of conservation affected by this year’s dry winter. Some have enormous If the meter is still services and programs offered underground basins; others get water from the Sacramento moving, you have a by the agency.

River Delta. leak.

On the other hand, the East Bay Municipal Utility District, S Water your lawn once a week and only at night. the Marin Municipal Water District, the San Francisco Public S Plant drought-tolerant gardens.

Utilities Commission, and the Sonoma County Water Agency are all asking their customers to voluntarily cut water usage S Install aerators on kitchen and bathroom faucets.

10 to 15 percent—with possible mandatory water rationing S Replace water-guzzling toilets and washing machines. later for some agencies. Each is providing conservation tips S Turn off the faucet when you are brushing your teeth for their customers on their websites or in glossy mailers or doing the dishes. sent to residents’ homes, as well as rebates for buying new, S Use a broom to clean sidewalks instead of a hose. water-efficient appliances.

Though each of these water agencies has a specific water portfolio (reservoirs, aquifers, etc.), most depend to some degree on the amount of annual winter precipitation and the natural storage system in the Sierra Nevada mountain range. In winter, water is stored cheaply in the Sierra snowpack until spring. When the snow melts, water flows into local waterways and eventually ends up in reservoirs and basins all over California. Since the water content in the snowpack along the 400-mile-long range Regional Roundup: Ferries Page 4 was 46 percent of normal this year, water agencies dependent upon Ecohazard in Suisun Bay Page 6 it have begun taking action.

Calls for Public Action Page 7 On the face of things, it seems strange that one household could be asked to cut water usage while another in a neighboring city FOCUS on Housing Page 8

ISSUE CONTENTS

continued on page 2

2 - Bay Area Monitor

June/July 2007

Who’s Feeling the Water Pinch? (continued from page 1 ) would not be. But where we get our water and how we get it is complicated.

two years of storage in our reservoirs. When we have a dry year we are particularly concerned about it.”

Asking For Conservation: Case by Case

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission In April, SFPUC urged its 2.4 million customers to curtail water consumption in order to avert mandatory water rationing later this year. Eighty-five percent of the water SFPUC captures to supply its customers is from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, a source of water influenced by the size of the Sierra snowpack.

Though officials at SFPUC believe that the reservoir will fill this spring, they fear that the surrounding watershed will not be able to meet customer demands in the summer or fall. Moreover, the agency’s local reservoirs are not completely filled. Crystal Springs Reservoir in San Mateo County is only at 85 percent capacity and the Calaveras Reservoir in Alameda County is only one-third full because of its seismic vulnerability.

The agency is keeping a close eye on consumer water use, and will decide on July 1 whether to set mandatory cutbacks.

Tony Winnicker, SFPUC Communications Specialist, sums it up: “If everybody takes small steps now, we can avert mandatory cutbacks later this year, but global climate change is upon us. We know that we’ll have drier winters and that droughts will be drier and longer. We will never have a period again where we don’t have to conserve. We need to confront the fact that we live in an arid environment, and make better use of the water we have.”

East Bay Municipal Utilities District In April, EBMUD declared a water shortage and asked its 1.3 million customers to cut water usage by 15 percent after experiencing one of the driest years in its 84-year history.

Though last year was a wet one, allowing EBMUD to come into this year with full storage capacity, the agency predicts that the abysmal runoff from the Sierra will put it at only 80 percent water storage capacity next fall. If next season is dry, the dwindling of the water supply could lead to mandatory water rationing in 2008.

Since the call went out to reduce water usage, no real change in consumer activity has been seen. According to Greg Chan, spokesperson for EBMUD, people generally won’t react until we have an even more extreme water emergency, but “the message is out there—please, please pay attention.”

Marin Municipal Water District At a May 2 meeting, the board of MMWD encouraged voluntary water conservation by its customers after receiving only 31 of the normal 51 inches of rain. Luckily, last year brought 73 inches, so the reservoir storage level now stands only slightly less than average for this time of year. But since its primary sources of water are five reservoirs on the Mount Tamalpais Watershed that depend on local rainfall, MMWD is already taking action against possible future dry winter seasons.

Paul Helliker, General Manager of MMWD, underscored the incredible need to conserve, commenting, “We have only

Sonoma County Water Agency On April 12, the Sonoma County Water Agency projected that Lake Mendocino, its main source of water, will reach historically low levels come fall—levels akin to those seen during the 1976 drought. Lake Mendocino stores an average of 69,000 acre-feet of water (that’s one acre of water one foot continued on next page

Bay Area Monitor 1611 Telegraph Avenue Suite 300 Oakland, CA 94612

Linda Craig LWVBAEF President

Alec MacDonald Monitor Editor

The Bay Area Monitor is a publication of the League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund. It is supported by the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District; the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; the Bay Area Rapid Transit District; the East Bay Municipal Utility District; the East Bay Regional Park District; the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District; the Metropolitan Transportation Commission; the Peninsula Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) and the San Mateo County Transit District; the Port of Oakland; the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority; and private donations to LWVBAEF.

The Bay Area Monitor provides impartial, independent coverage of agency activities and other important Bay Area issues. Material and viewpoints are chosen by LWVBAEF to provide a comprehensive view of regional developments.

Permission is granted to copy this publication in whole or in part as long as material is credited to the Bay Area Monitor of the LWVBAEF. The publication is online at www.bayareamonitor.org, including the current issue and an archive of back issues. For further information, call (510) 839-1608 or send an e-mail to editor@bayareamonitor.org.

June/July 2007

tall) and is losing 200 to 300 acre-feet per day. As a result, the agency has asked its 750,000 customers in Mendocino, Sonoma, and Marin counties to cut water use by 10 to 15 percent.

These low water levels are due to a lack of rain (which was only 60 percent of normal) and reduced water flows (66 percent of normal) from PG&E’s Potter Valley Project (a hydroelectric powerhouse). Nearly 60,000 acres of agricultural land is irrigated with the agency’s other water source, the upper Russian River. Increased summer usage by agricultural and urban customers will further strain the already low water supply from Lake Mendocino and the upper Russian River.

The agency is meeting with state and federal officials to discuss its concerns, as well as conducting public workshops on water conservation.

The Other Side: Agencies in the Wet Santa Clara Valley Water District SCVWD has plenty of water to meet the needs of its 1.7 million residents. Its water—half of which comes from local sources such as underground aquifers, and the other half from the Sierra Nevada through pumping stations in the Delta—is in good shape.

“We always encourage conservation and people are more conservation-minded now, but if we have another dismal rain season we will have to do more,” says Susan Siravo, spokesperson for SCVWD.

Bay Area Monitor - 3

Solano County Water Agency A single dry year doesn’t have an impact on the Solano County Water Agency, according to General Manager David Okita. Lake Berryessa—impounded by the Federal Solano Project—is its main supply, and is almost completely full. The agency also gets water supply from the State Water Project.

The wholesaler to Fairfield, Suisun City, Vacaville, Vallejo, and Benicia, as well as unincorporated farmers in the county, maintains that it will only ask for customer water cutbacks if the dryness continues for a few years and its ability to shift water is diminished.

Water supply, says Okita, “depends on where you are.”

Zone 7 Water Agency Zone 7 Water Agency, a water wholesaler for the municipalities of Livermore, Pleasanton, and Dublin, hasn’t felt the pinch of our low-yield rainy season. Zone 7 gets water from the State Water Project conveyed through the Delta, along with groundwater storage and some local runoff.

“Because 2006 was so rainy, the State Water Project was able to store enough water supplies from last year for Zone 7 to meet water demands this summer—despite this year’s lack of rain,” says Boni Brewer, spokesperson for the agency, who goes on to note, “however, should we be entering a multipleyear drought, like in the early 1990s, in future years we would need our customers to make an extra effort to conserve water.

Fortunately for us, unlike a lot of Bay Area agencies, we have a groundwater basin with long-term storage.”

Ideas Flow at Water Workshop

By Alec MacDonald On April 23, Bay Area elected officials, government staffers, planners, engineers, developers, and interested community members gathered in downtown Oakland for a day-long workshop on connecting water and land use. Hosted by the Bay Area Water Forum (BAWF) and Local Government Commission (LGC), the workshop addressed the challenge of judiciously managing water resources in the face of rapid regional growth. In half a dozen presentations, representatives from numerous public and private organizations described a wide variety of applicable policy strategies and specific technical measures. Among the topics of discussion were flood protection, landscaping design innovation, encroachment, erosion, drought, public participation, funding, and of course, conservation. A major event for both sponsors, the workshop served as yet another step in the ongoing efforts of BAWF to coordinate regional water management activities and LGC to promote the Ahwahnee Water Principles.

LGC’s Clark Anderson gave a talk at the workshop

4 - Bay Area Monitor

June/July 2007

Regional Roundup: Ferries

By Leslie Stewart The San Francisco Bay Water Transit Authority has been in existence less than a decade, but it is already making its mark on the region. The WTA plan for new ferry service on San Francisco Bay—approved by the state legislature in October 2003—is poised to commemorate its fifth anniversary by docking at Oyster Point. And funding for an expanded role for WTA in ferry emergency response and additional ferry routes could be on the horizon, due to the recent passage of Proposition 1B and local sales tax renewals in San Mateo and Contra Costa, adding to existing monies from federal programs and regional bridge tolls.

Critics of new ferries have shown resistance, however, focusing primarily on two major issues. One is air pollution.

The Friends of the Earth’s Bluewater Network—who successfully insisted on air quality standards for WTA vessels from the beginning—continues to be vocal about the importance of fighting ferry pollution. In hopes to address this issue, WTA has explored using fuel cells, biodiesel, and solar-powered vessels as part of its future ferry fleet.

The second criticism draws a comparison to the greater cost-effectiveness of other transit such as buses and trains—particularly in San Mateo, where some proposed ferry routes parallel CalTrain and BART, neither of which operate at full capacity. However, to a large extent, funding for ferries has been earmarked and is no longer available to support other transit, due to strong political backing for expanding Bay Area ferry routes. Supporters also argue that many people who are not currently using transit would be attracted to the ambience of riding the ferry.

Some funding for ferries, such as allocations of regional funds from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, is tied to increased housing and employment near ferry terminals, so new pools of riders may be created that are already oriented to water transit and ideally located to take advantage of new service.

The initial role of the WTA, according to the authorizing legislation, was to launch new routes or expand existing routes. If requested, WTA could also take on operation of existing service, and there have been discussions between the City of Alameda and WTA about possible WTA operation of the Alameda ferries. A bill recently introduced in the California state legislature, SB976 (Torlakson), would expand the focus of WTA beyond its operation as a comprehensive regional public water transit system by granting it a critical leadership role in coordinating waterborne transit emergency response activities. The bill

could be the first step in the Bay Area toward establishing an effective, coordinated ferry emergency response. It would also allow the WTA to become eligible for funding from the $1 billion deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security and Disaster Response account established by Proposition 1B.

Artist rendering of new ferry (courtesy of WTA)

Dropping Anchor off South San Francisco For WTA, starting ferry service to Oyster Point in South San Francisco is a series of firsts: purchase of the first new ferries, completion of the agency’s first environmental impact report for a terminal site in December 2006, and, in a little over a year, completion of the first terminal in the 2003 WTA plan.

On April 25, 2007, MTC approved $300,000 to fund a construction management firm, and terminal construction is scheduled to begin in spring of 2008.

South San Francisco ferry service will require an initial investment of $17 million in capital funds for the construction of two vessels, plus $28 million in capital funds for terminal and site construction. WTA is now working with the City of South San Francisco and San Mateo County Harbor District officials to explore ways to reduce the costs. This could include integrating landside improvements with the city’s plan for redevelopment at the terminal site, or optimizing value engineering for the new ferries. Two 149-passenger vessels are already under construction to provide the initial Oyster Point service and fill in as spares for other runs after dedicated Oyster Point ferries arrive.

Ferries will take approximately half an hour to complete the run from Oyster Point to Jack London Square in the East Bay, where a ferry terminal already operates. Employees of several major firms located at Oyster Point are expected to be the primary users, and WTA estimates over 900 riders per day by 2025.

June/July 2007

On the Horizon at Redwood City Although South San Francisco will be the first city in San Mateo County to have new ferry service, Redwood City is hoping to be right behind. In January, the Redwood City Port Commission authorized $121,000 to study four potential sites for a ferry terminal. The study, which will be completed in July, is the first step in site selection and design, and will be followed by additional environmental studies.

WTA will probably do these studies, but according to Michael Giari, Executive Director of the Port of Redwood City, “WTA is asking local jurisdictions where new service will be and to take the lead in identifying the site, rather than imposing these decisions from the regional agency level.”

Giari does not anticipate problems with the environmental studies, noting that “we are a working port and we already know what’s there.” A greater concern is funding. Terminal construction is estimated to cost $20 million and two new 300-passenger vessels would cost $22 million, with operating costs estimated at $5 million once service was well established. Although the Port provided the money for the first step, funding for the remaining costs to establish ferry service will have to come from other sources, including state and federal funds designated for ferries as well as San Mateo County’s sales tax, which includes money for ferries beginning in 2008.

Port officials are hopeful that service will begin by 2012. Redwood City’s recently completed Bayfront Visioning Study includes ferry service, and local elected officials are generally supportive. The WTA estimates that 1,400 commuters per day could use new highspeed ferries to reach San Francisco or the East Bay. Many of those commuters already work in the Pacific Shores Center near the Port, and there are plans for additional development nearby. In a few years, Redwood City’s port could be unloading passengers as well as sand, gravel, and cement.

Bay Area Monitor - 5

MAKING WAVES IN THE EAST BAY Planning anything new on the East Bay waterfront is likely to be contentious, and a ferry terminal is no exception. According to Paul Kamen, chair of the Berkeley Waterfront Commission, “Those who see the benefits of a mixed-use urban waterfront with appropriately scaled commercial and recreational activities tend to want the ferry. Those with a vision of an unbroken, continuous shoreline park are in strong opposition.” WTA has named four possible sites for a Berkeley/Albany ferry terminal: at the marina (either at the Doubletree Hotel or the fishing pier), at the end of Gilman Street, or near Buchanan Street in Albany. At two WTA meetings in March to take comments on all the proposed sites, there was substantial opposition to the Buchanan and Gilman sites based on traffic and other environmental impacts. City officials in Albany oppose both sites, while the Albany Friends of the Ferry group supports them.

Berkeley officials are cautiously supportive of a ferry terminal at the marina. The Doubletree Hotel location currently hosts excursion ferry service operated

by Hornblower. “The Doubletree hotel site has the potential to become a ferry terminal with minimal additional infrastructure,” says Kamen. “Most of the required dock, parking, dredging, and breakwater are already there.” However, there are concerns about traffic and parking and the need for good transit links.

Environmental impacts, particularly effects on wildlife in the Eastshore State Park, must also be addressed.

A draft environmental report to be released in early 2008 will look at these issues. Pending a decision on a preferred location, WTA has not made estimates on the cost for a new terminal, although new ferries and operation costs would be similar to other crossBay routes. Money for operating costs is earmarked in Regional Measure 2, the last bridge toll increase, but funding must still be secured for a new terminal.

Service is projected to begin in 2011.

Returning to Port Along the Contra Costa Shoreline The recent reauthorization of the county transportation sales tax measure included $45 million for West County ferries. For a brief period in 2000, Richmond had a commuter ferry to San Francisco, although it was discontinued for lack of passengers. These terminal facilities have since been removed. The WTA is now working with the city on the development of a unified land-use concept for the Richmond Terminal. However, environmental studies need to be done and additional funding secured.

Other cities along the Contra Costa shoreline are also anxious to add ferries to their revitalized waterfronts, although the WTA plan anticipates that the earliest that service could start would be 2012. Martinez City Council member Lara DeLaney says, “The council is definitely supportive of the ferry system.” In Hercules, officials have been designing the new downtown plan to include a ferry terminal, which would be near the town center and the new intermodal Amtrak station (making for good transit connections). An environmental study for the Hercules terminal is due in summer 2009.

Members of the Antioch City Council invited staff from WTA to make a presentation to them in February. WTA is currently seeking funding for an environmental impact report on several Antioch sites, including the marina at the end of L Street, downtown at the end of I Street (the preferred site), and the Fulton Shipyard north of town. Antioch ferry service could run directly to San Francisco or could include a stop in Martinez.

6 - Bay Area Monitor

June/July 2007

A Hull of a Problem: “Mothball” Fleet in Suisun Bay Poses Risk

By Gail Schickele Aliens have invaded and are harboring in Suisun Bay right under the nose—make that hulls—of the National Defense Reserve Fleet. The NDRF vessels are in the custody of the Maritime Administration (MARAD) and have been stored in the San Francisco Bay since WWII in case of war or emergency.

The “aliens” are toxic substances such as paint and oil that leach from the ships and pollute the Bay, as well as fouling communities of aquatic species such as barnacles, mussels, and crabs that attach directly to underwater vessel surfaces.

Known as “alien,” “invasive,” “exotic,” or “aquatic nuisance species,” nonindigenous species (NIS) are transported into the Bay from other regions. Once established, NIS can have severe ecological, economic, and human health impacts on the receiving environment, according to the California State Lands Commission (CSLC). In a report to the state legislature, CSLC observed that vessels that spend long periods in port or move at slow speeds appear to accumulate more extensive and diverse fouling, and that the “mothball” fleet of out-ofservice military vessels moored in Suisun Bay likely contains substantial fouling communities.

To prevent such problems, vessel operators periodically clean underwater areas and use antifouling toxic paints. Yet much of the Suisun Bay fleet has been immobile for years, if not decades, with little or no hull maintenance.

“The fleet is a floating wrecking yard and there is no fundamental reason that it should be there,” says Saul Bloom, Executive Director of Arc Ecology, which forwards that the vessels are ticking environmental time bombs. “This constitutes substantial dumping of hazardous material and toxic waste in San Francisco Bay.” The NDRF was established under the Merchant Ship Sales Act of 1946 for national defense and emergencies. In 1950 the NDRF held 2,277 ships, but the fleet is now fewer than 250 ships at anchorages in three locations: Suisun Bay, the James River in Virginia, and the Neches River in Texas. Of the 96 currently in the Western fleet, about a third are military useful, fleet support, or maintained as the Ready Reserve Force for expedient deployment; another third are under historic review or hold (with one school ship and one in donation hold to The Glacier Society); and the rest are slated for scrapping or disposal.

CSLC reports that research and access to military vessels has been extremely difficult to obtain. For example, NIS regulation exempts military vessels from its authority, and they are instead subject to the Uniform National Discharge Standards for Vessels of the Armed Forces.

To obtain information regarding the status and upkeep of the fleet, Arc Ecology and the National Resources Defense Council filed a freedom of information request last year with MARAD. Bloom reports MARAD has recently responded with hundreds of documents.

“They’re trying to be responsive to our request and they have attempted to reply in a timely fashion,” he says. “They have a big problem and very little money to deal with it—and that’s part of their frustration, as well as ours.”

Cleaning methods attempted by MARAD have included scamping (cleaning with rotary-like brushes called scampers), which may have caused more harm than good.

Keith Lichten of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) notes there’s some risk of a discharge of heavy metals both when the ships are at anchor and when they are transported—and a significant risk of discharge to the Bay when they’re cleaned prior to transport.

“It’s a challenge removing biotic material,” Lichten comments.

“It takes off paint chips and potentially large sections of paint.

In one case the hull had rusted in layers and a several-foot square section of metal and paint was discharged into the Bay.” Toxic substances such as metals and pesticides can adsorb to sediment particles, which organisms may ingest and introduce into the food web.

“We see this as real threat,” Lichten says. “We want to see the ships scrapped in as clean a way as possible.”

Bloom suggests the ships be dry-docked and scrapped locally. “The best thing to do is to scrap them in an appropriate fashion here in the San Francisco Bay Area and create some jobs,” he contends. “That would be the most expeditious and fortuitous of conditions.”

Although Federal and California Codes and Statutes are limited in scope and specificity in regard to these concerns, the U.S. Coast Guard was able to use federal regulation to intervene when some vessels were moved for dismantling, reports CSLC. According to MARAD, the Coast Guard has now put a halt to all scamping operations.

In the meantime, the Water Board and the other agencies are working with MARAD to help ensure the development of safe cleaning and scrapping methods. “It’s in the best interests of the Bay for the aging ships to be scrapped, yet in a way that is protective of water quality,” Lichten remarks.

For further reading on ship disposal and related issues, visit www.marad.dot.gov and www.arcecology.org

June/July 2007

Bay Area Monitor - 7

Public Action: Chances for Bay Area Residents to Enact Change

By Alec MacDonald

Participation Plan Open for Comment Although the primary responsibility for shaping the Bay Area’s transportation network falls to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, such a gargantuan task demands a significant amount of outside help. So who better to bring on board than the people who use that network every day? After all, consulting the general public on government decisions about anything—be it highways or healthcare—makes more than just good sense, it makes for strong democracy.

MTC currently incorporates community perspectives through its Public Involvement Action Plan (enacted in 2001 with Resolution 3351), but now must revamp this policy in accordance with recent statutes. In 2005, the passage of the federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act established specific public participation requirements for agencies such as MTC. And then last year, MTC itself adopted two Environmental Justice principles, one of which called for the agency to “create an open and transparent public participation process that empowers lowincome communities and communities of color to participate in decision making that affects them.”

Starting this year, MTC has been formulating a new policy, calling it the Public Participation Plan. The plan should give Bay Area residents increased opportunity to weigh in on a host of important transportation decisions that affect them. In moving forward, the agency looks to rely on a set of guiding principles that prioritize cooperation, adaptability, diversity, regionalism, and relationship-building.

The process began in January, as staff met with MTC’s three citizen advisory groups (the Advisory Council, the Elderly and Disabled Advisory Committee, and the Minority Citizens Advisory Committee) to evaluate current public involvement procedures and talk about potential changes. In subsequent months, staff also solicited similar input in meetings with half a dozen focus groups around the region, as well as through an online survey that was completed by more than 1,500 respondents. More feedback will be sought in upcoming discussions with a wide variety of transportation and environmental agencies, and with the six federally recognized Native American tribes in the Bay Area.

On May 4, MTC released a draft of the plan, representing much of the information gathering efforts thus far. The agency will be accepting comments on the draft up until June 20, and has scheduled a public hearing for this purpose during its Legislation Committee meeting on June 8. Then on July 13,

the Legislation Committee will oversee a final review of the draft, in preparation for the Commission to take action on the plan at its July 25 convening.

The draft may be downloaded from MTC’s website at http://mtc.ca.gov/get_involved/participation_plan.htm, where instructions for submitting comments are also posted.

It Takes Individual Effort to Spare the Air On a global level, battling air pollution seems like an overwhelming challenge. However, the situation starts to feel more manageable when addressed on a personal basis. To help reduce smog, there are a number of simple things individuals can do on their own: walking, biking, or riding public transportation instead of driving, using non-gasolinepowered lawn and garden equipment, or refraining from using aerosol sprays.

These are the kinds of clean behaviors that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District would like to promote as it plans once again for another season of its Spare the Air program, scheduled to run this year from June 1 through October 12.

With the tendency for ground-level ozone to accumulate as temperatures rise and wind dies down during the summer months, the Air District hopes to encourage residents in the region to make environmentally-conscious choices—especially at times when the air quality is expected to be poor.

The Air District will issue Spare the Air advisories on days when forecasts predict unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone on the Air Quality Index. The agency will publicize these advisories through television, radio, and newspaper outlets, a free phone hotline (1-800-HELP-AIR), on the Internet at www. sparetheair.org, and via AirAlert e-mail notifications sent out to nearly 47,000 subscribers.

The program will also again feature a free transit incentive, slated for the first four non-holiday weekdays of the season on which advisories are issued. On those days, passengers can ride for free on BART, CalTrain, ACE Train, and Bay Area ferries until 1pm, while Bay Area bus systems will offer free rides all day. All told, 33 transit operators will participate, thanks to $8.5 million in funding from MTC, with additional funding provided by the Air District, using federal transportation dollars allocated to the Bay Area.

8 - Bay Area Monitor

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU! In our efforts to monitor the region, we depend on the support of readers like you. We welcome your feedback on what we’ve done, your ideas for future articles, and your financial donations. We invite you to use this form in contacting us.

q

I have a comment/suggestion

q

I would like to Make a Donation of $__________ (Please make checks payable to “LWV Bay Area Education Fund”; we are a nonprofit organization and donations are tax deductible)

q

I would like to update my mailing address

June/July 2007 NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

OAKLAND, CA PERMIT NO. 4353

Name: ____________________________________________ Address:__________________________________________ City, ZIP:__________________________________________

q

I would like to receive the Monitor via e-mail E-mail address:___________________________________

League of Women Voters of the Bay Area Education Fund

Bay Area Monitor 1611 Telegraph Avenue, Suite 300, Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510) 839-1608 / Fax: (510) 839-1610 e-mail: editor@bayareamonitor.org

V Announcements FOCUS on Bay Area Housing Presented by the Association of Bay Area Governments, in conjunction with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, and the Urban Land Institute.

Thursday, June 28th, 2007 9:00am - 12:45pm The Gaia Building, 2116 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA Join regional housing and planning experts for discussions about the preliminary Regional Housing Needs Allocation, best practices for developing affordable housing programs, and related issues. The program will also feature remarks by keynote speaker Carol Galante (CEO of Bridge Housing) and Ted Droettboom (Regional Planning Program Director of the Joint Policy Committee). Refreshments will be provided.

Contact Felila Toleafoa at (510) 464-7993 for more information. To register online, visit: https://secure.abag.ca.gov/authorizenet/focus07.html