Update by the Interim Fire Chief on the Fluid Spill in the Estuary.  (Fire)
And at this point, we'll proceed with three. A update by the interim fire chief on the fluid spill in the estuary. Good evening, Madam Mayor. Actually, I'm going to give the update tonight. Sorry for that confusion. This is just going to be a very informal quick update. We we do plan on coming back once we after what I talk about once we receive more documentations, will be coming back and doing a formal report for you. But I just wanted to give you an oral update about where we are. On March 16th, Mayor Spencer, myself and Fire Chief Long went to Yerba Buena Island to visit with the Coast Guard Command staff, and we toured the facility there. They gave us a briefing on their response capabilities. And also they briefed us a little bit on the spill that occurred on February 10th in the Alameda, Oakland estuary. At that time, they they let us know that they had done testing. The testing was they had not received it back yet. Once they do receive the testing back, it will be forwarded on to their headquarters. And then we will be privy to the information of interim chief. Long has submitted a public records request, a freedom of information, they call it, for the federal government Freedom of Information Act. Once we they and they are obliged to respond to that. And once we receive that information, we will be coming back to council with that information. Additionally, Chief Long spoke to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Office of Spill Prevention and Response regarding their investigation. As you probably are aware, both the Coast Guard was doing their own internal investigation and the Department of Fish and Wildlife also did an investigation. And they they have concluded they actually haven't concluded their investigation. But the analysis that they did take in the samples that they took, there was not a match with any of the Coast Guard vessels. And from their perspective, they determined that the samples will be saved as evidence, and the investigation from their perspective remains open until they can actually determine where the source of the spill came from. But they did not. So this was again, this was Department of Fish and Wildlife, Office of Spill Prevention and Response. So separate from the Coast Guard. And they did not have a match and they did sample the Coast Guard cutters. So once again, though, we will be we still waiting on the response from the Coast Guard themselves from their investigation. And once we receive, that will be coming back with a full on report. That concludes. Councilmember questions before we have we have three speakers. Council member questions. All right. I'm going to go ahead and call the public speakers. Our first speaker will be April Squires and then Monty Hain and then Brock the Out. My chum. All around. 4:00 on the afternoon of. October 12th, 2014, I watched a floating expanse of grayish. Brown sludge. Enter San Leandro Bay from the direction of. Alameda. As Otis Street Bridge. The plume moved slowly and curled around the eastern tip of Alameda Island. Then enter the Oakland Alameda estuary. Mr. Huynh and I continued watching following the plume. From. A path on the Oakland side of the estuary. Around 5:30 p.m., we observed the plume from directly above the Fruitvale Bridge. By that time, the plume extended from San Leandro Bay westward past the Park Street Bridge. It was grayish brown and had a thick gel like almost foamy consistency unlike anything I'd seen. The plume was about. 15 feet wide and. Maybe 20 foot. Long segments embedded with some clumps. Of grass with roots attached. And other debris. Including straws, paper cups and pieces of wood. There were occasional breaks in the. Plume where there. Was a thin. Oily sheen. Around 6 p.m., Mr. Huynh borrowed. My cell phone and called 911. I listened as he was first connected with CHP. Then the Alameda Fire Department. I heard him describe the sludge and tell the other party that he would remain in the area. At the Nob Hill parking lot and be available by cell phone as if he were needed. I heard him give his cell phone number. So that he could be contacted. Mr. Huynh told me, Excuse. Me just one moment. I'm very sorry, but I just want to make it very clear. I truly apologize for interrupting, but I do not believe this is on the subject matter of the estuary spill. So it's fine to have you speak on matters, not on the agenda on this matter. And we were prepared for that. But I just wanted to make it clear that this is not a spill. So nobody's saying. I didn't think so, but no, I wasn't sure. How. No, no, I appreciate it. And I don't mean to, but I don't want it to be confusing because this is a different spill. So different this would be hold out. It's more like a public comment. Yeah, she's actually speaking items, not on the agenda. So public comments are not really on the estuary spill, right? That's right. Yeah. Thank you for the clarification. She'll get her full 3 minutes, though. So we start over. Okay. Anyways, should I just. Continue or do I start. Over? Okay. And why did time is the 3 minutes so anyway, so he could be contacted. He, he told me that quote that they said that a truck would be sent. So because it was getting dark and cold, Mr.. Huynh and I had coffee at Pete's at Nob Hill Grocery. Sitting where we could see the Fruitvale. Bridge, expecting to hear a siren after. About an hour when there was no siren or a fire truck. I laughed, and. Mr. Hawing said that he would return to the bridge and try again. Issues that concern me going forward, the insufficient response resulting from 911 calls. I learned that it is likely that response is inadequate. Because there was. No protocol. In place for first responders in pollution cases that are not petroleum. Based and. That the and. Also secondly, that the city of Alameda should establish its own protocol to protect the marine life we all enjoy, as well as public. Safety of residents and visitors who enjoy the beaches. The mayor should. Create a commission and a citizen advisory. Committee. And thirdly, that the proposed Senate bill 718 by California state senators Mark Leno and Lori Hancock delineates. Procedures to report pollution events, identify. Causes, hold accountable polluters, and create and promote citizen reporting and involvement. The mayor should ensure that the city's protocol. Is integrated with the Senate bill. Thank you very. Much. Thank you very much. Monte Hein. Thank you. When I was modifying, I investigated the plume that Ms.. Squires and I observed, and here are some of my facts and conclusions. Alamy the Sphinx lagoons underwent extensive dredging during the first two weeks of October 2014. Dredging. Solids from these lagoons were dumped in a toxic hot spot at Alameda Point, and the residual liquids were released through the Lagoon portal into San Francisco Bay. Two months later, a mystery, a great mystery girl killed and injured hundreds of seabirds along the shores of Alameda, San Leandro and Hayward and the bird rescue nonprofit's budget has been drained. Chemical analysis by Cal Fish and Wildlife has not ruled out lagoon dredging as the source of the mystery goo. Fish and Wildlife took samples from near the Lagoon portal to test and compare with the Mystery Goo. I saw an employee of Clean Lakes Inc taking a lagoon water sample. Per their website, Clean Lakes uses toxic agricultural chemicals to clarify inland waterways. One such product is, quote, absorbed and translocated by aquatic plant foliage interfering with plant metabolism. Another is, quote, a contact herbicide effective against a broad range of aquatic plants. Clean Lakes also uses surfactants, which are chemical compounds that can emulsify, dissolved and dissolve solids and render them float able. Degradation of marine habitat near the lagoon portal is evident in this screen right here I'm showing in the center. You'll notice the lush greenery around the rocks that was taken over a year from the most recent photo, which in which the rocks are bare. Here is a photo showing a foaming agent, a possible sort of act surfactant in the lagoons. That's right here. Hmm. Notice the gray fringe where the white foam meets the water as if a chemical change is taking place in those two cloudy areas with the arrows point. That's what I'm referring to. It's gray right on the fringe of that white foam. Conclusions. The timing, flow, direction and content of the October sludge plume are consistent with Alamitos Lagoon dredging and the mystery. Good additional sampling analysis are required to prove link with linkage between the goo and the lagoons. Further investigation is needed to determine the extent of environmental damage and the risk of relying on toxic chemicals to maintain the aging finger lagoons. We need further study to determine the extent to which a new era of catastrophic environmental risk to the Marines ecosystem of San Leandro Bay has been brought about by changes in tidal currents due to drought related sediment buildup. Thank you. Thank you very much. Rock the lot. Council Mayor. I actually want to address the February 10th fuel spill, which is different from what has just been discussed by the previous two speakers. We're all human and as humans we do make mistakes. Accidents are just that. There are accidents and we can accept that. What's difficult to accept. It's a cover up. And not getting the truth about something that put people from the island at risk. Health risk and risk of their property. The fuel spill that occurred on the 10th of February was quite substantial. It ultimately covered miles of the estuary. At the. March 3rd. City Council meeting, we had representatives from both the Coast Guard and the Cal. Fish and Wildlife Department. Who said that. The source of the spill remained unknown. That what was detected in the spill was Marine diesel. After that, you heard numerous speakers, numerous very knowledgeable speakers say that it was their opinion that what was detected was a kerosene based substance, which would be consistent with JP five, which is a fuel that's used in the modern generation cutters and the aircraft that fly off of them. The only place that that could have come from was the Coast Guard. We're all waiting for our Freedom of Information Act to come through. We have no further information from the Coast. Guard. Because their investigation is still active. It's still underway. So there's no news there. But I did take a sample from our marina that night and passed it on to Fish and Wildlife. And they sat on that for the last two months. And I found out just this afternoon that my request to have that returned to me so that I could do an independent analysis of it. They have instead sent it to a commercial lab for a, quote, independent analysis. So I'm actually looking forward to seeing those results and sharing those with the council. Once again, I would say if that comes back as JP five, the only source of that could be the Coast Guard. Now, we take great civic pride about having the Coast Guard in this city. And I, in fact, have great respect for the Coast Guard or have had respect for them up until this incident. But I think that we as a community deserve the truth on a matter that's this serious. And I'm feeling like the Coast Guard would just as soon have this all just pass as water under. The bridge or water out the estuary. Nobody wants to take any formal responsibility for this. And I think that the people that were. Liveaboard that night were put at risk. And I think that we could be better prepared for an incident like this in the future and that the city and residents of Alameda deserve the truth of the matter. And I don't think we received that today. Thank you. Thank you. Have no further speakers subs for this item. Three B. Update on safety of vacant buildings at Alameda Point or. Oh. Um. I'm going to. I'm just going to exercise my prerogative. Leave it. Thank you.