CFSB Board Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2022


Attendees: Michael Harrington, Nick Tharp, Paul Teall, Chris Voss, Mike Nelson, Gary Burke, Kim Selkoe, Nathan Rosser, Mary Nishimito, Tony Shiao, Dave Colker, Tony Luna


Notes: Ava Schulenberg


Agenda:

  1. Q2 Statement for approval

  2. Board Vote on Sea Sketch project

  3. Board Vote on joining Keep the Funk

  4. Board Vote on Chamber membership

  5. Holiday Party at the Brewhouse

    1. Ava will let Maria (GM) know what the board decides

  6. Saturday Market Vendor Meeting

    1. Insurance

  7. Kim’s Trip to Seattle/Alaska

    1. Report on trips

    2. Whale Tail Grant from the Coastal Commission

  8. Wind Energy - Scheiblauer’s recent letter

  9. Other

    1. Follow up to Ray’s Comment in Slip Transfer Meeting

    2. BSEE Invites Public Comment on Analysis of Decommissioning Oil and Gas Infrastructure off California Coast

      1. Which of the 3 alternatives are preferred (full removal, partial removal, or partial with reefing of the top section of the jacket)


Chris Voss opened the meeting on October 24, 2022 at 4:06pm. Meeting was held in person in the harbor classroom and via Zoom.

Minutes:

  • Q2 Statement for approval

    • Kim presents highlights

      • We are doing well with income, we are hitting our budget numbers for our projected expenditures throughout the year 

      • The Fishermen for Ukraine event funds got sent out in July, even though the event was in June, it looks like our revenue was highly boosted with the ~$20k figure but that ended up being donated the following month

      • The USDA grants are funded by invoicing so you can see the month that we spent out and got reimbursed for

      • Small membership payments show we did better than our budget projections

      • Standard expenditures listed: bank fees, staff costs, etc. 

    • Paul makes a motion to approve, Chris seconds, Garrett and Gary approve (4-0-0 vote stands, unanimous approval)

  • Board Vote on Sea Sketch project to map fishing grounds

    • This is an important decision that has a lot of politics to it in the port and we want to ensure that we don’t rush into it. Chris summarizes by saying the North coast guys got an OPC grant in order to gather information about where their activities happened on a finer scale than what DFW produces on blocks, and the Feds are willing to accept this type of information in terms of AOAs and offshore wind vs their own govt data, which is usually less accurate. If this is approved, Ava would conduct the survey with the help of Madeleine Berger from Sea Sketch. SeaSketch is a tool that fishermen use to draw shapes and map out zones based on importance.  The data will be proprietary to CFSB and individual fishermen responses will not be viewable by anyone aside from the computer analyst.

      • Gary notes this is similar to what Carrie Pomeroy did, but Chris notes that it would be more high-tech/accurate and would allow for adjustments to be made in the decision making process of locations of impactful projects like AOAs, Chumash sanctuaries, offshore wind, 30x30, etc. We are being encouraged by NOAA and by fishing reps in ports to our north to create our own spatial analysis using this type of tool.

    • Chris thinks we should do it, but also emphasizes that the decision is up to the board because it is a controversial decision and there is a legitimate argument for not doing it because of the betrayal that took place during the MPA process, so politically it’s hard to get fishermen to tell people where they fish. 

    • Kim says in the North Coast they got a bunch of people in a room and had fishermen put any designated area that they say as “fishable,” which is another approach we could take, but Gary makes the point that they probably filled the whole map because every area is likely fishable. 

    • Kim emphasizes that this would be proprietary if we decide to do it, and it differs from an MPA process because the goal of siting a farm is not to protect the most productive ecosystem spots, it’s to minimize impact to fishing. The intent is to have this information for us to have and use as we navigate a multitude of challenges that we face.

    • Paul asks why this would be better than fishing blocks, Chris says it would be more fine grain and accurate.

    • Paul asks how much it would cost - Kim says on the North Coast they asked for $12-15,000 and OPC gave them more than double that because they wanted them to do it well and hire Carrie Pomeroy. The government sees it as a liability to not give enough money so they give a lot so that your budget can actually fulfill the whole project and do it right. Kim says it would be funded by NOAA for us, not OPC.

    • Chris says a benefit would be having a more connected port community and we would be stronger collectively if we combine our efforts with Ventura, Channel Islands, etc. 

    • Paul asks if each port will have a surveyor or if Ava would be doing all - Kim says Ava would be doing all, but if we get enough money we could figure out a way to coordinate with members of each port’s association to do the legwork in their own port.

    • Kim emphasizes that to make sure we don’t do something that will be divisive for our port, if it gets approved today, we might want to have a larger port meeting to ensure we’ve got the support of the majority of members.

    • Kim says if we got funding, it likely wouldn’t be until about February and thinks if this moves forward, we should get going on the work sooner rather than later because some of the AOA maps are getting finalized, also Ocean Rainforest is getting ready to put in a permit to the Army Corp, and we would want to have the map ready to potentially be a stakeholder in their decision making process.

      • Paul asks how we would do this early without the funding until February. Kim says we could use some of our fishery advocacy grant funding from our 2022 Cable Grant and get reimbursed from NOAA, so we would be going on a financial limb recognizing that we wouldn’t be getting money until around spring time.

    • Paul makes a motion to start the preliminary process (convening a meeting for the fishing community and talking with other ports) so we have a foot to stand on when the ultimate timeline comes. Chris seconded the motion.

      • Gary asks if it’s 100% that NOAA could pay us, Kim says no, but it’s likely and will look into it.

      • Garrett opposes 

      • Gary is in favor 

      • 3-1-0 vote; passes by majority rule.

  • Board Vote on joining Keep the Funk

    • Keep the Funk is an organization fighting against development of the SoMo housing project in the funk zone and they have some momentum in shaping the future of the area

    • They would like a fishing community rep on their board

      • Current members include the Lark restaurant owner, CEO of Apeel Sciences, Erica who owns Dart coffee, and they want Kim to be on the board to maintain commercial fishing’s interests 

    • They are trying to buy property with funding from donors who can afford to do so now and then over time the property would be re-allocated accordingly

    • Would be 2hrs a quarter for Kim to go minimum and then if there was a need for Kim to be more involved, we can have that discussion later

    • Garrett makes a motion for Kim to be on the board and represent the interests of the fishing community as they navigate their challenges

      • Paul seconds, Chris approves, Gary approves

      • 4-0-0 vote stands, unanimous approval

  • Board Vote on Chamber membership

    • Chris says right now the chamber is organizing effectively and can help our advocacy at certain points; He says when he pursued their help for the lobster commission, they were very instrumental

    • Mike Nelson and Chris have split the cost in the past but are now asking that CFSB absorb the cost

    • Mike says their big push was for lobbying to the city council to support tourism and restaurants, etc. and we ought to get some of their attention to have them advocate for our needs which they have said they want to do now.

    • Mike says there are two tiers of membership, it would be $400 for us to join

      • Chris makes a motion to join

      • Garrett seconds, unanimous approval 

      • 4-0-0 vote stands

  • Holiday Party at the Brewhouse

    • Could do a buffet style setup or preset menu, no cost to reserve a room

    • Intention is to promote memberships for 2023

    • Ava will let Maria (GM) know what the board decides

      • SB Fishermen and their families only

      • Advocate for 2023 membership

      • Ava will gather more information from them in terms of budgeting and capacity and what would work best

  • Saturday Market Vendor Meeting

    • Insurance

      • Michael says we went from approximately $5000 to $1500 as far as the premium is concerned. The more expensive policy covers $5M and the $1500 is only $1M coverage and CFSB’s liability with the vendors is not covered.

      • Michael says its critical that the vendors have CFSB on their policy and are covered for liability. 

    • Other news

      • Kim reports she was contacted by a local caterer who has a smoker offering to smoke fish on site for customers at our market every Saturday, but the Health Dept. said it has to be raw or whole fish only at a market. Kim thinks we should relay some of these ideas to the Saturday Market vendors so we can see if we want to push forward with any potential permitting efforts

      • Garrett said he was contacted by a group in Humboldt that wants to start their own Saturday Fishermen’s Market and he will direct them to Ava and Kim to share info to help them.

  • Kim’s Trip to Seattle/Alaska

    • Report on trips

      • Kim says both were really good and acknowledges that there was mixed support for her going to Seattle but emphasizes that it was a fantastic trip in terms of what she got out of it. Some of the highlights:

      • Alaska:

        • Kim/Chris met with USDA officers to discuss how to get more money for the Maritime Collective project

        • We met with an architect from USDA who will draw up plans for projects like the Maritime Collective for free.

        • They went to Homer and learned about promotional videos that they have to highlight all of the economic activity produced by commercial fishing in their port and we want to go to Chris Bell and try and do the same.

        • There was a session on Saturday Fishermen’s market but it wasn’t a great session for us because it was more so about how do you start a new market, but Kim did say that she learned about their annual festivals as a non profit with local businesses sponsoring it, and they gave ideas about what we could do differently with ours. 

      • Seattle:

        • Kim learned about how other ports balance commercial/recreational slips

        • She has notes on fish walks and information that was being publicly displayed 

        • She took a harbor tour with their harbor commissioners so was able to learn about all the activity and controversy going on in their port

        • Women in fisheries session discussed how to get more  fishermen into elected positions, and how fishermen can come up with climate change solutions to bring to policymakers that are fishery-friendly. Also how to get new entrants and new diversity into the fishing industry, great brainstorming with representatives from around the country. 

        • Whale Tail Grant: Kim spent her last afternoon in Seattle writing a grant proposal based on the ideas she learned at the conference about frameworks for promoting new entrants.  The grant would bring in  ~$50K from the Coastal Commission’s Whale Tail program. It would be helpful for supporting Ava next year. This would not be a full fledged academy or even apprenticeship, it would be more to offer folks (who are over 18) who have no background in fishing to learn the basics about how it works (gear, management, permitting, safety, markets, policy) and get some vetting as potential deckhands.  One of the goals would be to give careers in fishing a better name to the public, focus on getting the message out that fishing is sustainable, and there are jobs to be had. We hear a lot about how hard it is to find deckhands. 

          • Paul has concerns about insurance, Kim says we wouldn’t do activities that require expensive insurance - its not an academy, just an introduction. 

          • Paul says we’re not really looking to add more people into the fleet, the younger guys disagree. Garrett says it’s extremely played down in our education system and across the board we have a bad reputation so this would actually be a good idea.

          • Gary emphasizes the barriers to entry are enormous from a cost perspective and luck in terms of permits

          • Mary points out that Sea Grant has an apprenticeship program, but Kim says what she is considering would be much less structured and is looking into more connections with trade schools, etc.

          • Gary says it’s a good idea and that we should make a documentary about each fishery and show it to schools 

          • Nathan says he did the apprenticeship through Sea Grant and they brought in high school kids and he told them what he did and he said there were other fishermen from other fisheries there and the reality is probably less than 1% of those kids would take up fishing because they didn’t strike him as gung ho about fishing. He says if we want to do something simple we should create an extra webpage to the website or a powerpoint about how you do it and outline all the steps you’d need to take in order to enter each fishery, this might encourage people to actually look into it because our permits won’t be worth anything in 30 years if no one wants them. Kim agrees that that could be part of our plan.

          • Chris makes a motion for Kim to apply for this grant and give direction to pursue this:

            • Garrett says it’s good PR 

            • Gary seconds, Paul opposes

            • 3-1-0 vote stands - Note, due to confusion around Robert’s Rules, we will be revisiting this topic for another vote  at our next meeting

  • Wind Energy - Scheiblauer’s recent letter

    • Steve is a former harbor master in Monterey and works with all Central Coast port associations and has been helping us with AOA topics

    • He has written a letter for the federal government to slow down on offshore wind efforts and almost every association has signed on to the letter in efforts to organize the state’s fishermen in a way that unifies our approach in opposing offshore wind at least getting them to slow down and better understand the short and long-term impacts

    • Chris says there were 41 qualified bidders and 5 leases were given, 3 off morro bay 2 off of Eureka; It’s a cash cow for the feds.

    • Paul asks if they took fishing into consideration on the east coast and the answer is no and there are several lawsuits currently in action 

    • Chris emphasizes that California is unique because we have the coastal act and the Coastal Commission has stepped up a bit to protect our interests and they have the authority to reject a lease since the cables will come onto the beach so that’s why these companies are approaching fishing communities to a small degree

    • Gary says he has been to every BOEM meeting on wind energy and there is just no stopping it

    • Garrett says they’re planning on giving the lease companies full managerial authority but BOEM should actually be overseeing the companies to ensure they meet certain standards for engaging with fisheries, but Boem declined playing that role.

  • Other

    • Follow up on Slip Transfer Meeting

      • Mike Nelson reminds the Board that there are two standing subcommittees of the Harbor Commission that have recently examined issues raised by commercial fishermen and the Waterfront Department: the Slip Assignment Policy Subcommittee and the Commercial Fisheries Subcommittee. And that those issues had also been reviewed and deliberated at the last meeting of the CFSB Board. He notes that Ray Kennedy, during the last meeting, had recalled an official declaration specifying a percentage of slips to be designated for commercial fishermen at a discounted rate and asked that Mike, as a commissioner, conduct research to determine if documentation of a percentage allocation could be found.

        • Mike reported that Ray’s recollection was correct and that a reference of a 19% allocation existed in the 1996 Harbor Master Plan, as well as, a condition set forth in the Coastal Development Permit issued by the Coastal Commission for the expansion of Marina One in May of 1998.

        • Tony Luna commented that by his calculations only 7% percent of slips in the harbor are currently commercially designated, yet more than 50 commercial fishermen are occupying guest slips at higher rates.

      • Garret Rose recommended that Mike Nelson, Chris Voss, Tony Luna, and Ray Kennedy first meet to discuss these findings and then consider reviewing them with the Coastal Commission, Waterfront Department and Harbor Commission Subcommittees.

    • BSEE Invites Public Comment on Analysis of Decommissioning Oil and Gas Infrastructure off California Coast

      • Which of the 3 alternatives are preferred (full removal, partial removal, or partial with reefing of the top section of the jacket)

        • Paul thinks this shouldn’t just be our decision and it should be the whole fishing community and that we should put flyers around the harbor etc. 

        • Chris says there will be a variety of opinions and he advocates us coordinating directly with Chevron since they’ve been impacting us for decades 

Chris Voss ended the meeting on October 24, 2022 at 6:00pm.