Kafka Goes Coastal Amending the Fort Bragg Local Coastal Program June 17, 2008

LCPs are basic planning tools used by local governments to guide development in the coastal zone. They contain ground rules for development and protection of coastal resources. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

is only partially correct. The LUP includes policies governing development in the coastal zone that are necessary to implement the Coastal Act and the LUP is typically a part of a city's General Plan. In Fort Bragg, the new LUP is contained within the "Coastal General Plan." The IP provides implementing regulations for the LUP policies, including zoning and subdivision regulations, site development regulations, resource management requirements, etc. In Fort Bragg, the IP is contained within the "Coastal Land Use & Development Code" (Coastal LUDC). 3. Local or County governments cannot legally apply an LCP or amendments to an LCP prior to certification by the CCC.4 An LCP is not deemed certified until all four of the following steps have been completed: • a local or County government has formally adopted the LUP and IP/LUDC; • the Coastal Commission has certified the LCP as being in compliance with Coastal Act policies; • the local government agency has formally accepted the Commission's approval, along with any suggested modifications adopted by the Commission; and • the CCC has filed a Notice of Certification with the State Resources Agency. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding, 4Public Resources Code §30514 may be accessed at www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 4. Most development in the Coastal Zone requires a Coastal Development Permit (CDP).5 Once an LCP and its IP/LUDC have been effectively certified, authority for issuing Coastal Development Permits is vested in the local agency “…for developments landward of the mean high tide line.”6 Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding in general, incorporating the City of Fort Bragg response in specifics. Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding in general, incorporating the City of Fort Bragg response in specifics. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

Local or County governments cannot legally apply an LCP or amendments to an LCP prior to certification by the CCC.4 An LCP is not deemed certified until all four of the following steps have been completed: • a local or County government has formally adopted the LUP and IP/LUDC; • the Coastal Commission has certified the LCP as being in compliance with Coastal Act policies; • the local government agency has formally accepted the Commission's approval, along with any suggested modifications adopted by the Commission; and • the CCC has filed a Notice of Certification with the State Resources Agency. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding, 4Public Resources Code §30514 may be accessed at www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

is only partially correct. The footnote re: Categorical Exclusion orders inaccurately defines the specified types of development as being "exempt from CCC appeal." In fact, they are exempt from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit. In addition, the last sentence is only partially correct. Pursuant to Section 30519(b) of the Coastal Act, the Commission retains permit authority (with certain exceptions) after LCP certification over development occurring on tidelands, submerged lands, and public trust lands. 5. Depending on the type and location of a permitted project, it may or may not be subject to appeal to the Coastal Commission. With the exception of major public works and energy projects, denials by local government are not subject to appeal to the Coastal Commission and may only be challenged through the courts. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. In mapped areas, Categorical Exclusion Orders exempt single-family homes, water wells, septic systems and/or other specified types of development from CCC appeal. Fort Bragg has no mapped Exclusion areas. Although local agencies may opt to exercise coastal development permit authority, subject to appeal to the CCC following certification of only an LUP, only the City of Los Angeles has exercised this option. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 6. When a locally approved CDP is appealed, the Coastal Commission has 49 days to hold a hearing. At a minimum, it must determine whether or not the local approval raises a substantial issue with respect to consistency with the policies o fthe certified LCP. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 7. If no substantial issue is found, the local approval stands; if the Commission determines that there is a substantial issue, there is no limit on how long it can take to hold a full de novo hearing.7 Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 8. The only recourse in the event of a contested CCC decision is to the courts. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. In a de novo hearing, prior testimony and the findings of local authorities are not considered. The entire process begins anew. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. The City of Fort Bragg LCP Amendment Application 9. The original City of Fort Bragg LCP was completed and certified in 1983/85. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

Depending on the type and location of a permitted project, it may or may not be subject to appeal to the Coastal Commission. With the exception of major public works and energy projects, denials by local government are not subject to appeal to the Coastal Commission and may only be challenged through the courts. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. In mapped areas, Categorical Exclusion Orders exempt single-family homes, water wells, septic systems and/or other specified types of development from CCC appeal. Fort Bragg has no mapped Exclusion areas. Although local agencies may opt to exercise coastal development permit authority, subject to appeal to the CCC following certification of only an LUP, only the City of Los Angeles has exercised this option. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

When a locally approved CDP is appealed, the Coastal Commission has 49 days to hold a hearing. At a minimum, it must determine whether or not the local approval raises a substantial issue with respect to consistency with the policies o fthe certified LCP. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

If no substantial issue is found, the local approval stands; if the Commission determines that there is a substantial issue, there is no limit on how long it can take to hold a full de novo hearing.7 Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

The only recourse in the event of a contested CCC decision is to the courts. Response: (Mendocino County Board of Supervisors) The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. In a de novo hearing, prior testimony and the findings of local authorities are not considered. The entire process begins anew. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer) The Chief Executive Officer agrees with this finding. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. The City of Fort Bragg LCP Amendment Application

is only partially correct. The City of Fort Bragg's original LCP (LUP and IP) was certified on July 14, 1983. A number of subsequent LCP amendments were certified by the CCC in 1985, 1986, 1988,1989,1991,1992, and 1995. 10. The Fort Bragg City Council adopted a new General Plan in December 2002, including an updated Coastal Element. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 11. In May 2003, the City of Fort Bragg Community Development Director submitted to the Coastal Commission an application for comprehensive amendments to the City’s LCP. This submission did not include amendments to the Implementation Plan.8 Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

The Fort Bragg City Council adopted a new General Plan in December 2002, including an updated Coastal Element. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

is only partially correct. The City submitted an application to the CCC for a comprehensive amendment to its LUP in May 2003. The City was in the process of preparing an amendment to the IP (i.e., the Land Use & Development Code) at that time. At the time the ·comprehensive amendment to the LUP was submitted to the CCC, the Council and Planning Commission were involved in a lengthy public process for reviewing the proposed Land Use & Development Code. The amended IP was not completed by the City until July 2004. During the period covered by this report, Fort Bragg employed three Community Development Directors. The first Community Development Director served as CDD from 1999 through 2005 and became City Manager in January 2006. The second CDD then served until the summer of 2006. The current Director was hired in the fall of 2006. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director 12. The CCC responded eight months later (1/29/04), acknowledging receipt of LCP amendment application # FTB-MAJ-1-03. The CCC requested extensive revisions in format and content, and additional information, including a required Resolution from the Fort Bragg City Council, a completed matrix showing changes to the original LCP, and corrected maps. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 13. On July 30, 2004, the FB City Council adopted the new Land Use and Development Code to implement the 2002 General Plan; sections applicable in the coastal zone were not sent to the CCC for certification until May 15, 2006, a delay of nearly three years since the May 2003 amendment application was submitted. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

The CCC responded eight months later (1/29/04), acknowledging receipt of LCP amendment application # FTB-MAJ-1-03. The CCC requested extensive revisions in format and content, and additional information, including a required Resolution from the Fort Bragg City Council, a completed matrix showing changes to the original LCP, and corrected maps. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

is only partially correct. Characterizing the submittal of the IP amendment to the CCC in May 2006 as a "delay of nearly three years" is inaccurate, since the IP amendments (which were included in the Land Use & Development Code) were not adopted by the Council until July 2004. 14. On April 11, 2005, the FB City Council approved Resolution number 2857- 2005, as requested by the CCC in January 2004, to transmit the LCP to the CCC for certification. This resolution states that the LCP amendments take effect “automatically upon Coastal Commission approval.” The Grand Jury found no evidence that the Resolution was sent. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

is only partially correct. It does not address the fact that, in November 2004, the Council adopted further amendments to the LUP to ensure consistency between the newly adopted Land Use & Development Code and the December 2004 General Plan. Following this action, Coastal Commission staff suggested that an entirely new LCP amendment submittal should be prepared, hence the adoption of Resolution 2857-2005 in April 2005. The quotation in Finding #14 that the resolution states that the LCP amendments take effect "automatically upon Coastal Commission approval" is misleading as it does not include the remainder of the sentence in the adopted resolution as follows "unless the Commission suggests modifications, in which case, the Council will take action to consider adoption Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director of the suggested modifications prior to the Local Coastal Program amendments taking effect." 15. On April 13, 2006, during Public Expression, it was called to the City Council’s attention that any amended LCP may not take effect in the City until it has been certified by the CCC and that “…any attempt by the City to impose the new Local Coastal Plan on a project prior to its certification would be contrary to law.” Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 16. On May 15, 2006, the City submitted a revised LCP amendment application to CCC including the December 2002 Coastal Element, amendments from November 2004, and the July 2004 LUDC. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 17. On May 22, the City Manager informed the City Council that: • the City used uncertified code to review applications in the coastal zone; • in the future, Staff will apply only the certified LCP; • she had reviewed 31 recent applications and “…did not find any instances where an applicant appears to have been harmed by the advice given.” Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

On April 13, 2006, during Public Expression, it was called to the City Council’s attention that any amended LCP may not take effect in the City until it has been certified by the CCC and that “…any attempt by the City to impose the new Local Coastal Plan on a project prior to its certification would be contrary to law.” Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

On May 15, 2006, the City submitted a revised LCP amendment application to CCC including the December 2002 Coastal Element, amendments from November 2004, and the July 2004 LUDC. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

inaccurately synopsizes the City Manager's May 22, 2006 report to the Council. The entire staff report is attached to this response. 18. The Grand Jury reviewed the 31 applications and related documents. Jurors found that at least one applicant was harmed by having a mix of certified and uncertified code applied to his application to develop 40 units of affordable housing in the coastal zone. The numerous demands placed on this application constituted an effective denial of the project. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

is only partially correct. The reference to an "affordable housing project" is not technically accurate as the referenced project did not include any restrictive covenants regarding rental rates or tenant income eligibility. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Based on the project design however, it appears that the project intended to target the lower end of the market rate housing spectrum. The statement that "the numerous demands placed on this application [Hazelwood Townhouse Project] constituted an effective denial of the project" is incorrect. In May 2004, the City sent a letter to the applicant requesting additional information and analysis necessary to complete the Hazelwood Townhouse Project application. That letter did not reference any "uncertified" LCP policies or regulations. The requested information (drainage analysis, traffic analysis, lighting plan, etc.) is standard information necessary to evaluate a project's impacts. Further, on June 19, 2006, the Community Development Committee (CDC) of the City Council met with Mr. Moura, his attorney and his architect to review the Moura Townhome Project application and clarify exactly what information would be necessary to complete the application (see attached CDC minutes). The City Manager, Community Development Director and Director of Public Works participated in that discussion. While the City understands that the information that was required was substantial and may have been interpreted by Mr. Moura to be an "effective denial," that was certainly not the intent of the Councilor staff. Unfortunately, the requested information was not submitted and the application remained "incomplete" until it was deemed to be withdrawn in July 2008. The Hazelwood Townhouse Project 19. In a letter dated May 5, 2004, the Community Development Director acknowledged the March 25th receipt of applications for a Use Permit, Coastal Development Permit and Site and Architectural Review to authorize construction of 40 units of affordable housing. The letter also acknowledged receipt of a $1,500 deposit to the project’s development account. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 20. The May 5, 2004 letter informed the applicant that the project plans had been reviewed on April 9, 2004 and additional information was required to complete the application and schedule it for a Planning Commission hearing. This information included: • a traffic and parking study and a turn-around on Hazelwood Street • location and size of playgrounds and specifications for play equipment • a drainage analysis • an archaeological records search • refinement of the landscaping plan to ensure security and minimize vandalism Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director • refinement of lighting plan • screening of garbage enclosures, fire check valves, PG&E junction boxes, etc. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 21. In a subsequent letter dated November 4, 2004, the Community Development Director invited a status report on the project and advised the applicant that “…the City Council adopted a new set of zoning regulations for Fort Bragg that took effect on July 30, 2004. The newly adopted Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) includes standards that will affect your project plans. Since your application was not complete at the time the new LUDC took effect, it is subject to the new development standards.” Areas specified as potentially requiring re-design included: • parking and loading • building frontages, setbacks, “common” and “private” open space • outdoor lighting • bicycle and motorcycle parking • landscaping standards Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 22. At the time of the November letter, the Community Development Director had not yet submitted the July 30, 2004 LUDC to the Coastal Commission for certification. It was not legally applicable to any development permit application in the coastal zone. Nonetheless, a mix of certified and uncertified code was applied to this project and to other applications. This practice continued at least through May of 2006. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

In a letter dated May 5, 2004, the Community Development Director acknowledged the March 25th receipt of applications for a Use Permit, Coastal Development Permit and Site and Architectural Review to authorize construction of 40 units of affordable housing. The letter also acknowledged receipt of a $1,500 deposit to the project’s development account. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

The May 5, 2004 letter informed the applicant that the project plans had been reviewed on April 9, 2004 and additional information was required to complete the application and schedule it for a Planning Commission hearing. This information included: • a traffic and parking study and a turn-around on Hazelwood Street • location and size of playgrounds and specifications for play equipment • a drainage analysis • an archaeological records search • refinement of the landscaping plan to ensure security and minimize vandalism Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director • refinement of lighting plan • screening of garbage enclosures, fire check valves, PG&E junction boxes, etc. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

In a subsequent letter dated November 4, 2004, the Community Development Director invited a status report on the project and advised the applicant that “…the City Council adopted a new set of zoning regulations for Fort Bragg that took effect on July 30, 2004. The newly adopted Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) includes standards that will affect your project plans. Since your application was not complete at the time the new LUDC took effect, it is subject to the new development standards.” Areas specified as potentially requiring re-design included: • parking and loading • building frontages, setbacks, “common” and “private” open space • outdoor lighting • bicycle and motorcycle parking • landscaping standards Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

is only partially correct. The statement that the July 30, 2004 LUDC was not legally applicable to any development permit application in the coastal zone is not accurate. The portions of the LUDC that did not amend the City's certified LCP were applicable to development in the coastal zone. A staff report to the City Council dated August 28, 2006 explains the necessity of a "hybrid" approach (see , attached). Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director 23. In a letter to the Fort Bragg City Council dated May 22, 2006, the Applicant’s Attorney observes: “…At this point, (my client) has spent more than $50,000 on reports and consultants, only to have his project effectively denied without a hearing. In my opinion, the Community Development Department should be trying to find ways to recommend approval of (affordable housing) projects such as this, not subject them to a slow ‘death by a thousand cuts’ until the applicant can no longer afford to build.” Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 24. Minutes of the June 19, 2006 Community Development Committee reflect a

In a letter to the Fort Bragg City Council dated May 22, 2006, the Applicant’s Attorney observes: “…At this point, (my client) has spent more than $50,000 on reports and consultants, only to have his project effectively denied without a hearing. In my opinion, the Community Development Department should be trying to find ways to recommend approval of (affordable housing) projects such as this, not subject them to a slow ‘death by a thousand cuts’ until the applicant can no longer afford to build.” Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

Minutes of the June 19, 2006 Community Development Committee reflect a

is not entirely correct. The statement that "Nonetheless, several provisions of the uncertified LCP are cited as also being applicable to the project" should read, "Several provisions e4Ae b1Asertifies bCP of the LUDC that are not part of the City's LCP amendment application are cited as also being applicable to the project." 26. From November 2007 through February 2008, the Grand Jury researched the course of the LCP amendment application and that of the failed Hazelwood Townhouse development application. Despite termination of this application, fees collected from the applicant remain in an inactive development account. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director)

is incorrect. The Hazelwood Townhouse Project application was not a "failed" application, nor was it "terminated." The applicant failed to submit the information required to complete the application. The application status was "incomplete" until July 2008, when the City deemed the application to be "withdrawn." At that time, the City refunded the full balance remaining in the applicant's developer deposit account. The LCP Saga Continues 27. In September 2006, the current Community Development Director assumed her position and began regular dialogue with the CCC. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 28. In a letter dated November 15, 2006, the CCC confirms that the LCP amendment application is complete and can be processed. For the ensuing year, CCC staff and the Community Development Director communicate regularly regarding a multitude of corrections and “friendly amendments” to the application. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 29. Shortly before the December 14, 2007 meeting of the CCC, at which Fort Bragg's LCP Amendment No. FTB-MAJ-1-06 was scheduled for discussion, Fort Bragg received a lengthy CCC staff report in which staff noted that despite considerable improvements to the application, further recommended changes were "numerous." The CCC staff report with addenda totaled approximately 1,000 pages. Some of the changes suggested in the report were "friendly modifications" requested by the City; a majority were proposed by the CCC. The CCC postponed all discussion from its December meeting to January 11, 2008. This was just prior to the January 29, 2008 deadline for the CCC to act on Fort Bragg's application. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director 30. On January 9, 2008, the City of Fort Bragg presented to the CCC a list of eleven substantive issues that remained unresolved. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 31. On January 11, 2008, the CCC voted to certify the City of Fort Bragg’s LCP Amendment with modifications. The CCC Executive Director was authorized to continue to work with the City to resolve outstanding issues and to modify the LCP without the need for further CCC review so long as the modifications were consistent with the Coastal Act. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 32. As of February 27, 2008, only four issues remained unresolved and the Council gave the Community Development Director authority to negotiate on these four points. Public workshops were then held in March and April. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 33. On May 12, 2008, the Fort Bragg City Council unanimously approved a resolution to adopt the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan (Coastal General Plan) and the Coastal Land Use and Development Ordinance. Together these documents constitute the Amended Local Coastal Program. The City anticipates that this document will be certified as part of the CCC Consent Calendar on July 11, 2008. Sometime after final certification of the LCP, the City may submit a “clean up” amendment covering issues from the amendment process that were not resolved to the City’s satisfaction as well as any issues that may arise as the City implements the newly certified LCP. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. 34. After the Coastal Commission has certified the LCP as being in compliance with Coastal Act policies, and before the amended LCP may be applied to review of development permits in the City, the CCC must file a Notice of Certification with the State Resources Agency. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

In September 2006, the current Community Development Director assumed her position and began regular dialogue with the CCC. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

In a letter dated November 15, 2006, the CCC confirms that the LCP amendment application is complete and can be processed. For the ensuing year, CCC staff and the Community Development Director communicate regularly regarding a multitude of corrections and “friendly amendments” to the application. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

Shortly before the December 14, 2007 meeting of the CCC, at which Fort Bragg's LCP Amendment No. FTB-MAJ-1-06 was scheduled for discussion, Fort Bragg received a lengthy CCC staff report in which staff noted that despite considerable improvements to the application, further recommended changes were "numerous." The CCC staff report with addenda totaled approximately 1,000 pages. Some of the changes suggested in the report were "friendly modifications" requested by the City; a majority were proposed by the CCC. The CCC postponed all discussion from its December meeting to January 11, 2008. This was just prior to the January 29, 2008 deadline for the CCC to act on Fort Bragg's application. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director

On January 9, 2008, the City of Fort Bragg presented to the CCC a list of eleven substantive issues that remained unresolved. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

On January 11, 2008, the CCC voted to certify the City of Fort Bragg’s LCP Amendment with modifications. The CCC Executive Director was authorized to continue to work with the City to resolve outstanding issues and to modify the LCP without the need for further CCC review so long as the modifications were consistent with the Coastal Act. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

As of February 27, 2008, only four issues remained unresolved and the Council gave the Community Development Director authority to negotiate on these four points. Public workshops were then held in March and April. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

On May 12, 2008, the Fort Bragg City Council unanimously approved a resolution to adopt the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan (Coastal General Plan) and the Coastal Land Use and Development Ordinance. Together these documents constitute the Amended Local Coastal Program. The City anticipates that this document will be certified as part of the CCC Consent Calendar on July 11, 2008. Sometime after final certification of the LCP, the City may submit a “clean up” amendment covering issues from the amendment process that were not resolved to the City’s satisfaction as well as any issues that may arise as the City implements the newly certified LCP. Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.

After the Coastal Commission has certified the LCP as being in compliance with Coastal Act policies, and before the amended LCP may be applied to review of development permits in the City, the CCC must file a Notice of Certification with the State Resources Agency. Combined Responses: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Fort Bragg City Manager Fort Bragg City Council Fort Bragg Community Development Director Response: (Fort Bragg City Manager, Fort Bragg City Council, Fort Bragg Community Development Director) We agree with this finding.