Hey guys, Mavericks needs women

by Sabrina Brennan

When it was my turn to speak during public comment at the November 2015 California Coastal Commission hearing, I explained that the San Mateo County Harbor District has a five-year exclusive permit with Cartel Management, the Titans event promoter. It specifies that only one surf contest can be held at Mavericks from Nov. 1 to March 31. I noted that the Mavericks contest does not include a women’s heat and no women have ever surfed in the final competition. I asked the Coastal Commission to add a condition to the Coastal Development Permit that would require a women’s heat.

My expectations were low. To my surprise my public comment was not lost on Commissioner Mark Vargas. He was concerned about inequality.

Contest organizers defended their all-male selection process. Contest founder Jeff Clark said, “The way we choose those invitees to surf in the Mavericks event is through a polling of the peers, the guys that surf out at Mavericks and the guys that are pushing it to the level of performance, that is the absolute highest level of performance. Now, there are women that surf Mavericks, I’ve surfed with many of these women at Mavericks and there’s the bowl at Mavericks, the most extreme and intense place to take off, and there’s, (pause) well we call it the west bowl, the much easier place to catch the waves, and the guys that get invited in this event, men or women take off in the bowl. And at this point we haven’t seen that kind of performance that would, you know, when the Committee 5 is watching a group surf Mavericks it’s like there’s always one guy that stands out. It’s that kind of, okay, can that person beat the guy who won it last year or the year before. Who has the ability to win this event. And the guys on the Committee 5 were with me when I first talked someone into going out there with me. They’re the guys in the early 90’s that actually surf Mavericks and still surf Mavericks, and they know, they have a very good eye of the performance level that we’re looking at, not only to surf Mavericks at the highest level, but to surf it safely and be in the condition that if you go down out there it’s not going to become a problem for the lifeguards, we want to avoid the rescue situations.”

Note that that the “Committee 5,” which selects competitors is not necessarily fair in its process. Case in point: Three days before the Coastal Commission hearing Sports Illustrated reported that the 2014 Mavericks defending champion, as well as 2006 Mavericks champion and 2014 Big Wave World Tour Champion Grant “Twiggy” Baker had fallen out of the Committee 5’s favor. Baker was banned from the 2015-2016 Mavericks contest for distributing a petition to support former 2013 Mavericks champion Peter Mel’s reinstatement in the contest. Mel was banned from the Mavericks contest because of a “conflict of interest.” The reasons given for banning Baker were convoluted. Jeff Clark told Stab Magazine that Baker had, “put other athletes’ at risk by being associated with a petition that was (circulated) on behalf of Mel to challenge the Committee 5’s decision on matters pertaining to the framework of their event protocol for the selection process.”

During the discussion at the Coastal Commission hearing, Mark Vargas said, “I'm still a little concerned about the fact that there is no clear plan for highlighting, involving, or encouraging the growth of women in this event or in this sport. I'll float it out there. I'd like to see if I can make an amending motion to add a specific condition that we ask the applicant to provide a plan for encouraging equal opportunity for women surfers in future events.”

In 1994, bodyboarder Sara Lucas broke the Mavericks gender barrier and four-years later Sarah Gerhardt became the first woman to ride the enormous wave standing on a surfboard. On The Inertia website Gerhardt is quoted saying, “I live as though I don’t have any limitations, when I have many. Physically, mentally, I’ve got many limitations. But surfing, surfing at Mavericks, makes me forget about them. And I try not to think about those limitations. I just go.”

In November 2015 a clear mandate was issued by a 7-4 vote to approve Vargas’ amended motion. Moving forward, oversight by the Coastal Commission will be necessary to insure that equity for women athletes includes a Women’s Division with multiple heats, appointment of a woman to the Committee 5, and a condition that corrects the gender pay gap in prize money. The Coastal Act provides coastal access for all.

 

Granting a CDP to an athletic event that discriminates based on gender is not consistent with the spirit of the Coastal Act.

 

The Eddie at Waimea in Oahu and Mavericks in Half Moon Bay are examples of off tour big-wave events that showcase an athlete’s talent and help them gain valuable sponsorships. A total of 9 contests have been held at Mavericks. The first event was in 1999, the same year I moved to Seal Cove, a bluff-top neighborhood in Moss Beach. My wife Aimee and I enjoy walking out our front door to watch awe-inspiring surfing at Mavericks. For years we’ve been hoping that women would be invited to compete and we’re thankful for the 2015 Coastal Commission decision.

Last month, it was announced that Savannah Shaughnessy would be included as an alternate in the event. It’s a well-deserved honor and a nice gesture however few alternates actually surf in the event. The decision came after alternate Garrett McNamara had emergency surgery resulting from a Mavericks wipeout earlier in the month. A total of six new alternates were added in January, including Savannah and her brother Patrick. The first woman selected as an alternate was Sarah Gerhardt. She was the last alternate in the first two events held in 1999 and 2000; she was not selected to compete.

In the world of elite surf competition women compete against women, as is the case with most sports. In 2015 the World Surf League championed equal pay for men and women. For the first time, women surfers earned the same prize money as their male counterparts on the WSL’s Samsung Galaxy Championship Tour. However prize money doesn't solve the problem of inequality in the number of women selected to compete at the elite level. In 2015 WSL Women's Championship Tour included 17 professional surfers competing in 10 events and the men’s tour includes 34 professional surfers competing in 11 events. Increasing the number of events and the number of awards for women, as well as offering equal prize money, is the only way to achieve meaningful equity in competitive surfing.

The WSL’s XXL Big Wave Awards first launched in 2000, to recognize the surfer who rode the year's biggest wave. Now into its 16th season, the Big Wave Awards has grown to include seven categories. The 2014/15 event included six categories for men to compete and win prize money and only one category for women. The 2014/15 purse for Performance of the Year was $15K for men plus a $4,500 watch and $10K for women. 

On Jan 22, 2015, local Maui big-wave surfer Paige Alms paddled into the barrel of a lifetime at her home break, Pe'ahi, Maui’s big wave mecca known as ‘Jaws’. Her 2015 barrel at Jaws netted $10k for the Women's Performance of the Year, unlike her counterpart in the men’s category she did not win a $4,500 watch or get paid $15k.

The 2014/15 XXL Big Wave Ride of the Year award exemplifies the gender pay-gap. One could argue that women aren't excluded from this event, presumably if a woman got the best ride of the year she could win, however, because women are not included in many year round competitions there are limited opportunities for them to win. Fewer events and less prize money makes it challenging for women athletes to surf big-waves as frequently as required to win Rider of the Year. Currently the WSL Big Wave Tour holds seven international events with 24 contestants in each event, and none of these events include women. This results in Rider of the Year prize money going to men, first place $60k, second $15k, third $10k, fourth $5k and fifth $3k. The same is true of Maverick, with a $120k purse for the 2015/16 event.

Pioneers like Gerhardt and Shaughnessy deserve recognition for their inspiring contribution to big-wave surfing. Requiring women athletes to compete against men blocks women from equal pay, marginalizes professional athletes, and discourages women and girls from participating in sports. It’s time all athletes had an equal opportunity to compete at Mavericks.

 

A city-owned landfill—subsidized by countywide property tax—is sinking into the Bay

Sea level rise and this year's “Godzilla” El Niño weather pattern will come together in a “perfect storm” this week as King Tides flood the Bay Area for a third month in a row. On Thursday at 9:30am and Friday at 10:30am South San Francisco’s city owned marina at Oyster Point will experience flooding as a consequence of landfill subsidence.

Late last year the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board sent an enforcement letter to the City of South San Francisco regarding recurrent flooding overtopping an old clay cap that covers the Oyster Point landfill. Environmental reports indicate that the cap should be replaced; as floodwater seeps through the clay, contaminants could be migrating into the Bay through poorly constructed mud berms. The letter states that South City has until the end of January to provide a short-term flood protection plan and a long-term plan is due at the end of May.

NBC Bay Area KNTV Channel 11 evening news Dec. 23, 2015 6:00pm and 11:00pm

In a Daily Journal article published earlier this month South City Manager Mike Futrell said Oyster Point has proven to be valuable and is an admirable example of how to turn an old landfill into an asset that earns the San Mateo County Harbor District $1.5 million a year. The article neglects to mention that operating costs at Oyster Point are $3.5 million annually. A $2 million annual shortfall is subsidized by countywide property tax.

Let’s take a look at why a city owned landfill is subsidized by countywide property tax.

In 1957 the City of South San Francisco discontinued open air burning of trash and established a solid waste disposal site on Bay wetlands. Consistent with landfill practices at that time, an impermeable liner was never installed at the site. Instead, waste materials were placed directly onto Bay Mud. A basic principle of landfill design is to keep water out and to prevent dumped material and contaminants from seeping into the Bay or groundwater. The consequences of placing household and industrial waste onto the Bay Mud without a liner are most likely still serious today. Rising sea levels will increase the hazards from the dump.

In 1962, while poorly compacted municipal and industrial waste, prone to subsidence, was being dumped in the Bay, “The Industrial City” simultaneously constructed a small craft harbor along the north shore of the Oyster Point Landfill.

Around 1976, the closure of the landfill prompted South City officials to make a sweetheart deal with the Harbor District to obtain a subsidy from county taxpayers for their marina. In 1977, South City and the Harbor District entered into a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) that terminates in 2026. The JPA resulted in countywide property tax funding South City marina operations and expansion projects.

Subsidizing operations at Oyster Point has resulted in deferred maintenance at Pillar Point Harbor.

Pillar Point Harbor (PPH) is one of the few commercial fishing ports in California and it’s owned and operated by the Harbor District. It’s located in an unincorporated area of the county; the District’s Harbor Patrol provides search and rescue emergency response, tenant occupancy rates are consistently high, and it’s the only harbor of refuge from Santa Cruz to San Francisco. The beautiful Half Moon Bay location provides ocean-dependent recreation and a local source for sustainable seafood. A strong case can be made for funding PPH emergency response, repairs and improvements with tax dollars. Maintaining a decades-old commercial fishing harbor in need of TLC is not unlike owning a boat—things are always breaking and maintenance is required.

Is South City better equipped to staff and operate their marina; why wait 10 years for the JPA to expire?

Today, the City of South San Francisco owns Oyster Point Marina/Landfill, the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) owns and operates the ferry terminal and the Harbor District manages the marina operations.

Since the closure of the landfill, South City has grown rapidly. However, new development at Oyster Point has been stymied because it would require a costly cleanup effort that includes excavation of landfill materials to meet Title 27 environmental regulations.

Since it opened in 2012 the ferry terminal has been challenged by poor public transit connectivity. The Genentech bus bottoms out because landfill subsidence has made the roads at Oyster Point a bit like a roller coaster ride.  Have you driven out there?  Go slow!  To address these problems South City should work with residents and stakeholders to establish a clear vision focused on public transportation and recreation.

A well-designed waterfront free of industrial sludge and whatever else is buried in the Bay would be a true environmental success story.

On January 13, 2016 the South San Francisco City Council approved spending $25,000 on a topographical study of landfill subsidence at Oyster Point. A similar proposal is on the January 20, 2016 Harbor Commission agenda. In what appears to be a goodwill gesture Harbor District general manager Steve McGrath is recommending the commission approve $25,000 for a landfill subsidence topographical study. McGrath’s staff report specifies that the money would not set a cost-sharing precedent and is not a commitment to correct landfill subsidence resulting from a pre-existing condition. The scope of the study has not been determined however it appears to be a first step in addressing decades of landfill subsidence. The study will need to consider current King Tide conditions and future flood conditions based on projected sea level rise and additional subsidence.

Oyster Point was San Francisco Bay in 1946.

Oyster Point Marina Underwater

Please checkout my presentation about chronic flooding at the Oyster Point Landfill.

The map below indicates the area the color photo were shot.

Please click the map to see a larger version. The map photo represents a low tide.

Oyster Point Marina is result of Bay fill dump era

Trash Dumps and the Hidden History of the Bay ShorelineFirst there were marshes; then there were dumps. The dumps were eventually turned into regulated landfills, and the landfills into shoreline parks.

Trash Dumps and the Hidden History of the Bay Shoreline

First there were marshes; then there were dumps. The dumps were eventually turned into regulated landfills, and the landfills into shoreline parks.

The Oyster Point Landfill is a closed, unlined Class III landfill that was in operation from 1956 to 1970. Prior to 1956, what would become the Oyster Point Landfill area consisted of tidal marshlands and upland soils and bedrock.

Between 1956 and 1970, the City of South San Francisco leased the site (approximately 57 acres) to South San Francisco Scavenger Company. 

In 1956, Scavenger began disposal operations at the landfill. Initially, municipal solid waste was disposed of on the ground and burned. This activity ended in 1957 following the enactment of laws prohibiting open air burning of rubbish in the Bay Area. To address the new air quality restrictions South City and Scavenger established a solid waste disposal site on the submerged lands just east of the original Oyster Point. 

The landfill was developed in three phases. Filling of the first section began in 1957 and was completed by late 1961. The first area to be filled extended into the Bay about 1,500 feet eastward from the original bluff. Scavenger placed waste directly into the tidelands and used a wire fence to control the discharge of solids into the Bay due to tidal action. Waste disposal operations eventually resulted in the relocation of the shoreline approximately 3,000 feet to the east of the pre-landfill shoreline. 

The landfill material consists of up to 45 feet of poorly compacted municipal and industrial waste. Typical waste found within the landfill includes the following: chemicals, drums, paper, cardboard, organic matter, wood, glass, metal, rubber, rocks, concrete, and other materials. The base of the landfill material has been compressed into, and mixed with, the upper part of the Bay Mud. The volume of waste in the landfill is approximately 2.5 million cubic yards and total tonnage of this material is approximately 1.4 million tons. This volume of waste would cover a football field almost to the height of the Empire State Building. 

Beginning in 1961, the landfill received liquid industrial waste for disposal. The types of liquid waste included paints, thinners, and coagulated solvent sludge. The liquid wastes were placed in a sump (Sump 1). No records describing the construction of the sump have been found. Liquid industrial wastes were disposed of in this sump from 1961 until 1966. In July 1966, the City of South San Francisco discontinued the use of Sump 1 and used Sump 2 until 1967. The total volume of liquid industrial waste received by the landfill in 1965 and 1966 is estimated at 608,351 and 378,680 gallons, respectively. Sump 1 alone is almost enough to fill an Olympic-size swimming pool. 

Consistent with landfill practices at that time, no liner was installed at the site. Waste disposal design features such as liners, cellular division of waste, and leachate collection systems were not installed. Instead, the waste materials were placed directly onto the Bay Mud and soils overlying bedrock. In order to contain the solid waste from contact with waters of the State, Bay Mud berms were constructed around portions of the waste disposal areas in 1961, 1962, and 1964. However, there is no data to suggest that the industrial waste sumps were ever constructed with additional berms or dikes to control the migration of liquid wastes. 

In 1962, a small craft harbor was constructed along the north shore of the landfill. To create a breakwater for the east side of the marina, the second phase of landfill was placed in the form of a mole extending from the eastern end of the first fill and north about 400 feet into the Bay. The third phase of filling began in 1964 and was accomplished by dredging up Bay Mud and forming mud dikes and a dike-enclosed cell in which solid waste was later placed.

Upon completion of the disposal operations, various landfill closure activities took place through the late 1980s. The closed landfill then became the site for development of the Oyster Point Marina/Park.  

The landfill is currently owned by the City of South San Francisco and is operated as a marina, ferry terminal, yacht club, hotel, office space, and open space. South City is responsible for landfill maintenance and the San Mateo County Harbor District manages marina operations pursuant to a Joint Powers Agreement that terminates in 2026.

South City hopes to redevelop the site. The 2015 Semiannual Oyster Point Landfill Report states that a project would include excavation of landfill materials at the former Oyster Point Landfill and relocation of these materials on- and/or off-site. The landfill cap would be upgraded to meet the current requirements of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations with the approval of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and San Mateo County Environmental Health Division. 

The first phase of redevelopment plans call for up to 600,000 square feet of office/R&D space, envisioned as a biotech campus, and possibly a retail/restaurant building, in the area currently occupied by the existing commercial development at the eastern side of the landfill site. Phase I also includes the reconfiguration of Marina Boulevard and a portion of Oyster Point Boulevard, and a shuttle turn-around will be constructed adjacent to the Ferry Terminal. Parcels to the east of the new development will be graded and improved as sports fields. Further east a future hotel and retail complex is envisioned. The existing Yacht Club structure and the Harbor District maintenance building would remain.

Where is the wisdom in developing such a risky site?  Health, safety, and public access concerns include flooding from landfill subsidence and sea-level rise, Bay saltwater breaching the landfill cap, underground electrical saltwater intrusion, gas explosions, and liquefaction.

On Dec. 9, 2015, Bruce H. Wolfe, Executive Officer of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board sent the City of South San Francisco an enforcement letter regarding recurrent flooding overtopping the landfill cap.  The San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Mateo County Division of Environmental Health, and Bay Area Air Quality Management District are the agencies that regulate the landfill.

 

Refer to the following documents for more info:

King Tide flooding at Oyster Point Marina—Wed., Nov. 25, 2015