At the Monterey County Peace Officer of the Year dinner Feb. 17, Pacific Grove Police Department honored Officer Jeff Haas as Officer of the Year.

Each police agency in Monterey County selects an officer to be honored.

A Pacific Grove native and graduate of Pacific Grove High School, Officer Haas also graduated from Monterey Peninsula College Police Academy in Aug., 2005. He started his law enforcement carrier in 2002 with the Seaside Police Department as a Police Services Assistant and worked there for nearly 3 years.

Haas became a full time police officer with the City of Pacific Grove on December 17, 2005. Last January, he was selected to be a Field Training Officer.

It appears that Jeff Haas was born to be a police officer. When he was born, his family rented a house at 580 Pine Avenue in Pacific Grove and that is the address on Jeff’s birth certificate. Address sound familiar? The family moved from 580 Pine Avenue because the house was torn down to build the Pacific Grove Police Department, located at 580 Pine Avenue.

Says Chief Darius Engles, “Officer Haas was chosen as PGPD’s Officer of the Year for his commitment to the Department, his quality of work, his developed expertise in the field of law enforcement, his willingness to help fellow officers, and his service to the community.”

Thirty-seven people voiced opposition at the Supervisors’ meeting.

The project proposed to destroy 3,400 oak trees on 58-acres in the former Fort Ord for a bus service yard and office park for MST. Opponents argued that, while a bus yard is an admirable option which would consolidate MST activities now spread across other locations, other viable property is available, including on the former Ft. Ord. Particularly, there is a “shovel-ready” site at the Marina Airport that many point to as a more realistic option, one that would not destroy open land. It has been estimated that Monterey County has some 1.26 million square feet of industrial space and nearly 800,000 square feet of retail space currently sitting empty. At the time of the original approval, MST’s Hunter Horvath said that the Ft. Ord location is more centrally located for MST operations than the two in Salinas or the one at Ryan Ranch in Monterey.

The County Planning Commission had originally denied the project, in March, 2011 because of the extraordinary number of mature trees that would be removed. The supervisors’ July, 2011 decision reversed that decision on appeal.

That reversal, also on a 4-1 vote but with Jane Parker dissenting, opened the door for MST to complete efforts to receive federal financing. At the time, MST was one of only eight projects nationwide to qualify for consideration to receive federal funding under the US Federal Highway Administration’s Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act. MST had garnered a $30 million no-interest loan, which is probably now forfeit. Based on the July, 2011 approval, MST proceeded to pay Monterey County more than $800,000 in fees and permits. It is unknown whether those funds can be refunded or applied to another project but MST CEO Carl Sedoryk was quoted as saying they could hopefully reuse most of the investment at another site.

The parcel remains on the list for development under both the Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan and the County General Plan. Whether that will come about or be another battle at the ballot box remains to be seen.

Pacelli takes his bike cam past Calendonia Park, turns right on Jewell, and winds up at the top of Lovers Point at the Rec Trail. Ignore him as he runs stop signs.

30 people were transported to area hospitals for treatment of respiratory symptoms: 11 to Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula, 14 to Salinas Valley Memorial and 5 to Natividad Hospital. All of the injured were employees of the hotel. One guest did ask to be checked because of concerns about his health prior to traveling but was not hospitalized.

Monterey Fire responded to the scene at 9:15 this morning and ordered an evacuation of the guests and employees of the hotel, and employees at the adjacent Monterey Conference Center. No conferences were taking place at the time of the incident. 210 guests were evacuated.

“A team effort by the Monterey Fire department, the Portola Hotel, Community Hospital and several other agencies led to the successful conclusion of this incident,” said Monterey Fire Chief Andrew Miller.

Nearly 50 first responders were at the scene. Responding to the incident were Monterey Fire, Monterey Police, Salinas & Seaside Hazmat Teams, Monterey County Health, American Medical Response, and the Monterey Airport District.

Monterey County Health hazmat specialists determined the potentially dangerous gas was confined to a barrel in the laundry room. They checked the hotel – floor by floor – and found no evidence of chlorine anywhere else.

Hazardous material clean-up specialists were called to the scene to remove the barrel where the chemicals were mixed. Once that was completed, the hotel was cleared for re-opening.

We broadcast this information at about 1 PM. You “like” Cedar Street Times on Facebook or followed us on Twitter you will get timely updates.

I have a lot to be grateful for this season and as of today I can add two more reasons to that list. The first is that Pacific Grove Breaker boys soccer team held the “Golden Ball” trophy in their care for one more year and the third in a row. The Padres hosted PG graciously and the non league but personally charged game was on. Carmel opened the scoring early from a well played long cross to the far post. Pacific Grove’s co-captain Callum Gilchrist countered with an unassisted goal of his own when both teams went to half time tied one to one. Mid way through the second half, after many shots on goal were saved by the Carmel keeper, Jordan Jones headed the ball back in front of the goal where senior Michael Brown put it in the back of the net to give PG a one goal lead. The gamed ended 2-1

The Pacific Grove Planning Commission, in a special session Feb. 9, approved the mitigated negative declaration and subsequently the Use Permit for the City to extend the hours at the golf course clubhouse to 10:30 at night. John Bridges, the attorney for the “organized opposition” appeared to be satisfied with the result and gave commissioners a literal “thumbs up.”

Commissioners had termed them “organized opposition” in order to be able to allow them more time at the microphone during public comment.

Mitigations centered around lighting of the parking lot and the sound levels of music.

Non-amplified and amplified music and live entertainment are currently prohibited under the terms of the Clubhouse’s on-sale beer and wine license, which actually took its lead from the restrictions in place on the Clubhouse at the time it was issued. The new agreement will allow both non-amplified and live music and entertainment indoors, during business hours, subject to certain decibel levels which will be measured and affirmed using Pacific Grove Police Department equipment. The wording in the findings was amended to say that the noise level can’t exceed what’s allowed in the City’s General Plan in any event, but will be restricted to 90 decibels or less at the north interior wall and decreasing to 44 decibels at the property line. The ocean, it was noted, can be measured at 66 decibels so it is hoped that 44 decibels for music will be a sufficient restriction to satisfy neighbors.

There are three houses, perhaps up to five, on Del Monte Blvd. which could be affected by lighting in the parking lot. The lighting presented both commissioners and the “organized opposition” with particular problems because there are legal requirements around how much light is necessary for safety reasons, but there are other standards for “Dark Sky” lighting coupled with the rise, or slope, of the parking lot and the resultant angle of the lights as compared to those few houses across the road.

A five-foot fence exists and recent photos show that it should be sufficient to prevent light pollution into the houses. But commissioners suggested the fence be made higher and light-proofed, as well as camouflaged with foliage.

Exact dimensions will likely be the subject of tests and plans for golf course staff who will probably be tasked with building the fence at the least cost possible to the city.

A number of people still took their three minutes to comment against the extended hours and accompanying mitigating suggestions, but it was clear from the results of the 120-day test so far, which were part of the accompanying reports given to the public and the commissioners, that nearly 60 percent of the public polled were in favor of the new hours. It is still unclear whether the project will wind up as a ballot item or even in court, but the next step will be to take the design plans to the Architectural Review Board. From there, the recommendations of the Planning Commission and ARB will go to the City Council.

WhasSUP! Stand-Up Paddle Boarding

Kowabunga! Work out and have a blast at the same time! Throw in the beautiful waters of Monterey Bay and you have yourself “Stand-Up Paddle Boarding.” Tips, techniques and all gear included. Just bring a willing attitude and enthusiasm for an amazing time on the water. Instructor: Monterey Bay Kayaks.

Ages: 13-adult, Sat., Feb. 11, 10 AM-12 noon, Monterey Bay Kayaks, 693 Del Monte Ave, Monterey, $20 (district resident), $22 (non-district resident).

The Nature Journal

Reflect on your experiences in nature with words and sketches in your own personalized journal. Join a local author and artist for a short and easy walk in Jacks Peak Park followed by a hands-on workshop to make your own nature journal. Make your first entries while enjoying lunch under the Monterey Pines. Bring nature and your experiences home wit you. Instructor: Patrice Vecchione.

Ages 7-adult, those 13 and younger must be accompanied by a paid adult, Sat., Feb. 11, 11 AM-2 PM, Jacks Peak County Park, 25020 Jacks Peak Park Road, Monterey, $15 (district resident), $17 (non–district resident), plus $10 materials fee.

To register online, go to mprpd.org and register with Visa, MasterCard or Discover. Walk-in registrations are accepted Tue.-Fri. from 11 AM – 1 PM at the MPRPD office, 60 Garden Court, Suite 325, Monterey (checks, money orders and credit cards accepted). Pre-registration is strongly recommended. There will be an additional charge of $5 to register on the day of class (space permitting). On-site registration will begin 20 minutes prior to the start of class. All check-in and registration closes 5 minutes before the class begins. For more information, please call Joseph at 372-3196, ext. 102, or send an e-mail to narvaez@mprpd.org.

Speakers are allowed three minutes during public comment at the beginning, but they are asked not to comment on an agenda item until that item is being heard: At that point they have three minutes again. So did Roger Pasquier think we didn’t know what he was doing when he got up at the beginning, turned his collar around (figuratively, of course), and began to preach to these selfless volunteers on the Commission about their duty as commissioners? I wondered who ordained him. I wondered who made him so high and mighty that he thought he had the duty to tell these people how to do their jobs. And I hoped that they were ignoring him and studying their 900-page packets on the agenda item as he droned on at the microphone, tight-lipped and obviously feeling superior.

He also gave them a 3-minute earful during the hearing on the agenda item as well, but it went in one of my ears and out the other.

We’ve heard it all before, Roger. No one was impressed. Those people on the commission knew perfectly well what their duty was when they signed on to serve and give up their Thursday nights, not to mention hours spent studying agenda items and going on site visits.

During the hearing on the agenda item itself, the petitioner (the City) and the “organized opposition” each had 10 minutes to speak, then to rebut, then to surrebut. City Manager Tom Frutchey as the petitioner gave a very matter-of-fact presentation.

Then came an attorney for those who don’t want the extended hours at the Grill or anything else that might help it succeed. People who would tear down the clubhouse if they could.

He put on his best “address-the-jury” persona and proceeded, in so many words, to tell the Commissioners – and the packed gallery – that he was prepared to take this matter all the way to an appeals court. Surely I’m not the only one who read between the lines of what he was saying. He was saying that he and his clients would not only sue, but they would appeal if they lost the suit, and he would spend all the City’s money doing so if that’s what it took. He was saying that, if they didn’t compromise “during the continuance” that he would make it very expensive. No one had said there would be a continuance, but he repeatedly referred to a continuance as if it were a foregone conclusion.

Oh, he was eloquent. He had the hand gestures. He had the lingo down. And he lost me a minute into his threatening speech.

It was all I could do to take notes. He wanted, during the continuance, an 8-foot solid fence to be erected from the putting green to Asilomar Blvd. (Yeah, that fits with preserving nature, protecting wildlife and promoting a view corridor. Excuse me. I digress.) He wanted no outdoor music, during the continuance. He wanted no offsite catering (I guess he didn’t work in a restaurant to pay his way through law school and isn’t aware of how inadequate the kitchen at Pt. Pinos Grill is for catering.) During the continuance, he wanted the City to erect “No Right Turn” signs so that patrons leaving the restaurant could only turn left, toward the cemetery and downtown, as they left the restaurant. And would that be a moveable sign so that golf patrons and lunch patrons could turn right but only evening dining patrons would be enjoined from doing so? Maybe they should hire a valet to direct traffic to make left turns or right turns, depending on whether they have crumbs on their faces or golf clubs in the trunk? During the continuance? And he wanted 4-foot bollard lighting and valets with flashlights to escort patrons to their cars at night. (If you can’t beat ‘em, make ‘em go broke with payroll costs.) (During the continuance.)

I think it only worked on one commissioner, who repeatedly tried to guide the other commissioners into compromise for the sake of compromise, first on lighting, then on entertainment. I decided not to bring up belly dancing when they were trying to decide what kind of entertainment might need amplification. I was tempted to ask about stand-up comedy, but by then nothing was funny. The meeting dragged on until 10:00.

Well, he got his continuance. The matter is continued until a Feb. 9 special meeting, when only this item will be discussed and no other Planning Commission business will be undertaken. But it was plain to me that, despite the support of the rest of the entire city, these people will never let it rest, as they have not since the 1930s. It was also plain to me that the planning Commissioners will approve a permit and will send it on the ARB or whoever gets it next.

Come on, Spring, with your extended daylight hours. Wait till these people hear what’s in store for the Lighthouse.

- Marge Ann Jameson

Mr. Paquier’s Response to Cedar Street Times Commentary on PC meeting 2/2/12.

I first of all want to say that at no time is it my intention to be “high and mighty” or “preach” to the commission and I apologize if my comments came off in that manner.

As with every citizen that takes to the podium I do so only trying to put my thoughts together in as organized a manner as possible and hope in the nervousness of the moment to put my best foot forward.  The other night my goal was to convey my understanding of just how important planning commission decisions are to the foundation of PG’s future.  The fundamental foundational question in this case.  Should we allow the commercialization of our exceptional Open Space zoned land?  I say no.  In my comments to the commission I tried to convey that it isn’t just enough that “we need the revenue” or that the “concessionaire will go broke” that we break the sacred covenant we made in 1994, through the adoption of a new general plan,  to protect these areas from becoming commercialized sources of revenue.

To me the standards are very clear: on what is allowed in Open Space areas they are according to the General plan and Municipal zoning Code:

Recreation areas, wildlife and forest preserves, and waterfront areas.

That is it!  These are the ONLY opens space land uses. Then it says:

Parks, playgrounds, public or civic buildings, structures, and parking facilities, to the degree they are pertinent to and compatible with open land uses, are allowed with a use permit.

So the ONLY WAY a commercial use is allowed is if it is ancillary to one or more of the open space land use designations listed above.  What this means is you can’t start taking a building used for the recreation of Golf and turn it into a night club restaurant, wedding event driven business. It also means that since golf is a dawn to dusk recreation the Clubhouse must also operate under those parameters.  Of course the retort is we already do this after all what about the Sally Griffin Center and the Bathhouse restaurant? Well, both of these are legally non-conforming because there existence pre dates the law that was put in place under the General Plan in 1994.  In other words they are grandfathered in.  The new Clubhouse built in 2004 is not.  Why do you think the current use permit of the Clubhouse was set up the way it was?  It had to conform to the 1994 General Plan.

The people for expansion of the Use permit have tried to downplay this and demonize those of us opposed to such a wholesale sell out of the Municipal Code and General Plan.  Ms Jameson, your castigation of our wanting to protect the rule of law attempts to trivialize these important matters. It further emboldens the “mob rule” mentality that disdains free and open exchange of ideas and attempts to intimidate people from speaking out less they be ridiculed in the open press. While I abhor this type of yellow journalism, I honor and will stand up for your right to do so.

Roger Pasquier