Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contamination And Remediation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community split as PUC moves ahead with Rod & Gun Club cleanup planning
Summary
At the Lake Merced workshop, long‑time club members urged preserving access and suggested lower remediation costs; other speakers — including environmental and public‑health advocates — warned shooting into the lake is no longer viable and asked for water and soil testing. Staff said a draft cleanup plan is being prepared for regulatory review and that implementation will take time.
A heated public comment segment at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s Lake Merced workshop centered on the future of the 14‑acre parcel used by the Pacific Rod & Gun Club and on competing views about remediation, public health and recreational access.
What speakers said: supporters stressed the club’s history and youth programming, and urged a cleanup approach that preserves continued recreational use. "We are not broke," one club representative said while arguing insurance and private funding could cover portions of remediation; another public commenter said his contractor bid came back "with less than $5,000,000," disputing larger official cost estimates. Club supporters repeatedly requested long‑term leases so they could invest in property improvements.
Opposing and precautionary comments: other community members and university faculty raised health and environmental concerns. Professor Barbara Holtzman said shooting into the lake "is no longer a viable option" and urged preservation of native habitat and removal of visible residues. Commenters requested public access to water‑quality data, including coliform counts and fish testing, before any expanded recreational fishing or consumption is encouraged.
PUC staff response and timeline: PUC presenters acknowledged long‑standing contamination — lead shot and PAHs — and said the plan for the site is in draft. Mr. Ritchie (PUC staff) told the commission "the plan itself is in draft now" and that the draft will be presented to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and returned to the commission; staff estimated excavation and construction phases could take months once regulatory approvals are received.
Diverging cost figures in the room: public commenters and staff offered different remediation figures during testimony. Staff said roughly $13,000,000 has been placed into the PUC budget for cleanup; some club representatives and contractors disputed that number and cited lower bids. The transcript records both sets of figures but contains no procurement documentation to reconcile them.
What happens next: staff said they will present a formal draft remediation plan to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and bring the regulatory review and implementation timeline back to the commission. Commissioners and members of the public asked PUC staff to convene a working group and to keep the record open for additional written comment.
The meeting adjourned after commissioners thanked staff and the many public speakers; staff committed to return with more specific schedules and water‑quality metrics.
