From: Becky Ruden
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 10:09 AM
To: Distrib- City Clerk <[email protected]> Cc: Maribeth Bushey <[email protected]>; Mayor Kate <[email protected]>
Subject: Pedestrian Safety
Dear City Council,
Once again, another member of our community was killed while walking or biking on Point San Pedro Road. This isn't the first time this has happened and if we continue to do nothing, it won't be the last. Don't sit idle and let another driver kill or seriously injure another member of our community - especially after this very Council passed it's Vision Zero goal.
What will you do to help prevent this from happening again? Thank you,
Becky Ruden
Mont Marin Resident
From: Dave Rhoads
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2026 9:29 PM
To: Distrib- City Clerk <[email protected]> Cc: Maribeth Bushey <[email protected]>; Mayor Kate <[email protected]>
Subject: Stop the killings on Point San Pedro Road
Dear City Council,
Once again, another member of our community was killed while walking or biking on Point San Pedro Road. This isn't the first time this has happened and if we continue to do nothing, it won't be the last. Don't sit idle and let another driver kill or seriously injure another member of our community - especially after this very Council passed it's Vision Zero goal.
What will you do to help prevent this from happening again? Thank you,
Dave
Dave Rhoads
Co-Chair, Walk/Bike San Rafael, A Marin County Bicycle Coalition Local Team P: 702-630-2423
W: www.walkbikesanrafael.org
Follow us on Instagram
From: joe mulligan
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 9:27 AM
To: Distrib- City Clerk <[email protected]> Cc: Maribeth Bushey <[email protected]>; Mayor Kate <[email protected]>
Subject: no more deaths on Point San Pedro Road
Dear City Council,
Once again, another member of our community was killed while walking or biking on Point San Pedro Road. This isn't the first time this has happened and if we continue to do nothing, it won't be the last. Don't sit idle and let another driver kill or seriously injure another member of our community - especially after this very Council passed it's Vision Zero goal.
What will you do to help prevent this from happening again? Joe Mulligan
From: Nancy - Gmail
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2026 6:43 AM
To: Mayor Kate <[email protected]>; Maika Llorens Gulati <[email protected]>; Distrib- City Clerk <[email protected]>; Cristine Alilovich <[email protected]>; Lindsay Lara <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Formal Public Comment – Opposition to Proposed Lighting on Starkweather Path Dear Mayor Colin and Councilmember Gulati,
I am writing to respectfully request that the City Council consider placing the following topic on a future City Council agenda for discussion:
Starkweather Path Lighting
More detail is presented in my original email below.
I understand that under the Brown Act the Council cannot take action on items that are not properly noticed, and that agenda items are typically brought forward by Councilmembers or City staff. I am therefore requesting that my Councilmember consider sponsoring this item or that staff be directed to prepare a report for a future meeting.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Nancy Long
Baypoint Lagoons
On Dec 8, 2025, at 7:45 PM, Nancy - Gmail wrote:
Dear Mayor Colin and Councilmember Gulati,
I am submitting this formal public comment regarding the proposed installation of lighting along the Starkweather Path. I request that this correspondence be included in the official public record for the next City Council meeting addressing this or any related parks, public works, or CEQA agenda item. Please confirm receipt and that this letter has been forwarded to the full City Council.
I oppose the lighting proposal because it conflicts with existing San Rafael municipal regulations, raises significant environmental and safety concerns, and would disproportionately affect residents who live adjacent to the path—particularly in the Baypoint Lagoons neighborhood.
1. Conflict with Municipal Code (Title 19, Chapter 19.20) The Starkweather Path is governed under San Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 19.20, which includes:
• §19.20.090 – Entering or Remaining in City Parks/Buildings Noticed as Closed • §19.20.070(B) – Use of City Parks/Buildings After Hours Under these provisions, areas posted as closed after dusk are not intended for nighttime access. Installing permanent lighting is inconsistent with the established operating hours under which the path has historically been managed.
The conservation-history of the park and the protected shoreline’s marsh and wetlands, while open for public access, imply that the park is intended as a public-use shoreline park, not a 24-hour urban corridor.
2. Need to Restore “Closed at Dusk” Signage for Legal Clarity The path was previously signed as closed at dusk, but this signage appears to have been removed. Lighting would implicitly encourage nighttime activity in direct contradiction to the Municipal Code, creating an enforcement and liability conflict.
To ensure safety, clarify hours of use, and support consistent enforcement, I request that the City restore “closed at dusk” signage along the entire path. This also reduces City liability given the long-standing maintenance issues and the presence of fire hazards.
3. CEQA Requirements Must Be Addressed Before Any Lighting Installation Any permanent lighting installation in a creek-adjacent, natural, or wildlife-supporting area qualifies as a project requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Potential impacts from lighting include:
• Light spillover and glare into residential properties • Disturbance to wildlife and habitat, particularly in a riparian corridor • Increased nighttime activity in an area not designed or permitted for after-dark use • Elevated fire risk where vegetation has historically been under-maintained • Cumulative impacts in a location with decades of deferred infrastructure maintenance
CEQA requires agencies to evaluate feasible alternatives, including the No Project Alternative. Because the Municipal Code restricts after-dark use, lighting is not the leastimpactful or legally appropriate option. Proceeding without CEQA analysis would be inconsistent with state environmental law.
4. Maintenance, Safety, and Fire Risk Concerns Remain Unresolved The path has experienced decades of deferred maintenance, including overgrown vegetation, uneven or deteriorated pavement, and the accumulation of fire fuels. Although recent fire mitigation work has been helpful, abatement has not been performed on a consistent long-term schedule. Fires and fire-related emergencies have occurred repeatedly in the immediate area.
Adding lighting would increase nighttime presence without addressing the underlying maintenance deficiencies or the funding required to remedy them. Research shows that lighting alone does not reduce crime on isolated or poorly maintained paths, and in some settings can increase undesirable activity by extending usable hours without improving safety conditions.
5. Disproportionate Impacts on Adjacent Residents
Many Baypoint Lagoons homes have bedrooms and living spaces directly facing the path.
Artificial lighting would:
• Intrude on privacy
• Disrupt nighttime darkness and quiet enjoyment
• Potentially affect residential property values
• Concentrate impacts on a single neighborhood rather than serving the broader district
Meaningful public engagement has been limited despite the disproportionate local impact.
6. Insufficient Public Rationale for Lighting
At a recent meeting, the primary rationale presented for lighting was to “allow families to walk the path in the evening.” However, because the path has historically been closed after dusk under City regulations, lighting does not align with the City’s stated operating hours or Parks Department practices.
The path is not a designated transportation corridor after dark and has not been demonstrated to fulfill a broader citywide recreational or mobility need at night. In lived experience over many years, the predominant after-dark activity on the path has involved unauthorized or unsafe uses, not family recreation.
7. Request and Conclusion
For the reasons above—including conflicts with municipal regulations, CEQA obligations, longstanding safety and maintenance concerns, limited public benefit, and the disproportionate impacts on adjacent residents—I respectfully request that the City Council reject the proposal to install lighting on the Starkweather Path.
I also request that the City:
• Restore “closed at dusk” signage immediately
• Ensure all resident feedback from Baypoint Lagoons and Spinnaker Point is formally reviewed and responded to
• Commit that any future proposals for path lighting or infrastructure changes undergo full CEQA review, public notice, and Council oversight
For transparency, I am copying the City Clerk to ensure this correspondence enters the public record. I request that the full Council review and respond to these concerns as part of the decision-making process.
Thank you for your attention and for your service to all San Rafael residents.
Sincerely,
Nancy Long
Baypoint Lagoons
San Rafael, CA 94901
Recipients:
• Mayor Kate Colin – [email protected]
• Councilmember Maika Llorens Gulati – [email protected] • City Clerk Lindsay Lara – [email protected] • City Clerk Office – [email protected]
• City Manager Cristine Alilovich – [email protected] Letter to City Council – January 20, 2026
Good Evening Mayor Kate and Members of the City Council.
My name is Susan Levine. I have been a resident of Baypoint Lagoons for many years, and I am here today to formally express my opposition to both the People of the Canal art project proposed by Rich Storek and the proposed lighting installations along that same Starkweather path.
Baypoint and Spinnaker residents were blindsided by how far along both proposals were before we became aware of them. We first learned of these projects in August 2025 by chance and not through the project sponsor, nor any formal neighborhood outreach. No public notices were posted along the path, and our HOAs were not contacted.
It is deeply troubling that our experience mirrors that of residents affected by the Merrydale project. It is concerning that Mayor Kate publicly endorsed this project months ago in a PBS video—making it difficult for residents to accept the claim that the City is merely a bystander especially since the Mayor reached out to neighborhood leaders stating her commitment to transparency, engagement, and direct dialogue.
Why has Rich been granted significant access and momentum, while the voices of more than 400 directly impacted homeowners were overlooked? We support the concept of Rich’s project, however, not the location.
We have proposed alternative locations but to date, Rich has declined our suggestions despite widespread neighborhood opposition.
Regarding the proposed lighting along Starkweather Path. There is no reasonable justification for installing nighttime lighting. No crime data from the Sheriff’s Department has been provided to support improving safety.
Conservation organizations caution against artificial lighting due to the loss of natural “dark sky” environments.
While we understand that neither project has yet come before you for final approval, we ask—respectfully but firmly—that if and when they do, you reject both proposals in their current form and stand with the residents who are directly impacted by these decisions.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Respectfully,
Susan Levine
Baypoint Lagoons
San Rafael
-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Nawbary
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2026 9:43 PM
To: Distrib- City Clerk <[email protected]> Cc: Maribeth Bushey <[email protected]>; Mayor Kate <[email protected]>
Subject:
Dear City Council,
Once again, another member of our community was killed while walking or biking on Point San Pedro Road. This isn't the first time this has happened and if we continue to do nothing, it won't be the last.
Don't sit idle and let another driver kill or seriously injure another member of our community - especially after this very Council passed it's Vision Zero goal.
What will you do to help prevent this from happening again? What will you tell the family members when you explain your choices for Point San Pedro?
Speeding down two lanes isn’t just a convenience, it’s a liability.
We’re waiting for answers and actions, instead of cowardice.
From: Todd Janzen
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 11:05 AM
To: Distrib- City Clerk <[email protected]> Cc: Maribeth Bushey <[email protected]>; Mayor Kate <[email protected]>
Subject: Another person killed on Point San Pedro Road
Dear City Council,
Once again, another member of our community was killed while walking or biking on Point San Pedro Road. As a father of 3 kids in the area, me and other parents have been very vocal about getting crosswalk buttons, flashing signs and reflectors at the crosswalks.
These deaths are so preventable, the time is now.
Thank you,
Todd Janzen