WUI fire map

Asked that the city-owned Roseland Creek acreage with heavy underbrush be included in the WUI fire area.

Creekside resident and attorney who argued the map is arbitrary, lacks rational basis, and demanded the city abate the Matanzas Creek hazard before voting.

Argued the city is shifting fire-hardening costs onto Creekside residents while sitting on PG&E settlement and grant funds, and demanded the vote be stayed.

Attorney who warned the map creates an inverse condemnation claim and multi-million dollar litigation liability for the city; asked for the vote to be stayed.

Questioned the 'leapfrogging' of embers over a mile gap and the creek changing risk classification at Yulupa; urged a stay and a binding creek restoration timeline.

Bennett Valley resident who described being refused insurance and quoted double or triple premiums; urged a cautious, ground-level local risk assessment.

Scientist who criticized CAL FIRE's modeling as flawed 'garbage in, garbage out' and asked the council to request ground-truthed reassessment.

Asked the council to postpone the vote, questioned the model's weighting, and criticized the notice process as looking like junk mail.

Creekside Road resident who drew on his past floodplain map experience and asked the council to make sure the line is logical, researched, legal, and justifiable.

Generally supported the map, saying residents of elevated areas must bear responsibility for where they live and the city must balance fair housing with fire hazard.