Corky Booze letter to Richmond City Manager Bill Lindsay

Courtland “Corky” Boozé

3302 Nevin Avenue

Richmond, CA. 94805


Bill Lindsay
City Manager450 Civic Center Plaza
Suite 300
Richmond, CA  94804

Re: Carson Blvd. Inspection May 29, 2013.

Dear Mr. Lindsey,

I am writing to you regarding my concerns and need for clarifications in reference to my business located at 22 Carlson Blvd. The most recent inspection with Tim Higares, took place on May 29, 2013 @1:00 pm.

Mr. Lindsey, my reason for writing you is, I am requesting from you clarification of the zoning and items that may remain on the property @ 22 Carlson Blvd. Richmond, CA.

I have had several meetings with City Attorney, Bruce Goodmiller; he stated to me that he did not want to take on a C-2 determination fight.  He suggested at the next inspection with Mr. Higares, we should work together to determine which items have to be removed and which can stay.

At the conclusion of the May 29th inspection I asked Mr. Higares which items he wanted me to remove from the property.  His response to me was that everything on the property must go.   He stated per the letter from Assistant City Attorney, Trisha Aljoe, 22 Carlson was in C-2 zoning and nothing in the yard complied with that zoning.

I stated that I disagreed with the C-2 zoning designation because I met the legal non-conforming use for M-2 zone. 

I am willing to work with the City to resolve this problem. However, I need exact clarifications in writing and direction following the city code and zoning designation. 

What Mr. Higrares relayed to me at the May 29th inspection was way too broad in its scope.  I need to operate my business without any more disruptions.



Courtland Corky Boozé


Cc:           Bruce Goodmiller, City Attorney,Chris Magnus, Police of Police

                Richard Mitchell, Planning and Building Director,  Tim Higares, Code Enforcement Manager


Richmond pays $43,000 bill to law firm that defended campaign law aimed at soda tax

The city council agreed 4-2 to pay the law firm Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai LLP $43,000 for its work defending the city’s campaign finance law, which was ruled unconstitutional in federal court.

The legal challenge came from the American Beverage Association-funded Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes, which sued the city over its campaign disclosure laws requiring large, front page disclosures on all campaign mailers.

City Attorney Bruce Goodmiller said: “During the August recess the city was sued by the CCBT in federal court. We had a week to respond to a highly specialized, cutting edge first amendment campaign election issue. We had an opponent who sued us with a bevy of high-priced Washington DC attorneys to sue the city.”

Goodmiller added, “The firm defended us at a deeply discounted rate.”

Bates called the defense, and Measure N, the penny per ounce tax on sugar sweetened beverages that was defeated by 67 percent of voters on Nov. 6, a “big waste of time and money … totally ridiculous.”

Councilman Corky Booze was more colorful: “I don’t call 43,000 a minimal amount of money. They got beat. They got beat. (CCBT’s lawyers) came in and stomped your face in the ground.”

Councilman Jim Rogers, who wrote the defeated campaign disclosure law, defended the process and the efforts.

“That’s the risk that you take. I will continue to do whatever I can to limit the influence of big money outside interests in Richmond politics.”


Marin Energy item to be on Tuesday’s Richmond council agenda


From the agenda report:





November 13, 2012


Mayor McLaughlin and Members of the City Council


Councilmember Boozé


Marin Clean Energy Project



The City of Richmond has become a member of the Marin Energy Authority JPA.

Richmond residents will be automatically enrolled in the Marin Clean Energy

Community Choice Aggregation program and must opt out if they wish to continue to

purchase electric power through Pacific Gas and Electric.




RECEIVE a report from staff on the Marin Clean Energy Community Choice

Aggregation program regarding the source of energy and the “opt out” process for

Richmond consumers – Councilmember Boozé (620-6953).




There is no financial impact related to this item.




I would like to receive a staff report on the Marin Clean Energy program. The report

should explain the program to the community. I am concerned that consumers must pay

to opt out of the program if they do not meet the initial opt out deadline. Other questions


1. What is the process to opt out of the program?

2. What is the difference between the charges of kilowatt hours through the Marin

Clean Energy program vs. the charges of kilowatt hours through Pacific Gas and





November 13, 2012 Page 2 of 2


3. Is the source of energy through PG&E? If not, what is the source?

4. Where will the energy panels be located?

5. Who initiated Richmond’s participation in the program?

6. Does the state dictate whether all Richmond gas & electric consumers participate

in the program or not?