~ January 25, 1999

Present: J. Vidaurri, E. Jindrich,, M. Hallett, L. Meredith,, R. Seiden,, E.Angotti, L. Dorfman

Presentation by Russ Haycock of Z-Clip: Russ Haycock provided us with an overview of what has been happening with their proposal and the activities of Z-Clip Corporation. The Z-Clip design patent lapsed and, at this point, Russ is just trying to sell a suicide deterrent not necessarily the Z­-Clip design. He said the Bridge district has allocated money for the design project, research, testing and then public meetings. At this point, we are at Phase II. An architectural review panel needs to meet and decide. The review panel was quite critical of the Z-Clip design; some did not like the overhang. Z-Clip has submitted a new design using a straight wire member. The following are members of the Architectural Review panel and they will meet on February 3rd.
         Howard Backen

         Henrik Bull
         Donald Sandy
         David Macdonald
The Bridge Board feels that the railing is an important visual aspect of the bridge and needs to be kept. Russ indicated that Z-Clip has returned to the Bridge Board with alternatives to the original Z-Clip design. Russ and his partner personally reviewed old designs and suggested eight new designs to be presented on 2/3/99 at the Architectural Review meeting. M. Hallett asked Russ if he thought that the Bridge District would want a prototype again and Russ indicated that he felt the GGB District would drag this out as long as possible. He feels that staff is supportive, that M. Giacomini will want 1000 ft. of prototype up and available for public comment, and that the Directors are the resistant ones due to political pressures. Fraser is an advocate. The whole process is politically charged.

Russ said that M. Giacomini wants Wind Tunnel testing simultaneously with the erection of a prototype. Wind Tunnel Tests are done by an outside contractor. 

Russ showed us architectural rendering of a project they are working on for a bridge in Florida. That bridge is two miles long and he indicated that the barrier would be the same cost per mile for the Golden Gate Bridge. Z-Clip is, by far, the cheapest option that the GGB District has explored and the District has never indicated that they have a dollar limit for a barrier. (The median Barrier is supposed to cost 6 or 7 million dollars) 

It would be key to get an independent advisory panel of architects to support something. An endorsement by architects would help things to move along. Z-Clip’s goal is to get the Architectural Review Panel to state a design preference. We need to find out who the Building and Operations committee is and to approach them. Russ Haycock suggests stepping up contact with individual board members. The process is; the Architectural panel reviews, then Building and Operations acts and sends recommendations on to the full Board for voting. He feels media attention would be very helpful. 

L. Dorfman suggests that we hook up with something that is happening now. We need to update statistics and think through the elements that make this worth a media attention. BBC was trying to do that. Some one noted that it is probably more interesting to speak with people who went to the bridge and didn’t jump. L.Meredith suggested putting together stories from the other suicide sites and how it has been handled in those jurisdictions. We need to revisit the number of suicides and add those to last year’s figures.  

Media Stories

We need to know who is now on the committee and push for any type of barrier. L.Dorfman suggests that it might be worthwhile to do a commentary on KQED on the day of the committee meetings. Decision-making becomes a matter of public record if illustrated by commentary. It is much more effective to do this when the board meets, that way the media will know too. J.Vidaurri will find out when the next meeting is and let Lori know. L.Meredith suggests that another angle for stating our position would be that there was a similar “suicide by jumping” problem in a certain place which has now been corrected due to a barrier or deterrent.  

Erv’ s Editorial E.Jindrich indicated that he got some comments on his article. In an IJ Editorial/article, Ross didn’t talk about the suicide barrier as one of the items that the bridge was working on. A follow up letter needs to be written to Ross or in response to the article.  

Board Member Survey’s There were no additional responses to the survey mailed to Bridge Board Members even though a second request was mailed out.  

New Coalition Members A letter to the Dean of the School of Public Health at UC Berkeley will be drafted, inviting the new Dean to be an advocate and to be listed on our letterhead.


Next meeting
~ Monday, March 1, 1999 7:00PM

at Marin Suicide Prevention
10 San Pedro Road, San Rafael
(Across from the Civic Center)

From Highway 101, going North,, take the San Pedro Road (Civic Center) Exit. BEAR TO THE RIGHT (east). Travel 3/10 of a mile and immediately turn right into the driveway and parking area of 10 North San Pedro Road. Building #10 is behind Building #30. There is adequate parking. We will meet in the conference room.

 Let me know if you are unable to attend our next meeting. If you have any questions or if you need paperwork, please contact me, Eileen Angotti 415-258-0150 (e-mail

"Return Home Safely"