The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-04-29 PacketAGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 3a. DATE: APRIL 29, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: BUDGET GOAL SETTING WORKSHOP: REVIEW OF 1997-98 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND 1998-99 OBJECTIVES FOR VARIOUS CITY FUNCTIONS As the Council is aware a very relevant step in the budget process is the City Council's review of the individual departments past year's accomplishments and consideration of the upcoming year's objectives. The statements prepared by each department are attached for the Council's information. This workshop is an opportunity for dialogue between the Council and Staff regarding the City's programs, projects, and priorities for the next fiscal year. The goals and objectives presented here have not been evaluated in the context of available resources which will be part of the budget process over the next two months. Staff is requesting Council input on these objectives to better evaluate the needs of the community. Each department head will be present at the meeting to discuss the salient points of their respective objectives and accomplishments. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and discuss the accomplishments and objectives as presented by Staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine there is no necessity to consider the accomplishments and objectives and cancel workshop. 2. Determine different format is desired and provide direction to staff. Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A . .. ,., '~.~( Prepared by: Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with: Gordon Elton, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Department accomplishments and objectives: Public Works, pages 1-6; Public Utilities, pages 7-9; Community Services, pages 10-15; Public Safety, pages 16-21; Finance, pages 22-26; Planning, pages 27-28; City Management, pages 29-33; Elected Officials, page 34; Redevelopment, page 35. APPROVED"-~ ~ CandaceVH~s~e~, '~it~ Manager mfh:asrcc98 0429GOALS 0 .-3 t.- > .o_ il ~ ~ o "' E ~ ~ E o c: {:33 · - ~ .~ ~ ~ g .~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 '~>~*~o>>oE'~ 0 8 0 0 0 0 ,.. 8 "~'~ 00..0000[L[I. OLU E IJJ ~ E {::)3 ~ 8~ 8 .-'o .> .,..; .- (~ ~) ~ o ~ (.3 IL 0 0 > fi~ ~fi'~ -~ ~8~ ~ .- o "~ ~- · = '~ E ~.~o.~ ,-. § ,- ~- ,- ~,- ,- ,- § ,- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~> .m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ii ;I '1 ;r 0 0 ~Oo il - § . ~~ 'o o 88~~~: ~8~ 8 E~ ~.~: 8~ ~ 0 ._ '~ . . . . . . ~ 0 · .~ .~_ ~ E ~u 300 S~MINAR~.~. AVE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · ADh/IN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC S, AF~ 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 · ; PACKET l Item N0~ .... '. ADDITION /yr~ i " IMeeting Date: . ,~'" '''?'' ~''''~'(:~ .' .... l Distributod to: ........... ' _ By: _~a~, ,:', April 30, 1998 Charles Peterson, Chair Board of Supervisors 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Peterson: The City Council recently became aware of the Board of Supervisors' appointments to the Section 7 Public Policy Facilitating Committee that was made at the last Board meeting. Though the three members appointed are all well qualified, we need to express our concern that the urban areas served by the Russian River; and, specifically, the unique circumstances with the City of Ukiah are not represented by an appointee who is familiar with the City's situation and concerns. Specifically, operation of the hydro-electric facility and the sewage treatment plant are critical to not only our citizens but many of the County residents that are served by the Sanitation District. Changes in the Russian River flow and other possible mitigations imposed could have devastating impacts on these facilities. The City Council urges the Board of Supervisors to reconsider their appointments to the Policy Committee, to include at least one representative that is familiar with urban issues and who has the historical background on these issues to represent our concerns and position. We appreciate your consideration of our request and would like to, once again, emphasize our commitment to working together on this important process for the entire valley. Sincerely, Sheridan Malone Mayor SM:CH:ky 4:CC:LAppt. Wat '¥v'e Are Here To Serve" 300 SE~,~..~'~VE., UK H, CA 95482-5400 · ADMIN. 707/463-6200 - PUBLIC SAFE'~ 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 · ii PACKET April 30, 1998 Charles Peterson, Chair Board of Supervisors 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Peterson' The City Council recently became aware of the Board of Supervisors' appointments to the Section 7 Public Policy Facilitating Committee that was made at the last Board meeting. Though the three members appointed are all well qualified, we need to express our concern that the urban areas served by the Russian River; and, specifically, the unique circumstances with the City of Ukiah are not represented by an appointee who is familiar with the City's situation and concerns. Specifically, operation of the hydro-electric facility and the sewage treatment plant are critical to not only our citizens but many of the County residents that are served by the Sanitation District. Changes in the Russian River flow and other possible mitigations imposed could have devastating impacts on these facilities. The City Council urges the Board of Supervisors to reconsider their appointments to the Policy Committee, to include at least one representative that is familiar with urban issues and who has the historical background on these issues to represent our concerns and position. We appreciate your consideration of our request and would like to, once again, emphasize our commitment to working together on this important process for the entire valley. Sincerely, Sheridan Malone Mayor SM:CH:ky C: Janet Pauli, Chairman Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission 4:CC:LAppt. Wat '~Ve Are Here To Serve" 300 SEMINAR1 ,AVE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · ADMIN 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC .S7-~ 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 · II I II i L I i j i I I i - PACKET Item No. ADDITION Meeting Date: .......... ~ ,,,~ ........ Received: ~ . - Distributed re: .... By: J , , ii III I III I April 30, 1998 Charles Peterson, Chair Board of Supervisors 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Peterson- The City Council recently became aware of the Board of Supervisors' appointments to the Section 7 Public Policy Facilitating Committee that was made at the last Board meeting. Though the three members appointed are all well qualified, we need to express our concern that the urban areas served by the Russian River; and, specifically, the unique circumstances with the City of Ukiah are not represented by an appointee who is familiar with the City's situation and concerns. Specifically, operation of the hydro-electric facility and the sewage treatment plant are critical to not only our citizens but many of the County residents that are served by the Sanitation District. Changes in the Russian River flow and other possible mitigations imposed could have devastating impacts on these facilities. The City Council urges the Board of Supervisors to reconsider their appointments to the Policy Committee, to include at least one representative that is familiar with urban issues and who has the historical background on these issues to represent our concerns and position. We appreciate your consideration of our request and would like to, once again, emphasize our commitment to working together on this important process for the entire valley. Sincerely, Sheridan Malone Mayor SM:CH:ky 4:CC:LAppt. Wat '¥v'e Are Here To Serve" AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO, 4a DATE: Aoril 29, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF LETTERS REGARDING THE SELECTION REPRESENTATIVE TO THE SECTION 7 POLICY COMMITTEE OF At the March 18, 1998 Council meeting, staff presented to Council a report discussing water issues affecting the Ukiah valley. Of the several issues discussed, the major focus of concern surrounded the Section 7 requirements under the Endangered Species Act recently initiated by the National Marine Fishery Services (NMFS), when they listed steelhead trout as a threatened species. Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) initiated a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between itself, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the National Marine Fishery Service, which was signed in December 1997. Through the MOU, SCWA has offered to prepare the biological assessment that Section 7 requires and work in direct communication with USACE and NMFS on the interpretation of the assessments and possible mitigations resulting from the studies. The MOU also contains a section establishing a Public Policy Facilitating Committee to disseminate information on the Section 7 consultation process and receive public input. This Committee will consist of one member appointed by and from USACE, one member appointed by and from NMFS, three members appointed by and from the Board of Supervisors of Sonoma County, three members appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Mendocino County, one member appointed by and from the Resources Agency of the State of California, and one member appointed by and from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. (Continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION' Approve Mayor's execution of letters regarding appointments to Section 7 Policy Committee. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' 1. Determine letters are not necessary and take no action. 2. Determine letters are to be modified, identify changes, and authorize execution of revised letters. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with' Attachments: N/A Mayor Malone Candace Horsley, City Manager Draft letters regarding Section 7 Policy Committee. Principles and Functions of the Public Policy Facilitating Committee. Sonoma County Board Agenda Item on Appointment of Public Policy Facilitating Committee. 4. March 18, 1998 Council agenda item on water issues. 4/Can.ASR.Watr. 1 Candace Horsle~,'l~,itylManager N/A 1. 2. 3. At the April Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIW&PC) meeting, at which our representative Mayor Sheridan Malone was absent, there was a vote taken to recommend Supervisor Delbar, Steve Thomas, and Rick Ruddick, as the Mendocino Board of Supervisors representatives on the Committee. At their last two Board meetings, the Supervisors discussed the possibilities of three Supervisors being selected as the representatives, as well as a combination of Supervisors and individuals selected by the Supervisors who have Districts along the Russian River. Sheridan Malone spoke at last Week's Supervisors meeting relating his concerns that the recommended representatives certainly were well qualified, but represented the agricultural and farm areas of our County. Though Supervisor Delbar does represent several water districts, there is an obvious lack of oversight for the urban areas along the Russian River. Mayor Malone has requested this item be brought to the Council and requests approval to send letters to both the MCIW&PC and Board of Supervisors stating our concern that urban area, particularly the City of Ukiah's unique situation of having not only a hydroelectric dam and sewage treatment plant, but also being responsible for the drinking water of the entire community, is not being represented on this Committee. We are also asking the Council to approve a request to the Board of Supervisors to reconsider its appointments to this Committee and include a representative who will represent the City and urban interests. If approved by Council, we will request this matter be placed on the next Board of Supervisors meeting agenda. 300 S~.N~.~,.,~VE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · ADMIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SIg:EIY 463-6242/6~74 · FAX # 707/463-6204 · April 30, 1998 Charles Peterson, Chair Board of Supervisors 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Peterson' The City Council recently became aware of the Board of Supervisors' appointments to the Section 7 Public Policy Facilitating Committee that was made at the last Board meeting. Though the three members appointed are all well qualified, we need to express our concern that the urban areas served by the Russian River; and, specifically, the unique circumstances with the City of Ukiah are not represented by an appointee who is familiar with the City's situation and concerns. Specifically, operation of the hydro-electric facility and the sewage treatment plant are critical to not only our citizens but many of the County residents that are served by the Sanitation District. Changes in the Russian River flow and other possible mitigations imposed could have devastating impacts on these facilities. The City Council urges the Board of Supervisors to reconsider their appointments to the Policy Committee, to include at least one representative that is familiar with urban issues and who has the historical background on these issues to represent our concerns and position. We appreciate your consideration of our request and would like to, once again, emphasize our commitment to working together on this important process for the entire valley. Sincerely, Sheridan Malone Mayor SM:CH:ky C. Janet Pauli, Chairman Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission 4:CC:LAppt. Wat Are Here To Serve" SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 4-24-98 ; 9:2?AM ; COUNTY,OF I~ENDOCINO- ?074636204;~ 9 ! I Cv 8Y',Xerox"Tele¢ol er 1021; 4-17-a8; 3:06PM ', ?07 544 $123', COUNTY OP IIENDOCZNO', PRINCIPLES AND FUI~CTfONS of the l~ublic PoiSe7 Facilitatin/Committee for The Russ/an River ESA Section ? Consultation Section ? of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) establishes the protocol by which federal agencies consult with each other on actions affcctint species pro Lt~t.,ed by the £SA. Listings of tkreatened and endaniered species possibly affected by ~he o~tiom of Coyote Dam, Warm Springs Darn, and other related activities require that the i~pacts of those operations be assessed. ! The Memorandum of Undetstanclin$ among United States. ~lly ;orps of ]/n~ineers Nations! Marine Fisheries Se~ice ('NIvlFS), md $oa(,r~ ~ Co city Water Alency ($CWA) (MOU), descdbin$ the COOl~mt~ve relationship between U; .ACl/ NI~iFS, and SCWA, instructs the Board of Dirccton of SCWA to establish a Public ~'¢ Licy 1 acilitating Comminec (PPFC) supported by $CWA staff. The'PPFC shall consist o:'c 3e m tuber appointed by and from USA, Cl., one member aI~pointml by and from NMI:S, ~ le []e, ml ers appointed by mi from the Board of Supe,'visors of Sonoma County, tlu'ee membcr~ al po~n[ d by the Board of Supervisors of Mendocino County, one member appoint~ by and fro'n he 1~ ~o ,urc~.s A,/ency of the State of California, and one member appointed by and from t' le Calit ,rrna Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. The PPFC shall disscminate information on the Section ? coils da ~ion process and receive public input through the u~e off public workshops to be held thro z/ho ~ tJ ~e consultation process. Public workshops are to be held to present background inform ~tion ma ~rdin~ the MOU, describe the consultation process, discuss the purpose of the PPI~, :, a~:1: o discuss actions chosen for implementation by the variou~ agencies. In addition, pub ic w, rk! hops will be conduct~ to hear public input and corrmient dutini circulation of the Drai'~ Biol, gi{ &l Asse~m'~ent Scope of Work, follov, ing the analysis of alternatives, ~ duririg the )r~ Bi 51osical Assessment comment period. The fimctions of the I)PFC shall b~ to: 1. Disseminate infornution related to the Section 7 C ,ns~ltati~n process to local, stem, and federal agencies, ~ well as the interested public. I. 2, Coordinate with SC. WA staff lo prepare mailing list for meeting notices, and other relevant notices, 3. Organize and facilitate l~tbllc workshops as de~cribei above. 4. Pr~ent informagon/a~hercd from public workshop~ to the :,xecu~i.ve Commits.- for ,.heir review and recommendation to NMF$. . ~, Identify public concerns and preferences to be co~ ndet~ ~cl analyzed durin~ the final refinint of alternative solutions and in the evaluation ,f th. cfi mpacts. d;~"a3\u~ec~\~sh~tiol~'/~Df{~n¢,doc 04/I $/95 '-" ..... A-GENDA I EM TRANSmiTTAL I PORT ...... DEP T ENT: " Sonoma County Water AgeqC~ .... R~dy D:,~oole r0 i crio ~':T-~s ITEM ~QUI~S: (Cheek appropriate boxes) ( ) Hea~ng ~ ~ ( ) ~ISVot~ d~te ttm~ ( ) Requem Gold R~olutioa ( ( ) Public Appea~nce An~cipated ( ) P,)slflon ~,lloc List Chnns~s) ( ) Coun~ Counsel Approval Date ~~~y: AGENDA SHORT TITLE: ' ' ............. '-'~'[' ..... Establishment of Public Policy Facilitating Commieee (PPFC)., Appo[:.~nt of~ Bo~d of Sup~iso~ Membor~, ~d Se~ing of First Meet~g Date REQUESTED BO~ A~ION: ' , Resolution Establishing ~he Public Policy F~lli~t~g Commi~ee, P~blic Policy Facilitating Commi~ee, ~d Su~ing ~ Fi~ M~dng Dt~ of the !~blic Poh~ Facili~ng Comm~ee for April ~0, 1998, ~ ~e Sono~ Coun~ Bo~ ofSupe~iso~ ~~rs fora 9 ~, ~ 11 a,m. ....... ~n~re of Depa~ent Head 'Sp~i~ In~t~eflo~$ to Clerk of the Bon~: ,':,,,,v. ...... :..~.:':'.,.,~' '':;.'. : ............. ~'~','~,~ ..... ' ....... . .:~ . : , , ~ -' .:'..' ~ ....... :.:~,;... ,.:', :,';;; ~; ": .::: C.'..' C'. :." '.' '"~' ': ~", "~ .... ~::"~' ":" .......... ~'": .......... : ~: "~: "'< ' :;~"~ ...... '~"' O ':" .... ' '7 ..... ': :"~",'.~ :, ~ "~: ~.,,:', ~'. ::;:':':.:..~ V. '.J :~:;'~: ',': ':" ~'., ~':~',:.;~ '::':~.:"~:":',; "~:',' ,' :-.-~ ; " : ~..:~ ...~ :: :.~,.::: ...... ,: ,,:. ,.,?, :~,, ..,,; .,.: :,.,..: .:~:~ .,..~ .: ~: :~:.~ :.;.~. ~. :,: ...: . ..... ::"::4.:, :,:~'~' .. :~'. ".:'. :',~ ;'",~ :,~. '.: :. :'::.:'~::::.' ..' ~'.'" ,";','":">.;';:~:'?:'~- ~.:. ': .", C':',:~?~'..:. ~' · :'~.~'.~.~:.,~,:.',, ,',..,~.,:,~..,. ' :"'-'.'.':' :. :'h '?'. :':~','. "...'~:'.,':' ..- .. ~ . ... .:.:. :.' .... .~; , , ',': ,, ,:: ~ :'; ...... . ....... /~.~:-'"::'/::_' .............. ~.:, ;,:,,,. ........... :'~";~:: ?~-L=,'-:' ................ ' ...... :.'" :'",:;;"-' "': ~ ':';~?,~'.:'.~':.':'::' :'":","~,,~:'.'" ' ...... ,', ...... -,-'~'.::,' ~,' .... Coun~ Adminb~ator's O~ee Recommendation: ( ) Approval ( ) Subml~d ~4~ h Comment ( ) Not R~ommend~ ( ) PoUe~ Detem~aflon by Board Ana~st Comment: Il I ..- I __ . i ,,1 il II ..... , ~ i ii ...... _. i, ii ii ~1 · i , ---- i Ag~nan Commltt~ AeOon: ( ) Conseot Cllendnr Date Sehedul~d: ~ ...... / ( ) R~lar Calendar Time Schedul,dt i Il I Il I . COUNTY OF SONOMA AGENDA ITEM Agenda Item No: ,::,' "'. Agenda Item"No: SUMMARY PORT ii. .~ ~: . . .'- ---,, ,,':" ". ",., ..'~ ..., ,]u,'L:d. - r . l .:..., '....' ..:.?... ~..: ,'.,.~' " i . ,.=,., =_~e.p~ent:'-~onoma_,.... Cou~' Wa~r ~g~cy ....... .... ( ) Contact: ~_~.~dy D, Pool~ 526-$370,' 4-21-98 4 ____ AGEND~ gHORT ~stabli5hmen~ of Publi~ Policy Facilitatin~ Commi~ee (PPF~)~ Appo ntmont and Se~n8 of First Meetm$ Da~ 1 ~QUESTED BO~ ACTION: R~aolution Es~bliahing ~he Public Policy Facilitating Commi~e, App, ,intin~ Supe~tso~ Kelley, Reiliy, and Smith to the Public Policy Facilitating Commi~, and S~ing ~e First M~ting D~ ,~ of the Public Poiicy Faoili~t~ng Commi~ee for April 30, 1998, in th~ So,oma Coun~ Bo~ ofSu~is~ra Ch~ben ~ 'om 9 a.~, to I t a.m. ........ E~ENDITU~S aOO'L F' ~NOS n,~OU~R~NG___ BOARD ~PROV_~ ~m~ted Co~t .... $ Contlnge~ t~tes $ Amount BudgetM $ UulnflciI ired ReVenue $ (Soune: ) Other Awil Approp $ Other Tr m~f~r(~ $ ~xplain below) (Source: ) ,, ....... Additloaal Requested: $ Add~! Fu~ds Req~ lested: $ Exphn~flon (if required): -P~6r Board g-12-97: Resolution No, 97-1096 approving tl~: Fisher[es Enh~c~ment Program FY 97.98 Work Plan; au&orizing the General Man.er/Chief Engineer to execute cooperative ag~e~ents; ap)r~ving amended ag~ement for personal se~i~s wi~ consultant Robe~ B~ach; authorizing ~e Gengral }~anaggr/(~hief Engineer to ~xecu~e MOU among National Mar~e Ftsh~ri~s Se~iee, U,S. Army Corps of ~nginaers, tad $CWA; authorizing CounW Counsel to amend ~exi~ting..ggteement with V~ Ne~s F~ldman for I~al se~i;es....... I ............. ~--Alte~a~ws. R~uita 0~ Non-Approval: Memben of the Board of Su~isors would not be appointed to the t~ublie Policy Facil[~ting Gommi~ which would not m~t ~h~ t~s of the Mamorandum of Understanding Among ~' Unit~ S mt~ Army Co~s of E. ngine~rs, National Marina Fiahgries Se~iee, and thg $onoma Count' Water Agency. If a mg~tinig date is not se~, the pu~ of th~ Public Policy Fagili~ting Commi~eg, which is to disaeminat~ info.dijon t~ achieved for th~ early phases of ~h~ Section 7 consultation process. ~, Background: On August 12, ~997, the Sonoma County wa:er Agency's (Agency) Bo~d ~ppro~.ed Resolution No. 9%1096 which among other things, authorized the General Manager/Chief Engineer of the Agr'.cy to execute a Memorandum of Undcrs~nding Among the United States A~y Corps of' Enginel~rs, NatiOnal Marine Fisheries Sec'ice, and the{ So~oma Coun~ Water Agency (Section November IT, 1997, at a Flood Control Workshop bet~re the Agenc)~'s Board, inclusion of a ~blic Policy Facili~ting Commi~ee in ~e Section ? MOU was approved by the Board. '~e Section ' ~lOLr was executed b~ all three signatofie~ i~ December .of 1997. A copy of the final Section T MOL~ ia on file wi~ ~e Clerk. ~e pu~ose of the Section 7 MOU is to e$~blis~ a framework for th, cons]ul~c~ and con,mace required ~y the Federal ~ndangered Sp~ies Act (ESA) with respect to the activities of the (.~ni:~ Stateu Army Corps of Engineers (USAC~), ~e Agency, and the Mend~ino County Russi~ lLlver PI5~ Control and Wa~r Conse~ation Improvement District which a~ recited in :he Section 7 MOU, or v'hlch th= ~ies to the Section 7 MOU ~ree are related to those ~tivities, ~d which may directly or indirectly affect coho satmc~ or steelhead ~ut in ~e Russian River. S~tion ~.d ofthe Board to which the Agency Mil provide s~ff suppo~. ~e purposes ff the PP]:C ~ to diiseminate information on the Section 7 consultation process ~d receive public input. The first pu~ose o~':h~s ~ard l~m is to establish the PPFC ~ mqui~d by S~tion S.d of the MOU. The principles and ~ncfions of the PP~C ~ included tn A~acl~tnent No. 2. 5~tion 5.d of the Section 7 MOU also states that the PPFC will consist ~)f o~ m~m~r appointed by and from USAC~, one merest ap~inted by ~d from N~fional Marine Fisheries Se~i~ ~ree members ~ppotn:e~ by and from the Board of Supm'isors of Sonoma Count, Mendocino Count', one mm~r appointed by m~d ~om the React roes Agency :f the S~te of California, and one member appo~d by md ~om ~e California Regional Water Qualil ~ Con~ol B~& Noah Coast Region, ~e second pu~se of this B~ i~m is to appoint ~e tl~ee Bo~d ~f Su~[~n members of Sonoma CounW to the PPFC, It ~s r~ommend~ ~at the thee members of the Board who~;e jurl,di~fiou ~-~ers the majer[W of the Russian ~vet wate~hed be the appob~tees to ~e PPFC; Sup~misors Kelley, t:ellly, m~ Smith. I ~e third pu~o~e of ~is Board i~em [s to ~et the first meeting of tt~e PPFC f~r .~r~l 30, 199g, in the Sonoma Count' Board of Supe~isors d~ambm. ~ pue~se of this first meeting of the P~TC ~s :o provide thc public with some background related to tl~e Section 7 MOU p~cess, to update ~ public and tlc PPFC on the consultation p~cess ghat is already unde~ay, ~d to ~c~ive publl~ input. ~er admi~istrativ,~ duties $t'~m will occur at th~ tint meeting inolude ~lectien of a ~mmi~ee ,hair md included u A~ehment No, 3, I I I Afiaehmeu,: I, ~solutton ' .... 3.. ..... ~.?{endm Ior April 30, 1998 t ..... On' F'~e- With Clerk: ~, Resolution No. 9%1096 2. ~gc 7 MOU . , ...,...q. ,.:,..:.:.......,...,..............:.. .. . , ..... ',.. ,,. ,.,.. . . ., , . , . ' '" : ' '=-':~'" '' :'"'': ..... :'' ' ' -~'- ........ '[~'~ ......... : ' ' ' ~ ' , ' ' ...... ~s" ~' ~ ~i .... ,,~ Board Action (If other than "Requested") Vole; ........ ' ........ ... ~,¢~olufio~ ~o. .ounty Administration Bldg. Rosa, CA Date: KESOLUTION OF TI-I~ BOARD OF DIKECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY WATER AGENCY , ESTABLISHING THE PUBLIC POLICY FACILITATING COMMITTE[~; APPOrN~G SUPERVISORS KELLEY, REILLY, AND SMITH TO T[-IE PUBLIC POLICY FAC ILITATING COMMITTEE; AND SETTING THE FIRST MEETING DATE OF 'II4E PL~LIC POLICY FAClLrl'ATING COM~flTTEE FOR APRIL. 30, I998, IN THE SONOMA COUNTY BO.~RD OF SUPERVISORS CI.L~MBEt3S FKOM 9 A.M. TO 11 A,M. WI.~KEAS, the Sonoma County Water Agency's Board of' 1~ authorized the General Man.er/Chief Engineer of thc Agency to exea United States Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries (Section ? MOU); and WKEKEAS, on November 17, 1997, the Sonoma County Ware of a Publio Policy Facilitating Committee in the Section 7 MOU; and WIqEKEAS, the Section 7 MOU was executed by all signatories WHEREAS, the purpose of the Section 7 MOU is to establish r~quired by the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) with respect to Engineers (USACE), the Agency, and the 'Mendoctno County Russ/i Improvement District which are recited in tile MOU, or which the patti( and which may dtrectly or indLrectly affect coho salmon or st~elhe~d WHEREAS, Section 5,d of the Se~tlon 7 MOU provides f Committee (PPFC) by the Board; and WHEILEAS, the purposes of the PPFC are to disseminate into receive public input; and WKEKEA$, the PPFC will consist of one member appointed and from NMI:S, thre~ members appointed by and from the Board appoint~ by the Boa~ of Supe~'i~ors of Msndo~ino County, one men of the State of Califomi& and one mem~r ~ppoimed by and/rom the North Co~t Re/ton; WHEREAS, the three members of the Board whose juri~d watershed are Supervisors Kelley, Reilly, and Smith, i~ors ~pproved Resolution 1'4o. 97-I096 wh!ch tea Men~orandum of Underst~dlng A~ong the ,em~e, nd the Sonoma County Water Agency Ageney4s Board of Directors approved Inclusion / in Dece~ a frame, the a¢tivi ~ River 997; and ,ork for the consultation and conference ties of the United States Army Corps of Flood Control and Water Conservation :s to fl~e ~OU agree are related to those activities, ,ut i~ the ~Russisn River; and ! >r eatabtlshment of a Public Policy Facilitating anation ~n the Section ? consultation procesa ~d by and Sup~rv ~ber appc Califbrni~ iction co' x)m USACE, one member appointed by sors of $onoma County, thr~ members [nted by and fro~ the Resources Agency Regional Water Quality Control Board, ers the majority of the Russian River followa: Now, T REFORE, nE IT R~.SOLVED that the Board of Directors hereby finds, determines, and declares as I. All of tl~e above recitals are true and oorrect, 2, The Public Policy Facilitating Committee ia hereby e~taSlished, , DIRECTORS: CAL~_~ $opetvisors Kelley, R~illy, and Smith ar~ hereby appoinl Aye~ . The first meeting of the Public Policy F~ilitating Cc County Bom'd of Supervisor~ chambers from 9 a.m. to i HARBER$ON SMITH R~ILLY Noes._._.. Absent ...-_ Abstain, . ~d to the Public Policy Facilitating Committee, n)mittee shall be April 30, ]998, in the $onoma K~LEY~ SO ORDERfiD )-2 (PUBLIC WOKKSHO] . -.. -- . ::~-._ .-.: Circulate Biologic[ Am~smnt (BA) Scope of ~UBLIC WO~SHOP .... '""~-" ~ __. '::-~ ........ Develop $C~=n Altemativ. ....... E'~ ...... I II ~ ................. Anal?~ Alt~matiws (~UBLIC ........... III ............... I I ~ ....... L ['. ......... . ............. Dnll~ BA _.. [ . _.L.: . ii ii Circd~e Dt'al~ BA {'PUBLIC WORKSHOI _ __ ..... ~A' Submi~ed to ~ iii I i~ - .~ I ._ ........ Asencie~ Noti~ ~S of Selected ~o~e -- "~.L.' I Ill NMFS Concu~en~ wi~ A, (~BLIC WORKSHOP Agenct~s lmpl{ment ;CWA ESS :tions/No ' i il ---- __J ,sm )ns ITEM NO, 10b DATE' March 18. 199~ AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF WATER ISSUES AFFECTING THE UKIAH VALLEY The Russian River is an integral and essential element and lifeline to the Ukiah Valley and Sonoma County areas. Since tr,e construction of the Van Arsdale Dam and the Coyote Dam, the land areas surrounding the Russian River have populated in response to the available water source and demand for housing in the Northern California region. The Russian River affects the City of Ukiah residents in three separate ways: 1) A source of ddnking water; 2) the source of power for our electro-hydro plant at Coyote Dam; and 3) an integral partner in our wastewater treatment plant operation. Though there are currently many proposed projects that could affect the flow of the Russian River, two are of utmost importance to our Valley at this time. The first is the Section 7 requirements (Continued on Page Two) RECOMMENDED ACTION· Discuss water issues and authorize MCIW&PC to negotiate on behalf of the City regarding Section 7 requirements, with the stipulation that the Council may review the direction of MCIW&PC before action is taken. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.' (if budgeted) Candace Horsley, City Manager David Rapport, City Attorney I · 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. . MOU among Army Corps of Engineers, et al. Letter, dated 12/30/97 to Army Corps of Engineers from Charles Peterson Memorandum, dated 2/15/98, to MCIW&PC from David Rapport Memorandum, dated 2/15/98, to Michael Delbar from County Counsel Document - Potter Valley Project/Overview Document - Proposed Recommendation for the Potter Valley Project April 25, 1997 Press Democrat Article, "Wider Protection for Coho" Wilderness News Article, "Effort Launched to Regain Diverted Eel River Water" Letter, dated 2/19/98, to Mike Scannell from Candace Horsley 4/Can.ASR.Watt Candace Horsley, Ci~ Manager under the Endangered Species Act regarding the Russian River and the recent decision by the National Marine Fishery Service to list Steelhead Trout and Coho Salmon as threatened species, and the second is the Potter Valley project. 1. Section 7 Reouirements Under the Endangered Species Act On August 18, 1997, the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) gave its final determination to list Steelhead Trout as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). On October 31, 1996 it had published its final determination to list Coho Salmon as a threatened species. Both of these species are prevalent in the Russian River. Section 7-A of the ESA requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce to ensure that any actions a federal agency authorizes, funds, or carries out, are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. Studies must be prepared to determine the effect certain flow regimes and other factors have on the viability of the continued existence of the endangered fish. The Army Corps of Engineers has responsibility for the flow regime from the Coyote Dam. Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) originally reimbursed the Corps of Engineers for the non-federal costs of the dam construction and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Mendocino, which SCWA uses in their water transmission system to their many customers. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District also has rights to the water in the lake for distribution to the Ukiah Valley. Sonoma County Water Agency has taken aggressive action towards being a major player in the studies and consultations regarding the Section 7 requirements and has initiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between themselves, the Corps, and the National Marine Fishery Service. The MOU establishes a framework for the consultation and conference required by the ESA with respect to the activities of any of the controllers of the Russian River, whose actions may directly, or indirectly, affect the Coho Salmon or Steelhead Trout. Sonoma County Water Agency has offered, through the MOU, to prepare the biological assessment that is required under Section 7 and to work in direct communication with the Corps and NMFS on the interpretation of these assessments and possible mitigations resulting from these studies. The MOU also contains a section establishing an Executive Committee that allows a member of our Mendodno County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIW&PC) JPA to sit with the General Manager/Chief Engineer of SCWA and the District Engineer of the Corp to provide public policy advice to Sonoma County Water Agency and the Corps in the execution of their respective obligations. Mayor Malone is the City's designated representative on the MCIW&PC. At its recent commission meetings, the MCIW&PC members indicated they feel they also need to be a party to the MOU, rather than just a under the Endangered Species Act regarding the Russian River and the recent decision by the National Marine Fishery Service to list Steelhead Trout and Coho Salmon as threatened species, and the second is the Potter Valley project. 1. Section 7 Requirements Under the Endangered Species Act On August 18, 1997, the National Madne Fishery Service (NMFS) gave its final determination to list Steelhead Trout as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). On October 31, 1996 it had published its final determination to list Coho Salmon as a threatened species. Both of these species are prevalent in the Russian River. Section 7-A of the ESA requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce to ensure that any actions a federal agency authorizes, funds, or carries out, are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. Studies must be prepared to determine the effect certain flow regimes and other factors have on the viability of the continued existence of the endangered fish. The Army Corps of Engineers has responsibility for the flow regime from the Coyote Dam. Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) originally reimbursed the Corps of Engineers for the non-federal costs of the dam construction and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Mendocino, which SCWA uses in their water transmission system to their many customers. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District also has rights to the water in the lake for distribution to the Ukiah Valley. Sonoma County Water Agency has taken aggressive action towards being a major player in the studies and consultations regarding the Section 7 requirements and has initiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between themselves, the Corps, and the National Marine Fishery Service. The MOU establishes a framework for the consultation and conference required by the ESA with respect to the activities of any of the controllers of the Russian River, whose actions may directly, or indirectly, affect the Coho Salmon or Steelhead Trout. Sonoma County Water Agency has offered, through the MOU, to prepare the biological assessment that is required under Section 7 and to work in direct communication with the Corps and NMFS on the interpretation of these assessments and possible mitigations resulting from these studies. The MOU also contains a section establishing an Executive Committee that allows a member of our Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MClW&PC) JPA to sit with the General Manager/Chief Engineer of SCWA and the District Engineer of the Corp to provide public policy advice to Sonoma County Water Agency and the Corps in the execution of their respective obligations. Mayor Malone is the City's designated representative on the MCIW&PC. At its recent commission meetings, the MCIW&PC members indicated they feel they also need to be a party to the MOU, rather than just a sub-committee member. The MCIW&PC represents all of the water related agencies within the Valley and it is felt that they, therefore, can provide the best representation for Mendocino County on this water issue. SCWA, at this point, has refused to change the MOU participation. However, in speaking with the Corps of Engineers' representatives, MCIW&PC was told that the Corps would have final review and decision making authority over anything that was done in the Russian River and that they would be listening to all public input. At its meeting of February 16, 1998, the MCIW&PC voted to request each of its member agencies to authorize MClW&PC to exercise the member's rights as an "applicant" under the ESA so that the MClW&PC could assert those rights in its negotiations with the Corps and SCWA over the terms of the MOU. An applicant is any non-federal agency or person who requires a federal permit to engage in an activity that could affect an endangered or threatened species or a critical habitat. If an applicant requests early consultation with a federal agency under Section 7 of the ESA, the federal agency is required to initiate early consultation with the NMFS and the applicant must approve the selection of a non-federal agency, such as SCWA, to conduct the biological assessment to be prepared in connection with that consultation. Under the JPA that created MClW&PC, its purposes included undertaking any act necessary for the preservation of the Eel River diversions and the maintenance of the PG&E Potter Valley Project, and conducting negotiations and entering agreements respecting Eel River and Russian River waters. However, the members specifically did not delegate to the Commission their respective water, water rights, contracts with third parties, or the right to perform, enforce or negotiate with respect to them (Art. VII, Sec. 7.01.D). Moreover, the members did not delegate their rights under federal permits they hold to engage in activities that could affect endangered species or critical habitat. For these reasons, Commission members who have applicant status, such as the City of Ukiah, would have to take some additional action to delegate their rights as applicants to the Commission. The Board of Supervisors wrote a letter to the Commission stating such a delegation. The Flood Control District passed a resolution with this same intent. The City Council should discuss whether it wants to delegate that authority to the Commission and if so, subject to what, if any, conditions. For example, the Council may want to retain the right to revoke that delegation at any time and to require prior notice of positions the Commission intends to take in enforcing those rights. It may also want detailed reports from the Commission as the negotiations and consultation progress. Though the Sonoma County Water Agency and the Ukiah Valley have many related concerns, there are issues that are unique to the Ukiah Valley and the City of Ukiah. We will be following this issue closely to ensure that our interests are relayed and considered in any mitigations contemplated by the Corps and NMFS. Attached to this report is a letter sent to Richard Shoemaker and Mike Scannell requesting joint staff participation between the County and the City on these water issues so that we may share information and cohesively join together in our efforts on the Russian River mitigations. 2. Potter Valley Proiect PG&~ is the current owner of the Potter Valley/Van Arsdale Dam and Eel River Diversion Project. The Van Arsdale Dam was originally built to divert Eel River water for power generation purposes, as a power source for City of Ukiah residents, but it has since become an essential supply of water to the Russian River watershed, including the Ukiah Valley. Before the Eel River was diverted to the east fork of the Russian River and the Van Arsdale Dam was built, the Russian River would literally dry up during the summer. With this diversion and the Coyote Dam construction, the residents have enjoyed a sustainable water source for many years and the population has grown extensively due to this dependable water supply. Currently, PG&E and several governmental resource agencies are recommending to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) a reduction of the Eel River diversion to the Russian River. The intent is to protect and maintain the migration of Chinook Salmon and Steelhead in the Eel River. The impacts to the Russian River, fish habitat, and dependant water users has not yet been evaluated in any form. Enclosed is a press release from PG&E delineating the process for public review of the recommended changes to FERC. This is a major issue, not only for the Ukiah Valley, but also once again, for the Sonoma County Water Agency. Reduced flows could affect agriculture, electric power, and drinking water interests for both counties. PG&E's recommendations will be filed with FERC by March 30, at which time they will be soliciting input from the public. This is another issue that we hope to jointly analyze and discuss with County staff to offer recommendations to the City Council and Board of Supervisors. Due to the critical and sensitive nature of these issues, staff will be continually monitoring the progress of the Sonoma County Water Agency's actions on both of these items and will be keeping the Council informed at every juncture. The City Attorney will also be participating in the formulation of our direction and will be working with Mayor Malone at the MCIW&PC meetings in his efforts to negotiate on behalf of the City of Ukiah. It is recommended that the Council approve MCIW&PC's ability to negotiate for the City of Ukiah and our representative report on the intent of the Commission's direction to the City Council before any decisions or final agreements are made by the MCIW&PC. Staff will continue to monitor and work with the County on these issues. I"I~NDOCINO COUNTY MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AMONG UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USA ), NATIONAL MARINP. FIS R S SERVICE (NMFS). AND SONOMA COUNTY WATER AGENCY ($CWA) SECTION I - BACKGROUND On August 18, 1997 the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) published its final determination in the Federal Register to list steelhead trout as threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of ~973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), within a defined central California coast evolutionary significant unit (ESU) which includes the Russian River as northern extremity. On October 31, 1996 NMF$ published its final determination in the Federal Register to list coho salmon as a threatened species under the iSA within a defined central California coast ESU which extends northerly to Punts Gorda and includes the Russian RAver. Section 7(a) of the iSA re_cuires federal agencies to consult with ~.he Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce to insure t. hat any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely %o Jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or results in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. This section also requires federal agencies to confer with the appropriate secretary on agency actions if the actions are likely to Jeopardize the continuing existence of species that have been proposed for listing or if the actions are likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat that has been proposed for designation. This section further requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary on any prospec~ive agency action at the request of, and in cooperation with, a prospective permit or license applicant if the applicant has reason to believe that an endangered species or a threatened species may be present in the area affected by ~he applicant's project and that implementation of such action will likely affect such species. Pursuant to 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 402.02, wactions" include all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded, or carried out, in whole or in part, by federal agencies including, but not limite~ the granting of licenses, contracts, leases, easements, right-of- way, permits or grants-in-aid, or actions directly or indirectly causing modifications to the land, water or air. Section 9 of the ESA prohibits certain activities that directly or indirectly affect endangered species. These prohibitions apply to all individuals, organizations, and agencies. Section 4(d) of the £SA allows NMFS to promulgate protective regulations /2- .TAN-13-1998 08:~3 I'~B,t~OCI~ COUNTY P. 03 ,, that modify or apply any or all of the section 9 prohibitions to threatened species. NMF$ published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 a policy that NMOS shall identify, to the maximum extent practicable at the time a species i~ listed, those activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9 of the ESA. The notice proposing to list steelhead trout listed the types of activities which might be construed to directly or indirectly affect steelhead. The notice listing coho extends the section 9 prohibitions to coho pursuant to section 4(d) of the ESA. The notice listing coho identified certain activities that NMFS, based upon the best available information, believes will not result in a violation of section 9 of the ~SA, and certain activities which could potentially harm coho salmon in the central California coast ESU and result in a violation of section 9 of the ESA. In the notice listing coho, NMFS indicated it may develop a regulation pursuant to section 4(d) for conservation of the species t~at would be more flexible and more specific than the generic section 9 prohibitions, and on July 18, 1997 issued an interim section 4(d) rule which became effective on August 18, 1997. SECTION 2 - PURPOSE The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to establish a framework for the consultation and conference required by the ESA with respect to the activities of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) and the Mendocino county Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (MCRRFC&WCID) which are recited in section 3 of this MOU, or which the par~ies to this MOU agree are related to those activities, and which may directly or indirectly affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River. The parties to this MOU will seek information and assistance from other local, State and Federal agencies with expertise and/or regulatory responsibility within the Russian River Basin including, but not limited to, the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State Water Resources Control Board, North Coast Regional Water Quality control Board, the State'Coastal Conservancy, and the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIW&PC). SECTION 3 - R~CITALS a. The Coyote Valley Dam Project was authorized by the Flood control Act of 1950 (Pub. L. No. 81-516), and was completed by USACE in 1958. Thi~ project i~ operated by USACE. It is situated on the Russian River and includes Coyote Valley Dam I'ENDOC ! NO COUNTY which forms Lake Mendocino with a capacity of 122,500 acre-feet for water supply, flood control and recreation purposes. SCWA reimbursed USAcE for ~he non-federal costs of the project and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Mendocino. One of the purposes o~ the Coyote Valley Dam Project is to provide wa~er to SCWA's water transmission system customers. b. The Warm Springs Dam Project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1962 (Pub. L. No. 87-874), and was completed by the USACE in 1984. This project is operated by USACE. It is situated on Dry Creek, a tributary of the Russian River, and includes Warm Springs Dam which forms Lake Sonoma with a capacity of 381,000 acre-fee= for water supply, flood control and recreation purposes. $CWA is reimbursing USACE for the non- federal costs of the project, and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Sonoma, pursuant to an agreement between USACE and SCWA dated October 1, 1982. One of the purposes of the Warm Springs Dam Project is =o provide wa=er ~o .,e including ~hcse served by SCWA's water SC~TA:s c--toners, transmission system. c. USACE owns and contracts with ~he California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) for the operation of the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery at Warm Springs Dam. This facility was constructed as mitigation for the annual loss of 6,000 steelhead ~rout and 100 coho salmon associated with the construction of warm Springs Dam, and to provide a fish run enhancement of 1,000 coho salmon and 1,750 chinook salmon. USACE also owns and contracts with CDFG for =he operation of trapping, egg-taking and imprint facilities at Coyote Valley Dam which were constructed, =ore=her wit~ an expansion of the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery facilities, =o mitigate for the annual loss of 4,000 steelhead trout associated with the construct£on of Coyote Valley Dam. d. USACE has constructed stabilization and erosion control works on both the Russian River and Dry Creek channels in conjunction w~=h the Coyote Valley and Warm Springs Dam Projects. The USACE projects were constructed to prevent erosion expected =o be aggravated by releases of wa=er from the dams. $CWA has a con=factual obligation to USACE to maintain those erosion con~rol works situated in Sonoma County pursuant to Agency Board of Directors Resolutions No. 6847 adopted May 24, 1955, No. 7798 adopted September 27, 1955, No. DR00793-1 adopted September 2~, 1961 and Resolution No. DR68485 adopted December 23, 1980. The MCRRFC&WCID has a similar con~rac=ual obliga=£on =o USACE ~o maintain those erosion control works s~tuated in Mendocino County pursuant =o an unnumbered resolution adopted by the Dis=rice Board of D~rectors on November 12, 1959. e. USACE regulates releases Of water from storage tn Lake ~endocino and Lake Sonoma for flood control purposes pursuant COUNTY ~he Coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino Ru-~sian River, California Water Control Manual, dated August 1986 and the Warm Springs Dam and Lake Sonoma Dry Creek, California Water Control Manual, dated September 1984. f. At times other than when USACE is operating the reservoirs for flood control purposes, SCWA regulates releases of water from storage in Lake Mandocino and Lake Sonoma to provide water for SCWA's water transmission system, to satisfy the needs of other Russian River water users, and to maintain minimum ~treamflows required by the California Water Resources Control Board's Decision 1610. g. USACE regulates activities in waters of the United States under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Ac: of 1899 (Section 10) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Section 404). Section 10 requires USAC~ approval prior to the accomplishment of any work in or over navigable waters of the United States, or which affects the course, location, condition or capacity of such waters, section 404 requires USACE approval prier to discharging dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States. h. The Russian River estuary is closed periodically because a sandbar forms across the mouth of the estuary. Artificial breaches of the estuary bar have taken place since at least 1968. A Russian River Estuary Study was carried out in 1992 and 1993 for the County of Sonoma and the California State Coastal conse~vancy under the direction of the Russian River Estuary Interagency Task Force. Agencies represented on the task force included USACE and NMFS. The study identified several elements of a management plan for the Russian River esuuary needed ~o protect fish and wildlife. The responsibility for implementing the Russian River estuary management plan, recommended by the Russian River Estuary Study, was transferred from the County of Sonoma to SCWA in April 1995. USACE has issued a permit to SCWA to implement the plan pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. i. NMFS has responsibility under the ESA and the Marine Mammal Protection Act for certain endangered and threatened species which reside for all or part of their life cycle in the marine' environment. NMFS responsibilities pursuant to the ESA include listed, proposed, and candidate anadromous salmonids within the Russian River Basin. NMFS also advises USACE on Section 10 and Section 404 permits. j. SCWA was created by California state legislation (Statutes of 1949, Chapter 994 as amended). Pursuant to this legislation SCWA, among other things, produces and furnishes surface and groundwater for beneficial uses; controls and disposes of flood, storm and other waters; generates electrical energy; and provides, operates and maintains recreation facilities in I"EI',~OCINO COUNTY connection wi~h its flood control and water conservation works. k. SCWA owns and operates a hydroelectric power pro, eot at Warm Springs Dam pursuant to the terms of a license issued ~y the Federal Energy Regulatory Co~ission (Order Issuing License [Hajor] for Project No. 3351 dated December 18, 1984). Az~cicles 33 and 34 of this license impose requirements on releasec from Lake Sonoma regulated by SCWA. 1. SCWA constructs, operates and maintains a water transl~ission system authorized by an Agreement for Water Supply a~d Construction of the Russian River-Cotati Inter~ie ProJec% between SCWA and eight public agencies, dated October 25, 1974 and last amended June 28, 1995. Existing facilities w~lch may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout include 5 Ranney collectors and 7 wells, diversion works and infiltration ponds. Facilities authorized, but not yet constructed, which may affect salmon or stselhead trout in the Russian River include a standby 20 million gallon per day Ranney collector to be constructed by SCWA. ~. SCWA has proposed a water Supply and Transmission system Project (WSTSP) which is the subject of an environmental impact report (EIR) currently under preparation. The objective of t. he WSTSP is to provide a safe, economical, and reliable water supply to meet the defined future needs of SCWA's service area. Modifications to ~he Russian RAver which may affect coho Balmon or steelhead trout in ~he Russian River would result from an increase in the amount of water diverted from ~he Russian River (a combination of re-diversion of stored water and direct diversion of winter flow) from 75,000 to approximately 101,000 acre-feet per year (AFY), and an increase in the SCwA water transmission system delivery capacity from 92 to 149 million gallons per day (mgd). n. SCWA operates and maintains the Central Sonoma Watershed Project, which was constructed by SCWA in cooperation with the National Resources Conservation Service. The project included the construction of flood retarding structures and the straightening, shaping and stabilization of waterways tributary to ~he Russian River. o. SCWA has established six zones for the purpose of financing the construction and maintenance of flood control works within Sonoma County. Zone lA, which encompasses the Mark West Creek- Laguna de santa Rosa watershed, and Zone SA, which encompasses t~e Russian River from the Pacific Ocean to Redwood Highway Bridge at Healdsburg excluding Zone lA, are sltua~ed within ~he Russian River watershed. SCWA constructs and maintains flood control and drainage facili~ies within these zones. P~EhlDOCINO COUNTY SECTION 4 - DESIGNATION OF LEAD AGENCY USACE agrees, pursuant to 50 CFR 402.07, that USACE shall be designated as the lead agency in conducting the consultation and conference described in Section 2 of this MOU. SECTION 5 - CONSULTATION PROCESS The signatories to this MOU agree that the consulbation and conference described in Section 2 of this MOU will be pursued in accordance with the following process: a. DescriDtion of USACE Activ~t%es. USACE will furnish to SCWA the best information available describing USACE's activities, including but are not limited to copies of the following documents: i. the Operation and Maintenance Manual for Warm Springs Fish Hatchery, dated october 1993; ii. the Operation and Maintenance Manual for Coyote Valley Fish Facility, dated October 1993; iii. the Cooperative Agreement between the United States of America and the State of California Department of Fish and Game for the operation and Maintenance of the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery at the War~ Springs Dam and Lake Sonoma Project and the Coyote Valley Fish Facilities at Coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino Project, dated September 30, 1991; iv. the annual reports describing hatchery activities since the beginning of operation of the hatchery; and v. a statement describing the current Warm Springs Fish Hatchery and Coyote Valley Fish Facilities fishery program; vi. the coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino Russian River, California Water Control Manual, dated August 1986; vii. the Warm Springs Dam and Lake Sonoma Dry Creek, California Water Control Manual, dated September 1984; viii. the Russian River Channel Improvement Operation and Maintenance Manual for Sonoma County, dated July 1965, which describe the erosion control facilities and operations along the Russian River for which SC"WA is responsible; ix. the Russian River Channel Improvement Operation and Maintenance Manual for Mendocino County, dated July 1965, which describe the erosion control facilities and operations ~E~OC ! ~0 COUHTY along the Russian River for which MCRRFC&WCID is responsible. x. the Warm Springs Dam and Lake Sonoma Project Channel Improvements Operation and Maintenance Manual, dated July 1991, which describes the erosion control facilities and operations along Dry Creek for which SCWA is responsible. b. Description of_$CWA Acti~.~ties. SCWA will furnish to USAC£ the best information available describing $CWA's activities, including but are not limited to copies of the following documents: i. Decision 1610 of the California Water Resources Control Board establishing criteria for the water supply operation of the coyote Valley and warm Springs Dam Projects; ii. the Russian River Estuary Study and a description of the current status of the implementation by SCWA of ~he Russian River estuary management plan; iii. a description of existing SCWA transmission system Russian River diversion facilities and operations; iv. a description of the proposed currently authorized new transmission system intake facility and operation with an assessment of its environmental impacts; v. the Draft Environmental Impact Report on $CWA's proposed Water Supply and Transmission System Project; vi. the Watershed Work Plan, Central Sonoma Watershed, $onoma County, California, April 1958; vii. a description of SCWA's Zone LA and 5A flood control facilities and maintenance practices. c. ,Executive Committee. During the term of this agreement an executive committee shall exist which shall consist of the District Engineer of the San Francisco District of USAC£ or his designated representative, the General Manager/Chief Engineer of SCWA or his designated representative, and one member appointed by the Board of Directors of the MCIW&PC. The purpose of the Executive Committee shall be to provide public policy advise to USACE and SCWA in the execution of their respective obligations under subsections (e), (f), (h), (i) and (j) of this section. The Executive Committee shall meet upon the call of the District Engineer or his designated representative. d. Public. Policy Facilit.ati~a committe~. The Board of Directors of SCWA will establish, and SCWA will provide staff support to, a Public Policy Facilitating Committee (PPFC) to JAN-l~-1998 08; ~? PE]~DOCINO COUNTY disseminate information on the Section 7 consultation process and receive public input. The PPFC will consist of one member appointed by and from USACE, one member appointed by and from NMFS, three members appointed by and from the Board of Supervisors of Sonoma County, three members appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Mendocino county, one member appointed by and from the Resources Aqency of the state of California, and one member appointed by and fzom the califo~nia Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. e. ~nitial $creenina by USACE and SCWA. As soon as practicable, USACE and SCWA will Jointly review the information furnished and received pursuant to this MOU, and other relevant information which may become available, and identify any actions or activities which may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat critical to the survival of these species. USACE and SCWA will identify possible modifications to the actions and activities, or other discretionary conservation measures, which might be reasonably implemented in order to insure that an action or activity is not likely to adversely affect these species, or to minimize any likely adverse effects on these species. The results of the initial screening will be furnished to NMFS. NMFS may, in its discretion, review and comment on them. f. ~r.eDara~pn of Draft AnalyseS_of ~ternat!ves. Based upon the initial screening, SCWA will, in consultation with USACE, prepare or cause to be prepared a draft analysis which will set forth each of the identified possible modifications and conservation recommendations and examine their technical and economic feasibility. The results of the analysis of alternative~ will be furnished to NMFS. NMFS may, in its discretion, review and comment on them. g. Public Workshon. A public workshop will be conducted prior to t_he preparation of the draft biological assessment, which shall include local, state, and Federal agencies, as well as the interested public. h. Sgope of Biolo, ical Assessment. Based upon the analysis of alternatives, agency and public comments, and NMFS comments, if any, USAC£ and SCWA will jointly define the range of activities and alternatives which will be the subject of the biological assessment. i. Preparation of__~i~lo~ical Assessment. Pursuant to 50 CFR 402.08, SCWA is designated as the non-Federal representative to prepare the biological assessment. The USACE shall furnish SCWA guidance and ~upervision and shall independently review and evaluate the scope and contents of the biological assessment. ,] JP14-13-1998 08:47 I~NDOCI~ COUNTY P. 10 ,, J. Submission_of Draft ~!0_loai~al.Assessment. SCWA will prepare,or cause to be prepared a draft biological assessment and submit it to USACE and NMFS. upon receipt of comments from USAC~ and NMFS, it wtll be circulated to local, State, and Federal agencies, as well as the interested public for comment and review. Upon ~he end of the comment period, SCWA will submit a draft final biological assessment to USACE. k. ~ubmission of Btoloatcal Assessment. USACE will submit the final biological assessment to NMFS. NMFS will respond to USACE in writing within 30 days as to wh~ther or not it concurs with the findings of the biological assessment. If the final biological assessment concludes that actions and acttvi~tes are likely to adversely affect any listed species or crltical habitat or likely to Jeopardize the continued existence of any proposed species or result in the adverse modification or destruction of proposed critical habitat, then USACE agrees to initiate formal consultation or conference, or both, upon USACE's formal submission of the final biological assessment =o NMFS. USACE need not initiate formal consultation if, as a result of the preparation of the biological assessment, USACE determines, with the written concurrence of NMFS, that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any listed species or critical habitat. SECTION 6 - SEVERABILIT¥ If for any reason any term or condition under this MOU is found to be inconsistent with any law or re--ulation, or in conflict with any other legally enforceable requirement of any party, the remaining terms and conditions of this MOU shall remain in full force and effect to %he extent they can be reasonably applied in the absence of the invalid or unenforceable term or condition, unless this MOU is otherwise amended or ~erminated in accordance with the procedures set forth in this MOU. SECTION 7 - WAIVER OF RIGHTS By signing this Mou, the parties do not waive or relinquish any legal or equitable right that they might otherwise have with respect to any of the actions, activities or obligations contemplated by this MOU. SECTION 8 - AUTHORITIES USACE and NMFS are authorized =o enter into this MOU pursuant to the E~dangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531- 1544) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661- 667c). SCWA is authorized to enter into this HOU pursuant to the COUNTY P.11 ; Sonoma County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Act (California Statutes of 1949, Chapter 994, as amended). This MOU may be executed in counterparts, each which shall constitute the MOU. This MOU is intended to be in furtherance of the agencies' discharge of their respective authority and responsibilities, and its provisions are to be interpreted and implemented accordingly. Nothing in this MOU is intended to or shall have t-he effect of constraining or limiting the agencies in carrying out their statutory responsibilities. SECTION 9 - TERM OF MOU This MOU becomes effective upon the signature by ali parties and remains in effect until modified by mutual consent or terminated in accordance with the following: a. Any party proposing to terminate the MOU shall so notify the other parties and shall identify the reasons, if any, for the proposed termination. b. The parties shall meet within a reasonable time, but not exceeding thirty (30) days, to attempt to resolve any differences. c. If, following the meeting, any party wishes to terminate the MOU, that party shall give 60 days notice of intent to terminate =o the other parties. The notice may be withdraw~ at any tLme during the 60 days. d. Unless the notice of intent to terminate is withdrawn, the MOU shall terminate upon expiration of the 60 day notice period. SECTION 10 - METHOD AND PLACE OF GIVING NOTICE Ali notices shall be made in writing and'may be given by personal delivery or by mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows: USACE District Engineer, San Francisco District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 333 Market Street, Sth Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-2197 NMFS Regional Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200 Long Beach, CA 90802-4213 $CWA General Manager, Sonoma County Water Agency 21~0 West College Avenue Santa RoSa, CA 95401 10