Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-27 Packet CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Adjourned Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 November 27, 2006 5:30 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and mil call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Adoption of an Ordinance Eliminating the Time Limit on Incurring Debt and Extending the Time Limitation for the Effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan and the Repayment of Debt for the Ukiah Redevelopment Project AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS (5:45 PM) a. Discussion and Conceptual Approval of Changed Preliminary Draft City of Ukiah Sphere of Influence Map and Approval of Letter of Support to the Board of Supervisors UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Approval of Response to the Grand Jury Water Report--Continued from November 15, 2006 8. COUNCIL REPORTS 9. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 10. ADJOURNMENT Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 21nd day of November, 2006. Gail Petersen, City Clerk NOTICE OF EARLY START TIME For adjourned City Council Meeting MONDAY, 11/27 5:30 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO: URGENCYITEM MEETING DATE:Nov. 27~2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF LE'I-I'ER OF SUPPORT FOR THE TAX SHARING AGREEMENT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Reason for the urqency: This item was originally placed on the Agenda to approve a letter to the Board of Supervisors (BOS) on the tax sharing proposal presented to Council at the last meeting. However, the item was mislabeled as a letter to the BOS regarding the sphere of influence. Therefore, due to the fact that the item must be approved for the BOS meeting of December 5, before the next City Council meeting, it is being requested that the Council approve this urgency item with at least a 4/5 vote. Summary: The City and County's elected representatives on the annexation/tax sharing committee met on Monday, November 20, 2006 to discuss several issues including the revision of the City's sphere and the upcoming BOS meeting on the proposed tax sharing agreement between the City and County. The representatives determined that a letter should be sent from the City Council to the BOS on the tax sharing proposal in time for the December 5, 2006 BOS meeting. Committee members Mayor Ashiku and Councilmember McCowen are asking for comment and approval of the draft letter that has been submitted. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the draft letter as submitted or modify. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not send a letter. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mayor Ashiku, Councilmember McCowen Candace Horsley, City Manager Letter Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manag~ November 27, 2006 af l iah Board of Supervisors 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1090 Ukiah, CA 95482 Honorable Chair Colfax and members of the Board, The Ukiah City Council wishes to thank you for your efforts to develop an updated Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) that reflects the concern of City and County residents to provide for reasonable growth and development while still protecting our quality of life. We agree with you that planning for the future of our community with broad input from the citizens is the only sensible approach and that future development should be based on the outcome of this process. The intent of this letter is to state openly and publicly that the City Council and City of Ukiah commit to seeing the UVAP process through to its conclusion. We appreciate the cooperative relationship that is focused on the UVAP process. However, without the timely completion of Municipal Service Reviews and a comprehensive revenue sharing agreement, implementation of the UVAP may be compromised. Therefore, we commit to taking to conclusion, in a timely manner, those items that are directly tied to and support fulfilling the goals of the UVAP. These items include but are not necessarily limited to: · Completion and submittal of Municipal Service Reviews for the City of Ukiah to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO); · Continued negotiation and completion of a Sales Tax Sharing Agreement; · Negotiation and completion of a Property Tax Sharing Agreement; · Negotiation and completion of a Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement; · Developing a realistic City of Ukiah Sphere of Influence in concert with the UVAP process followed by submittal to LAFCO for approval; · Working in good faith with the Board of Supervisors to complete additional tasks that may be identified or necessary as part of the UVAP process. The Ukiah City Council, on behalf of ourselves and the citizens whom we represent, ask you to give careful consideration to the draft revenue sharing agreement that has been presented for your consideration. This draft agreement, preliminary in nature, represents a framework which we believe can serve as the basis for our respective staffs to prepare a detailed and legally sufficient document that can serve as an important first step in developing a comprehensive revenue sharing agreement for the Ukiah area. Following discussion, we urge you to direct staff to continue the process and to address any concerns you may have. 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 Phone# 707/463-6200 Fax¢ 707/463-6204 Web Address: www cityofukiah corn We believe a revenue sharing agreement will result in the following benefits: 1. Greatly reduce or eliminate economic competition for sales tax revenue; 2. Position the City and County to make land use decisions based on planning principles - not anticipated revenue; 3. Facilitate annexation of areas that are appropriate for annexation, thereby providing for the rational delivery of services to those areas; 4. Reduce sprawl and direct urban scale development to areas best equipped to provide services and infrastructure; 5. Increase the likelihood that needed infrastructure will be funded and development impacts properly mitigated; 6. Enhance the current atmosphere of City/County cooperation and establish a framework for future agreements on revenue sharing. It is clear that the Ukiah area is currently subject to significant development pressure. Failure to plan cooperatively will likely result in sprawl, loss of agricultural lands, inadequate mitigations and insufficient infrastructure. We believe it is essential that the City and County work together to foster sensible land use planning, rational delivery of services and protection of our rural small town quality of life. We acknowledge that it is necessary to develop a property tax sharing agreement and advisable to also develop a transient occupancy tax sharing agreement. The item before you is a first step in developing a comprehensive revenue sharing agreement. Again, we ask your support for the continuation of this process. In closing, we wish to reiterate the commitment of this Council and the City of Ukiah to utilize the UVAP process to determine future development and to assure you that we are dedicated to working cooperatively to complete the tasks identified above in concert with the development and adoption of the UVAP. Sincerely, Mark Ashiku Mayor AGENDA ITEM NO: 4a MEETING DATE: November 27~ 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ELIMINATING THE TIME LIMIT ON INCURRING DEBT AND EXTENDING THE TIME LIMITATION FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE REPAYMENT OF DEBT FOR THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT SUMMARY: At its November 15, 2006 meeting, the City Council moved to introduce by title only, and moved to introduce an ordinance amending Ordinance 895 and Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's Resolution 99-1, by revising the Redevelopment Agency's Plan time limits for incurring and repayment of debt and for the effectiveness of the Plan. The purpose of this agenda item is for the Council to formally adopt the ordinance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the Ordinance Eliminating the Time Limit on incurring Debt and Extending the Time Limitation for the Effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan and the Repayment of Debt for the Ukiah Redevelopment Project ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: provide direction to staff Do not adopt the Ordinance and Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Gail Petersen, City Clerk Candace Horsley, City Manager #1: Ordinance Approved: ' i~ ca~n~a~~ty Manag r ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE cI'rY OF UKZAH ELIMINATING THE TIME LIMIT ON INCURRING DEBT AND EXTENDING THE TIME LIMI-rATION FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE REPAYMENT OF DEBT FOR THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT PRO3ECT The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows. SEC;~zON ONE. FINDINGS. 1. The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 895 on November 15, 1989, approving and adopting the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Ukiah Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). 2. The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has been designated as the official redevelopment agency in the City of Ukiah to carry out the functions and requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and to implement the Redevelopment Plan. 3. On December 16, 1998, the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency adopted URA Resolution No. 99-1, amending the Redevelopment Plan to limit the Agency's ability to incur new debt to twenty (20) years from the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, which would be November 15, 2009. 4. Section 33333.6 of the Health and Safety Code, which was amended by SB 211 and took effect on January 1, 2002, authorizes redevelopment agencies to eliminate the time limit on the establishment of loans, advances, and indebtedness contained in redevelopment plans adopted before December 31, 1993. 5. Section 33681.9 of the Health and Safety Code, which was added by SB 1045 and took effect on September 1, 2003, required the Agency during the 2003-04 fiscal year to make a payment for deposit in Mendocino County's Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (an "ERAF Payment"). 6. Section 33333.6 of the Health and Safety Code, which was amended by SB 1045 to add subsection (e)(2)(C), provides that when an agency is required to make a payment pursuant to Section 33681.9, the legislative body may amend the redevelopment plan by ordinance to extend by one year the time limit of the effectiveness of the plan and the time limit to repay indebtedness. 7. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33681.9, the Agency was required to make an ERAF payment for the fiscal year 2003-04. 8. The existing time limit on the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan, as set forth in Section 800 of the Redevelopment Plan, is November 15, 2029 (40 years from the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan) and the existing limit on the cumulative amount of tax increments that the Agency may be allocated is $260 million. SECTZON TWO. CONTENTS OF ORDI'NANCE Section 1. The Redevelopment Plan for the Ukiah Redevelopment Project is hereby amended to eliminate the time limit on the establishment of loans, advances, and indebtedness contained in Section 502 of the Redevelopment Plan and previously amended by URA Resolution No. 99-1. Section 2. A. In accordance with Section 33333.6(e)(2)(C) of the Health and Safety Code, the time limit on the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan, as set forth in Section 800 of the Redevelopment Plan, currently scheduled to terminate on November 15, 2029 shall be extended by one year. Based upon such extension, the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan shall terminate on November 15, 2030. B. In accordance with Section 33333.6(e)(2)(C) of the Health and Safety Code, except for loans and indebtedness approved or incurred prior to December 31, 1993, the Agency shall not pay indebtedness or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after ten (10) years from the termination of the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan. Based upon the termination date established in Subsection 2.A. of this Ordinance, the Agency shall not pay indebtedness or receive property taxes pursuant to Section 33670 after November 15, 2040; provided, however, that any loans or other indebtedness approved or incurred by the Agency prior to December 31, 1993, to finance the Project, may be repaid in accordance with the terms relating to such indebtedness, and the Agency may receive property tax increments after November 15, 2040, to repay such debt accordingly. SECTZON THREE. t4ZSCELLANEOUS 1. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 2. EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 895. Ordinance No. 895 is continued in full force and effect except as amended by this Ordinance. 3. DIRECTION TO C1TY CLERK. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Introduced by title only on November 15, 2006, by the following roll call vote: 2 968762vl 04513/0001 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERCRANE, MCCOWEN, RODIN, BALDWIN AND MAYORASHIKU NONE NONE NONE Adopted on ,2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Gail Petersen, City Clerk 3 968762vl 04513/0001 ITEM NO: 6a DATE: November 27, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION AND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF CHANGED PRELIMINARY DRAFT CITY OF UKIAH SPHERE OF INFLUENCE MAP AND APPROVAL OF LETTER OF SUPPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SUMMARY: On November 15, 2006 the City Council conducted a public hearing and discussed updating the City's Sphere of Influence boundary. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Council continued the matter to a special meeting on November 27, 2006 and scheduled a follow-up City/County Subcommittee meeting on November 20th to further refine the boundary in response to comments and issues raised during the public hearing. City/County Subcommittee November 20th Meeting: The City/County Subcommittee met on November 20th and discussed the comments and issues raised at the November 15m public hearing. The primary issues centered on whether or not agricultural land should be included in the City's sphere of influence and how far the boundary should extend to the west and southwest. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Discuss changed preliminary Draft Sphere of Influence Map developed by the City/County Subcommittee, allow for public comment, and conceptually support the draft map; and 2) Review and approve the letter of support to the Board of Supervisors. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not support the changed preliminary draft map or letter of support and provide direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: Interested groups and Organizations Requested by: City/County Subcommittee Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: City/Council Subcommittee and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. November 27, 2006 Changed Preliminary Draft Sphere of Influence Map APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager In addition, the City representatives on the Subcommittee concluded that the City should prepare and send a letter supporting the City/County partnership and teamwork on developing a new City of Ukiah Sphere of Influence. The draft letter will be presented to the City Council for review and approval at the November 27, 2006 meeting. After discussing the issues raised at the November 15th public hearing, the Subcommittee made the following modifications to the Map: 1. Delete the parcels east of Highway 101 between Gobbi Street, Talmage Road, and Babcock Lane. This land is zoned and predominantly used for agriculture. Including this land would not be consistent with the General Plan theme of precluding urban development east of the Highway. The Subcommittee agreed with public testimony and deleted this land from the proposed Sphere boundary. 2. Delete the parcels east of the Masonite Plant property between the 1995 Sphere boundary and the Russian River. Most of this land is in agricultural production, and the southern portion is zoned for agriculture. The Subcommittee felt that the proposed 1995 Sphere boundary went far enough to the east in this location. Retain the industrially zoned Dunnewood Winery property in the Sphere, as well as the agriculturally zoned parcels east of the railroad tracks just south of the housing development south of Lake Mendocino Drive. The Subcommittee concluded that it made sense to include the industrially zoned but agriculturally used Dunnewood property because it was situated in an industrial area and surrounded by urban uses. The property immediately south of and adjacent to the housing development on Lake Mendocino Drive was recently approved for the development of more housing, and the Subcommittee concluded that it made sense to include these non- Williamson Act parcels in the Sphere boundary. It also concluded that the parcels adjacent to the south of these parcels be included. 4. Added the parcels between Highway 101 and North State Street between Orr Springs Road and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District boundary to the north. The Subcommittee had originally reached consensus to add these parcels, but Staff had inadvertently left them off the map. 5. Deleted the land west of the ridge top in the western hills. These lands are zoned for 40-acre minimum parcel sizes, are not highly visible from City locations, have severe access issues, and it is questionable whether the City would be able to provide adequate public services to them in the next 10-20 years. Accordingly, the Subcommittee agreed to delete them from the map and honor the 1995 suggested boundary in this location. 2 6. Delete all the land in the southwest that does not have frontage on Booneville Highway 253, Similar to the lands west of the ridge top, these lands are zoned for 40-acre minimum parcel sizes, have access issues, and it is questionable whether the City would be able to provide adequate public services to them in the next 10-20 years. Accordingly, the Subcommittee agreed to delete them from the map and honor the 1995 suggested boundary in this location. 7. Add the land between Taylor Road and South State Street. These small parcels are predominantly developed and zoned industrial. The Subcommittee agreed that it made sense to add them to the map. CONCLUS:ZON: The City/County Subcommittee met to discuss the issues raised at the November 15th public hearing and how the preliminary draft Sphere of Influence Hap could be modified to resolve those issues. The Subcommittee agreed with concerns about including agricultural land east of Highway 101, except for the industrially zoned Dunnewood Winery property and land south of the Lake Mendocino Drive housing development. The Subcommittee also concluded that the lands west of the ridge top and in the southwest beyond the 1995 suggested boundary should be excluded because of zoning considerations, lack of access, and extreme challenges in regard to public service. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Discuss draft changed Sphere of Influence map developed by the City/County Subcommittee, allow for public comment, and conceptually support the draft map; and 2) Review and approve the letter of support to the Board of Supervisors. 3 AGENDA ITEM NO: 7a MEETING DATE: Nov. 27, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO THE GRAND JURY WATER REPORT - CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 15, 2006 On November 15, 2006, staff presented for Council's review and discussion a draft letter in response to the findings and recommendations proposed by the Mendocino Grand Jury for Mendocino County water districts. A copy of that Agenda Summary Report and proposed letter of response is attached (Attachments I and 2). As requested by Council, the submittal of the letter of response was delayed pending further review by Councilmembers. At the time of the preparation of this agenda item, no further information had been received by staff. Staff is requesting Council's direction so that the letter may be finalized. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction to staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Attachments: Mendocino Grand Jury Candace Horsley, City Manager Ann Burck, Water Project Engineer 1. Agenda Summary Report- Nov 15, 2006 2. StafFs Recommended Response- Nov 15, 2006 Approved: AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: SUMMARY REPORT ATrACHMENT~.,,, Nov. 15, 2006 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO THE GRAND JURY WATER REPORT Attached for Council's review and discussion is a draft letter in response to the findings and recommendations proposed by the Mendocino Grand Jury for Mendocino County water districts. This is the second and final response requested by the Grand Jury; the first involving the Police Department which the Council has already approved. The draft letter contains responses submitted by staff for Council's consideration and discussion. Many of the findings and recommendations are based on fact however others require a response of what the City sees as an appropriate role for the County Water Agency and Board of Supervisor's in the future. Therefore careful consideration by the Council is requested. Staff has attached the report responses from the Inland Water and Power Agency as well as the Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District to give the Council a flavor of the variation in viewpoints. Council will find that the City staff's version is also distinct from the other two agencies in various elements. Staff is requesting Council's direction so that the letter may be finalized. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction to staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Attachments: Mendocino Grand Jury Candace Horsley, City Manager Ann Burck, Water Project Engineer 1. Response letter 2. Grand Jury letter 3. Responses from IWPC and MCRRFCWCID Approved: ~~ Candace Horsley, C~ Manager Attachment 2 November 15, 2006 Judge of the Mendocino County Superior Court Mendocino County Courthouse 100 S. School Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Honorable Judge: The City of Ukiah is in receipt of the Grand Jury Report for 2005-2006 entitled, "WATER, WATER EVERYWHERE, but ... MENDOC1NO COUNTY WATER DISTRICTS REPORT" dated May 4, 2006. The following information is the City's response to the findings and recommendations contained in the report. Findings The City ofUkiah, RRFCWCD, PVID and Redwood Valley CWD comprise the Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that makes up IWPC. Agree with the finding. It should be noted that IWPC has invited the County to once again join the JPA. o Continual growth and development, together with increased population demands, have resulted in some overlap of interests, influence and competition between various UV/PV area water districts. Do not agree with this finding. The water agencies have distinct water rights and/or contracts under which they serve water to their customers. In addition, the City has been involved with various water agencies in cooperative efforts to share emergency water, investigate new water sources and to respond to outside threats to current water rights. 13. Except for the City of Ukiah, accurate measurement and/or metering of water usage (industrial, agricultural, and residential) within most water districts varies widely. Currently, it is not possible to know exactly how much water is actually being used in the U V/PV area because of the multiple systems of accountability in use, as well as a degree of undocumented use. The City of [Jkiah does not know what other water agencies are doing in this regard. As a customer of the RRFCWCD, we are aware that several years ago they required their customers to accurately meter their water use. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20. 22. The amount of water used by many water purveyors is known and available from those required to file Statement of Use with State Water Resource Control Board (WRCB). Reporting has been haphazard, with no current consequence for noncompliance. The City lacks sufficient information to agree or disagree with this statement. The City of Ukiah is in compliance with all SWRCB reporting requirements. RRFCWCD is currently operating under a Cease and Desist Order from WRCB over questions about water usage measurement. The City is not able to comment on the status of this issue. Users with riparian rights, those whose property is immediately contiguous to a water source, are required to file a Statement of Use with WRCB. The requirement to report is currently not enfomed, and many do not file. Currently, there is no requirement to report usage locally. Disagree partially with the finding. SWRCB recommends that users with riparian rights report usage; it is not required. The City of Ukiah has no direct knowledge regarding the reporting status by riparian rights users. Projections of population growth and development within the County and specifically the UV/PV area indicate that continued availability of adequate water resources will be problematic. Without knowing the status of water rights in the valley, final disposition of the Potter Valley project, what limitations may be imposed due to State regulations, or what water source alternatives are available, it is not possible for us to answer to agree or disagree with this finding. Increased demand for potable water within UV/PV area would require developing new water sources, conservation of existing sources, and the construction of new treatment, storage or supply facilities. Construction of these facilities could have significant environmental effects. Agree with the finding. Except for the City of Ukiah, the plans of most UV/PV area water districts for responding to earthquakes and multi-year droughts are marginal to non-existent. Disagree partially with the finding. According to the DWR, any water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides over 3,000 acre-feet annually should adopt and implement an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Included in the UWMP is a Water Shortage Contingency Plan to determine water allocation during drought or emergency conditions. While there may be some arrangements between various water districts for water sharing, there is no official comprehensive plan or legal agreement among water districts for sharing water resources. Disagree partially with the finding. Every water district is restricted in the place of use by that 2 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. specified in their water permit. Before a plan or agreement could be made to share water, each district would require approval from the SWRCB for a change in the place of use. The City of Ukiah, Millview and Willow Water Districts have an agreement in place for sharing water under an emergency intertie system and have submitted applications for change in place of use to the State. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC), the local sponsoring agency, are studying methods to improve flood control and increase water storage for the UV/PV area. Agree with the finding. The Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study will consider various options for increasing water supplies and storage. Raising the water level behind Coyote Dam or raising the dam itself are two of those options. Agree with the finding. ACE has completed its initial Reconnaissance Study and is prepared to proceed with the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, which will include California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses. Agree with the finding. The current cost for the complete Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study is estimated to be approximately $6,000,000 and will take five or more years to complete; $3,000,000 of that cost will consist of local matching funds. Agree with the finding. In the past, nearly $300,000 in ACE's annual appropriations for the Study has been lost due to local entities' inability to furnish the required matching funds. Disagree with the finding. The City is not aware of any funding being lost due to local timing issues. We were told by the ACE that their allocation was summarily reduced at the Federal level due to other funding priorities. In fiscal year 2006-2007, the Federal government has appropriated $100,000 to ACE for the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, anticipating $100,000 of local matching funds. This appropriation will expire September 30, 2006 if local monies are not forthcoming. Agree with finding. Each member of IWPC pledged and gave their apportioned share of the match which the ACE is now using. While Redwood Valley CWD has not committed to the project, three of the four members of IWPC (City ofUkiah, RRFCWCD and PVID) are currently negotiating financial participation relationships and funding availability for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, under critical time constraints. Qualification for Federal funds will depend upon successful completion of these negotiations. Partially disagree with the finding. All four members of the IWPC, including RVCWD, have signed a participation agreement. 3 30. 31. 33. 34. Funding for development and construction costs for the potential project coming out of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study would consist of 75% from the Federal government and 25% local monies. Total costs are estimated to be in excess of $150 million. Disagree with the finding. The percentage share and cost of the construction project is dependant on which option the ACE determines is appropriate based on the Feasibility Study results. State, Federal, and local laws deal with environmental issues, water supply, water quality, and water rights, utilization and distribution. Agree with the finding. Agencies outside Mendocino County influencing decisions regarding UV/PV area water resources include: Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) California Water Resources Control Board (WRCB) California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) California Department of Health Services (DHS) Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) National Marine Fisheries Services (NOAA-Fisheries) State and Federal courts Agree partially with the finding--there are other agencies involved not listed above. There is universal agreement that the most efficient, inexpensive and environmentally sensitive method to increase water availability is to reduce demand through conservation. Disagree partially with the finding. Water conservation is an environmentally sensitive method that will increase water availability by reducing demand, but the City of Ukiah has no direct knowledge regarding universal agreement or whether conservation would necessarily be the most efficient and inexpensive method to increase water availability in every situation. Recommendations The BOS take a leadership role in developing long-range comprehensive management plans and strategic policy for dealing with all aspects of water resources (supply, rights, availability, usage, conservation, storage, distribution and in£rastructure) countywide and specifically for the UV/PV area. (Findings 3, 10, 35-37) Response: A coordinated approach to these various issues including new water supply analysis and storage development could protect our customers and ensure a o viable level of water resoumes in the valley. It should be noted that the BOS has no authority over any other agencies water right and therefore this would be a coordination effort and role. The BOS establish a Water Resource Policy Council, composed of all water agencies/special districts and official water-related entities within the County and the UV/PV area. The Council should explore interests and concerns in order to develop common long-range plans and strategies to address the issues of adequate guaranteed water availability, usage, conservation and storage within the County. (Findings 3, 10, 35-37) Response: This certainly would allow each agency to have a voice in these matters. Cooperation among water-related agencies would be valuable. There are already several agencies that perform some of these functions with a limited scope. Coordination and local buy-in on eliminating duplication would need to be achieved before success with a Council of this sort would work. The BOS and the IWPC, perhaps in conjunction with other appropriate entities, arrange necessary financing for the matching funds to add to the ACE's 2005- 2006 appropriated monies for the continued development of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study. (Findings 26-29, 36, 37) Response: All four members of the IWPC have signed participation agreements for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study. IWPC has requested BOS involvement in the recent past and most likely would appreciate assistance in the funding issue. This would need to be agreed to by the IWPC members. The BOS take all steps necessary to ensure the water rights of any added water capacity be negotiated in favor of the County and UV/PV. (Findings 23, 24, 31) Response: Several projects are already in process by various agencies. The County could assist with future projects and issues that arise with water agencies outside Mendocino County boundaries. This would give a united voice and strength to our local water issues with outside agencies. The BOS by ordinance or other appropriate authority (activate Mendocino County Service Area #3) require all water purveyors, providers, agencies and special districts, as well as riparian rights users, to install meters and/or measuring devices to track water usage for local reporting. (Findings 13-16) Response: The City of Ukiah supports the accurate accounting of water use as a necessary part of xvater management and conservation. However, we wonder what the need for this provision is at this point in time due to recent State requirements that have been communicated to various water agencies. 5 o The Mendocino County Water Agency receive and compile water usage data for informational and planning purposes. (Findings 13-16) Response: Water usage data from water agencies is already available upon request. If the Water Agency worked with the water districts to determine what additional information is needed, performed the study and then compiled the information that would be extremely helpful. This would reduce duplication of effort and provide resources for data that may not be available to the smaller agencies. All water agencies/special districts immediately develop and implement conservation programs, with an education component for residential, agricultural and industrial use. Devices such as reduced-flow water fixtures and irrigation equipment and other passive and active approaches, including reclaimed water (treated wastewater) systems, should be investigated and considered. (Findings 3, 18, 31) Response: The City of Ukiah has implemented a voluntary water conservation program during summer months for residential and commercial users. Since 1992, Iow- flush toilets have been required in all new construction in Ukiah. The City of Ukiah has set a goal to develop a Water Recycling Master Plan within the next five to seven years to investigate the economic feasibility of recycled water in the City and Ukiah Valley and to identify potential uses for recycled water to reduce the demand on its drinking water supplies. In 2005 and 2006, the City and Ukiah Valley Sanitation District submitted applications for state and federal grants to conduct a feasibility study and a Water Recycling Master Plan study for a recycled water system. Sincerely, Mark Ashiku, Mayor City of Ukiah 6