Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4.B 03/20/2006CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA AGENDA ILL i�®a-off SCS- . March 20, 2006 Agenda Title: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Draft Meeting Date: March 20, 2006 Water Advisory Committee Letter to the Sonoma County Water Agency Regarding Water Advisory Committee Interests Meeting Time: © 3:00 PM ❑ 7:00 PM Cateeory (check one): ❑ Consent Calendar ❑ Public Hearing © New Business ❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation Department: Director: Contact Person: Phone Number: Water Resources & Michael Ban, P.E. Michael Ban, P.E. 778-4487 Conservation Cost of Proposal: $0 Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Name of Fund: N/A Attachments to Agenda Packet Item: Attachment A — Draft Letter from Water Advisory Committee to Sonoma County Water Agency Summary Statement: The Water Advisory Committee has requested that the water contractors consider and support a letter from the Water Advisory Committee to the Sonoma County Water Agency's board of directors addressing various interests of the Connnittee. Recommended Citv Council Action/Suggested Motion: City Management reconnnends the Council support issuance of the draft letter. Reviewed by Admin. Svcs. Dir: D7 L t A/VAlt Todav's Date: March 2006 Reviewed by City Atto•nev: no Date: WN Revision # and Date Revised: Appro ed by City Manager: Jz Date: File Code: S:\water resources & conservation\Nater\6110 Source of Supply\20 water agency contractors\city council\'_006\march 20\1_006 Agenda aill.doc CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING DRAFT WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE LETTER TO THE SONOMA COUNTY WATER AGENCY REGARDING WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE INTERESTS AGENDA REPORT FOR MARCH 20, 2006 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Water Advisory Committee has requested that the water contractors consider and support a letter from the Water Advisory Committee to the Sonoma County Water Agency's board of directors addressing various interests of the Conunittee. BACKGROUND: At the March 6'h Water Advisory Committee meeting, representatives from Rolmert Park, Santa Rosa, Town of Windsor and the North Marin Municipal Water District presented a draft letter from the Water Advisory Committee to the Sonoma County Water Agency (see Attachment A). The letter addresses a range of WAC interests, including: Urban Water Management Plan. The Plan is being prepared by the SCWA for the WAC. It was due on December 31, 2005. The letter urges the Agency to complete it by June 30, 2006. Water Policy Statement. The letter requests the SCWA update its 1991 Water Policy Statement. Russian River Project Water. The letter recommends the SCWA include evaluation of a new water conveyance system that would be separate from the Russian River in its Water Supply Transmission System and Reliability Project EIR. This alternative would include a pipeline adjacent to Dry Creek, from Lake Sonoma to the intake and infiltration facilities at Mirabel. City Management suggests the following revision be considered: Paragraph 4, second to last sentence. Delete the word "incremental" as follows, "We recognize that the cost of this option would be substantial, but believe the reliability benefits and the reduced fisheries impacts may outweigh the in?efemental cost." The word "incremental" implies that the costs for this alternative are not substantial. 3. ALTERNATIVES: Alternatives available for this item include: 1. Approve letter as drafted. 2. Approve letter with recommended revisions. 3. Do not approve letter. 4. Take other action as directed by the City Council. 4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. 5. CONCLUSION: The proposed letter highlights a number of concerns shared by the water contractors, and brings the concerns to the attention of the SCWA's board of directors. 6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR COMPLETION: Submittal of letter from the Water Advisory Committee to the SCWA board of directors. RECOMMENDATION: City Management recommends that Council support issuance of the letter. S:\water resources S conservation\Water\6110 Source of SupplyLO water agency contractors city council\2006\march 20\2006 Agenda Bill.doc I_r.W r_�� . ►I D DRAFT 3/6/7/06 March 7, 2006 Paul Kelley, Chair Sonoma County Water Agency Board of Directors 404 Aviation Blvd P.O. Box 11628 Santa Rosa, CA 95406 Subject: Water Advisory Committee Interests Dear Mr. Kelley: The Water Advisory Committee (WAC) collectively congratulates the Sonoma County Water Agency (Agency) staff and Board of Directors for obtaining the commitment of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to issue a biological opinion on current Russian River Project facilities and activities by December 2006. This NMFS commitment is a major milestone in the Section 7 consultation process related to protection, preservation and restoration of the salmonid fisheries in the Russian River. The WAC has been working with the Agency since 2002 on development of a Restructured Agreement for Water Supply, and we are hopeful thatthis agreement can be executed by all parties by June 30, 2006. The WAC recognizes that the Agency has many initiatives ongoing, and while the Agency may prioritize completion of the Restructured Agreement, we believe the highest priority at this time should be completion of the regional Urban Water Management Plan, which should have been completed by December 31, 2005. We urge the Agency to use its maximum resources to complete this plan at the earliest possible date so that it may be adopted by the Agency and each participating water contractor, required by the State to adopt such a plan, by June 30, 2006. With regard to the Agency's other initiatives, the WAC first recommends that the Water OPolicy Statement be updated and incorporate comments and suggestions from the WAC reflecting 3 the need for long-term, reliable water supply and deliveries from the Agency to the contractors. The current statement, developed in January 1991, was proposed for revision in March 2002, and the changes would have considerably broadened the 1991 version. However, the WAC's comments 5 were not solicited in 2002, and the 1991 Policy is still in effect. Second, the growing costs and lengthening time to perfect additional water deliveries from the Russian River Project is a matter of concern for the WAC and Agency. The WAC believes that the Agency, working in coordination with the WAC, should begin consideration of an alternative to delivery of additional Russian River Project water supply via a new conveyance system that would be separate from the River, and which may eliminate or diminish future impacts of Agency operations on the listed fisheries. We recognize that the cost of this option would be substantial, but believe the reliability benefits and the reduced fisheries impacts may outweigh the incremental cost. The WAC recommends that this alternative should be evaluated and fully considered along with the other alternatives in the Water Supply Transmission System and Reliability Project EIR which the Agency is now preparing. The WaterAdvisory Committee appreciates the Agency's full consideration of the above recommendations and asks that you respond to the WAC at our May 1, 2006 meeting. CDG:rr \lserveOAdmmislrellon\GM\SCWAL666\I(elly LIr-RBM rev 021306 doc C Sincerely, Miles Ferris, Chairman Water Advisory Committee