HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01/10/2000_. January 1"0, 2Q00" Vol. 34, Page 181
1 City of Petaluma, California
2 .~. ~; Mnutes~.of' a Special: b~.
3 City~CounciF and
4 Sonoma County. Water Agency
5 Joinf`W.or~kshop
6
7 IVlonday, January 1~0, 20.00:
8 Petaluma Community Center
9
10
11 The City Council met on this date at 7:10 p.m. at the Petaluma Community Center;
12 320 North McDowell Boulevard in rooms A - D.
13
14 ROLL CALL
15
16 Present: Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Healy, Keller, Maguire, Thompson, Torliatt
17
18 Absent: .None
19
20 PUBLIC COMMENTS
21
22 Geoff Cartwright, 56 .Rocca Drive, spoke .regarding the history of flooding in
23 Petaluma.
24
25 Beth Meredith, -104 - 5th Street, spoke regarding City Council-Agendas posted at the
26 City's website.
27
28 •` COUNCIL COMMENTS
29
30 Council Member Keller spoke regarding ,the Sonoma County Transportation
31 Agency's (SCTA) recent meeting and reported that SCTA had a split vote., five o
32 five with one abstention regarding; its position,.on the upcoming Measures B and C
33 to be placed on the ballot. 'There was no formal stance on these Measures by
34 .SCTA. ~ -_
35
36 :-~• AGEIVbA CHANGES, DELETIO~lS, ADDITIONS
37
38 .None
39
40 IVEW BUSINESS
41
42 1. Joint City Council/Sonoma County ~ Water Agency (SCWA) Workshop on
43 Regional Watershed and Basin . Planning and, Setting . Fufure Agendas for
44 Other Regional V1/ater~lssaes.
45 ~ ` .
Vol. 34, Page 182
January 10, 2000
1 Supervisor Mike Kern provided background °information on the: agency and, indicated
2 that the Sonoma County` Board ~of Supervisors' served as Commissioners for the
3 SC1NA. He introduced'the'following members present;from the SCUVA:
4 ..
~_ ~:~
5 Division Manager of Environmental Resources and ;Public Affairs Renee Weber;
.,,
6
7 General. Manager Randy Poole; _
8
9 Principal Engineer Pamela Jeane;
10
11 Public: Information Officer Shannon Vllilson;
12
13 Ellen Dowling, Lynne Hulme, Ally Davidson, and Lee Kingsbury.
14
15 Sonoma County 1Nater Agency Principal E'ngnee.r Pame a Jeane .began the
16 presentation :by providing' a status .update of activities of SCWA that: have a
17 benefit%impact on Petaluma.
18
19 Watershed Activities that, Ms. Jeane addressed included background,. status,. and
20 the future role of the Northbay Watershed ,Association; the Northbay Dischargers
21 Association, and a review of California's, Toxic::Rule requirements. Funding projects
22 reviewed included, the San Pablo _Bay Project (.US Army Corps of Engineers), he
23 Napa Salt Marsh', and :general ,restoration p,rojects`in, Petaluma, She mentioned: the
24 Pacific Coast- .Salmon:. Conservation and Restoration Lnitiative and provided
25 information about the State 1Nater Band and Parks Bond.
27° Relative to flood control funding; -she .indicated funding of Petaluma .Flood Control
28 Projects from Subvention 'Funds -for the Trapezoidal Channel; the U-shaped'
29 Channel; and the Payran Street. Bridge..
30 ~ "
31 Ms. Jeane continued: by addressing Point/.Non-Point" Source Pollution relative to an
32 urban baseline program; and,the opportunity for a,~oint.National Pollutant Discharge
33 Elimination System (NPEDS) permit: She provided information on water aupply
=34 issues, such as the 'impairment process and 'the Petaluma Aqueduct del_i~ery
35 problems, recycled wate'r• and ;urban reuse and the technology process for
36 commercial and industrial. entities. 'She noted that, Senafe Bill 709, the. Caean 1Nater
37 Enforcement and .Pollu;tion~ ~Pre~ention Aet of 1999!, required pollution, prevention
38 plans., and had mandatory fines': She finished by summarizing Resolutions 99-0$68
39 approved on .June 29,,, 199.9`. The Resolution,. included eleven items of direction
40 relative to an immediate potential- _for peak=day' water supply shortages "and
41 addressed potential significant delays ,in construction ;of additional water supply
42 facilities.
43 .'
44 SCWA Division Manager Renee Weber talked about: Indiast_rial V1Late}r Efficiency
45 Programs. She recognized Mishi Apparel, Inc:... as the first case-study in Petaluma;
46 for a water reduction rate of forty--six'. percent (:46%,)„ and' Sola Optical USA, Lnc.« for
January 10, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 183
1 development of cost ~ef~fective water savings strategies. She identified benefits of a
2 Nationwide Demoristratio_ n Program than included water conservation, reductions in
3 water pollution, energy=savings, ,.general community and economic development,
4 local job creation and retention.,.an;d infrastructure improvement.
5
6 Ms. Weber introduced: the Clean Water Innovation and Technology Transfer Act of
7 2000 that aimed at''providing financial, incentives and assistance to publicly owned
8 treatment works. ~ S_he ..noted that common areas of concern included pollution
9 prevention, regulatory;:1 compliance, water supply and water reuse, water
10 conservation, habitat. restoration, 'flood control, pubic education and outreach, and
11 limited local re"sources.
12 9` .•- a
13 Ms. _Weber concluded he Agency's pre'sertation with a summary and request for
14 action by Petaluma to: _„
15
16 • Participate in the Northbay V1latersh~ed Management .Association by designating
17 one Council member as liaison.
18
19 Requested support ,for urban reuse programs, begin discussion for joint NPDES
20 Agreement.
21 ..~ ~ .,
..
22 • Request. support foc creating a' nationwide .demonstration program to promote
23 voluntary actions by commercial and 'industrial entities to increase water
24 conservation, reduce water discharge, and improve the quality of wastewater
25 requiring treatment. at;a publicly owned treatment works.
26
27 PUBLIC COMMENTS
28
29 Geoff Cartwright,..5.6 Rocca Drive:, spoke regarding, storm water and flood control
30 and provided statistics relative to water shortages:
31
32 Richard Brawn, 141 Grevillia Drive, spoke regarding' the quality of life, water issues
33 today and in :the future., and asked if' the City's growth was limited by its water
34 supply.
35
36 Terence Garvey;: 83 Maria Drive, spoke regarding xeriscape practices and thought
37 the City and the County should have a reservoir or ponds.
38
39 COUNCIL COMMENTS
40
41 Council Member Keller remarked that he saw policies and procedures focused on
42 short-term results and did not see significant efforts to reduce the overall demand. of
43 water resources. -
44
Uol. 34, Page 184 January T0, 2000
General. Manager and Chief Engineer Randy P.oofe replied that conservation was
an ethic; there was arecycle-water plan and. .inclining ,tier "block rates locally. He
asked- Council Member Keller for clarification about :effort."
. .,
... ;
Council Member Maguire .asked how water was measured.
Mr: Poole replied that: three. hundred., twenty-six ahousand (326,OOb) gallons was
equal. to one acre foot. ~ `
..r ..
Council, Member Ma uire asked how man. allons of`water cou d 6e saved..
g : 'Y9
Mr: Poole replied. between ten (10) to. ~twelVe (1~2) million _gall'ons per day on. a
regional basis,. 'He explained that. it was,regonal effort.
' ..4
Council Member Keller asked for an accounting. of the yield' M`r Foole had
.referenced. He wanted to: know if ,Lthere existed a long-.term. solution. #or the
County's water resources concerns. ~` "~; ~ . " ~ -
Mr. Poole replied that SC1NA continued ~to :encourage cutbacks.
Council Member Keller emphasized: the corporate customers using less `water used
fewer chemicals as well. ,He was in support of. legislative changes and asked Mr.
Poole to present a proposal.. He addressed =Aquifer and' the need to develop. an
Aquifer Management Pfau: "~
Mr. Poole questioned prioritization..
Council Member'Torliatt stated the Agency decided the priorities.
Mr. Poole clarified that it was a Commission decision.
Mayor Thompson.had; questions about the availability of'funds:
Council Member Caller-Thompson stressed the need for overall county planning.
and.. cities working together:
Mr. Poole added that NJarin aril Mendocino Counties needed to be included. There
were questions on how to make sure there was'adequafe allocation.
Council Member Maguire asked `whaf Petaluma peak daily usage was arid. whether`
the City had gone offer its limits. He asked what independent water supplies added;
if anything:
Mr.; Poole, stating it was complicated, noted the shortage provision of the contract'
and that recycled water did not count.
January T0, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 1'85
1 Council Member Maguireasked where the net benefit was and for an .update on the
2 Water Mitigation litigation.
3
4 Mr. Poole indicafed an action was filed::in January of 1999 and provided background
5 information, concluding that he was not~sure how the courts would rule.
6
7 Council Member Maguire what would. results would the City achieve by joining the
8 Northbay Watershed Association..
9
10 Mr. Poole replied the impact was assistance with funding from the federal and state
11 governments.
12
13 Council Member Maguire concluded there might be more money than there was
14 water.
15
16 Council Member Healy asked if current litigation held up Collector Six.
17 -
18 Mr. Poole replied that Collector Six was exempt. Collector Six was on hold because
19 of environmental .hazards to the fish. He then noted impairment as an~ issue relative
20 to the parallel pipeline.
21 _
22 Council Member .Healy asked -about the `time constraint for capacity restraints.
23
24 Mr. Poole replied that it was three to four years. ~ - ~ -
25
26 Council Member Healy referred to rate designs, in particularly tier=based rates, and
27 inquired how Rohnert Park could be convinced to initiate water metering.
28
29 Mr. Poole suggested the .development. of a Memorandum of Understanding with
30 various programs to encourage savings, review allocations, and rate paid. _
31
32 Council Member Hamilton asked how to receive more funding for a more
33 aggressive water program. --
34 _ .., _
35 .Mr.. Poole ,suggested crate increase.
36 -
37 Council Member Hamilton clarified-that SCWA could not help.. ~. ~~
38
39 Mr. Poole confirmed that they could not help.
40
41 Council Member Hamilton noticed SCV1lA's billboard on U.S. Hwy 101 and asked
42 why the agency was advertising.
43
44 Mr. Poole explained that the goal was to help restore fisheries.
45
46 Council Member Hamilton queried if the ad built awareness.
Vol. 34, Page 186
January 10, 2000
1
2 Mr, Poole replied that it did and 'added education as a benefit.
3
4 Council ..Member ,Hamilton wanted. to. know! in; conjunction with SB~ 7, 09, if the Joint
5 Power's Authority's {J PA) purpose. was t'o lobby for milder fines.
6
7 Mr. Poole responded that the JRA was advocating getting funds back to Region.
8
9 Council Member Hamilton stated she was in favor of tying water' supply .issues to
10 development..
11
12 Mayor'Thompson :asked what. the percentage was ofi residential use to commmercial
13 use.. -.
14 ~ ,; '
15 Director of Water Resources and. Conservation Tom .Hargis responded that the
16 ~ sewer indicated eighty .percent ..residential use and'twenty percent commercial use.
17 ~ He offered, to create a record based on utility billings.
18
19 Council,; ..Member Keller asked for `information to better understand the. allocation
20 methodology.
21
22 Mr. Poole; explained that for ten years,, Retalu_rna's allotment that was not~.used was
23 given to. North Maria 1Nater District, who' in turn gave to Rohnert Park what they did
24 not use,.
25 ~ .
26 -. Council .Member Keller expressed concexn about Petalurna`s entitlement..
27 ~ -
28 Mr. Poole responded that the problem was clouded title.
29
30 Council Member Keller stated that Rohnert` Park was not metered an'd the City paid
31 for development cost.
32
33 Mr. Poole replied that. all cities get together to' discuss this type of issue.
34
35~ ` Council Member Torliatt had questions about the capacity of the watershed, the
36 current supply, and 'indicated. her- desire for the water agency to move faster with
37 their improvement programs. She thought it was critical to ,have informatioon about
38 the water supply in order to make knowledgeable, decisions about, housing and
39 development plans for the community. She requested'. a copy of` the staff report
4,0 from the SCINA meeting of June 25, 1999.
41
42 Mr. Poole :replied it was key fore cities to~ work'with one another.; it wasn't a matter of
43 how much water th°ere was in the watershed.
44
45 Council Member Maguire- concurred with Council Member, Torliatt andstated he
46 preferred knowing sooner what Petaluma's capacity was. He encouraged SCWA to
January 10, 2000
Vol. 34, Page 187
1 educate the public and take strides in reducing the capacity now rather than taking
2 water from the river.- Conservation was the .least expensive direction for the
3 community to take. He asked. that the Phase I impairment be better defined so the
4 Council could make better decisions.
5
6 Discussion ensued about concerns for the South County's watershed, impact of
7 growth and development, participation and authority of a watershed association and
8 the need for more background information regarding regional water rights,
9 reclamation programs,. and conservation.
10
11 Beth Meredith 104 -Fifth Street spoke in favor of establishing conservation goals
12 rather than spending resources for the lack of conservation such as restoration and
13 reuse.
14
15 Council summarized their requests and concerns as:
16
17 Regional focus of the impact of growth and development;
18 • Sustainability and conservation .legislation.;
19 • Commencement.'of a ;groundwater study as soon as possible; and
20 • Development of new, substantive water conservation goals.
21
22
23
24 The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 ATTEST:
34
35 /1 ~ D
6
Beverly J. Kline, City Cler
3
39
40
41
******
ADJOURN
E. Clark Thompson, Mayor