MWD Director Update for Fullerton Water Ratepayers

Thomas S. Babcock

Director to the Metropolitan Water District

Representing the City of Fullerton, California

August 1, 2013

To: Mayor Bruce Whitaker
Mayor Pro Tem Doug Chaffee
Council Member Greg Sebourn
Council Member Jennifer Fitzgerald
Council Member Jan Flory

Report on MWD Director activities

August 2013 Events:
• August 13, 2013 - MWD Meeting MWD HQ
• August 15, 2013 – OC Caucus meeting
• August 17, 2013 – MWD “Sustainability” Inspection Trip
• August 19, 20, 2013 – MWD Committee meetings and Board of Directors Meeting
• August 23, 2013 – Meeting with Jennifer Medina, Fullerton Engineering Dept
• August 26, 2013 – Meeting with California Avocado Commission Representatives
• August 27, 2013 – Other MWD Committee Meetings
• August 27, 2013 – Attend Mayor’s “Talk around town” to discuss MWD CRA trip in October

I have also included the August summary report of Board meetings.
Planned September 2013 Events:
• September 3, 2013 - MWD CRA Planning Meeting
• September 4, 2013 – MWDOC Joint Board Meeting
• September 5, 2013 – Orange County Caucus Meeting
• September 9, 10, 2013 – MWD Committee meetings and Board of Directors Meeting
• September 24, 2013 – Other MWD Committee Meetings

Summary Report for

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California

Board Meetings

August 20, 2013

PUBLIC HEARING
Held a public hearing on the standby charge levy supporting Annexation No. 97 to Calleguas Municipal Water District and Metropolitan.

INDUCTION OF NEW DIRECTOR
Director Michael T. Hogan, was inducted to the Board of Directors representing the San Diego County Water Authority. DEFERRED TO SEPTEMBER (Agenda Item 5C)

COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
None. (Agenda Item 5E)

TAX LEVY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/14
Received report on list of certified assessed valuations for fiscal year 2013/14 and tabulation of assessed valuations, percentage participation, and vote entitlement of member public agencies as of August 15, 2013. (Agenda Item 5G-1)

Adopted resolution maintaining the tax rate for fiscal year 2013/14. (Agenda Item 5G-2)

WATER PLANNING AND STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE
Adopted the CEQA determination that the project is categorically exempt and authorized the General Manager to enter into an agreement with the San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District consistent with the terms in Attachment 1 of the Board letter. REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR (Agenda Item 7-3)

AUDIT AND ETHICS COMMITTEE
Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed actions are not subject to CEQA and adopted the policy principles in Attachment 1 of the Board letter; adopted the investigations procedures in Attachment 2 of the Board letter; and authorized $245,000 increase to the Ethics Department fiscal year 2013/14 budget. (Agenda Item 8-1)

FINANCE AND INSURANCE COMMITTEE
Adopted the CEQA determination that the project is not subject to CEQA and authorized the General Manager, with approval of the General Counsel, to execute a contract with CERBT to administer and invest Metropolitan’s pre-funding of OPEB benefits. (Agenda Item 8-2)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is not subject to CEQA and authorized the General Manager to sign a nonbinding Memorandum of Understanding stating Metropolitan’s intention to pay its proportionate share of the Hoover Dam Visitors Center and the Hoover Dam Air Slots debt obligations, as approved by the General Manager and General Counsel; and authorized the General Manager to provide approximately $26 million of available cash funding from the Water Rate Stabilization Fund to repay Metropolitan’s proportionate share of the Hoover Dam Visitors Center and the Hoover Dam Air Slots debt obligations. The exact amount will be determined at the time of the repayment. (Agenda Item 8-5)

ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is categorically exempt and appropriated $19.3 million; and awarded $11.11 million contract to Southern Contracting Company to construct the Stage 2 electrical upgrades at the Diemer plant. (Approp. 15380) (Agenda Item 8-3)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action has been previously addressed in the certified EIR and that no further environmental analysis or documentation is required and appropriated $5.65 million; and awarded $3,801,758 million contract to J. F. Shea Construction, Inc. for seismic upgrades to the Weymouth filter buildings. (Approp. 15369) (Agenda Item 8-4)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the action is not subject to CEQA, and adopted a Board resolution authorizing the General Manager to apply for Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund financing for two projects, with separate applications for: (a) the Palos Verdes Reservoir floating cover replacement, and (b) enhanced bromate control, coagulation, and filter biomass control at the Weymouth plant. (Agenda Item 8-6)

COMMUNICATIONS AND LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is not subject to CEQA and is categorically
exempt and authorized the General Manager to express Metropolitan’s opposition to SB 731 unless
amended as described in the Board letter. (Agenda Item 8-7)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is not subject to CEQA and is categorically
exempt and authorized the General Manager to express Metropolitan’s opposition to AB 52 unless
amended as described in the Board letter. (Agenda Item 8-8)

CONSENT CALENDAR
In other action, the Board:
Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is categorically exempt and authorized the General Manager to grant a permanent easement to San Diego Gas and Electric Company in San Diego County. (Agenda Item 7-1)

Reviewed and considered information provided in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopted the Lead Agency’s findings related to the proposed actions and adopted resolution granting Calleguas’ request for approval of Annexation No. 97 concurrently to Calleguas and Metropolitan; established Metropolitan’s terms and conditions for the annexation in Attachment 2 of the Board letter, conditioned upon approval by Ventura Local Agency Formation Commission, and upon receipt of annexation fee of $8,149.28; and adopted resolution to impose water standby charge at a rate of $9.58 per acre, or per parcel of less than one acre, within the proposed annexation area in Attachment 3 of the Board letter. (Agenda Item 7-2)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is categorically exempt and appropriated $610,000; authorized final design to replace the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning equipment system at Metropolitan’s Water Quality Laboratory; and authorized procurement and installation of a new chiller unit. (Approp. 15391) (Agenda Item 7-4)

Adopted the CEQA determinations that the proposed action is categorically exempt and appropriated $350,000; authorized installation of pavement at Temescal Power Plant; and authorized preliminary design of pavement repairs at the Skinner area facilities. (Approp. 15441) (Agenda Item 7-5)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is categorically exempt and appropriated $175,000; authorized preliminary design to upgrade the surge tank system at the OC-88 Pumping Plant; and authorized preliminary design to replace a sectionalizing valve on the Santiago Lateral. (Approp. 15441) (Agenda Item 7-6)

Adopted the CEQA determination that the proposed action is not subject to CEQA and authorized agreements with AECOM, Black & Veatch, HDR Engineering, and MWH Americas, in an amount not to exceed $2 million per year each for a maximum period of five years, to provide engineering services. (Agenda Item 7-7)

OTHER MATTERS
Director Larry Dick, representing the Municipal Water District of Orange County received a 10-year
service pin. (Agenda Item 5D)

THIS INFORMATION SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED THE OFFICIAL MINUTES OF THE MEETING.

Board letters related to the items in this summary are generally posted in the Board Letter Archive
approximately one week after the board meeting. In order to view them and their attachments, please
copy and paste the following into your browser http://edmsidm.mwdh2o.com/idmweb/home.asp

Join me - Rolling Hills School Carnival August 23, 5 to 8PM!

Save a Pet's Life - This Saturday in Fullerton

Happy Father's Day Dad

Happy Father's Day to my dad!




"‘Cause I’ve been watching you, dad ain’t that cool?
I’m your buckaroo, I want to be like you.
And eat all my food and grow as tall as you are.
By then I’ll be strong as superman
We’ll be just alike, hey, won’t we dad
When I can do everything you do.
‘cause I’ve been watchin’ you."

MWD Holds On To Surplus Revenue

A message from MWD Director Thomas S. Babcock for the City of Fullerton:

The discussion today with a 3 hour Board of Directors board meeting (usually it has not gone over 1/2 hour). The Board majority approved the distribution of the $75M excess surplus after restoring the reserves to be distributed equally into 3 areas; repair and maintenance (PAYGO); OPEB ($575M underfunded retiree health benefits) and a water transfer fund to allow a restricted fund to purchase water as needed should MET need to purchase water to restore reserves as necessary.An alternative option to this distribution was to refund to the agencies $28M allocated on water purchases to reduce the budgeted 5% increase for 2014 to 3%. With the selection of "Option 1", this option was not considered.  However, a separate motion was made which I seconded to refund the 28% while agreeing to fund the 3 areas in Option 1.  While there were votes for this motion, it failed 75% to 25% based on the agencies assessed value weighted distribution voting. Had this passed, Fullerton would have received a refund of 2014 water purchases for approximately $150,000.It is generally believed that with the current drought condition, MET will sell more water than budgeted for in the 2014 budget and again have a surplus of funds this time next year when the 2015/2016 two year budget is considered.  With the financial reserves at their maximums, I am reasonably sure we will have this agency refund discussion again next year.Another item that was approved was a "freeze" in the ad valorem property tax rate for one year at the .0035% in an effort to stabilize the fixed portion of agency revenues. This is allowed under the Administrative code of the Metropolitan Act.  The current rate represents  a tax of approximately $10.50 for a $300,000 property. The tax would have dropped approximately $0.60 for the same $300,000 had this action not been taken and will result in a $4M increase in Metropolitan's fixed income sources.We had quite a few speakers addressing these 2 items for and against during today's meeting.  There was also a rather lively discussion among Directors.I felt these items were important enough to provide a summary in addition to my report which I will provide at the end of the month. Thomas S. BabcockDirector to the Metropolitan Water Districtfor the City of Fullerton

Guest Editorial

by Sean Paden

As you know, the County of Orange wants to build an emergency shelter in Fullerton. This shelter will be next door to hundreds of apartments and single family homes, an elementary school, and near a junior high school and public park – all of which are considered “sensitive uses” under Fullerton’s own municipal code ordinance you just past two weeks ago and therefore not one of the 61 locations suitable for a shelter in Fullerton.

The County purchased the property after giving notice only to Santa Ana residents – not Fullerton ones – of its intent and, since the purchase, have this City that they can open this shelter where they want with or without our consent.

The County also claims that, once they get what they want, they will institute a “good neighbor” policy with the City, which begs the question – does the County even know what a good neighbor is?

Judging by their actions, the county seems to believe that the best way to notify neighbors of a party you’re throwing is to let them hear the noise when they’re trying to sleep at 11 pm on a Tuesday.

The County seems to think that if you want to use your neighbor’s lawnmower, a good neighbor just goes up to him and says “I’m bigger than you, I’m stronger than you, I can take this anytime I want but if you give it to me I’ll let you borrow it when you need it.”

And the County seems to think that if you damage your neighbors property while trimming trees or playing baseball, a “good neighbor” simply gives a referral to a contractor to repair the damage but doesn’t pay the cost for the repair themselves.

If the County really wanted to show they were good neighbors they would have acted like ones from the minute they decided they wanted to build a shelter in Fullerton. They would have worked with the City and attempted to locate a property in compliance with the City’s own zoning laws. They would have notified residents OF Fullerton of their attempt to buy property IN Fullerton. They would have agreed – in writing – to pay out of their own pocket the cost of mitigation for neighboring properties that may be adversely affected by the shelter.

Instead they have done the exact opposite. And keep in mind – this is how the County acts BEFORE they get what they want. As anybody who has ever entered into a bad business arrangement before can attest, nobody is ever more charming than they are when they want you to sign on the dotted line. Once that agreement is entered into the County’s bullying will only get worse.

We’ve heard the County can force us to build this shelter here and there’s nothing we can do to stop it. I still am not convinced this is the case since the County’s own escrow instructions say the sale cannot be finalized until the City changes its zoning laws to allow the shelter at this location.

But EVEN IF THE COUNTY COULD FORCE THIS DOWN ARE THROATS we are better off not signing off on it. This MJA will create additional liability for the City – if anyone gets hurt at the facility or as a result of the facility and chooses, the operators of the facility will be named as defendants. And if we sign the MJA WE will be co-operators of the facility. I don’t know about you, but I think Fullerton has already flushed more than enough money down the drain on litigation costs in the last few years. If we sign the agreement we will be responsible for a portion of the cost of operating this facility – a facility we didn’t want in this location in the first place. And if we sign the agreement we will NOT receive full credit under state law for all of the beds in this location. I keep hearing staff argue that the Multi-Jurisdictional Agreement offers some measure of cooperation with the County, but given that the County’s definition of “cooperation“ is “do what I say” we are clearly better off telling the County “no thanks.” On Tuesday, June 18, we hope you will do exactly that. Thank you.

**********************

The views expressed in the above editorial are those of the author, Mr. Paden.

Pet Health Expo - June 22 - Fullerton Community Center

NO MORE RUBBER STAMPS

Today I received the following email that deserves about a moment of  scrutiny:

Dear Fullerton Mentally Ill Homeless Task Force and FriendsLast night the Fullerton City Council met until the bars closed this morning to deliberate the Multi-Service Year-Round Homeless Shelter being proposed by the County, under the leadership of Supervisor Shawn Nelson, for 301 S. St College Blvd. , Fullerton . 

Passion ran high in the packed chambers where a mixed group of opponents and proponents listened for hours and gave testimony for even more hours. 

Councilmembers Sebourn and Mayor Whittaker seemed determined to prevent the Multi-Jurisdictional Agreement (MJA) language from being added to the State required SB 2 Zoning designation.  This zoning is required by the State to make sure that all cities take some responsibility for their homeless residents.  

Councilmembers Flory, Fitzgerald and Chaffee prevailed with the logic that the County can open a shelter there without permission of the City, and the MJA gives the City the best tool for having a voice in how such a shelter is run. The Second vote of the night was going to be over approval of a draft MJA that included specific responses to the concerns raised by the school and neighbors.  After hours of testimony this item was tabled to accommodate additional specificity requested by Councilmember Chaffee and the City Council to the concerns expressed.  Fullerton staff did a great job putting together a comprehensive presentation, that a number of us participated in, to explain where we are, and how we got here. The final meeting to approve this MJA between the County and City will occur on Tuesday, June 18. 

By that time hopefully the school’s concerns can be more completely answered, and the other concerns expressed can be more comprehensively addressed. 

The challenge for the County laid out by Karen Roper at 1:30am to the City Council, is how to get specific answers to questions that were intended for the non-profit provider to determine in a “design and build” phase, BEFORE the Request for Proposals is sent out.  (since the County wanted to wait to issue the RFP until after they acquired the property.)  SO there are additional steps that will have to be taken to bring this all home.  Hopefully, they are surmountable!! A special thanks to so many of you who attended last night’s meeting, and others who could not be there but wrote letters to the City Council supporting the shelter. 

Sincerelyrusty 

Rusty Kennedy, Executive Director  

OC Human Relations

1300 S. Grand, Bldg BSanta Ana, CA 92705 

714-567-7470fax 714-567-7474 

www.ochumanrelations.org

Rusty Kennedy believes that the multi-jurisdictional agreement (MJA) is a REQUIREMENT under Senate Bill 2 (SB2).  However, the City's attorney, Jeff Goldfarb of Rutan & Tucker, repeatedly made it clear that the MJA was not REQUIRED (shall) but that it was permissible (may) under SB2.  So, while zoning constraints must be identified and codified for shelters, multi-jurisdictional agreements do not need to be codified in the City's municipal code with an ordinance.  It was also made clear by the City's attorney and city staff that the County did not need the MJA in order to proceed with their plans for a shelter anywhere in any city.

Further, since the County can build a shelter anyplace they wish, how much leverage does a city actually have when negotiating the terms of a MJA?  NONE.  So why waste the ink giving the perception that there is a negotiated agreement when in fact there is not?  FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY.

The MJA was a pre-packaged document created without any input from the Fullerton City Council and designed to make residents feel as if the City had a voice or some control over the project.  

NO MORE RUBBER STAMPS.

Free Math Tutoring at Fullerton Library

Free Math Tutoring in Fullerton

PRESS RELEASE - Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan

PRESS RELEASE

City of Fullerton

April 23, 2013

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

City of Fullerton to extend deadline to recruit volunteers for The Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan Advisory Committee (DPAC)

Fullerton, CA  - On April 23, 2013, The City of Fullerton Planning Department announced that it will continue to accept applications for the Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan Advisory Committee (DPAC) until Friday, April 26, 2013.  Although the City has received several applications from well qualified candidates, the goal is to have representation from all of the eight “neighborhoods” represented on the project plan as well as members from the business community, the Korean community, the Latino community, a senior community member and a youth/young adult representative.  To ensure the community has had ample time to review the application and respond, the deadline is being extended until the end of the week. 

The Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan is an planning effort intended to guide the future vision for the Downtown Core and Corridors areas and ensure our downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods are thriving and sustainable. To assist with this effort, a committee representing the multiple interests of the study area will be appointed to provide input and guidance throughout the work program. The “Advisory Committee” will be responsible for reviewing information, providing feedback on topics, recommending priorities, soliciting the participation of the community at large and working to represent specific interests of the community. To ensure  the Advisory Committee includes a balance of perspectives and interests, the group is intended to be composed of the following cross-section of the community:

• West Commonwealth – 2 members

• East Corridor – 2 members

• University Neighborhood – 2 members

• Orangethorpe/Magnolia Neighborhood – 2 members

• Brea/Harbor Neighborhood – 2 members

• Downtown Core – 2 members

• Orangethorpe/Euclid – 2 members

• Orangethorpe/Brookhurst – 2 member

• Orangethorpe/Harbor – 2 members

• Community Serving Partner Organizations (e.g., Faith based, St. Jude, etc.)– 1    member

• Korean Community Partner – 1 member

• Latino Community Partner – 1 member

• Development Community – 1 member

• Broker/Realtor – 1 member

• Business Community – up to 3 members

• Historic Preservation – 1 member

• Parent Teacher’s Association (PTA) or Elementary/Middle School – 1 member

• Youth Community Partner – 1 member

• Senior Community Partner – 1 member

• Non-Profit Community Based Organizations (Fullerton Beautiful, NUFF, etc.) – 1 member

The study will involve the active participation of City Staff, a team of consultants, the public at large, and the City Council. The Advisory Committee will play a key role in providing insight and guidance during the Specific Plan process. Please be aware that selected Advisory Committee members will not receive any financial compensation for their service. The first meeting is planned for Thursday, May 9 at 6:30 pm. The Committee members will need to attend approximately eight (8) evening meetings during an eighteen (18) month period. It will be important that each Advisory Committee member attend all meetings throughout the process. If you are interested in being considered for the Advisory Committee position, based on the information above, please complete the application form, available on the City’s website www.ci.fullerton.ca.us or by visiting www.fullertonplanningforum.com, and submit to Heather Allen, Planning Manager at HeatherA@ci.fullerton.ca.us, by April 26, 2013.

####

My Refuge House Golf Tournament - March 28

Please support 

My Refuge House 

March 28th 

Golf Tournament 

at Coyote Hills Golf Course.

Year-Round Emergency Shelter and Multi-Service Center Update

(the following is from the City of Fullerton website: http://www.cityoffullerton.com/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=1553)

Latest Update:

A Community Meeting regarding the Emergency Shelter and Multi-Service Center is scheduled for Monday, March 11, 2013 at 6:30 pm at the Fullerton Main Public Library located at 353 W. Commonwealth Ave. in Fullerton. 

Background:

At their regularly scheduled meeting on January 15, 2013, of the Orange County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to approve a purchase and sale agreement, in the amount of $3,150,000, for the purchase of property at 301 South State College Boulevard in Fullerton for a year-round emergency shelter and multi-service center for at-risk and homeless families and individuals in Orange County.

The action by the Orange County Board of Supervisors is part of the County’s approved “Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness” which includes goals and implementing strategies to effectively end homelessness in Orange County. Plan goals and implementing strategies include but are not limited to:

• Improve the emergency shelter and access system.
• Develop year-round permanent emergency shelters to replace the seasonal Armory Emergency Shelter Program.

The County will make a presentation before the Fullerton City Council on February 19, 2013. The County is also making arrangements to hold a public meeting to discuss this project.  That meeting date will be announced as soon as it is confirmed.

In advance of upcoming presentations, meetings, and the development of a management plan, the following provides some preliminary details about the proposed Shelter and Multi-Service Center:

• The Shelter will be owned by the County of Orange and operated by a nonprofit contractor. The nonprofit contractor will be contractually required to operate the facility in compliance with the County’s good neighbor policy which requires collaboration with the City of Fullerton, residents, businesses, and other stakeholders regarding shelter operation and provision of services.
• The facility will be designed to provide emergency shelter for homeless individuals and their families. It will also provide a wide variety of multi-disciplinary services designed to successfully transition clients from homelessness to permanent housing.
• In addition to assisting those who are already homeless, the multi-service center will provide homeless prevention services and support to assist homeless families and individuals that are at-risk of losing their housing due to unforeseen circumstances.
• The proposed shelter and multi-service center will replace the existing shelter at Brookhurst and Valencia which has approximately 200 beds. Design features, including the number of beds, types of services, requirements for services, and collaborative partners will be determined at a future date through the County’s contractor selection process.
• The facility will be staffed by the contracted operator 24 hours a day / 7 days a week. 

The facility will have 24 hour a day / 7 day a week security.  Security plans will be coordinated with the Fullerton Police Department and the County of Orange. 

• The facility will be managed by the contracted operator in collaboration with various collaborative partners including but not limited to, multiple County Agencies, other nonprofit service providers, and local churches to coordinate services offered to the homeless and at-risk community.

For more information on the County’s proposal:http://cams.ocgov.com/Web_Publisher_Sam/Agenda01_15_2013_files/images/A13-000002.HTM

For agenda and minutes of the January 15, 2013, Orange County Board of Supervisors meeting:
http://cams.ocgov.com/Web_Publisher_Sam/Sam01_15_2013.htm 

Homepage for the Orange County Board of Supervisors: http://media.ocgov.com/gov/bos/default.asp

Updated: February 19, 2013

Value or Cost - Fullerton Water Rates

Last night's Fullerton City Council meeting brought forth much discussion on the subject of water rates.

The issue which generated the greatest debate was "cost of service" and how "costs" should be determined.  

I argued that the actual "costs" were already known, accounted for, and collected by the City as those costs are indicated on this pie chart from the City. (click image to see)

The chart identifies the "expenses" of operating and maintaining the water system which were budgeted for FY2011.  Let's keep in mind that the reason the Franchise Fee was put in place was to help pay for administrative costs of the City Administrator, City Clerk, and City Attorney.  

As you can see, "Other Expenses" and "Administrative Services" appears to cover those expenses.  Therefore, the Franchise Fee was a double dip into the Water Fund and the "costs" were already accounted for.  

What was presented by staff and agreed to by some members of the Council is the "value" of the water service.  This was best represented by lease-back option that was floated by staff.  The lease-back would have required that water rate payers pay a fee for leasing the property on which the reservoirs were built.  It is the left hand charging the right hand for the honor and convenience of being connected to the same body.  It is predicated on a single word: IF.  IF the water system had to rent the land...  That same logic could be applied to ALL of our city services with dangerous consequences.

How long will it be before this is brought back to Council so that the left hand can take another swipe at the right?  

Community Meeting January 24th

I hope I see you there!

Happy New Year!

A new day brings us the New Year and with it renewed hope.