HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11122013 - C.67RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT the recommendation of the Mental Health Director to adopt the draft Fiscal Year 2013-2014 Mental Health
Services Act (Proposition 63) Plan Update.
AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign the County Compliance Certificate as required by the
State of California.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adoption of the FY 2013-2014 MHSA Plan Update assures continued MHSA funding for FY 2013/2014 in the
amount of $56,800,981.
BACKGROUND:
Proposition 63 was passed by California voters in the November 2004 election. Now known as the Mental Health
Services Act (MHSA), the legislation provides public mental health systems by imposing an additional one percent
tax on individual, but not corporate, taxable income in excess of one million dollars. There are a total of six MHSA
components which have been rolled out over time by the State Department of Mental Health with the goal of creating
a better program
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 11/12/2013 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Steven Grolnic-Mclurg,
957-5115
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: November 12, 2013
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Jeromy Callado, C Rucker, T Scott
C. 67
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:November 12, 2013
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Mental Health Services Act (Proposition 63): Annual Plan for Fiscal Year 2013/14
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
of mental health services and supports in California’s public mental health systems. The six components include:
Community Services and Support; Prevention and Early Intervention; Workforce Education and Training; Capital
Facilities and Technology Needs; and Innovation. There are multiple programs operated within each component.
This is a state mandated program under Welfare & Institutions Code.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speaker: Mariana Moore, Human Services of Contra Costa.
ATTACHMENTS
Program Plan
County Cert 11-6-13
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACKNOWLEDGE the limited funding in Flood Control Zone 7 (Wildcat Creek);
SUPPORT the Chief Engineer’s approach to continue participation with the Corps of Engineers on the Wildcat Creek
Section 1135 project planning as long as possible without a cash contribution to the Corps;
DIRECT the Chief Engineer, Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District to continue project
participation under certain conditions; and
AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign the attached letter to the Assistant Secretary of the Army,
North Richmond area. (100% Flood Control Zone 7 funds)
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 11/12/2013 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Paul Detjens (925)
313-2394
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: November 12, 2013
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: David Twa, County Administrator, Lara DeLaney, County Administrator's Office, Mike Carlson, Flood Control, Paul Detjens, Flood Control, Catherine
Windham, Flood Control, Paul Schlesinger, Alcalde and Fay
C. 11
To:Contra Costa County Flood Control District Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:November 12, 2013
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Support continued participation with US Army Corps of Engineers on the Wildcat Creek Section 1135 Project, North
Richmond area. Project #7527-6F8619
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact throughout the design and construction phases is estimated to be approximately $200,000,
funded by Flood Control Zone 7. The anticipated local match for the $5,000,000 federal project is approximately
$1,500,000, which is expected to be covered by future grant proceeds.
BACKGROUND:
This is a time-critical item and would normally go before the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
(TWIC). With the cancellation of the November 7, 2013, TWIC meeting, this item is proceeding directly to the
full Board for consideration.
Original Corps Project
In the late 1980s, the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water
Conservation District (Flood Control District), and many local stakeholders worked together to develop plans for
a flood risk reduction project on Wildcat and San Pablo Creeks in North Richmond. With extensive stakeholder
input, the Corps developed a comprehensive plan that reduced flood risk, improved the environment, and
provided recreation to the local community. Unfortunately, this plan was costly and there weren’t enough benefits
to be financially justified by the Corps. Raising the needed funds for the federal project’s local match was
especially difficult in these watersheds, because the ad valorem tax rate had been frozen in the aftermath of
Proposition 13 at a level that did not support the type of project desired by the stakeholders.
In response, the Flood Control District offered a lower cost and much more austere plan that reduced flood risk
but did not substantially provide the other desired amenities. This plan was not well received by stakeholders. To
resolve disagreements in the project design, the Corps, Flood Control District, and stakeholders formed the
Wildcat San Pablo Creeks Design Team, which eventually evolved into the Wildcat San Pablo Creeks Watershed
Council. This group worked on a compromise plan, which was eventually implemented by the Corps in the early
1990s. The resulting project has become a nationwide model for innovative, geomorphic design and features
much more vegetation and habitat than is found in a typical flood control facility.
On Wildcat Creek, some problems with the project arose soon after construction. Wildcat Creek has a very large
sediment load, which makes constructing a stable, sustainable channel very challenging. The fish ladder on
Wildcat Creek tended to fill up quickly with sediment and debris, and even with extraordinary maintenance
efforts, did not allow steelhead to successfully pass upstream. The sediment basin constructed with the project also
was undersized and filled up much more quickly than originally assumed in the design of the project.
Funding a Fix
In 1998, in response to these and other issues, the Corps of Engineers offered participation in their “Section 1135”
Ecosystem Restoration program for Wildcat Creek. This program offered an avenue to further improve habitat in
Wildcat Creek, and also to resolve many problematic features of the original design.
At the request of the Watershed Council, the Flood Control District indicated to the Corps interest in participating
and serving as the nonfederal sponsor for the project. As per the terms of the Corps’ nationwide 1135 program,
there was no upfront local match required to begin the planning effort. At the conclusion of the Corps’ planning
process, the nonfederal sponsor would receive the proposed design concept and, at that time, decide whether to
abandon the partnership (with no financial responsibility or hard feelings) or to pay back the local share of the
planning costs and proceed forward with detailed design and ultimately to project construction.
The Flood Control District agreed to be the sponsor of the 1135 project with the explicit understanding that it
would participate with staff time and expertise, but that local match would need to come from community
stakeholders, such as the Watershed Council. The expectation was once the Corps planning was completed, the
Watershed Council could use the Corps’ design concept to seek grant funding, which would pay the local cost of
the Corps’ planning process and also cover the local match moving forward.
Corps Section 1135 Project
Between 1999 and 2003, the Corps made great progress on identifying problems and developing conceptual
solutions under their Section 1135 program. The Watershed Council had identified $1,000,000 in state funding
that would cover the local match. At this point, all indications were that the project would come to a successful
conclusion.
In 2004, in the middle of the Corps’ planning work on Wildcat Creek, the Corps instituted a nationwide freeze on
the 1135 program. This pause ended up lasting six years until funding was partially restored in 2010.
It was becoming clear to watershed stakeholders, including the Flood Control District, that some of the more
serious issues on Wildcat Creek could not wait until the completion of the Section 1135 process. One such issue
was the realignment of the low flow channel which had, in the course of one winter season, filled with sediment
and shifted away from the trees and shade that bordered it. The low flow channel was intended to provide good
passage and habitat for fish, but had quickly evolved into something that provided neither.
Early Implementation
As part of their preliminary planning, the Corps had identified solutions for this exact issue. However, the Corps
was not able to implement any solutions until their planning and design processes were fully completed. In
response, the Flood Control District and a local nonprofit group used the Corps’ preliminary 1135 designs, and
using grant funds, reconstructed the low flow channel into a much more stable configuration.
In 2007, specific language was included in Congress’ Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) that
specifically acknowledges early implementation work, such as this low flow channel work, and allows it to count
towards the local match of a future Section 1135 project. This project was, and still is, in Congressman Miller’s
district. Congressman Miller was the sponsor of the language added to WRDA for Contra Costa County.
While the Corps 1135 program was frozen, the Flood Control District received nearly $2,000,000 in state grants
that covered levee investigation and rehabilitation on Wildcat and San Pablo Creeks. This was in response to the
levees on these two creeks, potentially requiring many properties to purchase flood insurance. The levee
investigation work has been completed, and the rehabilitation design work is ongoing. Construction is tentatively
scheduled for summer 2015. Approximately $1,000,000 of these grant funds are being spent on Wildcat Creek
levees.
The Corps early 1135 project planning work identified that levee raising would be needed to accommodate many
of the solutions being studied (such as the low flow channel realignment). The Flood Control District took
advantage of state grant funding opportunities when the Corps process was stalled. Because the levee work was
identified by the Corps as necessary for the future 1135 project, the Flood Control District intends to use these
state grant funds as partial local match for the Corps 1135 project.
Restart of the 1135 Project; Change in Rules
In 2010, the Corps provided a small amount of funding to restart the 1135 planning work for Wildcat Creek. The
minimal funding levels allowed study of some minor project items, but progress was slow. The completely new
planning team needed to become familiar with the project’s problems and the past work. This rework increased the
Corps overall planning costs and slowed progress. In August 2013, an additional $300,000 of federal funds was
provided for Wildcat Creek and the Corps hired a planning consultant to bring the planning phase of the project to
completion by late 2014.
Nearly coincident with the announcement of the additional funding, Corps Headquarters issued new nationwide
guidance that changed the rules of the 1135 program. Under the old rules, the Corps would pay 100% of planning
costs with the expectation that the local sponsor would pay back their 50% share of planning costs if they wanted
to proceed to design and construction. Under the new rules, the local sponsor must pay a 50% share of the
remaining planning costs (estimated to be about $400,000) in addition to paying back their 50% share of past
planning costs if they want to proceed to design and construction. This results in a significant local cash outlay
now before being able to see the final product and to seek grant funds to pay back the local share.
The Corps has notified the Flood Control District that project planning work will again cease unless the Flood
Control District executes a Feasibility Cost Share Agreement (FCSA) that conforms to these new rules.
Credit for Early Implementation Work
In accordance with the language Congressman Miller added to WRDA 2007, the Flood Control District intends to
use grant funds to cover the entire nonfederal share of the project. However, the Corps new Section 1135 rules and
their standard FCSA do not specifically allow this approach, and instead expect the sponsor to pay their share of
the planning work in cash.
Flood Control District staff is working with the Corps to modify the standard FCSA to allow credit for the early
implementation work as noted in WRDA 2007. The new Corps’ guidance and Congress’ project-specific WRDA
2007 direction to the Corps are in conflict. The attached letter to the Assistant Secretary of the Army seeks her
support in resolving this policy issue.
An Approach to Continued Participation
Even with the poor financial condition of Flood Control Zone 7, the Flood Control District can participate in the
Wildcat Creek 1135 Project under the old Corps rules. These old rules allowed the completion of planning work,
and then time to seek grant funds before paying back the local share and proceeding with design and construction.
However, the new rules requiring upfront cash payment all but preclude continued participation by the Flood
Control District or by other watershed stakeholders such as the Watershed Council.
After considering many options, the Flood Control District’s desired approach is to:
· Operate within the financial means of Flood Control Zone 7.
· Continue participating with the Corps as long as possible.
· Seek Corps acceptance of early implementation work as project credit per WRDA 2007.
· Negotiate an acceptable FCSA which includes consideration and credit of the early implementation work.
· Negotiate a reduction in the amount of past planning costs.
· Request the Watershed Council seek grant funding, as needed, to cover any remaining local cost share.
Outside these specific, reasonable conditions, the Flood Control District cannot continue to participate in the
Wildcat 1135 Project.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Rejection of the recommendation would cause a disorderly termination of the Corps partnership, which may
negatively affect the Flood Control District’s and watershed stakeholders’ ability to implement future restoration
projects in Wildcat Creek.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
BOS Letter to USACE
The Board of Supervisors
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, California 94553
John Gioia, 1st District
Candace Andersen, 2nd District
Mary N. Piepho, 3rd District
Karen Mitchoff, 4th District
Federal D. Glover, 5th District
November 12, 2013
The Honorable Jo-Ellen Darcy
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works
108 Army Pentagon
Washington, DC 20310-0108
RE: Importance of US Army Corps of Engineers to Honor WRDA 2007 Language
Regarding In-kind Contributions for the Wildcat Creek Section 1135 Project
Dear Assistant Secretary of the Army Darcy:
The Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Flood Control District)
and the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) have enjoyed a long and successful partnership
that has reduced flood risk for thousands of residents in our County. Most recently, this
partnership extended to Wildcat Creek, resulting in an innovative flood risk reduction project
that features geomorphic principles and habitat improvement in addition to the standard
channelization and levees.
Since 1998, the Flood Control District has been working with the Corps on a Section 1135
ecosystem restoration project on Wildcat Creek that builds on the successes of the original
project, which was completed in the early 1990s. The Flood Control District has been patient
through the many starts and stops of the Corps Section 1135 planning process and has acted
reasonably and responsibly as a nonfederal sponsor for this work. Part of this approach includes
seeking out funding opportunities to assist in implementation of the Corps Section 1135 plan. To
date, the Flood Control District has secured over $1million in state grants for Wildcat Creek,
which will be used to implement portions of the Corps 1135 plan years before the Corps is able
to do so.
At the Flood Control District’s request, Section 3039 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 2007 included specific language allowing credit towards the nonfederal share of the project
carried out by the nonfederal interest before the date of a formal project partnership agreement.
This language was specifically requested to ensure that credit would be properly granted and
gave the Flood Control District confidence to proceed with applying for state grants to fund early
implementation of parts of the 1135 project.
Last month, the Flood Control District was informed of imminent changes to the Continuing
Authority Program (CAP) process. This process now requires execution of a Feasibility Cost
Share Agreement (FCSA) with resulting cost sharing of feasibility phase costs incurred up to and
payable upon execution of the FCSA. The Flood Control District’s intent has always been to
satisfy the local match using state grant funds and local work-in-kind.
David Twa
Clerk of the Board
and
County Administrator
(925) 335-1900
Contra
Costa
County
The Honorable Jo-Ellen Darcy
November 12, 2013
Page 2 of 2
Early feedback from the Corps San Francisco District has been problematic. Due to lack of
specific implementation guidance, there has been confusion about the applicability of the WRDA
2007 language and skepticism that the state grant funds could be credited towards the nonfederal
cost share.
The Flood Control District’s continued partnership in the Wildcat Creek 1135 project is
predicated on allowing fair and appropriate credit of this early implementation work in
accordance with the project-specific language included in WRDA 2007.
The Flood Control District is also concerned about excessive planning costs for the 1135 project,
which partially stem from the six-year freeze (2004–2010) in the CAP program. Stopping the
project and then restarting has required a near complete turnover of the project team and
significant rework of project assumptions and planning efforts. To date, Corps expenditures and
obligations exceed $1.5 million. A significant amount of that expenditure was prior to freezing
the project in 2004.
In summary, we respectfully ask for your assistance to:
1. Ensure fair and appropriate credit of early implementation work by the nonfederal
interest as specifically granted in WRDA 2007, and
2. Grant partial relief of excessive planning costs in light of the duplication of Corps efforts
due to the six-year total shutdown and subsequent restart of the project.
We greatly value our continued partnership with the Corps and trust that these current difficulties
can quickly be put behind us so that we may continue working together toward implementing the
Wildcat 1135 project. Please contact Julie Bueren, Chief Engineer of the Flood Control District,
at (925) 313-2201 or jbuer@pw.cccounty.us if you have any questions or need any follow-up
regarding this request.
Sincerely,
FEDERAL D. GLOVER
Chair, Board of Supervisors
cc: Members – Board of Supervisors
David Twa, County Administrator
Lara DeLaney, County Administrator’s Office
Julia R. Bueren, Chief Engineer
Mike Carlson, Flood Control District
Paul Detjens, Flood Control District
The Honorable George Miller
U.S. House of Representatives
2205 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Paul Schlesinger
Alcalde and Fay
2111 Wilson Blvd., 8th Floor
Arlington, VA 22201
MHSA COUNTY COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION
County: Contra Costa
Local Mental Health Director
Name: Steven Grolnic-McClurg
Telephone Number: 925-957-5150
E-mail:
Steven.Grolnic-McClurg@hsd.cccounty.us
Program Lead
Name: Warren Hayes
Telephone Number: 925-957-5154
E-mail:
Warren.Hayes@hsd.cccounty.us
County Mental Health Mailing Address:
Contra Costa County
Mental Health Administration
1340 Arnold Drive #200
Martinez, CA 94553
I hereby certify that I am the official responsible for the administration of county mental health services in
and for said county and that the County has complied with all pertinent regulations and guidelines, laws
and statutes of the Mental Health Services Act in preparing and submitting this annual update, including
stakeholder participation and nonsupplantation requirements.
This annual update has been developed with the participation of stakeholders, in accordance with
Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5848 and Title 9 of the California Code of Regulations section
3300, Community Planning Process. The draft annual update was circulated to representatives of
stakeholder interests and any interested party for 30 days for review and comment and a public hearing
was held by the local mental health board. All input has been considered with adjustments made, as
appropriate. The annual update and expenditure plan, attached hereto, was adopted by the County
Board of Supervisors.
Mental Health Services Act funds are and will be used in compliance with Welfare and Institutions Code
section 5891 and Title 9 of the California Code of Regulations section 3410, Non-Supplant.
All documents in the attached annual update are true and correct.
STEVEN GROLNIC- MCCLURG, LCSW DATE
FEDERAL D. GLOVER, CHAIR, 5th DISTRICT DATE
County: Contra Costa
Date: