HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10131987 - I.O.2 _a. 2
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on October 13, 1987 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
See Below -
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SUBJECT: Referral of the Report of the Water Task Force
The Board considered the seven recommendations of the
Internal Operations Committee (attached) relative to the report of
the Water Task Force on the need to provide a high quality of water
for municipal and industrial consumption and the need to implement
conservation procedures for water use.
Supervisor Tom Torlakson advised that he had reser-
vations with Recommendation No. 5 opposing the proposed Tri-Valley
Wastewater pipeline through Contra Costa County. He referred to an
earlier action taken by the Board on this project in that it should
be considered with various reports on health impacts and water
quality impacts. He suggested that no action be taken on this
recommendation until this matter has been further reviewed.
Supervisor Nancy Fanden advised that she had previously
taken a position to oppose this project. She referred to comments
of former Senator John Nejedly in which he advised of the potential
of the Tri-Valley Wastewater pipeline project increasing pollution
in the Suisun Marsh. '
Supervisor Sunne McPeak expressed concern with taking a
position that might be contrary to a previous Board action. From
her recollection, she expressed her belief that the previous action
was in the interest of safeguarding the water quality in the
estuary.
Supervisor Tom Powers suggested that rather than taking
a position, he would rather the Board express its concerns and
refer the issue of the Environmental Impact Report to staff for
further review and report to the Board.
Supervisor Fanden advised that she would not support the
amendments to Recommendation No. 5 as proposed by Supervisors
Torlakson and Powers. She expressed the belief that this project
will be opposed not only by environmental groups but by the
industrial associations as well. She commented on the impact this
project might have on industry in Contra Costa County.
The Chair called for the vote on the amendment to
Recommendation No: 5, which was to decline to take action, to
reaffirm the Board' s previous position, and to refer the issue of
the Environmental Impact Report to staff for review and report back
to the Board.
The vote on the motion was as follows:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, Torlakson, McPeak
NOES: Supervisor Fanden
ABSENT: None
1
The Chair then called for the vote on the remaining
recommendations as set forth on the attached report of the Internal
Operations Committee.
The vote was as follows:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder,
Torlakson, McPeak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
I hereby certify that this is a true and corrAct cep;.of
an action ta;ten and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: -*- ice 13 1,9 2.7
.7
PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
®y .,.. - ,Deputy
cc: Community Development
County Administrator
Public Works Director
2
To: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS nom.,,}
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE C tra
Costa
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 1987 COU*
SUBJECT: REFERRAL OF THE REPORT OF THE WATER TASK FORCE w
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) a BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize the chair to sign letter of Commendation to the Task
Force participants, Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) , East Bay
Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) , and the Chair of the Task Force,
John Nejedly.
2. Strengthen the Task Force' s statement concerning water use,
development, and sharing, to include the principle that water agencies
should seek to provide the best available, and highest quality water
for municipal and industrial consumption.
3. Request CCWD and EBMUD to review and coordinate their Disaster and
Emergency Plans especially concerning water sharing during shortages
and management of groundwater resources.
4. Recognize that ultimately, the joint management of water resources
for the greater Bay Area, most certainly the East Bay, must be
studied.
5. Oppose the proposed Tri Valley Wastewater pipeline through Contra
Costa County unless the environmental impacts can be mitigated.
6. Reaffirm the County' s fisheries concerns, especially the impacts
of Central Valley Project and State Water Project pumping during
April, May and June - i.e. cessation of all pumping during the
critical fisheries months.
7. Schedule Board of Supervisors time to view the KQED Express
program, "Further Down the Drain" dealing with agricultural drainage
in the San Joaquin Valley.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
NONE
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE f+ OTHER
-Z;pt
SIGNATURE s : Tom Torlakson Nanc C. Fa en
ION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AN ERED ON THE MIPIUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPE S ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Orig. Dept. : Community Development
cc: County Administrator ATTESTED
PHIL BATCHELOR, CL OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNT MINISTRATOR
M9s19/7 Q9 BY DEPUTY
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS/BACKGROUND
There are several projects in the formative stage concerning the
acquisition and development of municipal and industrial water
including:
o EBMUD' s American River Project
o CCWD' s Los Vaqueros Reservoir Project
o CCWD' s East County Water Treatment Proposal
o CCWD and East Contra Costa Irrigation District Agreement
Additionally, the State Water Resources Control Board is in the midst
of hearings that will result in the establishment of water quality
standards in the Delta.
Common to all the consideration in the pursuit of the "Best Available"
water for municipal and industrial consumption.
Contingency planning by the major water agencies in the County could
benefit from the development of a fully integrated and cooperative
plan to share water, facilities, resources, organizations etc. The
need to prepare and maintain a groundwater inventory and utilization
plan in the event major disaster (in the Delta) is apparent. The
Water Agency and Health Department could participate in a County-wide
plan.
During the drought of 1976-1977 Marin County was served by a pipeline
across the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge; EBMUD' s aqueducts traverse the
Delta and much of Contra Costa County; CCWD is studying the Los
Vaqueros-Kellogg reservoir and has agreed to purchase EBMUD surplus
water; San Francisco serves much of the Peninsula (and its Hetch
Hetchy source is now being questioned) ; Alameda County, as is Santa
Clara, are dependent on the State Water Project; Vallejo had a
pipeline on the Crockett Bridge to connect to EBMUD during World war
II and thereafter.
The above is to illustrate the possibilities that a long term water
study plan for at least the East Bay and even the entire Bay Area
should be commenced. It is suggested that ABAG might be the
appropriate agency to undertake this study.
The Tri Valley Wastewater Disposal alternatives that traverse Contra
Costa County from its boundary in Alameda County to discharge into the
Carquinez Straits-Suisun Bay should not be considered as viable until
full consideration has been given to all the impacts on water quality
at the point of discharge; impact on fisheries in the Straits (the
salt water/fresh water interface) ; and the merits of other
alternatives e.g. tertiary treatment, San Francisco Bay disposal, and
slowed or no growth in the Valley.
DBO:ean
L25:pek.bo
/. V
Q'Ima COSTA C10UNTY
AGCY
RO: Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency
FROM: Phi]. Batchelor, E acative Director
DATE: November 4, 1986
summr: sale of Option to Purchase Easement to Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority
st�c ---ESTs(S) CR RErocx TiCN(S) AND JIISrsF CMICN
I.
A. APFF4= the sale of an Option to Purchase a Sanitary Sewer easement to Tri-
Valley Wastewater Authority, along portions of the former Southern Pacific
Railroad riot of way awned by the Agency arra determined to be surplus.
B. AunERIZE the Executive Director to sign the Option to Purchase agreement
with the Tri-valley Wastewater Authority dated November 4, 1986.
C. Pursuant to Government Code' Section 25526.6 Pa1D that the conveyance is in
the public interest and that the interest conveyed will not substantially
conflict or interfere with the use of the property by the Agency.
D. P W that the sale of the Option will not have a significant effect on the
environment and that it has been determined to be categorically exempt from
the California Ernviromrental Quality Act under state C Qh Guidelines,
Section 15112. The Community Development Director is MERM to file a
Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk. Zhe requirements of Government
Code Section 65402 have previously been met.
2. Finaaw4al pact: Zhe Agency will receive $16,500 for the sale of the Cptien. if
the Option is exercised, the Agency will receive $580,000 for the sale of the
easement.
3. Reasara for 'artist To further a spirit of cooperation between public
agencies and to raise funds necessary to develop the former Southern Pacific right of
way corridor.
4. — 1ramh Alameda County, the Dublin-San Ramon Services District and the City
Of Pleasanton have formed a joint powers agency to provide sewer treatment for their
jurisdiction which is currently in a crisis situation, having reached their treatment
capacity. They need a route to the Bay for their trued effluent.
5. Qorequenoes of Negative Action: The Tri-Valley ter Authority will have to
find another more costly method of routing their treated a fl A crit of public
Agency cooperation will not be established.
Continued on Attachment: yes Signa
Recommendation of Executive ve Director ti of Coaraittee
Approve Other
Signature(s)
Action of Agency on 4. / Approved as recommended ✓ Other J;Z
Before approving, the Board AMENDED the "Option" to provide that the construction could not begin until
all the required permits have been secured and DIRECTED the Director of Community Development to monitor
and report to the Board on the EIR process and REFERRED the EIR to the Board's Water Committee for
review. Supervisor Fanden voted "ne because she was not satisfied that specific information is
available to know what the impacts would be if the option is implemented.
Vote of Caamf ssioram
Unanimous (Absent ) I IB'1MY C ERMY VT PIIS IS A M
Ayes: zU Z-f2 Noes: ,�_ AMID SCP COPY OF AN ACMCN '!NKEN
Absent: ` Abstain: AND ERMUM CN 7ME MUMS OF 7HE
DD:pg MOPMU AGENCY ON 7HE MM =W.
bo:b4Tri.t11 ATTESM I-fea
Phil Batchelor, Agcy Secretary
Orig: Public Works (R/p)
cc: County Administrator BY , EEPUrY
Public Works Ao=mting IV
Community DevelgRwnt/CaMA
JWAitj0r—Cko trn11 e,- h,4 s lorb%