HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11042008 - D.1 (5)TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS *D
FROM: Transportation Water & Infrast'ructu're Committee
Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema, Chair
Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Member
DATE: November 4, 2008
sE:t Contra
Costa
,s
OyTq COUN ►� .G o u n ty
SUBJECT Consider Delta Water Strategy and Action Plan Documents
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. APPROVE the attached Delta Strategy and Action Plan.
2. CONSIDER prioritizing primary goals as part of the attached Delta Platform Summary Document.
3. DIRECT the staff planning team to report back to the Board of Supervisors on status and update of
the Action Plan every three months, and/or at milestone events as necessary.
4. DIRECT staff to draft a letter, for the. Board Chair to county legislators requesting them to ask
legislative counsel if the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) has authority to construct a
peripheral canal and on legislative requirements for a canal.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Delta Strategy represents the entire universe of potential activities associated with the Delta, and
represents more activities than existing staff resources could achieve. The activities recommended to be
acted on in the Action Plan by staff in the next three months fully utilize current staff resources devoted to
the Delta. If additional activities in the Action Plan were to be acted on or implemented, additional staff
resources would become necessary or the scope of some of.the recommended activities reduced or
some of the recommended activities not acted on.
The Transportation Water and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) also recommends that the Board
consider, at some point, the hiring of consultant experts to assist the County on Delta Water issues as
identified in the Action Plan.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: px SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OFCOUNTYADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT
COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE
AYES: NOES: DATE SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Contact: Roberta Goulart (925) 335-1226
GBU: ATTESTED
DAVID TWA, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
c: David Twa, County Administrator
Jason, Crapo, County Administrator Office
Lara Delaney, County Administrator Office
Julie Bueren, Public Works BY: DEPUTY
Mitch Avalon, Public Works
Greg Connaughton, Flood Control
Catherine Kutsuris, Department of Conservation & Development
Roberta Goulart, Department of Conservation & Development
Consider Adoption of Delta Strategy and Action Plan Documents
November 4, 2008
Page:2 of 3
BACKGROUND AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:
On August 19, and September 23, 2008, (and on a number of other occasions) the Board deliberated
over Delta water issues; how these issues affect the County, and what additional activities are necessary
to effectively engage in the multitude of State plans, programs and projects attempting to repair an ailing
Delta and provide water south. It became clear that with the Delta Vision and Strategic Planning process
coming to a close, our participation is becoming more important in other areas such as the legislative
arena (as the Vision and Strategic Plan are implemented), the Bay Delta Conservation Planning
process, the Delta Protection Commission's Management Plan Update, and a great number of other
projects and programs. In evaluating how the County could operate more effectively, the Board
requested several items from staff, including a Strategic and Action Plan, Timeline of events, and a
Summary and prioritization of the Delta Water Policy Platform, and referred these items to the
Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (TWIC).
Staff and Department Heads from the County Administrator's Office, Public Works and the Conservation
and Development Department met to preview a draft of the Strategy and Action Plan and to discuss staff
resources that could be devoted to this program. Because there are no additional funding sources to take
on additional tasks, it was decided to optimize existing staff resources within the three departments with
the Department of Conservation and Development being the lead. It became clearthat with existing staff
resources, all of the items contained in the Action Plan could not be implemented at the same time,
therefore a selection process is necessary to help guide staff actions.
This report includes the following attachments:
1. Delta Strategy
The Delta Strategy outlines the activities the County can take to protect its interests and influence
events in order to do so. These activities include responses to the many State projects, programs
and initiatives concerning the Delta. The Strategy also recognizes that our activities will be
transforming from responding to planning initiatives towards responding more to legislative
proposals. The Strategy includes an overarching goal and several objectives and activities to
achieve the goal.
2. Action Plan
The Action Plan represents the implementation of the Delta Strategy. Each of the strategy
objectives and activities are listed with the individual responsible for implementing that particular
objective. Staff has indicated which activities would be acted on over the next three months.
These activities fully utilize existing staff resources. If the Board chooses to add additional
activities for staff over the next 3 months, then additional resources would be needed or some of
the recommended activities reduced in scope or some of the recommended activities not acted
on. It is recommended that the Action Plan be updated and brought back to the Board every three
months or as necessary at specific milestone events.
3. Delta Platform Executive Summary
During Board discussion when approving the Delta Platform on August 19, 2008, the Board
requested an "Executive Summary" of the Platform. This isa' short concise document that Board
Members and staff can refer to when articulating our top priority needs and interests. The Delta
Platform contains thirteen policy areas and twelve pages of detailed descriptions for each policy
area. The summary briefly covers each policy area and indicates why it is important to the
County. The summary indicates the top priority items for staff and the Board to focus on over the
next several months.
4. Timeline
The timeline identifies key State projects, programs and initiatives that are currently underway and
will have an impact on the Delta and on the County over the next two years. The timeline is
divided into near-term events and milestones and long-term events and milestones. The near-
term events coincide with the three month activities outlined in the Action Plan. The attached
G:\Conservation\Roberta\TWIC_11-04-08\6011-04-08 Consider Adoption of Delta Strategyand Action Plan Documents.doc
Consider Adoption of Delta Strategy and Action Plan Documents
November 4, 2008
Page:3 of 3
chart of Delta and Suisun initiatives was prepared for the Delta Vision process and is a more
extensive list showing all of the State projects, programs and initiatives associated with the Delta
over the next two years. This chart. underscores how many complex activities are currently being
undertaken within the Delta arena.
The TWIC met on October 20 and on October 29, 2008 and recommends adoption of the Delta Strategy
and Action Plan and the Executive Summary and Priorities Documents. In an attempt to help expedite
matters, the TWIC also wanted to clarify existing Board policy as follows: 1) The Chair of the Board may
sign a letter from the Board on a subject consistent with established Board policy; 2) The Board may
consider adding urgency items to the Board's agenda as necessary. The TWIC also considered
recommending the addition of a standing (weekly) addition to the Board's agenda for water and water -
related legislative issues, should it be necessary.
Attachments:
Delta Strategy
Action Plan
Delta Platform Executive Summary and Priorities
Priority Chart
Timeline
Dorian Chart Timeline of Delta Projects
Peripheral Canal memorandum from County Counsel
G:\Conservation\Roberta\TWIC_11-04-08\BO11-04-08 Consider Adoption of Delta Strategy and Action Plan Documents.doc
J
Delta Strategy
Contra Costa County. Board of Supervisors
October 2008
A. Overview
There are currently several initiatives directed by the State that will have
an impact on the Delta and resultant impacts on Contra Costa County and
other Delta counties. These 20 plus initiatives include the Bay -Delta
Conservation Plan (BDCP), the State Water Resources Control Board's
Bay -Delta Strategic Work Plan, The Delta Protection Commission's
Management Plan update and the Delta Vision and Delta Vision Strategic
Plan to name just a few. At the conclusion of the Delta Vision process in
December of 2008, the Governor will have recommendations from his
cabinet on strategies to implement the vision. This will result in a myriad
of legislative proposals and bills to implement the Delta Vision and the
BDCP, which includes an isolated water transfer facility (peripheral canal).
This strategy will provide a guideline for the Board of Supervisors and
County staff on how to achieve our objectives over the next two years. In
the near term, the Delta Vision process will be wrapping up, culminating in
a report and recommendations to the Governor from his cabinet (Delta
Vision Committee). That will occur by the end of 2008. The beginning of
2009 will see a large number of legislative proposals to implement various
aspects of the Delta Vision. The primary focus for the Delta will shift from
the Delta.Vision planning process to a legislative implementation process.
In addition, the BDCP process will be determining how much water will
need to remain in the Delta to meet endangered species requirements.
We will need to push BDCP to include the needs of all Delta eco -system
needs and not just endangered species.
B. Overarching Goal
Protect the Delta eco -system and Delta resources, water quality, water
supply and flood protection.
C. Strategic Objectives
(not in priority order)
1. Establish Partnerships and Engage Partners with Common Interests.
• Adopt common strategy with partners
• Delta Counties Coalition
o Identify common interests among Delta counties.
Page 1 of 4
o Develop response protocols as a group.
o Work to make Coalition more effective.
• Cities
o Increase awareness of Delta issues through regular briefings at
Mayors conference and other forums.
• Special Districts/Agencies
o Identify other local districts/agencies with common interests (e.g.,
CCWD, BIMID, Ironhouse, RD 800)
o Letters, cover letters, sample resolutions to each agency.
• Environmental Groups (e.g., NRDC, Bay Institute, Environmental
Defense, etc.)
o Identify interests, position and strategy of environmental groups.
• Other Organizations (e.g., Contra Costa Council, Bay Area Council,
Delta Protection Commission, other civic groups, other
organizations and interested citizens).
2. Influence Processes of State Initiatives and Key State Agencies.
• Delta Vision Committee
o Voice concerns at meetings with Secretary Chrisman.
o Request separate meetings.with the Delta Vision Committee for
Delta counties.
• Bay -Delta Conservation Plan
o Voice concerns at meetings with Secretary Chrisman.
o Request an unconditional seat at the Steering Committee table
or inclusion in the process.
o Request detailed briefings.
o Establish relationship with Steering Committee members.
• State Department of Water Resources (DWR)
o Develop outside allies with influence at DWR.
.o Identify issues that DWR would need to come to us to resolve.
o Establish relationships with upper management at DWR.
• Delta Protection Commission's Management Plan update.
• Determine legality of a peripheral canal today in light of the 1982
voter referendum.
• Identify a set of principles for potential negotiation.
3. Influence Legislation and Increase County's Visibility in Sacramento
• Educate Legislators of our interests.
• Identify and draft any legislation to be sponsored by the County.
• Meet with legislative delegation and legislators to sponsor relevant
legislation.
• Influence other legislation through comment letters and meetings
with legislative staff.
• Testify at Legislative and Committee hearings.
Page 2 of 4
• Fully engage our legislative lobbyists.
• Enhance the Board of Supervisors efforts.
o Meet with legislators to discuss Delta legislation.
o Regular briefings by lobbyist and staff on Delta legislation.
• Establish process to quickly respond to relevant legislation.
• Identify sponsor, endorse legislation promoting County goals,
priorities.
• Identify viable options to State proposals.
Contract with a lobbyist that specializes in water related issues.
4. Advocate for our Interests: Communication
• Prioritize and identify the top 5 issues from the Delta Platform.
• Promote the Board of Supervisors' Delta Platform.
o Engage media.
• Engage cities at the Mayors Conference.
• Collaborate with the League of Cities
• Collaborate with the California State Association of Counties.
• Fully engage our Legislative Lobbyist.
• Schedule/Prepare testimony for board members at hearings.
• Solicit letters of support from cities and special districts on Delta
Platform and priorities.
• Add a standing item on the board agenda for Delta issues.
5. Seek Accurate and Meaningful Science/Data.
• Utilize sound science and data to make informed decisions.
• Advocate that major decisions made for the Delta address the
following:
o Major scientific or economic uncertainties are addressed.
o All alternatives have been explored.
• Identify what information/data is needed.
o Energy use of proposed alternatives.
o Financial impacts.
a Environmental impacts..
o Local impacts.
o Water quality, water rights and groundwater resources impacts.
o Impact of 200 year level of flood protection on creeks, levees
and land use.
o Impact of climate change.
• Use information/data to respond intelligently and meaningfully to
Environmental documents and to advocate our positions relative to
impacts to County from programs/projects.
Page 3 of 4
6. Maintain Involvement in Delta Initiatives
• Obtain ongoing current information from the "field" to act on.
• Establish a communication network with partners.
• Share information within the county team.
• Report regularly to the Board (staff and board members) on Delta
issues.
7. Establish Ability for Expedient Responses
The board chair shall sign letters as warranted/needed.
o Prioritize policies in the Delta Platform.
o Identify resources and resource limitations to pursue policies.
RMA:Iz
GAAdmin\Mitch\Delta\Delta Strategy 10-30-08.doc
Page 4 of 4
Cly
(0 1
CD
0 3 M
�� v CD Dcn
U) X- o0D
0 0
00. 03 o
�
CD
0 « —
� O O fU
c
c 3
Q cr w
X0'3 3
CD
0 M :3 :3
< 0 '�.
co 3 -0
<Q CD CD
3' CD (n CD
CD Q -
O O O a)
-
CL :3
O0 CD CDD -
-0 v
o =; Q =3
CD .
O Q
Q 3 Q
O
O r, fn 0
O O FP'"O C
O
--+1 O
< O _
.: QCn —0
�< a
cQ � CD
0C CD
CD (D � Q
a
(nO
0 c C
.•,: =r CL a
CD C N CD (n
(n m CD
cn
O W �
�
cn
O 3
cn O v
(a
CL o (n
Q (n OCD 0
..
3 (n
CD N
C2 Cn
Q =�Q�
v ND 0
C
O
CD
CD cn =r
_0 m Q
CD
O
o0,�
c CD CD
�0)<
sy
o o
3 cn
CD 3
O (n CD x-
^� (n
Ov
n CND
X,
CD v cD
33CD
_CLCD
3 0
C)
O
CD
CD
:3 O ((DD
zr
O 0 0
C2 O 1
-,(D
0 O <
Q
O (D v O
(D C1 0• :3
�G 0
0 CD 0-
O
O
0 n
0 N
CD
n
oC0 D
co O .O� 0
I cn<O
co
o�
=3 CD
C CQ iZ M
v O
� 0
N cn
co (CCD
c
O
-n
m
p
n
co
D
m
O
mmPO
�cn
�nWN-�pD0
(D
O CD
O
O
Q
Cr
sy 0 �
0 1
E
< <_
-' �
r
�
(D CZ
(D
o
O.
0 0
7
p
C1
�
0-0
O
.
0
O
0
O
0
CD
p p �
�
CD CD
CD
�
3
CD
C7
CC ((n
((n
CD
c O
v �_
o
n o
=
14 0
(D
C7
o
CD
O
cD
cn
CD
(D
—
CD
CD
cn
,�
m
�,
Cn
Cn
o
Q- o
CD
(
CD
D
(y w
r+
0
3
0
cn
?
cn
Cn
n C
-0
O
co o
CD
0 :
CDD
CD
N
fu
-D
CD
cn
cn C:
CD
—
0
cn CDCD
fl1
D
CDN
N
CD cin
to
p v>
FD
0 n
O cCL
CCD
0
CD
Q
(sZ
O
CD
0
C/)
=3
0
O
CD
(n
0.
o
CD 0
�
N
3
_a
.0
EL
OW
0 p
CD
O
;L
to
(D
(D
(D �
_
CD
C a
CD CD
Cn
(n
O
O
CD
0
:3C7
Z
=
;a m
CL
�
p
�
O
�0
p(n
o N
cCD
of
(D
O
-D O
CcD
O
o n
O
0)
0
--+,
c
n.
`<
Cv
3
(n
(n
0
O
C
CD
0
O
a
(n CD
p
0
�0
0
cn
CD
CD
3
O D
CD
(o
CD
(n
c
CD
m
v
m
cD
X
X
X
X
XXX
N
cnrt
r
O
a
Cr
l<
(n'
rt
X
X
X
X
X
00
O
2)
CL
3
3'
CD
I-+-
sll
Cz
CL
-�
�
�
o
N
CD
0
v
v
c
�
0
0
0
0
CDn
OO
O3
(n
(n
CD
CD
O cn
O
(D
C
C
3
0
0
N
CD
CA
N
O
tll
rt
O
O
�
�
N
0 3 M
�� v CD Dcn
U) X- o0D
0 0
00. 03 o
�
CD
0 « —
� O O fU
c
c 3
Q cr w
X0'3 3
CD
0 M :3 :3
< 0 '�.
co 3 -0
<Q CD CD
3' CD (n CD
CD Q -
O O O a)
-
CL :3
O0 CD CDD -
-0 v
o =; Q =3
CD .
O Q
Q 3 Q
O
O r, fn 0
O O FP'"O C
O
--+1 O
< O _
.: QCn —0
�< a
cQ � CD
0C CD
CD (D � Q
a
(nO
0 c C
.•,: =r CL a
CD C N CD (n
(n m CD
cn
O W �
�
cn
O 3
cn O v
(a
CL o (n
Q (n OCD 0
..
3 (n
CD N
C2 Cn
Q =�Q�
v ND 0
C
O
CD
CD cn =r
_0 m Q
CD
O
o0,�
c CD CD
�0)<
sy
o o
3 cn
CD 3
O (n CD x-
^� (n
Ov
n CND
X,
CD v cD
33CD
_CLCD
3 0
C)
O
CD
CD
:3 O ((DD
zr
O 0 0
C2 O 1
-,(D
0 O <
Q
O (D v O
(D C1 0• :3
�G 0
0 CD 0-
O
O
0 n
0 N
CD
n
oC0 D
co O .O� 0
I cn<O
co
o�
=3 CD
C CQ iZ M
v O
� 0
N cn
co (CCD
c
O
N
0
a
O �
a-
cD
oC0 D
00 .�� 0
I C/) < a
�vo�
c co Q a
Cu O
N
cn
Oc
O CD
O
cn
G)
?n
m
p
n
p
T
m
p
C7
ao
D
m-n�3
m �C�Qmm
�opopc�
N-��
�w
iv�0o
rv�p
v
`<
o
Q-
0(D
N
m
_
CD °-
CD
C
CD
Cu CD
0
CD
CD
v
CD
CD<
° °
��
'
r
o
��
(n
o
CD
<
pv-c
i
-�
p°
m
��
0
G
co °
.�
cD
cD
v
— a'
o
o-
-�
m
m
a-
c
cD c
CD
p c
CD
in
(D
cn (D
CD �
r
Cn
CSD (D
CD
(n
CD `G
O
v
Fn
c
° cn
0
Cv
n
O.
=r
mm��o
r
a
o_cov.�om
CD
cn
CD
°
�
�o
NQS'
,�
.�
o
�o°�,m
C7
v
o
CO
O
N'
ca
p°
:
c,
CD
CD
CnD
can
0 CD
N
O
�
� �
gin'
C L
�
�
-a
m
v
m
�'
'
�'
3
�
v
o
v
°�'�'a10o
`nmoo�o°cn<�vcn3C
cn• c
�
:3
�m<cn'
cQ
m
m
ate'
cn
an
c o
3
,�
-,'�
O
Q"a.o
tll
�, m
y
�
O
�<•�-,,��
(p
O
O
O
-a'
3 �3�
v�.�aa
ff—
C3�
33
CD
mc
C:
CD
o
in'
-
.�
�
m
m
m
CD
to
aCD0
0
CD
CD
CD
moi
���
�:3
CD
CD
�.
°
3
cQ
�.
�
a
c
cn
" v
on
a
O
�.
Fon
i
v
o
a'onCD
m
CD
o
���
��.C:
n
to
nM
cn
cn
cn
a;
c=
CD
0
rtcn�c
CD
m
CD
w
0
CDz
fn
o
a
OCD
C
CD
CD
CD=r
CDa
CD
o
oD1
�O
��
C
�
�F
1
co
3
CD
Qpm
p�3
c
C
cn
cry,
�
��
o
<
mo
0
<
7
Cv3
o
a
5•
ca
�
n
CDo
a
M.
cn
a
CD
�
�o
°
CD
n
3
nCD
CD
cQ
m
3
cn
_0 a-
O
<<
v
3
0
°
c
CD
3
3
3
3
a
CD
cncn
C
CD
CD
m
CD
°
o
o
X
X
X
XX
X
XX
XX
X
XX
rt
a�
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r
O
a
a
t
N.
rt
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
CL
O
O
7
7
O
=3
O
O
:3
O
T
0
O
n
0
O
Q
Q
3
3
3
OCD
(n
CD
cn
o
3�
O
=
0
0
0
0
0
o
m
cn
=�
cn
cn
cnc
°
3
CD
cn
c
CD
-0
_0
•ate
m
CD
_0
0
0
CDCD
3
o
3
a
<
a-
v►
CD
o
m
cn
cnO
n
n
c
N
rt
r�-r
cn
co
y
-
v
CD
CD
O
O
CD
O
0
a
O �
a-
cD
oC0 D
00 .�� 0
I C/) < a
�vo�
c co Q a
Cu O
N
cn
Oc
O CD
O
cn
w.
� <-
<
n
co
Dcn
?impp
coDDT.�
-_
cD-.
0-
�N�o
(Z
CD'
��o
n
c
nC�m���0
C�Q�
M. Q�
!��
0 <
=�
Dc
�°
—
—o
°cam
o'v
0
CD
=3
CD
0v
�<
0.
0
CD
0
cn~
0
O
(D
3�
(D
CD
CD
(Q
0)
O�
7
(0 CSD
Cn
o
c
�;
w
3
c
(D
co
O
O
CD
(Q
N
CD
O
-1,
O
0
.,
<
c
O
�
7CD
(7
O
p
Cn
Cv
F'
3
CD
v
(Q
0
T
CD
(Q
CD
CD
(D
CD
3
N
sz
C
CD
c
°
O-
(D
�,
r,
<
. �
n
Q`
"0
0
0
;
Q
co
°
Q
5
Cv
0
cn
0
0
CD
CD
CD
O
O
(D
�:
O
0 Cn
-
�
CD
"a
�±
(Q
Cn
o
v��
°
�v:
S0
CD-0CD
CD
CD
0
(0
:3
CD
:3
CC
Q
3
cno�
nr�
Q�
o0
_
°
Q�
=O
Cn•
°--.
m
0
0
(c
O
-
O
=r
cn
CD
�o
n
Q"
Cv
COD
o'
Q"
sll
co
O
3
c
N
0
N
in
CD
�'
3
sv
Q
�3
�,
v
0oorvoo
�(n3�m
CD
CD
CD
m0M
�3°
oc
CD
0-
F)
�v
=�cnm
in-
CD
CD
CD
o
m
Q
m
0-
cD
�
p
c
�
C
D
N
�
3
o
CD
cn
sll
:
O
cn
CD
(D
Cn
Q
O
CD
-c
CD
CL
cn
3
cn
cn
0
°
r.
sy
p
c
cn
n
-O
�
r.
CD
�,
o
sy:
<
_0
CD
°
CD
°
30
°
o
m
CD
CD
(n
n
cr
m
v
v
sll
<
cc
v
o
v
mo
o�
p
v
CD
0
�
Q(,
=3��
30
C�-
Q
v
0
m
I
o
nc°�'0
Q"
v
n
CL
M.
�
O
o
3
CD
o�,m
c
v
co
CD
Q
o:
�,
c
C-
�.
cn
CD
m
o
o
�(a
�
<
o
v
�
cn
c
cn
`n
C
0
CD
0
0
CD
v
v
cn
XX
X
XXX
X
XXXX�
c
sv
XX
XX
XXXr
O
s
a.
X
X
X
XX
X
XX
XXXX�
O
sv
CL
co
0
0
Xo
=Xocc
O
D.
v
sll
0co
v
sll
CDD
Q
CD
CD
CSD
Q
O
�'
C2
C2
�n
:
: c
cn
3
O
O
�`-
�`—
o
n o
"0
v
cn
cn
5
3
3
o
aaa�
CD
���cn
m
°
~
''
~
<
=3
cn
0 -CL
—�
0
��(nNo
M.
CD
(D
3 -
m
m
o
�
O CO
m
<
<
r.
-a
_0
3
m
(0
CD
Q"
c'
(n
o
cn'
0
CD
cCD
n
cn
c
cn
0<<
0
o
0
CD
to
000
CD
CL
Ca
0CDCDoo,:
o
CDCDcn
c°
a-
a-
D
cn
cn
��
�
W;e
���
=r
0
O
:2_ =r..
m
CD
`c
c
c
0
°-
O
O
CD
CL
CD
CD
O
c°n
un
o
o
(n
O
CD
_
CLc
0
"a
o
�
CD
(n =r
CD
,<
n
O �
0 n
o
CD sli
o(D0 D
0
00
,� �
1
C -o 0
�. CD v sy
v�
CL =3
O
N cn
O =
O -0
CCS CD
cn•
O
Cn
0
CD
v
0
v
cn
79CD
CL
m
CD
CD
cn
0
6
p
a
0
0
0
R
0
O w
� n
o cn
o -
CD w
oCD0 D
O � o
0o w .+
,
1 � �
w 0
�0vw
o
N (n
co CD
O
Cn
00>m
0C)00D
w
p�tnm0
mc-4
M
cn4�--WN)
'C
Cr
CD CD
v�.
cr
<
mO
-
M.
CD
vo
�
3'�0'3
33
�3�oQm
D
w
o
oCD
w
w
w
v
o
CL
�
n`0
O
mwoCL0�3
�'
�.
CD
Cn
�.
w
'*
w
w°
n O
0(n
N
�
��3
�n�.0
�o3°moa°
Q
3
o
CD o
°
w
13
0
3�
�'
m
X
.�
°g�CD
°
3
c
c o
° n w
C:
CD
<<
m
,�
30�
n
cn
U)
CD
3
n
(7
"O
a:
w
m
_0
(fl
Q_
m
m
m
m
O O
w
n
CD
CL
0
�
�_
co
--%
3 cn CD
7
<
Cfl
CD
�
3
O O
CD
O
O
O
CD
cn
a
o:3
O
m
w=
� a
~'
(Q
c
-O
C
vcn
CL
O
C
m2.
O
p
w
0
5
:3
�O
3w
=m
Q
0D
—
3
n
w
O
<=
-
<n
CD
O
00�
o
a
v
..
��^'3
a
�
3
0 CD
0
cQ
�
CD
�
w
m
,�
�n O
0
O
c
:3
cn
..
a
o
w
_.:
m
c w
=30
°
O
m
CD
Q
-° a
0
'
I
CD
a
3
=
0
° 3
r: CD
n
m
CD
c
CD
CD3
C
°
�
.�
cn 3
cn
m
-0
O
m
O
°
��
m
_
�
cn
o
cn
�
c
m
�
con
m 0
n
n
XXXX
X
rr
X
X
X
X
X
r
O
a
a
rt
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
W
w
CD 00
w
v
X O
m
v
a
O
m
n
w
0
Q
O
Cn
O3
CD
cn
c
_0
CD
�
O
3
CO
O
0
cn
CD
O
0
O
N
cn
<<
rt
N
S
a
O
O
CQ
l
O
CD
0
O w
� n
o cn
o -
CD w
oCD0 D
O � o
0o w .+
,
1 � �
w 0
�0vw
o
N (n
co CD
O
Cn
Executive Summary of Delta Water Platform; Criteria for determination of
Priorities
The County Delta Water Platform was approved on August 19, 2008 and will continue to
evolve over time. The Platform represents a consolidation of many Delta -related policies
and positions into one document which can be utilized to guide actions and advocacy to
(in the broadest sense), promote a healthy Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta..
The Delta Water Platform is comprised of fourteen subject areas. Each of these subject
categories contains relevant policies and background explanatory language. Each subject
category is summarized below:
Short Term Actions to be implemented immediately includes a broad range of
specific, relatively non -controversial actions to quickly improve the state of the Delta,
such as improvements to levees, the fishery, habitat and emergency response. ,
Conveyance: Through -Delta and Isolated Conveyance; consideration of isolated
conveyance must protect and improve the Delta and the entire Bay -Delta ecosystem,
include the broadest range of non -biased scientific analysis of impacts, include levee
repair and all costs of a facility must be paid by beneficiaries.
Water Storage; multi-purpose storage facilities are recommended and groundwater
storage preferred to surface storage options. Detailed groundwater studies are
recommended.
The Delta Ecosystem; protection and restoration of an ailing Delta ecosystem has long
been a priority of the Board of Supervisors, including need for additional scientific
research to address fundamental questions, fishery and habitat restoration projects.
Water Conservation; landscape and household conservation, maximizing use of
reclaimed wastewater, use of meters, and agricultural water conservation are
recommended.
Governance; a new or improved system of oversight related to ecosystem and water
management is necessary. The existing Delta Protection Commission land use
governance structure has been successful, requiring no further action. Local Government
representation in any governance structure is paramount.
Levee Restoration; advocacy for immediate and significant (multi-year) funding and
levee repair is a priority, including upgrades to minimum (PL 84 99) standards for all
levees, and a higher, 200 -year level of protection for communities protected by levees.
Stockpiling rock in the Delta specifically for levee repair and continuance of the Long
Term Management Strategy (LTMS) are highly recommended.
Water Quality, Water Quantity and Delta Outflow; protection and improvement of
water quality, quantity and outflow, determination and assurance of adequate water for
the delta ecosystem and examination of the State and Federal project operations
(including potential for reduced exports) are recommended here.
Flood Protection/Floodplain Management; Comprehensive flood management
planning throughout the Delta and its watersheds, as well as funding to bring flood
facilities to 200 -year levels and revenue generation for flood control districts continue to
be of import.
Water Rights and Legislative Protections; existing area -of. -origin and other water
rights protections established for the Delta'should be preserved.
Regional Self -Sufficiency; all export regions should be implementing all water supply
options available to them to reduce stress on the Delta as a limited resource.
Emergency. Response; collaborative efforts among the Delta counties to improve
emergency response in the region have.been productive and should continue.
San Luis Drain/Grasslands Bypass; longstanding opposition to selenium discharges
from this project entering the delta and support of in -valley treatment solutions are
ongoing. Continued reduction in drainage from the Grasslands Bypass project is also
monitored.
Climate Change; impacts of climate change must be considered in planning, engineering
and construction activities.
Priorities for Board Consideration
Attached is a matrix whereby criteria was applied to the Platform subject categories to
establish
priorities of importance to the County for advocacy and other activities. The
following questions were posed as follows;
1)
Is this issue not being dealt with as part of external ongoing processes consistent
'to a large degree with our goals? If the issue is not being addressed (as indicated
by a check -mark), these categories are worthy of further consideration as a
priority.
2)
Does this issue directly affect the County in some way?
3)
Is this issue of indirect importance to the County?
4)
Are there many other (external) advocates for our position on this issue? If so, we
r .
may not need to expend resources here.
5)
Are there few or no other advocates for our positions on this issue?
6)
Does our position on this issue serve a multi-purpose function? Several of our
issue areas are quite interrelated, therefore providing multiple benefits for time
spent
7)
Is this issue of primary importance to our allies?
As you can see from the attached matrix, the priorities become more evident when one
considers the subject areas where the County is more directly affected, which are
.consistent with the subject areas where, there are few or no other advocates, and where a
multi-purpose function is also achieved. These areas are also consistent with areas of
interest of our working partners. Priority subject areas (in accordance with criteria
examined) are as follows (not in priority order).
Short-term actions
Ecosystem
Water quality, quantity, outflow
Conveyance
Levee Funding, repair
Governance.
The first three subject areas (ecosystem, water quality, quantity, outflow and
Conveyance) are so inextricably linked that the Transportation; Water & Infrastructure
Committee (TWIC) recommends that they be considered as one item.
The subject of salinity intrusion into the Delta, a phenomenon that occurs with a levee
break (or multiple breaks), was a recurring theme of concern at the TWIC meetings.
Because salinity intrusion is a component of both the water quality and levees priorities,
it was not called out specifically here:
n
CD
v
0
m
v
M
x
CD
0
W
C
3
3
a)
z
v
-4
0)
(r
�
w
N)
--.%v
v
cn O
0 y
cn
0 v y
�- CD
�,
v p-0
Oo cD
o a -D
m. CD
c M.
5
p CD cn
v � 3
00 =
; W
n cn
0. cQ
C
N
n (n
to cn O
(D
CCD CD
(D
N v CD
�' CD ((D
v
n U)
,�
C7 �'
C) cn
n (Q CLCD Cr
CD CD
N ,N -r
= �.
CD CCD
CD p
�_
�, 3
c CD
�j (n
O �+
N
O O
1. M
0
v
CD
O O
(n
CD
(a N
c�
o..
=
J r.
o
Q
O�
CD
Q
0.3
N N N
O
-t
'
- +
O
"O O
J CD
(D
J -0
O
3
CD
"
`G
J
-
� Cr
F CD
O
X
x
x
x
X
A. Short-term
Improvements
x
X
X
X
X
B. Conveyance
C. Water _Storage
X
X
X
X
D. Ecosystem Protection
E. Water Conservation
X
X
X
x
X
F. Governance
X
x
X
G. Levee Restoration
X
X
X
x
H. Water Quantity, Quality,
Outflow
I. Flood
X
X
x
Protection/Floodplain
Management
J. Water Rights &
X
X
X
X
Legislation
Protection
K. Regional self-
sufficiency
L. Emergency Response
M. San Luis Drain
N. Climate Change
v
cD
Iv
as
.D
a�
0
3
m
x
M
0
_
CA
3
3
as
n
1
M
aa'
Timeline Priority Delta Projects/Programs
.(see attached Timeline for all projects)
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
October 2008
Near Term
October 31, 2008 Delta Vision Strategic Plan submitted to Governor's Delta Vision Committee
Nov. -Dec -2008 DV Committee holds workshops, hearings on Strategic Plan
Dec. 31, 2008 Delta Vision Committee/Governor provides Strategic Plan to Legislature for
implementation
December 2008 Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) Conservation Strategy Document
released
Dec 31, 2008 Draft Delta Protection Commission (DPC) Management Plan Update release
Longer Term
January 12009 -
February, 2009. Legislative Bills introduced
February 2009 Approx date DPC Management Plan Update (final)
March -July 2009 State budget process, legislative process (implement Delta Vision, Strategy,
update Delta Protection Act (DPC Management Plan Update(s))
June 2009 Possible election. Possible Water Bond on Ballot (includes large surface
storage, isolated transfer, etc).
Sept. 30, 2009 Deadline for Governor to sign, veto bills
Nov -Dec 2009 Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) draft EIS/R public review
Mid -2010 Final BDCP EIS/R public review
Articulation of Delta and Suisun Initiatives Timeline Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force Meeting
2 0 0 8 prepared by belta Vision and the CALFED Bay -Delta Program October 16-17, 2008
Ann.— Feh. March ADrll May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 2009 20110
Delta Vision
Delta
ee
Feb s. Apnt I1: ;
CM einge CMee'rge
sep+embe,m and November ea,ryanu Dec
CMee(ng C arDee NeclamCappedf.mlee Mee(rg .
_ ,
Repml:O
Marling3t-
O
. 21} 2a- 2& 26 •
2d29
• Wve:noraM •
] 21- 8 IE LegglaWe
O zz O O
Blue Ribbon
Dales
a
RP,u. saategk O
Task Forte FINAL
Reprxl
41la fton
Rekasea
DflNi
strategic planningr!a,
for Usion jmplemenlalion Slralegk Plan
m Cemmalce O
flevised dral;s aM(caw lm 9
Stakeholder
Meeting
Dales
Js
Coordination
Group
Advise ata suppml Task Forma de ebpvg SaatcTc Mn ,
Work Groups-
and
$gvsral, vAth o.fgie5I m, the lank
foLue
Joint
Fact -Finding
•. ;
Bay -Delta
ft gical Coals and
Dialer—
• mla'09 mia'ID
prvekp Mapt" Flawgemern Plan FL'Iil;: LRAFI nl F41ia APEP and
M'o8: DRAFTDDCP F:IS(R
Conservation
Plan
md'r
fn,aer aum Arveg!, e�e'ei 01'erma
(BDCP)
ncvelnp Cnnsr,varan Measures IRoa8LI(.-Ir"EISR Imp'morr. Fgmd
-----Phase
...____-.--....—..__ _
DeHa Risk
...
Phgss l
Poase t • 2 Jam,ary: 2
Mgmt. Strategy
ADMIN ORAE(
Pace
NNAL 1 PUBLICORPIf FItJAL Re orf
(DBMS)
CALFIED
'
M
MBLK DRAFT Pubflc Comments January: nNAL [ons. y
i4
Conservation
FGEnd of
�A.IMIIIRAR
I_
Saateq),DueNov ral.
dateaStrategy
-- __ _
1 .. _
Sy -D.
BayDelta
.____
----- -_.................----------------_._..-.--....r.
1
-`•• '
Strategic Workplan
•'
.._._ ._.._.
........__._ .._....._.. .____________ __ __ ._.__..__.. ___ _._.__..___. .....
-----
. .............................':_____---;.--_.___._-__---_--_-_.___-.----_
California'
__ _--------... ____...__._
_
t
' r
Water Plan Update
- • "
' .. • .
2009
](1110:5ule Ra nl
-------------------------- -___-__.
FloodSAFE Ca., 2nd.
Valley
Central Valle Flood
.........................._______...__..__.—._...—..........—....___----.-.-.__..._.......___.._._...._._____..__.._...........___._...._..____..__-.-----_._--_-----_.___..__
RSR NW I•ralmi r
NonrrojM Lwees and
2 .I �n
Ox'OB'. PRET IM Leree Flood 009 Laca (4,M Conti
Rq:ecGan Zoe Maps; Project FUM:ngl I2/3+: central vaney
Levee Slalus Nepal; Duiding Rnam'Fg
Protection Plan
PREL111. FbMplain Naps
[ode U dale vwla ROM Rn lie on,
P
_ •....._..........:....._. _ status Mpat
____________________...
•
R
0ecemta+03 Mesa levee ogran
DWR Delta
'
Pare SpwalPmlens C.u�c.•raa:,
levees Program
and cm+va-q rkanao •>oy ,
_ _.._.._ _....-.--.-_.........-._-_-._--_-.----_.__.---.------_
- .
Operations, Criteria
' and Plan
................................._....._..........._
..._._.__.__...__ :.__
Biological
Assessmem '
FINAL Biological FWSBolggi<al March: NMFS
Assessment Opinion Bbkgkd Opinion
,1 (OLAP)
.
........._.._......_
+
__..._._.._______________________'......_..._.._...__...._..._....._..__.______..____.._...._.___.______.._._.________..__.......__.___._........_
_..
tan.' 9 lip.
UPC
I'roceS.
I.
POHLK IiLLIEY.' Mopxnl adopOr
1 Mgmt. Plan Update
Plan
MPU
concept avprm,ed
MPU -
maleate
pRAr H neaaed. aPlod
"i (MPU)
e..................
I:Wa Palo Ar
-------_------__ _.._....------ ........_.._._. ..--__-_----.
--
______..._
DPC DES
Planning
Eater Plano n
_._...______.....:_...___...._____.:
-----------------
ase
Regiael Fmngenry
.._....__.----- --__--.._.. •_
Ntmu 1
n`y F NAL Response
Erne g�remy n
enc
9 y
=, and Response Plan
Planning Ramevrork
; ; Ro
ResponseFesise
._____...... ......____._ _ .........................................................................
----
.--VRW ---------.......................................__________.____._____-_gra
•'Slarl
C B Delta
{ Methylmercury
Doom__.__..._________.._........_......................_____
hearug
------..._...._..
slakehoder ; SPdrg: Hoard
IF— -Lave, hewing
TMDL Program
_.-__.._.-.- .............
-----------
............................_-.-__,...__.....___.....,.._._________...._,.....-.-..__._.__..---_________.--.__.....__........._._.._.-_.......___._____._.._..._._........._.
..._...... '
'
r
CAUSED
Slage2 RanniPg and lmpkmentation[(fort, in comtlination xith lkllaY'nn and+ne BahDei+a Cwserval'mn Plan ,
Stage 2 Planning
.---------------.................
•.___..---_-•---'c----.-..__........................_............._..__e_._........
..._:----_ ------------...-.--..-..-.-.,..._......._......:.....__--------" --- ......
AI 'v )ni l5etll LI(gvl7 pklAj., LAD"; "11,111t
..._.....-' ..........
CAIFED
'
Ap 09 13L. f{rl'rf �St= art T1P: IIF
Sarfate Storage
;
; ; Serf Al H4RR.Ri O7 j16iRksy1 �Ir'1fl U9!((P.pl
Investigations'
,
Jw.'09� NDF:+S ae+*MR(%b end Holli$
r
! ....... ................. .
os Ita Regional
Et Restoration
......................................................'__.-_----.__._.........__.____._____._._._.............t_............__.._;._._._._..______..__..........._...
IINAL he ys:em ane
us DA[RP MMehv.T be continuously updated. a
par other
ya.
Implerrrert'n Plan
tics Life "MaryrCM
c."PI-1 Model
a, St,acsy,rd other perri,m pkom
FRP Coracrvallon SvntOgyand other planningprxrsses
Nsted+Mt, LRIP
regional ec ry;km lmplemaalalienpWns Nsfed In the EnPPlan
---
----------------- •-----------------
—----------------- —------------------------------------- •---------------- _.......
.................. ............ ............
__
'Il DWR Dutch Slough'-'-_....._--•--DRaFf
nn ant
Tidal Marsh
'
pd" N""m
Restoration'
'___.__.__...._.
DWR N. Delta Flood
Control A Etosys.
.......................................................------------------
Nov.'0]: DRAFT
.................. a..--------------- .:...._..........._:.....
Springlemry
Summer: FINAt
Restoration ProjectRRfEIs
_.....__------.
F.IR/F.5
--__-__----_ ._.-._..... .._...__... .._________.._............
-__--- -..--_-----------
US py,s
Lon in Small
---------------------------------_.__--------_-__----.-_---_-_-----.__------------------------------------
90 -dal' Filling
pu ,'
d helm
ommrnf perbd ' ,
` 12d1nnlhR dlrg
]
I Petition
Fedmal ReglsNr
cM_ed Jur
'
..._._...----_--------------•___.....
Ca. Fish b Game
__________________________._..._.........__.._._..___....__._.___._._.._____.._............._...__________.______........_....__..___.________�...____.....
A review bsts l2 mwNs:
°AGn ar Status Review APrG'09: FGC foal decision
Comm. lengfin
on gsero
( Smell Petition
2 0 0 8
January
Feb. March April May June
July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 2009 2010
Suisun Marsh
PEW,ElS
Plan
II.
_........... ...__...__._
- PPIC • UC Davis
.............__..........____.___.____._...______...__._______._..._..
......................_._-.-.._.._
_.._......_..__._. _.___ _____.______._..___..___.__..___._._..__.__......_..___...._.____... i
-----------------------------------------------
,
Comparing Futures
.
gNAL Report
j., for the Delta Report
__ ---
- 4.................. ----------------------------------
'
.______
USACE
DeHa Dredged
�`,<`s�t �
• , ' `'
.
.
Sediment LTMS
1
-_---_ --- ................................------------- ..------------ ...__..__.__..________:
_......._.___._...._....._.....__..._............................................. ___._._____...______...._.......___.._...___.___._.._.._._..._...
CAUSED
-----_-.
- USACE Leree
•'
i."A�:A
- ' ••• '' ' ''
... +.
,
-- '
Stability Program
.....
:<.._ .
... _._.
. <, - •'__.., . .- <. ;_ , ....m_::.
.......
................
USACE Delta
Islands 8 Lure's
.;-
Feasibility Study
�- ...•,.
.' .. -: + ,t. :,�. •- .. ..
.. _......... .............. ...._......___..--------------------
..... .._-.__---_---- -------------- — ..._.... ..._.___............._... ...__.___.. ._._..
! ..........................
Law¢r Yolo Bypass
Planning Foram
. ... .............................__.____.________.__..____......_...._..__..___._.____...__.............._
' _ _
Process iraUalcd
-
OINrt OPeralmg Mules,
Common. ProWcgs.d .
puneadl Plau
sept 'Cn. OMF'r
Ngm:. sua!rg,
'---- '---•--------
----
----'--------- ---------------
----------'----'-----------'-'-'--'-------•----- --'-----------------------
. ...........• ---------- •----------- --:--------------
F09:.D -- ------•----
. - •---------. ................... "
ll+ne
' US FWS
Rx Rao
Delta Native Fishes
ro9:
fkc. FINAL
.i Recovery Plan
.
Recovery Pian
------------------ -._....._.._ � .___.........
r ---
------ -------------------
US NMFS Central
Valle Salmonids
-----------------r-----------------"----------""'--------.._....__...,.....-..__..----_-_...---.-.._.. t
DRAFT Reeovey nen day red. •
dKuroulM.aM redcaed WCemral ;
------------ ,- .----------.------------------------------------
PUAI,IF REV"'i
' DRAFT Recovery -m Trim
iterate,, ran
pan
Recovery Plan
vi
_._................._.................................... ._.._._......... ..-------._ --------_._..
--- _.CALFED State of
...................•
Exeralrve
--------- ........ _... .------------- _-------------- _................. ................. ..........
---------- _.---------------
fINAI RepOr: ,
Bay -Delta
summary
,
� ;
Science, 2008
•
............ _.__..______ _........... •__ _..._.._._.___._....._...........____.__.__...__._._..___....
...._ ....................................:.................:..................:..................:................___..._____._._....____._........_..
! IEP Pelagic
:_
. 2008 PoORepal 2009 PoDRepat
Ch9anis. Decline
2001 POD Repel
Progress Report
. — ------------
----------------------
SFEP 2007
.
• '
c Comp. Conservation
,
i and Mgmt. Plan
'
.......... ..__.................. _......___... ._..__... __ .._.
Sle BCDC
.............
........---...--_-------..._-___-_.--. ..._.--_ .________. ._.._.._.__..
'
, Ir'r.,-
Sea L-1PL<¢ 'F Ba CRmal (Icrxgr• �. FT. FrrTaam
, peel b daplt Ar tl enll $I i..M I!e 5f
Bay Plan Updates
Imlmd; IlepnO Ara. vs Mpny e.,v Ran e�y lYar.
.. _ .__...____...-_........_....
'_ ......._........._; .____.__--------------------------------------
,I _.__-__-_-..-_._-_
--------------
The Great
California Delta
------_____----_t_-.._.._----
- __t_._
_t__-------._.....:..................:_..._......... .........__.._..._........._.
Ran m
Fram Concept
, .._ -- _ ._ ..�,,,�....
...1 ..
' ._•. Fmcuq Secured W Planning k CaH.
, Coste and Solam Caumles ,
Trail System'opted
awak
Calsbudan of z segments In 5o1aoo County
Through 2009: DmhM PRELIM. HCP
Lune: ADrIIN, URAFi lune: f,Nui NCP,
South Sacramento
Through June rn: 0rahing RR]s
' ; HCR r.NdT EIRIEISaM FINAL EIftls and
OSAFI Im tem. alt Impkm. m+.
Q'. HCP
Through lune 09: trabingImplementing Agml.
---- ----- ---- __-_. _..________.________......... ............. .___
•
Z-_..__.________...._.__.._......._._....____......._......._._...._.__._._..__.__.__._.__.._.___r__...___.___.._T.._..._....___.__
--------------- —_._----
SanJoaquin
---.____--------- ------------
Th -91,2008: p,mcsal dre m1I 2W]
•
Species
.-m.--an.pped p, ant A d Re 1
nu pa
, ,
Conservation Prog.
can'
Riparian Arush Rabbit
b wont fla+takings
----- _----- .----- _....--____.._-...__-__.-_................--...._.....
-------------------------------------------- .._._._.__-----.-.---__---.----..._...___..._______
Z, ....------------------
--- — --- --------___
YMo Natural
Yols'
-------.._._.--__..__-.____...--_
Ilevebp DRAFT Oevebp ORPFf
7.`lp lGoshConservation
Complcle p NN N01 in Oct09.Rmb,Planb1.-
AUMIN DRAFT sept0tOo.:NFPAICEOA Iloa,-1. Nov 09: NCCP
Fetleral Regi4efpprovedand._._..__.________._..._
ggmu:��E
oHe Program
ritagand
0 clrves strategy
VUn Doormen;
I '. East Contra
.__.............-.-.._.____......_...._.___..__.__.____..__._r_.....__.___..__;_...____....._.._._;__..____._____..-__......_..._.__.,.._.____..__.._._.'__...___...-___.._......___.........
a Costa County
,
r:. HCPINCCP
-
---------- ...._-.......--__.---------- .._._........___._..-.--._..__---_.-.............-_-.._.....----_____._.._._...._................._....__,._..._._..........,_._.__.__..__.__.,.__..____.__.._..._
¢-
fae'oBlWnlcr'09: PUBLIC SumIFaO'09: FIN.1L
• DRAFT HCP and Etta NCP. EIRIS. ant
_-.- Solano NCP
• ; ; DRAFT F plementi,q Agent Impkm. At-
.
w Sacramento County
..._...._..
rmllal ADMIN
_-. ---_._--._--_-_ ...................................... -._._..----_ ___ .-_.-.-..__. ......._......................._
ame' Orah E
r R. IP
IMI,t+'arz
' I.apaa $lady
F! GPU
1
ORAfi RR
,,l6
ad IM cm,. Ran
_....._____.._.._.______._.__oP _.. _. .._
d'11i
San Joaquin CountyIHig¢•mr�(C3ii%:1'u^„':,
�'. GPU
._
i,.
¢: Yolo Courtty'
---_.
.
--------
-_.-_-----................_..--.---..._----------------. --......-_ ._._...
._.._......_._______......___.....__._.._.___.___._._.__- ..................
...........----- __....._...._...
uN•r.la,t. DRnFT nN
DPNT sapanmrl flan
GPU
General Ran ,kcl,_
¢'; Contra Costa County
operatvlg uder
zooio
; , ,
rrGeneral Plan
&ne. ral pPlan
............................__..
_----------- ---------
w.•.
Z.
'
w'' $olanO County
. ..............
DRAFT ;
� � General Plan �
......._..---------------------------------- _._.._.. _......... _.--------- ------
. FINAL Elft tertlaM ant
General elan adopted •
, (mrddmnal on voter � ' �
V' GPU
dEIR
approval an Nw. a)
January Feb. March April May June duly .Aug. -P, -11. -___
SFR = State Feasibility Report The Federal Feasibility Process has three phases: the Initial Alternatives Information Report, the Plan Formulation Report, and the Feasibility Study Report (FR), which includes an EIS-EIR. NODOS = North -of -Delta
OHstream Storage (Sites Reservoir) USJRBI = Upper Sen Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation (Temperance Flats) LVE = Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion
Office of the County Counsel
651 Pine Street, 9th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Contra Costa County
Phone: (925) 335-1800
Fax: (925) 646-1078
Date: October 27, 2008
To: Supervisors Gayle B ilkema and Mary N. Piepho,
Transportation, ater, and Infrastructure Committee
From: Silvano B. Marchesi, County Counsel //�
By Christine Chestnut, Deputy County Counsec4L
Re: THE POTENTIAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PERIPHERAL
CANAL OR RELATED PROJECTS.
QUESTION PRESENTED
Can the legislature enact legislation that authorizes a peripheral canal or related
project without obtaining voter approval?
The legislature could approve legislation that authorizes a peripheral canal or related
project. However, any bill amending an initiative statute such as the Burns -Porter Act would
.require voter approval. In addition, any bond measure that secures funding for a peripheral canal
project will require voter approval. Even if the legislature were to take an action that did not
require voter approval, legislation approving a peripheral canal could likely be challenged by a
voter referendum.
BACKGROUND
The California State Water Project.(SVWP) is the largest publicly -built and operated
water development and conveyance system in the nation, providing water to 23 million residents
and irrigating 75,5,000 acres of farmland. Although proposals for a state-wide water project date
back to the early 1900s, construction of the SWP began in earnest in 1960, after the Burns -Porter
Act was approved. The Burns -Porter Act, formally called the California Water Resources
Development Bond Act (Bond Act) and codified in Water Code Sections 12930 et seq.,
authorized the sale of $1.75 billion in general obligation bonds to fund the SWP. The Bond Act
required voter approval, pursuant to Article XVI Section 1 of the California Constitution, which
requires that all bond measures over $300,000 be approved by a majority of the electorate. The
_Bond Act identifies the facilities that make up the SWP as the "State Water Facilities" defined in
Water Code Section 12934(d) and the facilities that comprise the Central Valley Project (CVP)
and California Water Plan. The Bond Act allows for the inclusion of additional facilities into the
SWP, provided that the Department of Water Resources determines that the facilities are
necessary to meet local needs, and that funds are appropriated pursuant to Bond Act.. An
amendment would presumably be necessary to appropriate the necessary funds from the. Bond
Act, or to add funds if an expensive project such as a peripheral canal was proposed.
Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee
October 27, 2008
Page 2
In 1980, the legislature tried to add facilities to the SWP by passing Senate Bill (SB)
200. SB 200 amended the Bond Act and other sections of the Water Code to add facilities,
M a peripheral canal, to the CVP and the iist of "State Water Facilities" funded though
the Bond Act. Pursuant to Article lI Section 10(c) of the California Constitution, an amendment
to an initiative statute must receive voter approval, .unless the statute to be amended explicitly
states that no such vote is required. The Bond Act is an initiative statute and does not permit
amendments without voter approval: Therefore, SB 200 required voter approval, and was
submitted to the voters in 1982, as a referendum called Proposition 9.
The majority of California voters voted no on Proposition 9, thereby rejecting SB
200. Proposition.9' applied solely to SB 200, and thus does not bar the legislature from enacting
peripheral canal legislation in the future. To date, however, the legislature has not passed
legislation that revives the peripheral canal proposal.
DISCUSSION
Whether a statute authorizing a peripheral canal or related project requires voter
approval depends upon the type of legislation that is passed. A peripheral canal will be an
expensive project, however, and it is important to note that any legislation appropriating bond
money in excess of $300,000 to fund the project will require voter approval. Bond measures
must be submitted to the voters_during a.general election or direct..primary, not during a special
election '
Although the legislature can propose legislation similar to SB 200, any bill seeking
to secure funding for a peripheral canal by amending the Bond Act, as SB 200 did, will require
voter approval, pursuant to Article H Section 10(c). Legislation that funds the peripheral canal
through other bonds (such as the Governor's recently proposed water bond measure) will require
voter approval as well, pursuant to Article XVI Section 1.2 '
In the unlikely event that the legislature could enact a bill relating to the peripheral
canal that introduced an entirely new law or amended a non -initiative statute, and bond money in
excess of $300,000 would not be needed to implement the legislation, voter approval would not
necessarily be required. These actions, however, are legislative acts, which would be subject to a
voter referendum. The referendum.power applies only to legislative acts, not administrative
1 Cal Const, Art. XVI § 1.
` Although it is possible that the legislature could propose a bond measure to fund a peripheral
canal that does not exceed $300,000, this is highly unlikely, given previous cost estimates of such a project. For
example, the Governor's water bond proposal totals $9.3 billion.
Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee
October 27, 2008
Page 3
acts.' It is difficult to envision how an act by the legislature or even the Department of Water
Resources authorizing a peripheral canal or related project could be construed to be an
administrative act, given that the addition would significantly alter the SWP and given the extent
and cost of the project.' In fact, the high costs associated with a peripheral canal project would
most likely require bond funding, and the resulting bond measure would require voter approval.
cc: Roberta Goulart, Department of Conservation and Development
Mitch Avalon, Public Works
Steve Goetz, Department of Conservation and Development
CAC:cac
HASupervisor assignmentsTeripheral Canal\Draft Memo re peripheral canal 10.24.08 wpd.wpd
' Southwest Diversified v. City of Brisbane, 229 Cal. App. 3d 1548, 1555 (Cal. App. 1st Dist.
1991). See also, Johnston v. Claremont, 49 Cal. 2d 826, 834 (Cal. 1958).
4 The Governor's water bond proposal, entitled the Safe, Clean, Reliable Drinking Water Supply
Act of 2008, totals $9.3 billion.