The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 04191988 - WC.2 W 01 TO; BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: water committee Contra Costa DATE: April 21, 1988 v(�. a* SUBJECT: water conservation and Drought Preparedness Recommendations SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) .& BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Authorize staff to. send a letter to all Contra Costa cities encouraging them to adopt water conservation policies." 2. Authorize County (all departments and agencies) assistance to the Contra Costa Water District and East Bay Municipal Utility District in their water conservation programs. 3 . Encourage the East Bay Municipal Utility District to use Delta water supplies in preference to mandatory rationing. 4. Encourage local landscapers and nurseries to become involved in water conservation. 5'; Encourage water conservation through incentive pricing. 6. Request water districts not to annex areas or serve large new installations until there is an aggressive water con- servation plan in place. / . Reaffirm County portion of statewide water conservation, including metering of domestic water supplies in all urban locations. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The activities and efforts by County departments and agencies in support of the Water District etforts are to be provided from current staff and budgets. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND The Water Committee, at its April 11, 1988 , meeting, heard pres- entations by the Contra Costa Water District and East Bay Municipal Utility District on the current water outlook for the remainder of this year. It was reported that storage levels in the Northern California reservoirs were severely low, and that water quality and .availability during the summer months would be critical. In light of this report, the Water committee outlined five recommendations in order to promote and encourage the use of all available means to augment possible water shortages and enhance water conservation. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE; RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATUREISI: Supervisor Tom Torlakson Supervisor Sunne W McPeak ACTION OF BOARD ON April 19, 1988 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER Supervisor Powers moved an amendment'.to the Water Committee Report to recommend to East Bay Mud that •they adopt the flat water rate selection and that they adopt a policy of not annexing new properties to the District or new large facilities without a strict water conservation program. The motion was defeated. The vote being: Ayes:' Supervisors Powers and Fanden; Noes: Supervisors McPeak, Torlakson and Schroder. Supervisor McPeak moved the addition of recommendations 6 and 7 to the Water Committee Report. The motion carried unanimously. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Orig. Dept. Community Deve 1. ATTESTED April 19, 1988 County Administrator EW/jn PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 145:h2O.brd Water Committee BY M382/7-83 ,DEPUTY 1�C2b THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WC2.B Adopted this Order on _April 19, 1988 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson and Schroder NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN: None =--------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Contra Costa Water District Entitlement and East County Irrigation District entitlement and the Involvement of East Bay Municipal Utility District Participation in Water Storage at Los Vaqueros. In conjunction with consideration of the Water Committee Report, Supervisor McPeak moved to refer to the Water Committee the letter from the Environmental Defense Fund dated April 11, 1988 relative to the water entitlement for the Contra Costa Water' District and to consider in concept Contra Costa Water District using the rest of its entitlement this year instead of having it resold by the Bureau of Reclamation to farmers in the Valley and reasserting their ownership over it and using it for either sharing or release into the estuary to repel salt. Supervisor Torlakson also requested referral to the Water Committee the matter of the East County Irrigation District entitlement in Indian Slough and East Bay Municipal Utility District participation in water storage at Los Vaqueros. Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the letter from the Environmental Defense Fund relative to Contra Costa Water District' s use of its entitlement demand and the East County Irrigation District water entitlement and possible participation by East Bay Municipal Utility District are REFERRED to the Water Committee. 1 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. orig. Dept. Clerk of the Board ATTESTED: 1 PHIL BAT ELOR, Clerk of the Board cc: County Administrator of Supervisors and County Administrator County Counsel Water Committee Community Development Lo By , Deputy ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND Rockridge Market Hall 5655 College Avenue Oakland, CA 94618 (415) 658-8008 April 11, 1988 Donald Freitas President, Board of Directors Contra Costa Water District 1331 Concord Ave. Concord, CA 94520 Dear Mr. Freitas: I write on behalf of the Environmental Defense Fund to request that you entertain a novel idea which may be of great benefit to the ecological integrity of the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta estuary. The idea is simple: would the Contra Costa Water District be willing to dedicate the unneeded portion of its annual entitlement to water to Bay/Delta freshwater outflow? Three factors have combined to bring us to make this suggestion. First is the fact that this is the second consecutive very dry year in California. Freshwater inflow to San Francisco Bay is severely restricted. Any additional infusion of freshwater would surely be a boon to the already severely depleted fish and wildlife resources of the estuary. This will also be true in future years, particularly next year, should it also be dry. Second is the fact that the CCWD recently announced its willingness to share its surplus water this year wi tb its s neighbors at EBMUD. EDF praises you for this statesmanlike National Headquarters offer, but as you know, EBMUD has already declined to accept the offer, preferring instead to institute unnecessarily 257 Park Avenue South Draconian and potentially inequitable mandatory water New York, NY 10010 (212) 505-2100 rationing measures. 1616 P Street, NW Finally, for the last year and half, EDF has been Washington, DC 20036 concerned about the Bureau of Reclamation's announced (202) 387-3500 intention to sell water CCWD does not use in any given year 1005 Arapahoe Avenue for a second time to other potential water users in the San Boulder, CO 80302 Joaquin Valley. In its "San Joaquin Valley Conveyance (33!440-4901 Investigation, California Status Report, " October 1986, the 1108 East Main Street Bureau announced that it proposed to sell prospective Richmond, VA 23219 Mid-Valley Canal contractors 250,000 acre feet of so-called (804) 780-1297 128 East Hargett Street Raleigh, NC 27601 (919) 821-7793 Recvcled Paper Donald Freitas April 11, 1988 Page 2 "interim yield. " It defined interim yield as water "assumed to be available only until about 2010 when buildup of present and future contracted water is complete. " It also stated that "interim yield is yield that is now under contract, but is not yet being delivered." That of course includes CCWD's unused water. Essentially, CCWD has a choice. Either it can stand idly by and watch the Bureau resell water CC;VD has already bought and paid for, with no benefit to CCWD or its constituents, or it can request (indeed, it can demand) that the Bureau release that water for San Francisco Bay/Delta estuary outflow on a schedule most beneficial to the estuary. EDF would be pleased to cooperate with the District in developing such a schedule. We have already discussed the matter with eminent biologists and engineers who have expertise in this area. We also hope to interest other agencies who are in the same position vis-a-vis the Bureau as CCWD is, especially EBMUD, in doing the same thing we are requesting you to do. (As you know, EBMUD and its constituents have paid for and not used increasing amounts of Bureau water since the early 1970s. ) Please let me know your reaction. I would be very happy to discuss thij matter further with you, your Board and your staff at any mutually convenient time. Sincerely yours, Thomas J. Graff Senior Attorney TJG:mjg