HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05162000 - C49 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: TRANSPORTATION, WATER&INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
DATE: MAY 8, 2000
SUBJECT: ADOPT a position in opposition to Assembly Bill 2492 (Kuehl) which would impose numeric
effluent limits on discharges from municipal stormdrain systems
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTTFICATION
I. Recommended Action:
ADOPT a position in opposition to Assembly Bill 2492 (Kuehl) concerning numeric effluent limits on
stormdrain system discharges and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to forward the Boards action
to Assembly member Kuehl.
II. Financial Impact:
If passed,Assembly Bill 2492 could have a tremendous impact on the County's General Fund. The cost to
comply with AB 2492 requirements would far exceed the current Stormwater Utility Assessment revenue
the County receives. The County would be faced with a Proposition 218 assessment increase or funding the
increase with the General Fund.
Continued on Attachment: SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OT
R
SIGNATURE (S): AAVL� L&rL01�_a
ACTION OF BOARD OPWy 16, 2000 APPROVED AS RECOM NDEDXL_OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
- - —UNA?--;I1+Gk4{ARSENT— - - - - - - } I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an
AYES: I-IT,IV, NOES: action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TIT Supervisors on the date shown.
RMA:mw
G:\OrpData',Admin\Mitchlbo=00\Trans,Water,&Infrastructure BO.doc
Div: Public Works(Admin)
Cont ATTESTED: - try 1� =)o
Contact:
Match tch Avalon(313-203) is i
cc: D.CountyEck Counsel PHIL,BATCHELOR Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
D.Eckerson,Flood Control County
Y
D.Freitas,Contra Costa Clean Water Program and County Administrator
Karen Keene,County Supervisors Association of California
13 -, Deputy
SUBJECT: ADOPT a position in opposition to Assembly Bill 2492 (Kuehl) which would impose numeric
effluent limits on discharges from municipal stormdrain systems.
DATE:
PAGE 2
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
Assembly Bill 2492, as currently proposed, would impose numeric effluent limits on discharges from
municipal and industrial stormdrain systems. This bill exceeds the requirements of federal law. The Federal
Clean Water Act requires the reduction of Stormwater pollutants to the "Maximum Extent Practicable" as
a compliance standard for municipal stormwater discharges. The "Maximum Extent Practicable"
compliance standard was recently upheld in a Ninth Circuit Court ruling. The court confirmed that National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for municipal stormwater dischargers are not
required to include provisions such as numeric effluent limitations for compliance with water quality
standards. In addition, numeric effluent limitations are not required in permits when they are determined
to be infeasible. The State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Boards have recognized that
effluent limitations for municipal stormwater discharges are currently not feasible and have reflected this
in their NPDES permit requirements.
Pollutants that reach municipal stormdrain systems originate from various sources. Many of these sources
are beyond the control of local governments. These include atmospheric deposition, natural oil seeps, the
lawful use of pesticides, and degradation of mineral deposits in watersheds. Since it is not possible to
control all sources of pollutants, the application of inflexible numeric effluent limits could lead to treatment
of stormwater at the outfall (end of pipe treatment).
The County is a member of the Contra Costa Clean Water Program and, along with all the cities in the
County,has embarked upon improving water quality through best management practices. Since most of the
non-point source pollution comes from individual activities in the watershed, the long-term solution is to
modify social behavior. This can only be accomplished over a long period of time through educational and
awareness efforts. A similar effort was conducted by the American Lung Association on cigarette smoking
many years ago and was very successful. This type of approach addresses the root cause of the problem.
From a policy standpoint, if we go to numeric limits as required by AB 2492, our approach to the problem
will move from an education program addressing the root cause to an enforcement program.
Establishing effluent limitations in itself can be problematic. Some watersheds have different natural
baseline amounts of constituents or pollutants. As an example, there is a mercury mine located in the
headwaters of Marsh Creek. The mercury levels in Marsh Creek are much higher than mercury levels in
other watersheds in the County due to this naturally occurring mineral deposit.
Numeric limits, as a compliance standard, comes from the regulation of point sources where the input of
the pollutants into the wastestream or stormwater discharge is easily calculated and fully known. This type
of compliance standard is not readily transferable to non point source pollution,where the baseline pollutant
levels are not easily calculated and the sources not fully known.
Compliance with the requirements of AB 2392 would be very costly. The California Stormwater Quality
Task Force, a consortium of Flood Control Agencies and Clean Water Programs working with the State
Regional Water Quality Control Board on developing reasonable regulatory programs, and the National
Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies have been researching the costs of various
SUBJECT: ADOPT a position in opposition to Assembly Bill 2492 (Kuehl) which would impose numeric
effluent limits on discharges from municipal stormdrain systems.
DATE:
PAGE 3
regulatory requirements. It has been estimated that the cost to local government statewide to shift from best
management practices based programs to stormwater treatment systems would be $7 billion per year. As
a comparison, if our Stormwater Utility Assessment was increased to the maximum amount of$30 per ERU
(equivalent runoff unit) we would generate about $3 million annually. The unincorporated County's share
of a$7 billion statewide cost may be in the neighborhood of$50,000,000 to $60,000,000 per year. In 1990,
Sacramento City and County commissioned a detailed study of the capitol and operations and maintenance
costs for a similar water quality plan at the time and came up with a cost of$260,000,000 per year for the
City and County.
For the above reasons, staff is recommending opposition to Assembly Bill 2492. It should be noted that this
bill is also opposed by the League of Cities and the California State Association of Counties. AB 2492 was
referred to the Suspense File by the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Eventhough the bill is in the
suspense file, staff believes it would be beneficial to take a position on the bill and forward the Boards
position to Assembly member Sheila Kuehl.
IV. Consequences of Negative Artions
The Board would not take a position to oppose legislation that would institute numeric limits for storm
water discharges. Compliance with these proposed requirements could prove extremely costly and currently
is not feasible.
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 3, 20W
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-1999-2000 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2052
Introduced by Assembly Member Aroner
February 22, 2000
An act to amend Section 99315 of, and to add Chapter 3.5
(commencing with Section 99170) to Fart 11 of Division 10 of,
the Public Utilities Code, relating to transportation, making
an appropriation therefor, and declaring the urgency thereof,
to take effect immediately.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2052, as amended, Aroner. Transportation: public
transit: CalWORKs recipients.
(1) Existing law requires regional transportation planning
agencies, as defined, and regional transportation
commissions, as defined, to prepare and adopt an action plan
that describes in detail the steps required to consolidate social
service transportation services. The plan is required to be
submitted to the Director of Transportation and updated
every 2 years.
This bill would create the Welfare-To-Work Account in the
State Transportation Fund and would provide that money in
the account is continuously appropriated to the Department
of Transportation for allocation to certain regional
transportation entities for the purpose of developing
transportation projects and services to assist persons who are
receiving aid under the CalWORKS program, as specified, and
98
AB 2052 —2—
for
2—for transfer to a specified subaccount within the account for
other specified purposes.
The bill would require the department to allocate funds
from the account to the regional transportation entities based
on a specified formula.
The bill would require each regional transportation entity
to create a welfare-to-work fund as a trust fund in the county
treasury, to deposit in that fund all money allocated to it under
these provisions, and to apportion and allocate money from
the fund to the operaters claimants within its jurisdiction to
fund projects and services for providing transportation for
recipients of aid under the Ca1WORKs program. The bill
would thereby create a state-mandated local program by
imposing additional duties upon local governmental entities.
The bill would create the Suburban and Rural Operators
Welfare-To-Work Subaecount within the account and require
the department to transfer money from the account to the
subaccount in a specified amount. The money in the
subaccount would be available for allocation by the
department to fund certain projects and services—seleefed--by
aid under the G94W4)RKs pf-egraffl. in counties with
populations of less than 100,000 persons.
The bill would require the department, in consultation with
representatives of the CaIWORKs program, to prepare an
evaluation report regarding the effectiveness of the
demonstration project, and, on or before December 31, 2003,
to provide a copy of that report to the Legislature.
(2) The California Constitution requires the state to
reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs
mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish
procedures for making that reimbursement, including the
creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of
mandates that do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide and other
procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed
$1,000,000.
Existing law requires that certain funds transferred to the
Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation
Fund be appropriated to the department for specified
purposes relating to public transit, among other things.
98
-3— AB 2052
This bill would, if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state,
establish a procedure whereby the funds transferred to the
department from the account would be made available for the
additional purpose of reimbursing regional transportation
entities for those costs.
(3) The bill would appropriate $20,000,000 from the
General Fund to the 'Welfare-To-Work Account for the
purposes specified in(1) above.
(4) The bill would declare that it is to take effect
immediately as an urgency statute.
'Vote: !3. Appropriation: yes. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the,Mate of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of
2 the following:
3 (a) Public transit is an essential element for successful
4 implementation of welfare reform.
5 (b) A variety of different approaches to improving
6 public transit to aid welfare reform must be tried,
7 including, but not limited to, added levels of service, van
8 pools, subsidized fares, trip planning, and public
9 education.
10 (c) In order to lead the way in developing these
11 various approaches, including, but not limited to, projects
12 to better leverage available federal funds for the Access
13 to Jobs and Reverse Commute Program made available
14 under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
15 (P.L. 145-178), legislation should be enacted to fund a
16 range of demonstration projects.
17 (d) In order to better implement that legislation, not
18 less than 25 percent of the funds received by a regional
19 entity, as defined under subdivision (f) of Section 99171
24 of the Public Utilities Code, should be allocated to
21 nonprofit entities other than transit providers.
22 SEC. 2. Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section
23 99174) is added to Part 11 of Division 14 of the Public
24 Utilities Code, to read:
25
98
AB 2452 —4-
1
4-1 CHAPTER 3.5. WF.LFARE-To-WORD TRANSPoRTATION
2 DEmoNSTRATION PROJECT
3
4 Article 1. Definitions and General Provisions
5
6 99170. This chapter shall be known and may be cited
7 as the Welfare-To-Work Transportation Demonstration
8 Project Act of 2000.
9 99171. For purposes of this chapter, the following
10 terms have the following meanings:
11 (a) (1) "Account" means the Welfare-To-Work
12 Account created by Section 99180 in the State
13 Transportation Fund.
14 (2) "Subaccount" means the Suburban and Dural
15 Operators Welfare-To-Work Subaccount created within
16 the account by Section 99190.
17 (b) "Ca1WORKs program" means the program
18 provided under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section
19 11200) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and
20 Institutions Code.
21 (c) "Claimant" has the same meaning as that term is
22 defined in Section 99203 or is a nonprofit entity that
23 provides transportation services.
24 (d) "Department" means the Department of
25 Transportation.
26 fd}-
27 (e) "Fund" means the county welfare-to-work fund
28 created under Section 99182.
29 „ has the same that term
30 defined in Seetien 993110 of is t entity that
31 pfoyides transpertatieft serviees.
32 (f) "Regional entity„ means a transportation planning
33 agency designated under Section 29532 of the
34 Government Code or a county transportation
35 commission created under Division 12 (commencing
36 with Section 130000).
37 (g) "Welfare population" means the number of
38 persons within the jurisdiction of a regional entity who
39 are receiving aid under the Ca1WORKs program.
98
Ile
—5— AB 2052
1 99174. For the purposes of this chapter, the "area" of
2 a regional entity is as follows:
3 (a) For a county transportation commission, all of the
4 area within the county in which the commission was
5 created.
6 (b) For a transportation planning agency, the area for
7 which it is the designated agency under Section 29532 or
8 29532.1 of the Government Code, but excluding those
9 areas that are also under the jurisdiction of a county
10 transportation commission.
11 99176. Not more than 5 percent of any funds received
12 under this chapter by a regional entity or operate
13 claimant may be expended for administration of the
14 program established under this chapter.
15 99178. Prior to making any funds available to a
16 provider of services, the department, regional entity, or
17 operator making those funds available shall obtain both
18 of the following from the proposed recipient of those
19 funds:
20 (a) Certification that the proposed recipient is in
21 compliance with all applicable state and federal laws
22 governing labor, employment, safety, and taxation.
23 (b) A statement disclosing all violations of those laws
24 committed by the proposed recipient within the past 10
25 years or certifying that no violations of those laws have
26 occurred during that time.
27
28 Article 2. Allocations to Urban Operators
29
30 99180. The Welfare-To-Work Account is hereby
31 created in the State Transportation Fund.
32 Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code,
33 the money in the account is hereby appropriated, without
34 regard to fiscal years, to the department for allocation to
35 the regional entities for the purpose of developing
36 transportation projects and services, including, but not
37 limited to, the linking of transit information systems to
38 agencies administering the Ca1WORKs program to assist
39 persons who are receiving aid under the Ca1WORKs
98
AB 2052 —6-
1
6-1 program and for transfer to the subaccount as required by
2 the department.
3 99181. (a) Ninety percent of the funds made
4 available for purposes of this chapter shall be allocated to
5 regional entities serving populations of 100,000 persons or
6 more.
7 (b) The department shall allocate funds from the
8 account to the regional entities based on the ratio of the
9 welfare population within the area of the regional entity
10 to the welfare population of counties with a total
11 population of 100,000 persons or more, as estimated by the
12 State Department of Social Services.
13 99182. (a) Each regional entity shall create a
14 welfare-to-work fund as a trust fund in the county
15 treasury and shall deposit in that fund all money allocated
16 to it under Section 99181.
17 (b) Any interest or other income earned by
18 investment of the money in the fund shall accrue to and
19 be a part of the fund. Interest earned during a fiscal year
20 shall be treated in the same manner as funds allocated to
21 the regional entity by the Controller during that fiscal
22 year.
23 (c) The money in the fund shall not be commingled
24 with the local transportation fund, nor with planning
25 subventions from the Public Transportation Account, nor
26 with any other revenues or funds of the regional entity or
27 of any city, county, or eperate claimant.
28 (d) If there are two or more regional entities in the
29 same county, the money in the fund for those entities may
30 not be commingled.
31 99183. (a) The regional entity, in
32 cooperation with any other regional entity in that county
33 and after consulting with the county welfare
34 departments and other interested governmental and
35 nongovernmental entities, shall adopt rules and
36 regulations for the establishment of an annual grant
37 program for the allocation of funds for the purposes
38 described in Section 99184. Any The rules and
39 regulations shall include a requirement that regional
40 entities review grant proposals to ensure
98
-7— AB 2052
1 cast-effectiveness. Any claimant within the area of the
2 regional entity may file a competitive claim for a grant of
3 funds under the program.
4 (b) The regional entity shall allocate money from the
5 fund to the —openers claimants within its jurisdiction for
6 competitive claims that are approved by the regional
7 entity in accordance with the procedures developed
8 vader Seetien 99185. Not less than 25 pei-eent of the f�attds
9
10 priyate, nonprofit entities the qeftlify its operators en
11 .
12 , any
13 witeent ef an operator's appet4ionment that is not.
14 eAleeated to that eperatef- she4l be fetaitted in the fund
15 later e4leeatien to the same operator er to a stieeeed4*g
16
17 regiefta4 eadty.-
18 (d)—under Section 99185.
19 (c) On June 30, 2003, all regional entities shall transfer
20 any money that was allocated by the department under
21 this article and that was not encumbered under this
22 article on or before that date to the Controller for deposit
23 in the General Fund.
24 99184. An opera A claimant may file a competitive
25 claim under the grant program developed under Section
26 99183 for an allocation from the fund to accomplish the
27 following purposes:
28 (a) Providing transportation to jobsites, educational
29 facilities, and child care facilities for recipients of aid
30 under the CaIWORKs program.
31 (b) Purchasing vehicles for transportation of
32 recipients of aid under the CaIWORKs program.
33 (c) Designing and implementing transportation or
34 transportation management systems that will assist
35 recipients of aid under the CaIWORKs program in
36 obtaining jobs or other services that promote
37 employability.
38 99185. (a) The regional entity shall establish rules
39 and regulations for approving claims filed under the
40 grant program.
98
AB 2052 -8-
1
8-
1 (b) 1f the regional entity is a local transportation
2 commission within the area of a multicounty regional
3 agency, the eperate claimant shall file a copy of the claim
4 on the same day with the multicounty regional agency.
5 99186. An allocation made under this article may not
6 be rescinded or revised, except under one of the
7 following circumstances:
8 (a) A revised claim has been filed by the eperatet
9 claimant or an appeal affecting the allocation has been
10 filed.
11 (b) The operater claimant is found to be spending
12 money in a manner that is not in accordance with the
13 terms of the allocation.
14 (c) An adjustment is proved to be necessary to
15 reconcile the estimates on which the allocation was based
16 with the actual amounts required or with revised
17 estimates.
18 99188. A multicounty designated transportation
19 planning agency, as defined in Section 130004, may file a
20 competitive claim under the grant program developed
21 under Section 99183 for an allocation from the fund for
22 the purpose of linking transit information systems to
23 agencies administering the CaIWORKs program.
24
25 Article 3. Allocations to Suburban and Rural
26 Operators
27
28 99190. (a) The Suburban and Rural Operators
29 Welfare-To-Work Subaccount is hereby created within
30 the account.
31 (b) The department shall transfer from the account to
32 the subaecount an amount that is equal to 10 percent of
33 the total amount that is in the account.
34 (c) The money in the Subaccount shall be available for
35 allocation by the department to eperaters claimants
36 within counties with populations of less than 100,000
37 persons for the purpose of deyeleping taranspeftatie
38
39 purposes described in
40 Section 99184.
98
-9— AB 2052
1 99192. (a) The department shall develop procedures
2 to accept competitive applications from eperatefs
3 claimants within counties with populations of less than
4 100,000 persons for allocations of funds from the
5 subaccount for those projects and services that
6 accomplish the purposes listed in Section 99184.
7 (b) The department shall develop procedures to select
8 projects for funding and shall allocate funds from the
9 subaccount to fund the projects selected. When selecting
10 project proposals, the department shall review proposals
11 to ensure that the proposals are cost effective.
12
13 Article 4. Reimbursement of State-Mandated Local
14 Program Costs and Program Effectiveness Report
15
16 99198. Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the
17 Government Code, if the Commission on State Mandates
18 determines that this chapter contains costs mandated by
19 the state, the regional entity shall apply to the
20 department for payment of those costs, and the
21 department shall make those payments from the funds
22 made available to the department under subdivision (g)
23 of Section 99315.
24 99199. The department, in consultation with
25 representatives of the CalWORKs program, shall prepare
26 an evaluation report regarding the effectiveness of the
27 demonstration project under this chapter and, on or
28 before December 31, 2003, shall provide a copy of that
29 report to the Legislature.
30 SEC. 3. Section 99315 of the Public Utilities Code is
31 amended to read:
32 99315. Funds made available pursuant to subdivision
33 (a) of Section 99312, shall be available for all of the
34 following purposes:
35 (a) Bus and passenger rail services pursuant to
36 Sections 14035, 14035.5, and 14038 of the Government
37 Code.
38 (b) Funding of public transit capital improvement
39 projects in the state transportation improvement
98
AB 2052 — 10-
1
10-
1 program, pursuant to Section 14529 of the Government
2 Code.
3 (c) To the department for its planning activities not
4 payable from the State Highway Account in the State
5 Transportation Fund, its mass transportation
6 responsibilities, and its assistance in regional
7 transportation planning.
8 (d) To the director for allocation to the Institute of
9 Transportation Studies of the University of California for
10 training and research in public transportation systems
11 engineering and management and coordination with
12 other transportation modes.
13 (e) To the commission for its activities not payable
14 from the State Highway Account.
15 (f) To the Public Utilities Commission for its passenger
16 rail safety responsibilities specified in statute on
17 commuter rail, intercity rail, and urban rail transit lines.
18 (g) To the department for the payments required
19 under Section 99198.
20 SEC. 4. The amount of twenty million dollars
21 ($20,000,000) is hereby appropriated from the General
22 Fund to the Welfare-To-Work Account for the purposes
23 of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 99170) of Part
24 11 of Division 10 of the Public Utilities Code, as added by
25 this act.
26 SEC. 5. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the
27 immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or
28 safety within the meaning of Article IV of the
29 Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts
30 constituting the necessity are:
31 In order to implement, as soon as possible, the
32 Welfare-To-Work Transportation Demonstration Project
33 Act of 2000 to provide a variety of different approaches
34 to improving public transit to aid welfare reform, it is
35 necessary that this act take effect immediately.
0
98