HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-15-2016 Agenda Packet
Tuesday, March 15, 2016
6:00 PM
REGULAR MEETING
Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo Page 1
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx
ROLL CALL: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan
Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Mayor Carpenter
APPOINTMENTS
1. 2016 APPOINTMENTS TO CITY ADVISORY BODIES (PRICE / MAIER /
GOODWIN – 5 MINUTES)
Recommendation
In accordance with the recommendations of the Council Liaison Subcommittees, make
appointments to the City's Advisory Bodies effective April 1, 2016 as set forth below and
direct the City Clerk to continue to recruit for any unfilled vacant positions.
2. APPOINTMENTS TO THE CITIZENS’ REVENUE ENHANCEMENT OVERSIGHT
COMMISSION (PRICE / MAIER / GOODWIN – 20 MINUTES)
Recommendation
1. Make appointments to the Citizen’s Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission as
follows:
a. One member shall be appointed effective immediately, to fill an unscheduled
vacancy with an unexpired term of June 30, 2017.
b. Two members shall be appointed effective July 1, 2016, to terms expiring on
June 30, 2018.
2. Direct the City Clerk’s Office to come back to Council with any recommendations in
order to make the appointment process for the Citizen’s Revenue Enhancement
Oversight Commission coincide with other advisory bodies.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 15, 2016 Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15
minutes total)
The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip
and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council
on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the
Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the
Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons
exercising their public testimony rights (gov. Code sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to
follow up on such items.
CONSENT AGENDA
A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items
shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses
another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the
three minute time limit.
3. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Recommendation
Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
4. MINUTES OF JANUARY 19 AND FEBRUARY 2, 2016 (MAIER)
Approve the Minutes of the City Council meetings of January 19 and February 2, 2016.
5. PARTICIPATION IN CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE AND ACCESSIBILITY PLANNING PROGRAMS
INCLUDING FUNDING ASSISTANCE (GRIGSBY / IRONS / LYNCH)
Recommendation
1. Accept financial assistance for sidewalk deviation removals in the amount of $73,000
from the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority as part of a California Joint
Powers Insurance Authority master services agreement with Precision Concrete Cutting;
and
2. Accept financial assistance for updating of the City’s self -assessment and transition plan
in the amount of $21,500 from the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority as part of
their support of ensuring ongoing compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA).
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 15, 2016 Page 3
6. FLEET REPLACEMENT ACCELERATION (GRIGSBY / OLSON / BOCHUM /
SCHMIDT / COX / BETZ / SHUCK)
Recommendation
1. Approve acceleration of three vehicle replacements from FY 2016-17 to FY 2015-16
due to the extended period of time between order and receipt; and
2. Approve the lease purchase of one 2016 Pierce Arrow XT PUC 75’ Quint Aerial Fire
Apparatus in the amount of $894,650; and
3. Approve the lease purchase of one 2016 International/Tymco Street Sweeper Truck in
the amount of $246,817.60; and
4. Authorize the City Manager, to execute a five year agreement with PNC Equipment
Finance to accomplish these two lease purchases in a form subject to the approval of the
City Attorney and Director of Finance; and
5. Authorize the Finance Director to execute the purchase orders in the amounts noted and
associated with the fleet replacements described in Attachment A; and
6. Approve revenue appropriation of $36,096 from the Fleet Sale of Surplus Property fund
and expenditures of $36,096 for Command Vehicle CIP ($16,247) and
Ambulance/Squad CIP ($19,849) for new equipment requirements for Ambulance/Squad
and Command Vehicle; and
7. Authorize the surplus designation of Fleet Asset No. 9403, a 1991 Pierce 75’ Quint,
Fleet asset 0021, a 2000 Chevrolet Tahoe, and Fleet Asset No. 0317, a 1998 Ford E350
Ambulance, Fleet Asset No. 0206 2001 Freightliner/Tymco Sweeper Truck by sale,
auction, trade-in or other method in accordance with the City’s policies and procedures
as prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Section 405-L and 480.
7. SLO TRANSIT VEHICLE REPLACEMENT BUDGET AUGMENTATION
(GRIGSBY / ANGUIANO)
Recommendation
1. Approve a budget amendment to increase the budget for Transit Vehicle Replacement
Project Specification No. 91447 by $96,393; and
2. Amend the purchase order with Gillig Corporation in an amount not to exceed
$1,551,093 for three SLO Transit Vehicles.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 15, 2016 Page 4
8. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE 2016-17 GRANT APPLICATION FOR
DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL (CANTRELL /
ELLSWORTH)
Recommendation
1. Authorize the Police Department to submit a grant application to the Department of
Alcoholic Beverage Control for 2016-17 in an amount not to exceed $35,000; and
2. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, authorizing grant applications for funding provided through the
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to increase education and enforcement
programs focusing on regulating retail alcohol outlets,” and authorizing the City Manager
to enter into a contract with the State of California if funding is awarded; and
3. If the grant is awarded, authorize the City Manager to execute all grant related documents
and authorize the Finance Director to make the necessary budget adjustments upon the
award of the grant.
9. SCHEDULE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR 2016 (PRICE / MAIER /
GOODWIN)
Recommendation
1. Reschedule the Regular City Council Meeting of June 7, 2016 to June 14, 2016; and
2. Reschedule the Regular City Council Meeting of July 5, 2016 to July 12, 2016.
BUSINESS ITEMS
10. POLICE DEPARTMENT FIVE -YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN 2016-2020 (CANTRELL
/ AMOROSO – 20 MINUTES)
Recommendation
Receive and file the Police Department’s Five-Year Strategic Plan.
11. DEMOCRACY VOUCHER FUNDING FOR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS (DIETRICK
/ ANSOLABEHERE – 45 MINUTES)
Recommendation
Discuss the citizen proposed “Ordinance to create a system of Democrac y Voucher funding
for municipal elections” and provide direction whether the Council desires staff to review
and analyze the proposed ordinance for further Council consideration.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 15, 2016 Page 5
12. FULL ALLOCATION OF THE NACIMIENTO WATER PROJECT (MATTINGLY /
FLOYD – 30 MINUTES)
Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, Adopting an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for
the Nacimiento Water Project and Authorizing an Amendment No. 3 to the Nacimiento
Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract Reflecting an Additional Allocation of Water
to the City.”
13. SUPPORT OF THE NATIONAL REVENUE-NEUTRAL CARBON FREE
DIVIDEND ACT (JOHNSON / HERMANN – 15 MINUTES)
Recommendation
Consider a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, regarding the National Revenue-Neutral Carbon Fee and Dividend Program.”
14. 2016 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM (DIETRICK – 30 MINUTES)
Recommendation
1. Adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, establishing the City Legislative Action Platform for 2016 and
appointing the Council Member and staff person to act as liaison between the City of
San Luis Obispo and the League of California Cities.”
2. Provide direction to staff on limiting the application of the platform to legislative action
and restricting use of the platform as a basis for advocacy for or against particular
projects or adjudicative acts before other jurisdictions’ governing bodies.
3. Appoint the Mayor, City Attorney and City Manager to act as the primary legislative
liaisons between the League of California Cities and the City of San Luis Obispo.
COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
(Not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities.
Time limit—3 minutes each.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 15, 2016 Page 6
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(Not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a
question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In
addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or
other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a
subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of
business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2)
ADJOURNMENT
Regular City Council Meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00
p.m., in the Council Chamber, respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see City Clerk.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City
Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related
writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the
City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California during normal
business hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning
any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100.
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Lee Price, Interim City Clerk
Prepared by: Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: 2016 APPOINTMENTS TO CITY ADVISORY BODIES
RECOMMENDATION
In accordance with the recommendations of the Council Liaison Subcommittees, make
appointments to the City's Advisory Bodies effective April 1, 2016 as set forth below and direct
the City Clerk to continue to recruit for any unfilled vacant positions.
DISCUSSION
San Luis Obispo has a long history of involving its residents in the business of City government.
Holding a position on an advisory committee and/or commission provides an opportunity for
interested residents to participate in the governing of their community under guidelines and
procedures established by Council. The City holds an Annual Advisory Body Recruitment to fill
those positions which commence on April 1st.
This year the City recruited to fill 20 scheduled and unscheduled advisory body positions. The
recruitment was conducted between December 2015 and January 22, 2016. A total of 44
applications were received. Council Liaison Subcommittees conducted interviews during the
month of February. The following recommendations will fill 17 of these vacancies. Three
vacancies will remain unfilled on the Parks and Recreation Commission. The City Clerk’s Office
will continue to recruit for these vacancies.
No vacancies currently exist on the Jack House Committee, Personnel Board, and Tree
Committee and therefore no recruitment was held.
Council Liaison Subcommittee Recommendations
Administrative Review Board
1. Appoint Daniel Knight to a two-year term expiring March 31, 2018.
2. Appoint Matthew LaFon to a two-year term expiring March 31, 2018.
3. Appoint Michelle Tasseff to a two-year term expiring March 31, 2018.
Architectural Review Commission
1. Reappoint Amy Nemcik to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
1
Packet Pg. 7
Bicycle Advisory Committee
1. Reappoint Randol White to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Citizen’s Transportation Advisory Committee
1. Reappoint John Schutz to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Construction Board of Appeals
1. Appoint Gregory Starzyk to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Cultural Heritage Committee
1. Reappoint Thom Brajkovich to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Housing Authority
1. Reappoint David Booker to a four -year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Human Relations Commission
1. Reappoint Maria Troy to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Mass Transportation Committee
1. Reappoint John Osumi to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Parks and Recreation Commission
1. Continue to recruit for two unfilled vacancies with a term expiration of March 31, 2020.
2. Continue to recruit for one unfilled vacancy with a term expiration of March 31, 2018.
Planning Commission
1. Reappoint William Riggs to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
2. Appoint Charles Stevenson to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Promotional Coordinating Committee
1. Reappoint Daniel Levi to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
Tourism Business Improvement District Board
1. Reappoint Nipool Patel to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
2. Reappoint Matthew Wilkins to a four-year term expiring March 31, 2020.
3. Appoint Pragna Patel-Muller to a three-year term expiring March 31, 2019.
Applications of those who were unsuccessful in this process will be kept on file for the next year
and will be notified of any subsequent vacancies.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
All applications are available in the City Council reading file and for public review in the Office
of the City Clerk.
1
Packet Pg. 8
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Lee Price, Interim City Clerk
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO THE CITIZENS’ REVENUE ENHANCEMENT
OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
1. Make appointments to the Citizen’s Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission as
follows:
a. One member shall be appointed effective immediately, to fill an unscheduled vacancy
with an unexpired term of June 30, 2017.
b. Two members shall be appointed effective July 1, 2016, to terms expiring on June 30,
2018.
2. Direct the City Clerk’s Office to come back to Council with any recommendations in order to
make the appointment process for the Citizen’s Revenue Enhancement Oversight
Commission coincide with other advisory bodies.
DISCUSSION
On July 15, 2014, Council adopted Ordinance No. 1605 establishing the Citizens’ Revenue
Enhancement Oversight Commission (REOC), to review the half-percent sales tax revenues and
expenditures, report on the City’s stewardship of this general purpose tax, and provide
recommendations directly to the City Council regarding expenditures of these tax revenues as an
integral part of the budget process. This ordinance became effective following the passage of an
extension to the Essential Services Transaction (Sales) and Use Tax. The REOC consist s of five
members who must be residents of the City and preferably have experience with finance,
budgeting, or municipal accounting. The appointment process for this particular advisory body is
made by majority vote of the City Council.
REOC currently has one vacancy due to the resignation of Hilary Trout in December 2015. Two
additional vacancies are scheduled for June 30 of this year. The City Clerk’s Office’s Advisory
Body recruitment process included this commission and received four applications. It is
recommended that the City Council immediately appoint one member to fill the unscheduled
vacancy expiring on June 30 of next year and appoint two members effective July 1, 2016, to
terms expiring on June 30, 2018.
As stated above, the appointment process for this body is made by majority vote of the City
Council. Currently, there are no Council liaisons for this body and consequently, no
2
Packet Pg. 9
recruitment/appointment interview process. It is also recommended that the City Council direct
the City Clerk’s Office to return with appropriate recommendations and actions to align the
REOC appointment process with that of other advisory bodies for consistency and efficiency.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with the appointment.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Defer making appointments and direct the City Clerk to continue advertising. The
City Council may choose to defer making appointments at this time and direct the City
Clerk to redouble efforts to advertise recruitment for REOC.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
Copies of applications have been provided to the City Council and are available for public
review in the City Clerk’s Office.
2
Packet Pg. 10
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Date: March 8, 2016
TO: City Council
FROM: John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk
VIA: Lee Price, Interim City Clerk
SUBJECT: City Council Minutes for January 19, 2016.
Please note that the City Council Minutes for January 19, 2016 will be included as an Agenda
Correspondence.
Memorandum
City Administration
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
4.a
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo Page 1
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
Regular Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday,
February 2, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor
Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson,
Assistant City Manager; and John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk; were present
at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as
indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM
Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns with uncommon structured buildings that
satisfy tourists’ interests; inquired about the City Council’s allegiance to developers and high
profile projects; voiced concerns regarding the City’s water resources for development projects.
CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9:
No. of potential cases: One.
4.a
Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 2
A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the local agency
on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a
significant exposure to litigation against the local agency. The existing facts and
circumstances exposing the City to litigation include allegations by ARH Quicky
Investments, LLC regarding ownership of a well located at 1460 Calle Joaquin, San Luis
Obispo. A letter, dated January 21, 2016, from the property owner’s attorney is on file
with the City Clerk.
ADJOURN TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 2, 2016
4.a
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 3
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday,
February 2, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor
John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager; and
John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk; were present at Roll Call. Other staff
members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Christianson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Dietrick stated that there was no reportable action, noting that the City Council
directed staff to agendize Item A for consideration in open session at the February 16, 2016 City
Council meeting.
INTRODUCTION
1. MIGUEL BARCENAS - UTILITIES ENGINEER AND MICHELLE BULOW -
SUPERVISING ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
Utilities Director Mattingly introduced Supervising Administrative Assistant Bulow and
Utilities Engineer Barcenas and provided brief introductions.
PRESENTATION
2. PRESENTATION BY JOHN FOWLER, PRESIDENT & CEO OF PEOPLE'S SELF-
HELP HOUSING, REGARDING AN UPDATE ON LOCAL HOUSING MARKET
John Fowler, President and CEO of People’s Self-Help Housing narrated a PowerPoint
presentation entitled “Local Update Regarding and State Housing and Community
Development Programs, Initiatives and Budgets” and responded to City Council inquiries.
4.a
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 4
3. PRESENTATION BY FIRE CHIEF OLSON AND PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
GRIGSBY, REGARDING WINTER STORM PREPAREDNESS
Fire Chief Olson and Public Works Director Grigsby narrated a PowerPoint presentation
entitled “City of San Luis ‘El Niño’ Preparation” and responded to City Council inquiries.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Barbara Frank, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding the Rental Housing Inspection
Program; opined that surrounding counties do not have an inspection program; stated that most
cities inspect properties when there is a citizen complaint.
William Derringer, San Luis Obispo, distributed a packet regarding his dogs Shadow and
Pebbles; voice concerns about the City’s open space policy; opined that aggressive dogs should
not be off leash in City parks, revealing that an aggressive dog that was not on a leash attacked
his dog.
Jeff Eidelman, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of a letter submitted to the California State
University (CSU) about limiting the number of students that will be attending Cal Poly in the
future; requested that the City Council agendize an item at a future City Council Meeting,
relating to limiting the enrollment of students at Cal Poly.
Pamela Werth, San Luis Obispo, voiced concerns regarding the use of dangerous or toxic
poisons at City parks; opined that the City did not provide adequate signage waring the public of
poisons being used to control ground squirrels at the park; stated that a feral cat and her nursing
kittens died after the mother cat ingested a dead ground squirrel.
Odile Ayral, San Luis Obispo, voiced concerns about the number of students at Cal Poly; urged
the City Council to agendize a CSU petition to limit the number of students at Cal Poly.
Heidi Harmon, San Luis Obispo, requested that the City Council agendize an item related to the
ban of single use plastic water bottles and the creation of refill infrastructure in the City; opined
that the ban will align with the City’s Major City goals.
Carol Winger, San Luis Obispo, voiced concerns regarding the housing project at Slack Street
proposed by Cal Poly; stated that she attended numerous meetings at Cal Poly regarding its
future growth, noting that this project was never mentioned.
Harry Busselen, San Luis Obispo, commended staff regarding the bicycle marking lanes on the
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Santa Rosa Street; voiced the importance of these markings,
indicating that it will help to reduce the number of accidents; suggested adding markings to
Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road.
Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the catastrophe in Los Angeles, relating to a large
gas leak; opined that the disaster was due to fracking.
4.a
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 5
Janine Rands, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of “SLO Refills NOT Landfills”; encouraged
the City to install rehydration stations; recommended that the City Council ban the sale of single
use water bottles under twenty-one ounces.
Cory Jones, San Luis Obispo, urged the City Council agendize an item related to the ban of
single use plastic water bottles at City Events; encouraged the implementation of refill stations
throughout the City; opined that there is only one refill station in the City currently.
Linda White, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the City’s neighborhood wellness; opined that
ordinances have been adopted to improve the quality of life in the neighborhoods; urged the City
Council to agendize a CSU petition to limit the number of students at Cal Poly.
Sharon Whitney, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the petition regarding limiting the number
of students at Cal Poly; encouraged the City Council to agendize this matter at a future meeting.
Helene Finger, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding Meadow Street near the South
Hills Open Space; stated that the there is a fence blocking the public access to the open space;
requested that the City Council contact the property owner to remove the fence or agendize an
item to discuss any changes to the current City public easement that is in place.
Mayor Marx advised that Ms. Finger contact the City Attorney to discuss the public easement
matter.
Michelle Tasseff, San Luis Obispo, spoke about a shelter crisis in the City; requested that the
City Council find a way to help assist the homeless who are in need of a shelter; noted that the
costs associated with providing a shelter are minimal.
Mila Vujovich-La Barre, San Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of endorsing the refillable water
stations in the City, the senior care facility proposed by the Madonna family on Froom Ranch
and the petition to limit the number of students at Cal Poly.
Kyle Jordan, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his experience being student in the City; voiced
concerns regarding the costs for housing in the City; opined that residents do not want students to
live in their neighborhood; requested that the City Council prioritize student housing.
In response to public comment, City Attorney Dietrick addressed Ms. Franks concerns regarding
the Rental Housing Inspection Program; stated that the City is aware of a case in Ohio, noting
that there was a ruling that the ordinance issued was unconstitutional based on a Federal and
Supreme Court precedent; noted that the ordinance adopted by the City Council was based on a
California Court of Appeals case.
In response to public comment, Assistant City Manager Johnson explained that San Francisco
was the first jurisdiction to ban the use of single use water bottles on city property and at city
events; noted that universities throughout the nation have taken a similar stance on this ban;
stated that this ban was not contemplated in our City’s Climate Action Plan, noting that there are
efforts to reduce the overall waste stream; voiced that some City events use the single use water
bottles as a source of revenue for nonprofits that sell water at the events.
4.a
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 6
In response to public comment, Assistant City Manager Johnson explained that the City has
several hydration stations installed throughout the City; stated that when a water fountain needs
replacing in the City, the Public Works department looks to see if a hydration system can be
installed.
In response to public comment, Public Works Director Grigsby addressed Ms. Werth’s concerns
regarding poison used to control ground squirrels at City parks; stated that staff will provide Ms.
Werth and the City Council a response regarding the City’s protocol and practices relative to the
use of chemicals at City parks in two weeks.
In response to public comment, Community Development Director Codron provided an update
regarding the City’s housing project; stated the staff is in the process of preparing the
Environment Impact Report (EIR) for the Cal Poly Master Plan; noted that the draft EIR is not
ready for review at this time; stated that staff will proved an update to the City Council when it is
ready for review.
Mayor Marx reopened Public comment; indicated that the public comment period was not open
during the Winter Storm Preparedness presentation, Item 3; stated that there were two speaker
slips submitted for this item.
Steve Barasch, San Luis Obispo, submitted a speaker card and was not present during Public
Comment.
Harry Busselen, San Luis Obispo, spoke on Item 3; voiced concerns regarding the City’s creeks,
flooding of creeks and fire protection; stated that flooding accumulates lots of debris in the
City’s creeks; suggested that the City include in their utility billing inserts information about
flooding awareness along with fire protection awareness.
By consensus, the City Council directed staff to agendize a study session to consider approaches
to regulation of single use plastic water bottles, including work program and resource
prioritization impacts and desired scope of potential regulations.
CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER
CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to approve Consent Calendar Items 4 thru 6.
4. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER
CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as
appropriate.
4.a
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 7
5. TRAFFIC MODEL UPDATE & ON-CALL TRAFFIC MODELING SERVICES
STUDY REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS; SPECIFICATION NO. 91434
MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER
CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Approve the issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to provide “Traffic Model
Update & On-call Modeling Services, Specification No. 91434”; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to award a contract is within the proposed budget of
$180,000; and
3. Authorize the Finance Director to execute and amend purchase orders for on-call
traffic modeling services purchase orders in an amount not-to-exceed the authorized
budget.
6. CALTRANS SPONSOR APPLICANT AGREEMENT WITH RACE SLO
MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER
CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support (“Support Letter”) for the
2016 SLO Marathon + Half; and
2. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a CalTrans Sponsor Application Agreement
(“Agreement”) and supporting document (“Authorization Letter”) with Get Off The
Couch, Potato Sports Productions, LLC authorizing the City of San Luis Obispo to serve
as the Sponsor Applicant for the CalTrans encroachment permit for the 2016 SLO
Marathon + Half.
BUSINESS ITEMS
7. ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT,
SINGLE AUDIT REPORT, AND ANNUAL AUDIT OF TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT ACT FUNDS FOR 2014-15
Glenn Burdette CPA Principal Allen Eschenbach, Assistant City Manager/Finance and IT
Director Johnson, and Senior Accountant Warner narrated a PowerPoint presentation
entitled “New Pension Accounting and Reporting Summary,” and responded to the City
Council’s inquiries.
Following discussion, MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0 to receive and file the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report, Single Audit Report, and annual audit of the Transportation
Development Act Funds for Fiscal Year 2104-15.
4.a
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of February 2, 2016 Page 8
LIAISON REPORTS
Council Member Ashbaugh reported on a conference and other City activities.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 4:00
p.m., and 6:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room and Council Chamber, respectively 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
__________________________
Jon Ansolabehere
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2016
4.a
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: a - Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016 (1291 : Minutes of January 19 and February 2, 2016)
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Monica Irons, Human Resources Director
Prepared By: Barbara Lynch, Deputy Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: PARTICIPATION IN CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE
AUTHORITY SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE AND ACCESSIBILITY
PLANNING PROGRAMS INCLUDING FUNDING ASSISTANCE
RECOMMENDATION
1. Accept financial assistance for sidewalk deviation removals in the amount of $73,000 from
the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority as part of a California Joint Powers
Insurance Authority master services agreement with Precision Concrete Cutting; and
2. Accept financial assistance for updating of the City’s self-assessment and transition plan in
the amount of $21,500 from the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority as part of their
support of ensuring ongoing compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
DISCUSSION
Background
The City is part of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) for risk (liability and
workers compensation) coverage. Liability coverage includes claims against the City for trip and
fall accidents or violations of accessibility requirements, the subject of the programmatic and
financial assistance being offered to the City as a Member of the CJPIA. These programs aim at
providing additional resources to member agencies to address common challenges that if
managed, could reduce potential liability claims. Council authorization is requested as the
assistance requires some commitments on the part of the City as discussed in the sections below.
Sidewalk Deviation Removals
The City has approximately 240 miles of sidewalks in the City. Sidewalks are subject to various
forms of wear and tear including damage from vehicles, settlement or uplift, and general
deterioration due to age. The City dedicates a portion of each year to identification and action on
sidewalk damage.
The Public Works Department completes a visual review of the sidewalks in the Downtown area
and one of the outlying eight Pavement Zones, each year. Any location with a hole or crack, or
an elevation deviation is captured by coordinates on a tablet computer, and uploaded into the
City’s Maintenance Management program. Crews are then dispatched to make temporary
repairs, or to complete full replacement of the worst areas, although resources are not adequate to
replace all damaged areas. This program was adopted by Council on January 22, 2013, but has
5
Packet Pg. 20
been used, in practice, for many more years. Systemic, proactive maintenance is a strong risk
management principle, supported by the CJPIA in that it improves public safety and reduces the
potential for claims and provides a strong defense when claims are submitted.
Occasionally, there are significant incidents, and costs are incurred by the CJPIA to either pay
the claimant, defend the claim, or both. While these are not frequent, the additional resources
offered by the CJPIA to reduce the possibility of a person being injured will likely be beneficial.
Attachment A shows a five year summary including the City’s investment in sidewalk
maintenance compared to numbers of claims and the amount paid. Summary information of
actual costs for claims now closed is shown as well. The CJPIA also holds aside money in
reserve based on the estimated cost of open claims. Reserves for open sidewalk related claims is
currently $110,000.
The CJPIA has entered an agreement with Precision Concrete Cutting to perform horizontal
sidewalk cutting. The Contractor will cut areas of raised sidewalk horizontally, removing the
deviation and reducing the likelihood that someone will trip and fall.
Before and After Photos from Precision Concrete Cutting Website
The City was selected by the CJPIA to participate in the Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance
Program and to receive funding to further address removal of sidewalk deviations in a high
traffic area of the City, such as the Downtown. The Downtown Pavement Area (approximate
boundaries – Osos to Nipomo, Monterey to Pismo) was recently surveyed and repaired just prior
to the holiday season. Staff will work with the CJPIA to determine whether alternative areas
such as those around Cal Poly or other schools are a more appropriate use of the available
funding. The area will need to be surveyed by staff and the data furnished to Precision Concrete
Cutting to specify areas where deviations require removal.
Not all deviations are suitable for cutting and the program requires the City to remove and
replace sidewalk panels or provide a temporary ramp, where cutting is not suitable. Attachment
B outlines the requirements of the program for Sidewalk Inspection and Maintenance. The
agreement to complete sidewalk replacement for sites where deviations cannot be mitigated
obligates the City to actively pursue replacement.
The City budgeted $100,000 annually in the 2015-17 Financial Plan to replace sidewalks through
the Capital Improvement Plan, including necessary tree removals. Contract costs for repairs over
5
Packet Pg. 21
the last couple of years for individual projects have varied from between $10,000 to $22,000 per
site depending upon the degree of damage, width of sidewalk, and need for tree removal. Within
the Operating Program for Streets and Sidewalks, a typical Pavement Zone receives 46 repairs
by City staff, with individual projects averaging 222 square feet.
The CJPIA has stated they will consider funding constraints when determining whether the City
is abiding by the terms of the program. It is unlikely that the City could replace all areas that
cannot be horizontally cut within the current annual capital budget of $100,000. In the likely
event that budgeted funding is not adequate, Street Maintenance staff will install temporary
ramping of areas not cut. This is work that would normally be done as part of the City’s adopted
Pavement Management program.
Updated Self-Assessment and Transition Plan
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed in to law in 1990. Once in effect, all
cities assumed a responsibility for compliance with the ADA. In 1994 and 1995 the City
prepared and adopted a Self-Assessment and Transition Plan ( “Plan”), as required under the law.
The Plan looked at the City’s facilities and identified items that did not comply with the
requirements of ADA. The Plan outlined the improvements to meet or exceed requirements
under ADA.
The City is routinely completing maintenance and replacement of its facilities. In doing so, the
facilities are either brought into compliance, or some upgrade in the facilities is made to improve
accessibility. While this continual improvement is good, it is also important to formally review
and update the City’s Plan to ensure resources are allocated towards addressing ADA issues and
ensuring public facilities have improved accessibility. ADA standards have changed since its
inception and facilities that met standards in 1995 may not meet current, updated standards. By
having an updated Plan, the City can focus its funding dollars to the right priorities, while still
accomplishing important infrastructure maintenance.
CJPIA is again offering assistance to its member agencies as many of them have not had the
resources to complete an updated Plan for several years. With recent and growing litigation in
this area, CJPIA has identified it as an area for added efforts to avoid potential risk. In doing so,
they contracted with Disability Access Consultants (DAC) to assist member agencies with ADA
compliance. Specifically, CJPIA has allocated $21,500 in services from DAC to assist the City.
This amount includes $5,000 towards the cost and licensing of DAC Trak, software developed
by DAC. DAC recommends that every public entity begin with an accessibility survey report.
The accessibility survey report consists of deficiencies or items that are not compliant with
current regulations. Items or elements that do not meet minimum requirements of compliance are
recorded in DACTrak, which provides for easy reporting and progress monitoring. The
remaining funding available through CJPIA can be put towards the cost of surveying existing
facilities or reviewing policies. Further discussion is necessary to identify a project team and
timeline for this important project as discussed under the Fiscal Analysis section of this report.
5
Packet Pg. 22
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Sidewalk maintenance efforts, such as deviation removal is exempt under CEQA Section 15301
Class 1 – Existing Facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
Sidewalks
The fiscal impacts to complete all needed repairs are currently unknown; however, given the
flexibility of the program, no cost impacts are anticipated. After the visual review of the area to
be addressed is complete and the contractor reviews each site to determine feasibility of the
horizontal cutting, the number of sites to be removed and replaced will be known. Given that the
program guidelines allow for the City to complete temporary ramping, in lieu of full
replacement, staff is comfortable recommending acceptance of the financial assistance. Ramping
will occur as part of normal maintenance activities, and replacement of sidewalk panels would
then occur as funding was available through the operating and capital budgets for sidewalk
replacement.
Transition Plan
An initial estimate from DAC indicates the cost of a full survey of all City buildings and parks
open to the public, 240 miles of sidewalk, curb ramps, crosswalks, intersections, street furniture,
and related areas such as bus stops and shelters, a Self-Assessment, and Transition Plan
including software to allow continued monitoring, would cost approximately $200,000, less the
$21,500 authorized by CJPIA. Staff is evaluating options to further refine this estimate, which
does not include open space, identify the necessary staff resources and timeline to accomplish
this project, and intends to return to Council with a more specific request at the 2016-17
Financial Plan Supplement. While accepting the funds commit the City to the updating of the
Plan, this update is needed anyway. Without the assistance of the CJPIA, the entire cost will be
borne by the City.
ALTERNATIVE
The Council could choose to decline funding for either one, or both, of these programs. This
option is not recommended, as ultimately both programs contribute toward work that needs to
get done. The flexibility the CJPIA has offered on completing the follow -up, related to
availability of funds, provides some flexibility to the City.
5
Packet Pg. 23
Status Closed
Year Sum of Expenses Paid Sum of Loss Paid Sum of Total Paid
2010-11 $999.01 $91,610.95 $92,609.96
2011-12 $85,718.82 $45,500.00 $131,218.82
2012-13 $1,022.24 $31,800.00 $32,822.24
2013-14 $248.78 $1,328.19 $1,576.97
2014-15 $0.00 $670.10 $670.10
2015-16 $0.00 $500.00 $500.00
Grand Total $87,988.85 $171,409.24 $259,398.09
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
0
5
10
15
20
2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15
Total Claims Made Total Claims Paid
Amount Paid Total Annual Sidewalk Maintenance Investment*
5.a
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: a - Loss Chart (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
5.b
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: b - Sidewalk Inspection & Maintenance Pilot Program (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
5.b
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: b - Sidewalk Inspection & Maintenance Pilot Program (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
5.b
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: b - Sidewalk Inspection & Maintenance Pilot Program (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Rev. 9/9/15 Page 1
California JPIA
Americans with Disabilities Assistance Program
Overview
The purpose of the California JPIA’s Americans with Disabilities Assistance Program is to provide
technical and financial resources in order to help members achieve compliance with federal and state
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) laws. Recognizing the importance of ADA compliance, the
Authority’s Executive Committee has approved a level of funding across three broad areas. First, an ADA
consulting firm will work with members in assessing compliance; evaluating physical structures,
programs, and services; and developing transition plans. Second, members will be provided ADA
compliance tracking software. Third, the Authority will make seed money available through short‐term
matching loans in order to assist in funding necessary ADA capital improvements for purposes of barrier
removal.
The assistance program is expected to be carried out for a period of five years, with roughly 20% of the
membership receiving assistance in each of the program years. Since some members have already
begun addressing ADA compliance independent from the Authority’s program, partial or complete
reimbursement may be available if the work comports with the program conditions described below.
Agreement for Professional Services
For ADA consulting services described below, the Authority has entered into an agreement with
Disability Access Consultants (DAC). The agreement details terms and conditions for the provision of
professional services, the scope of ADA consulting services being provided, and the costs for these
services. The ADA consultant may incur reasonable actual expenses, including mileage, lodging, meals,
and transportation costs associated with providing ADA consulting services. Authorization for any and all
services to members will be according to the terms and conditions described therein. A copy of the
agreement is maintained at the Authority’s offices.
Level and Types of Assistance
The following describes the different types of assistance being provided to members.
Assistance Level 1: Member Assessment and Overall Diagnostic Profile
The ADA consultant will perform an assessment to determine the current level of ADA compliance
and plan a course of action to enhance compliance. If, after review, it is determined that the
member needs to complete or revise any of the required compliance components, the ADA
consultant will provide a recommended compliance plan that may include other assistance‐level
options. Following is a list of items determined during an assessment.
An ADA coordinator has been designated, noticed, and posted
Each site has a current transition/barrier removal plan that meets the requirements under
Title II of the ADA
A self‐evaluation of programs, services, activities, policies, procedures, and practices has been
completed
Attachment B - 15.c
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: c - ADA Pilot Procedure (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Rev. 9/9/15 Page 2
The member has updated its current transition/barrier removal plan, if applicable
Current ADA transition/barrier removal plans include all sites, such as new sites added since
the completion of the previous plan
Space leased “from” others for use by the member are identified
Leased sites and program locations are identified
Space leased “to” others by the member is identified
Any current ADA‐related concerns or issues are identified, including any pending or actual
litigation
The member may need questions answered regarding the ADA, Title 24 of the California
Building Code (CBC) or related accessibility standards
Staff development activities have been provided or are requested
Methods and priorities are recommended to members for achieving ADA compliance
Assessments carried out under Assistance Level 1 are designed to assist those members that
perhaps have done some ADA compliance work, but are uncertain either of its completeness or
being up‐to‐date. During the course of such an assessment, findings are likely to show that member
concerns were valid, and that the member is not compliant. As a public record, these findings might
create legal exposure for the member if an ADA activist or attorney were to learn of them.
In anticipation of exposure to litigation, the Authority will require that assessment work always be
requested and directed by an attorney in order to preserve attorney‐client privilege. In this scenario,
the attorney would work with the Authority’s ADA consultant in order to begin the work, and then
receive the findings directly from the consultant. The attorney would then share them with the
member. Under the Authority’s ADA assistance program, the Authority’s ADA attorney will request
and direct work of the ADA consultant.
The California JPIA will fund this assistance level in its entirety, with no contribution from the
member.
Assistance Level 2: Inspection of Sites, Development of Transition/Barrier Removal Plans
This service will provide members with inspection of sites that may be new or not inspected
previously, or have had extensive modernization or major remodeling. The service will include
inspection of member facilities and public rights‐of‐way, and identification of barriers to
accessibility, solutions to remove these barriers, and incorporation of the information into the ADA
consultant’s accessibility management software, DACTrak.
Following training, members will be able to license DACTrak to complete their own inspections,
including facilities and PROW, or update and manage their current plans. The software has an intake
component that can be used to inspect recently completed construction in order to ascertain
compliance with ADA requirements and Title 24 of the California Building Code. It also features an
online accessibility management component.
Under Assistance Level 2, public rights‐of‐way (PROW) must be evaluated to determine if there are
barriers that would prevent those with disabilities from traversing the pedestrian access route in the
public right‐of‐way. When members complete a self‐evaluation, these barriers must be identified
and incorporated into the member’s ADA transition plan.
Attachment B - 25.c
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: c - ADA Pilot Procedure (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Rev. 9/9/15 Page 3
There are standards in the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) that
address sidewalks, but those standards are for design only. They specify that changes in the level of
accessible routes up to 1/4” may be vertical and without edge treatment. Changes between 1/4”
and 1/2” are to be beveled with a slope no greater than 1:2. Changes greater than 1/2” are to be
ramped. These regulations do not specifically address maintenance. Therefore, it is the Authority’s
opinion that there is no ADA maintenance standard for sidewalk deviations that exist in the PROW
path of travel, and members have no general requirement to inspect or repair deviations that
exceed the ADAAG’s design standard. That said, there are instances where sidewalk deviations or
conditions of sidewalk surfacing that should be addressed in order to ensure accessibility by
disabled persons.
More broadly, and within the context of maintaining an agency’s public sidewalks, deviations that
are 3/4” or less vertical displacement have been deemed by the courts to be trivial in nature, unless
there are aggravating circumstances such as jagged edges or a history of falls that make such
instances of greater risk to the public. A vertical displacement of greater than 3/4” is not considered
trivial as a matter of law, and poses a jury question as to whether it constitutes a dangerous
condition of public property. Members have a duty to mitigate such dangerous conditions either
because they knew of the condition or should have known. This duty exists separate and apart of
any duty imposed under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Given the scope and costs associated with inspecting public rights of way (PROW), each member
must determine whether the consultant or member staff will carry out inspections.
The California JPIA will fund up to $16,500 toward this level of assistance. Members will be
responsible for any costs that exceed this amount. The California JPIA will also fund the first year of
licensing and training the DACTrak software. Members will be responsible for any required
equipment and licensing costs beyond the first year. The annual licensing fee is $2,000.
Assistance Level 3: Self‐Evaluation of Policies, Procedures, Practices
The ADA consultant will conduct a review of policies, procedures, and practices to determine if any
are discriminatory or potentially discriminatory. Programs, services, and activities would be
reviewed to determine accessibility by persons with disabilities.
The California JPIA will fund up to $5,000 toward this level of assistance. Members will be
responsible for any costs that exceed this amount.
Short‐Term Loans
Since some members may be unable to fund necessary capital improvements for purposes of barrier
removal due, the Authority is also making capital improvement matching funds available. These
funds are designed to help incentivize members to make needed improvements, particularly those
that would otherwise be out of fiscal reach in the foreseeable future.
The matching loans will be allocated up to $1 million over each of five consecutive years, with loan
recipients agreeing to repay the loans within five years of receiving the funding.
Allocating the loans to interested members will be done on a competitive basis, and will be based on
the total amount of funds being requested in any single year. Members requesting matching funds
Attachment B - 35.c
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: c - ADA Pilot Procedure (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Rev. 9/9/15 Page 4
will also need to have a completed transition plan that identifies the capital improvement associated
with the funding request.
The Authority will charge a percentage point above the yield to maturity at cost for all investments,
as shown in the April Treasurer’s report, for loans disbursed during the following fiscal year.
The California JPIA will announce its first call for funding applications in December 2015, with future
announcements occurring annually 12 months thereafter. Specific instructions with loan terms and
conditions will be provided when the application periods open.
ADA Training
The California JPIA will provide ADA training for both general employees and for those responsible
for ADA compliance, and will fund this training in its entirety, with no cost for the member.
Additional Consulting Services
For any ADA consulting services needed by members beyond the scope of those listed above, the
California JPIA has negotiated a flat rate of $98 per consultant hour.
The cost for additional consulting services will be borne by the member.
Member Responsibilities
The member must agree to carry out the following responsibilities.
Provide necessary human and fiscal resources in order to complete ADA assistance work in an
agreed‐upon and timely manner
Provide the ADA consultant with necessary information and documents
Complete an ADA self‐evaluation and transition plan for removal of accessibility barriers
Develop needed capital budget plans based on information contained in the ADA self‐evaluation
and transition plan
Complete a review of policies, procedures, and practices to determine if any are discriminatory
or potentially discriminatory
Designate an ADA grievance coordinator
Be responsible for costs that exceed per‐member funding levels approved by the Authority’s
Executive Committee
Provide a tablet or other device that will run the DACTrak software
Receive training on the use of DACTrak software
Be responsible for licensure of DACTrak software beyond the initial year
Attachment B - 45.c
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: c - ADA Pilot Procedure (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Rev. 9/9/15 Page 5
Program Procedures
General Procedures:
1. The Authority’s risk managers will work with members to determine assistance levels for each
member and notify members of the assistance level they will be receiving. Members will receive
a copy of this document, outlining the details of the program
2. Risk managers will contact the ADA consultant, notifying them of members ready to move
forward with one of the assistance levels
3. The ADA consultant will contact individual members to schedule an on‐site project kick‐off
meeting, and will forward information to the member and the risk manager regarding the kick‐
off
4. In coordination with the member, the Authority’s risk manager and the ADA consultant will co‐
participate in a project kick‐off meeting. The meeting will include discussion of the project scope
and responsibilities
5. The ADA consultant will develop a scope of work and an estimate of costs, outlining all
expenditures according to the various assistance levels described above
6. The ADA consultant will begin work upon written approval of both the Authority and member
Specific Assistance Level Procedures:
Assistance Level 1
1. The Authority’s ADA attorney will request and direct all member assessments
2. A report regarding the compliance level of the member will be issued to the ADA attorney in
order to preserve attorney‐client privilege
3. The Authority’s ADA consultant will provide written reports of completed work and member
actions
4. The ADA attorney will provide the ADA consultant’s report to the member
Assistance Level 2
1. Member will be provided DACTrak accessibility management software
2. Member will receive training regarding the use of DACTrak accessibility management software
3. Member will determine the level of ADA consultant assistance in completing inspections of
buildings, parks and facilities
4. Member will determine the level of ADA consultant assistance in completing inspections of
public rights‐of‐way
5. The ADA consultant will produce all necessary reports of findings and recommendations
Assistance Level 3
1. The ADA consultant will complete review of policies and procedures
2. The ADA consultant will review accessibility of programs, services and activities
3. The ADA consultant will produce all necessary reports of findings and recommendations
4. The ADA consultant will assist with required public input process, as required by Title II of the
ADA
Attachment B - 55.c
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: c - ADA Pilot Procedure (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Rev. 9/9/15 Page 6
Billing and Reimbursement
Work Performed through the Authority’s ADA Assistance Program
All work carried out through the California JPIA’s ADA assistance program must be approved in writing
by both the member and the Authority prior to commencement of work by the Authority’s ADA
consultant.
All invoices for work completed by the ADA consultant will be submitted to the California JPIA for
payment. Any amounts for services provided beyond the per‐member funding levels approved by the
Executive Committee will be billed to the member.
Work Performed Outside of the Authority’s ADA Assistance Program
Members who have completed independent ADA work between December 2012 and July 2015 may
submit for reimbursement of costs, according to the following conditions:
1. The work must be of the same or greater scope of what the Authority is making available
through its ADA assistance program
2. The work must be detailed in an agreement with the vendor
3. The work must be complete
4. Reimbursement amounts are the same as the per‐member funding levels approved by the
Executive Committee
5. The member would not qualify for additional ADA assistance in any area for which it is seeking
reimbursement
Attachment B - 65.c
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: c - ADA Pilot Procedure (1260 : CJPIA Financial Assistance)
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief
Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Jeremy Schmidt, Fire Mechanic
Julie Cox, Administrative Analyst
Ryan Betz, Administrative Analyst
Isaac Shuck, Fleet Supervisor
Tim Bochum, Public Works Deputy Director
SUBJECT: FLEET REPLACEMENT ACCELERATION
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve acceleration of three vehicle replacements from FY 2016-17 to FY 2015-16 due
to the extended period of time between order and receipt; and
2. Approve the lease purchase of one 2016 Pierce Arrow XT PUC 75’ Quint Aerial Fire
Apparatus in the amount of $894,650; and
3. Approve the lease purchase of one 2016 International/Tymco Street Sweeper Truck in the
amount of $246,817.60; and
4. Authorize the City Manager, to execute a five year agreement with PNC Equipment
Finance to accomplish these two lease purchases in a form subject to the approval of the
City Attorney and Director of Finance; and
5. Authorize the Finance Director to execute the purchase orders in the amounts noted and
associated with the fleet replacements described in Attachment A; and
6. Approve revenue appropriation of $36,096 from the Fleet Sale of Surplus Property fund
and expenditures of $36,096 for Command Vehicle CIP ($16,247) and Ambulance/Squad
CIP ($19,849) for new equipment requirements for Ambulance/Squad and Command
Vehicle; and
7. Authorize the surplus designation of Fleet Asset No. 9403, a 1991 Pierce 75’ Quint, Fleet
asset 0021, a 2000 Chevrolet Tahoe, and Fleet Asset No. 0317, a 1998 Ford E350
Ambulance, Fleet Asset No. 0206 2001 Freightliner/Tymco Sweeper Truck by sale,
auction, trade-in or other method in accordance with the City’s policies and procedures as
prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Section 405-L and 480.
6
Packet Pg. 34
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
Due to three specialized vehicles rapidly approaching end of useful life and because of the
extended times to procure such specialized vehicles, staff recommend the accelerated
replacement of the following: Fire Aerial Quintuple (“Quint”) Apparatus, Fire Command
Vehicle and Public Works Street Sweeper. A Quint combination pumper-aerial serves a dual
purpose, both as a fire pumper and an aerial apparatus. By definition this includes an aerial
ladder greater than 50 feet, minimum water tank of 300 gallons, fire pump capable of 750 gallons
per minute, and incorporate specific inventories of ancillary equipment including hose and
ground ladders.
These three vehicles were each approved for replacement FY 2016-17. Additionally, the Fire
Squad/Ambulance was approved for replacement in FY 2015-16 but because of new ambulance
crash standards, this purchase requires a more expensive gurney system and added funding of
$19,849. The Fire Command vehicle requires a more expensive radio system because the old
system is no longer available and the additional allocation of $16,247 for this vehicle is sought.
Staff is proposing the use of Fleet Sale of Surplus Property revenue from FY 2015-16 to pay for
the additional costs associated with these vehicle acquisitions.
DISCUSSION
Background
The build time for these vehicles ranges from approximately six to twelve months due to their
complexity. Given this long build time and the condition of the current fleet, staff is requesting
this replacement acceleration to ensure continuity of service and decreased maintenance
expenses to keep aged apparatus in service. Emergency vehicles are a vital part of the service
delivery for the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department. The Fire Department responds to over
5,000 emergency service calls annuall y. A Fire Apparatus Quint, Squad Ambulance and
Command Vehicle, were all approved to be replaced as part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan in
Fiscal Year 2016-17, Fire and Fleet operations developed a Fire Quint Apparatus, Squad and
Command Vehicle specification committee that took into account the unique features of our
community and identified the overall best fit for City’s fire vehicles. The new Fire Quint
Apparatus will replace a 23-year-old unit and the Squad will replace City an 18 year old unit.
The Command vehicle will replace a 16-year-old unit. The new vehicles will provide a higher
level of service while reducing costs and staff time for maintenance. The new Quint will also
meet highest emission standards.
The replacement of the 2001 Freightliner/Tymco Street Sweeper Truck, used daily by the Streets
maintenance staff, was approved as part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan in Fiscal Year 2016-17,
This vehicle is now fourteen years old and is well beyond its useful life replacement target of
eight years for sweeper vehicles. This truck is used primarily for critical City streets sweeping
maintenance and paving operations cleanup. Additionally, it is used to assist the Police
Department with vehicle accident cleanup, cleaning the City Corporation Yard’s wash bay area,
and assisting the Utilities Department in cleanup after water main breaks and/or storm drain
cleaning. Similar to the fire apparatus discussed above, the sweeper lead time for vehicle
6
Packet Pg. 35
production is six to twelve months. Ordering the vehicle now allows for delivery in the fiscal
year that is planned for in the Financial Plan.
Fire Apparatus Quint – Sole Source Purchase Recommended
Following extensive analysis, Staff is seeking the authorization to purchase a 2016 Pierce 75’
Quint Aerial PUC Pumper. Pierce Fire apparatus has been a dependable platform for emergency
response in the City for more than a quarter century.
Why a Sole Source Purchase of the Quint is Recommended
Staff recommends a sole source purchase award to South Coast Fire Equipment in the amount of
$894,650.29 for the purchase of a 2016 Pierce Arrow XT Quint 75 Foot Aerial PUC Fire
Pumper. (Attachment B) City purchasing guidelines allow for sole source when supplies or
equipment have been uniformly adopted in use by the City or otherwise standardized. The Pierce
Fire Quint Aerial Pumper has been the standard aerial apparatus for the City of San Luis Obispo
for the last quarter century. While there are other vendors that could provide aerial apparatus,
staff is recommending Pierce due to a variety of issues, including, equipment standardization and
familiarity by both the fire engineer and fire the mechanic, production time reduction due to the
working experience the City has established with Pierce’s manufacturing staff, and the benefits
of utilizing local vehicle vendors, California-based South Coast Fire Equipment. South Coast
Fire Equipment is providing the purchasing quote for aerial apparatus at the base price reflective
of a nationally utilized cooperative purchasing agreement. Used as a pricing standard throughout
the fire service, this master contract is commonly known as the HGAC, or Houston Galveston
Area Council cooperative purchasing agreement. While the City is not purchasing through the
HGAC, the City’s price for this apparatus is reflective of this agreement.
The Fire Department has a significant equipment and training investment with maintaining
Pierce manufactured apparatus. Fire Fleet already has an inventory of spare parts, filters and
maintenance items specific to the Pierce fire aerial apparatus platform. This inventory would be
costly to retrofit to accommodate another make of engine. Additionally, the Fire Department Fire
Vehicle Mechanic is specially trained and equipped to provide maintenance to Pierce
manufactured fire apparatus. All current front-line heavy duty fire apparatus is manufactured by
Pierce. Continuing with Pierce heavy duty apparatus maximizes the training and specialty tools
already provided to staff, thus controlling costs. Finally, the cost for the Pierce Aerial Apparatus
is comparable to that of other vendors.
Squad Rescue Ambulance - Cooperative Purchasing
The City’s Financial Management Manual, Section 405-I page 14, recommends fleet purchases
using either a State cooperative purchasing contract or “piggyback” agreements with local
agencies.
All Fleet purchases such as Police patrol vehicles, general purpose fire trucks, sedans
station wagons, passenger vans, light to heavy trucks, utility vehicles, and construction
equipment should generally be acquired new through State of California Multiple Award
Schedule (CMAS) contracts. Specialized units not generally available through CMA
should generally be acquired new through “piggyback” purchases, where other local
6
Packet Pg. 36
agencies have conducted competitive procurements and made those contracts available
to the City.
CMAS contracts that leverage prices by other agencies provide substantial cash discounts for the
City when making these procurements as well as expedite the purchasing process. Having the
capability to make a purchase through an established purchasing agreement, as opposed to an
independent purchase, will provide the City with additional savings which can be utilized
towards the purchase of additional replacement equipment. After conducting bids from the
National Joint Purchasing Alliance (NJPA), the HGACBuy Cooperative Purchasing Program
(HGACBuy Contract No. SW04-14 and local vendor Perry Ford and Alfano Motors per City’s
financial Management Manual Section 405-I, page 14 line 3 which states:
3. Contact any local dealers that might have been potential bidders to ensure that the
cooperative contract price is a good value and prudent alternative to advertising for
bids.
a. Use local dealer within the city limits if they can provide the same brand, model and
configuration of item(s) identified in cooperative purchase agreement(s) at or below
the cooperative purchasing net cost within the same terms and conditions.
Per the City’s purchasing policy, staff is seeking Council approval to purchase one Squad Rescue
Ambulance for $199,849. Currently budgeted and approved for replacement as part of the
2015-16 financial plan. Staff has concluded that the 2016 Ford F550 4WD with Leader
Industries ambulance package would make the best fit for the Fire Department’s Squad Rescue
Ambulance needs (Attachment C). The vehicle will be outfitted through Leader Ambulance, a
well-known and well reputed fire equipment builder and repair facility located in Southern
California. The price quote benefits from the cost competitive bid process obtained by the City of
Downieville Fire Department. The chassis for the vehicle will be purchased through Perry Ford,
a local vendor, and transported to Leader for production.
Squad Chassis
Perry Ford was the lowest bid for the Squad Chassis. Staff recommends approval of using Perry
Ford for this purchase. (Attachment E)
Command Vehicle
Per the City’s purchasing policy, staff is seeking Council approval to purchase one new Fire
Battalion Chief (BC) Command vehicle currently budgeted and approved for replacement as part
of the 2015-17 Financial Plan in Fiscal Year 2016-17. Staff has concluded after an extensive
analysis that the 2016 Chevrolet Suburban 4WD 4-door, 1500 series would make the best fit for
the Fire Departments’ command vehicle requirements. The vehicle will be purchased through
Alfano, a local vendor, pursuant to City purchasing guidelines. An additional $16,247 is also
requested as the radio in the replacement Command Vehicle is no longer available and a new
model radio kit ($16,247) for the vehicle is required.
Command Vehicle Chassis
Alfano Motors was the lowest bid for the Command Vehicle Chassis. Staff recommends
approval of using Alfano Motors for this purchase. (Attachment D)
6
Packet Pg. 37
Sweeper Truck
Pursuant to City purchasing guidelines, staff explored use of a multi -year cooperative purchasing
agreement with HGACBUY Contract No. SW04-14, effective through March 31, 2016, to
purchase a sweeper truck that met City specifications. This resulted in a quote to taling
$246,817.80 through its approved dealer, Tymco Inc. Per City purchasing guidelines, staff
searched for a local dealer for comparison pricing and found no local sweeper truck dealers.
(Attachment F)
Lease Purchase
The City has strategically used lease options as ways to reduce significant variations in the costs
of replacing vehicles or other specialty equipment. Due to the high cost of the fire engine and
sweeper, staff proposed and Council approved debt financing of these two vehicles in the 2015-
17 Financial Plan to stabilize the annual costs needed to be paid from the Fleet Fund. Staff is
seeking the authorization to execute a lease purchase agreement with PNC Equipment Finance
(Attachment G), - for the acquisition of the new Fire Apparatus Quint and the Tymco Street
Sweeper currently budgeted and approved for replacement as part of the 2016-17 Financial Plan.
In the 2015-17 Financial Plan, pages G7 and G10 the debt financing is addressed and within
expectations.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for the replacement apparatus listed in the table below was approved in the 2015-17
Financial Plan. Since the approval of the 2015-17 Financial Plan, new standard equipment
requirements have occurred such as gurney and radio kit for the Ambulance Van Package and
the Command Vehicle. The ambulance budget expected that the current patient gurney could be
reused with the new vehicle. The existing gurney for the Ambulance does not meet the triple K
Ambulance Crash Standards and requires purchase of a new gurney $16,169 plus $3,680 for
increased cost for required equipment, totaling $19,849. The radio in the replacement Command
Vehicle is no longer available and a new model radio kit ($16,247) for the vehicle is required.
(Attachment H) The current budgets for these vehicles are not sufficient to cover these additional
costs. Staff recommends approval of $36,096 from Fleet Sale of Surplus Property revenue fund
to cover the additional costs.
Department
Adopted
Budget Fiscal Year
New
Equipment
Requirements Total Cost
Fire
Ambulance Package Van 180,000 15-16 19,849 199,849
Aerial Fleet Apparatus 900,000 16-17 n/a 900,000
Command Vehicle
(Emergency Response
SUV) 99,400 16-17 16,247 115,647
Public Works
HD Truck Sweeper Unit 266,600 16-17 n/a 266,600
6
Packet Pg. 38
The first payment of the purchase lease, in the amount of $42,184 for the Aerial Fleet Apparatus
and the HD Truck Sweeper, was scheduled to occur in FY 2016-17. Based upon the proposed
lease purchase agreement with PNC Equipment Finance and the acceleration to the delivery of
the two vehicles, the new FY 2016-17 payment will be $241,019. The change to the payment
plan in the Debt Service Fund will be updated as part of the 2016-17 Budget Supplement.
ALTERNATIVES
Deny Funding Transfer and Purchase. The City Council could choose to deny or defer the
Quint 75’ Aerial Fire Apparatus, Command and Squad Rescue and Street Sweeper vehicles.
Staff does not recommend this option as the replacements were approved as part of the 2015-17
Financial Plan. The vehicles above have met its useful target life in both years and mileage.
Denying or deferring the purchase could result in costly maintenance and repairs due to aging
vehicles.
6
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment A Purchase Orders
Authorize the Finance and Information Technology Director to execute the purchase orders listed
below:
1. a purchase order to South Coast Fire Equipment in the amount of $894,650.29 for the
purchase of one new 2016 Pierce Arrow XT PUC 75’ Quint Aerial Fire Apparatus and
2. a purchase order to International/Tymco in the amount of $246,817.80 for the purchase of
one new 2016 Sweeper Truck and
3. a purchase order to Alfano Motors in the amount of $46,961.75 for the purchase of one
new 2016 Chevrolet Suburban 1500 Command Vehicle Chassis and
4. a purchase order to Perry Ford in the amount of $55,118.88 for the purchase of one new
2016 Ford F550 Ambulance Chassis and
5. a purchase order to Leader Emergency Vehicles in the amount of $144,730.09 for the
purchase build of one new Ambulance/Squad and
6. a purchase order to Motorola Solutions in the amount of $16,247.52 for the purchase of a
radio kit for the Command Vehicle Chassis
6.a
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: a - List of Purchase Orders (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.b
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: b - Purchase quote from South Coast Fire Equipment, Quint Fire Apparatus (1251 : Fleet
6.b
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: b - Purchase quote from South Coast Fire Equipment, Quint Fire Apparatus (1251 : Fleet
10941 Weaver Avenue
South El Monte, CA 91733
Kevin Oberthier, Factory Direct Sales
Mobile: (559) 761-9382
Fax: (559) 276-3235
2-Feb-2016
TERMS SHIP VIA
COD Ground
QUANTITY EACH EXTENDED AMOUNT
1 $133,998.00 133,998.00$
Sub-Total 133,998.00$ 133,998.00$
1 Sales Tax 8.00%10,719.84$ 10,719.84$
7 CA Tire Fee $1.75 (Per Tire)12.25$ 12.25$
1 DMV Fee's
TOTAL QUOTED AMOUNT 144,730.09$ 144,730.09$
Customer Approval:Payment: (Please check one)
Leasing
Company Check
Wire Transfer
Quotation is valid for 60 days
Stryker power cot, Electric Modular door locks,
Features. "E" Start, Unlock Switch, Tinted Windows, Cot Stop.
Safety Net, Console, LED Lighting, Zico Bottle Holder.Pre-set Reg,
Chassis Will be Provided by SLOFD.
FOB
South El Monte, CA
QUOTATION
Signature
San Luis Obispo F.D.
2160 Santa Barbara AveSan Luis Obispo , CA. 93401
THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS
Pricing
Date
Delivery 120-140 Days after receipt of chassis
DESCRIPTION
Purchaser agrees to defend, indemnify and hold Halcore Group Inc., dba Leader Industries, harmless from any claims, costs (including actual
attorney's fees), damages and liabilities caused in whole or impart by any alteration or modification of, or change
TERMS: All Vehicle Sales Are C.O.D. Titles to be Processed Upon Receipt of Payment in Full.
2016 Ford F-550 Type-1 4x4 Leader Conversion
Inverter / Charger, "H" Tank set-up, Hidden Door Switch,
Liquid Spring system, Paint Ford Red, Rear Chevrons, lettering
6.c
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: c - Purchase quote from Leader Industries, Squad Build (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.d
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: d - Purchase quote from Alfano Motors, Command Vehicle Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.e
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: e - Purchase quote Perry Ford, Squad Chassis (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
Contract
No.:SW04-14 Date
Prepared:1/26/2016
Buying
Agency:Contractor:
Contact
Person:
Prepared
By:
Phone:Phone:
Fax:Fax:
Email:Email:
Product
Code:BH06 Description:
95,750.00$
Cost Cost
1,500.00$ 565.00$
1,225.00$ 1,300.00$
1,275.00$ 815.00$
410.00$ 1,130.00$
1,605.00$ 77,750.00$
14,000.00$
Subtotal B: 101,575.00$
Cost Cost
5,000.00$ 750.00$
200.00$ 1,800.00$
50.00$ 600.00$
750.00$ 1,500.00$
2,500.00$ 80.00$
50.00$ 50.00$
750.00$ 5,150.00$
500.00$ 1,680.00$
800.00$ Subtotal C: 22,210.00$
11%
219,535.00$
1 219,535.00$ =Subtotal D: 219,535.00$
Cost Cost
9,000.00$
18,282.80$
Subtotal F: 27,282.80$
246,817.80$
CONTRACT PRICING WORKSHEET
For MOTOR VEHICLES Only
This Worksheet is prepared by Contractor and given to End User. If a PO is issued, both documents
MUST be faxed to H-GAC @ 713-993-4548. Therefore please type or print legibly.
City of San Luis Obispo, CA TYMCO, Inc.(ISSUE P.O. TO TYMCO, Inc.-
email below)
254-799-2722
kaye.morgan@tymco.com
Kaye Morgan
254-799-5546
Hi/Low Pressure Washdown System 600005 Hopper Drain 600020
Auxiliary Hand Hose - 8" 600035 Gutter Broom Tilt Adjuster - Left & Right 600022
TYMCO Model 600 Regenerative Air Sweeper
A. Product Item Base Unit Price Per Contractor's H-GAC Contract:
B. Published Options - Itemize below - Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary - Include Option Code in description if applicable.
Description Description
Pick-Up Head Curtain Lifter 600087 2014 International 4300-DT Chassis 600707
John Deere iT4 Auxiliary Engine 600001
Abrasion Protection Package 600036 Hopper Deluge 600043
Reverse Pick-Up Head System 600082 Auxiliary Hydraulic System 600053
PRICE GOOD UNTIL 3/31/16
Hydraulic Level/Temp Shutdown System
Dump Switch in Cab Low Emission Package
Hydrant Wrench
Subtotal From Additional Sheet(s):
LED Lights - Stop/Turn/Tail/Clearance/Markers Gutter Broom Segments - Spares
Traffic Directing Light - LED
C. Unpublished Options - Itemize below / attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.
Description Description
Truck Manuals - Parts & Service 2016 International 4300-ISB 2 Spd UPGRADE
FT4 John Deere Aux. Engine UPGRADE
F. Trade-Ins / Other Allowances / Special Discounts / Freight / Installation
Description Description
Freight/PDI/Inservice
Check:Total cost of Unpublished Options (C) cannot exceed 25% of the total of the
Base Unit Price plus Published Options (A+B).For this transaction the percentage is:
D. Total Cost Before Any Applicable Trade-In / Other Allowances / Discounts (A+B+C)
Quantity Ordered: X Subtotal of A + B + C:
CA Sales Tax (8%)
Delivery Date: 120-180 Days G. Total Purchase Price (D+E+F):
Slow Moving Vehicle Sign Hazard Reflectors
Water Tank Level Gauge
ASI Overspeed Auto Sweep Interrupt
Camera/Monitor System - 2 cameras Fire Extinguisher
6.f
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: f - Purchase quote Tymco Street Sweeper (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
6.g
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: g - Lease Purchase Agreement PNC Equipment Finance for fire truck and street sweeper
Quote Number:QU0000349962
Effective:02 FEB 2016
Effective To:27 MAY 2016
Bill-To:Ultimate Destination:
SAN LUIS OBISPO FIRE DEPARTMENT SAN LUIS OBISPO FIRE DEPARTMENT
2160 2160
SANTA BARBARA STREET SANTA BARBARA STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
United States United States
Attention:Sales Contact:
Name:Jeremy Schmidt Name:Tammie Massirer
Email:jschmidt@slocity.org Email:Tammie.Massirer@motorolasolutions.com
Phone:805-781-7375 Phone:19166260493
Contract Number:LA COUNTY (CA)
Freight terms:FOB Destination
Payment terms:Net 30 Due
Item Quantity Nomenclature Description List price Your price Extended Price
1 3 M25KSS9PW1AN APX6500 VHF MID POWER $2,194.00 $1,645.50 $4,936.50
1a 3 G806BE ADD: ASTRO DIGITAL CAI
OPERATION
$515.00 $386.25 $1,158.75
1b 3 G442AJ ADD: O5 CONTROL HEAD $432.00 $324.00 $972.00
1c 3 G67BC ADD: REMOTE MOUNT MID POWER $297.00 $222.75 $668.25
1d 3 G398AU ENH: 3 YEAR REPAIR SERVICE
ADVANTAGE
$182.00 $182.00 $546.00
1e 3 GA00179AB ADD: NO REMOTE CABLE NEEDED ---
1f 6 W22BA ADD: PALM MICROPHONE $72.00 $54.00 $324.00
1g 3 G444AE ADD: APX CONTROL HEAD
SOFTWARE
---
1h 3 G89AC ADD: NO RF ANTENNA NEEDED ---
1i 6 G831AD ADD: SPKR 15W WATER RESISTANT $60.00 $45.00 $270.00
1j 3 G48BD ENH: CONVENTIONAL OPERATION
APX6500
$500.00 $375.00 $1,125.00
1k 3 GA00092AC ADD: DUAL-CONTRL HD HARDWARE $570.00 $427.50 $1,282.50
2 1 M25SSS9PW1AN APX6500 UHF R2 MID POWER $2,194.00 $1,645.50 $1,645.50
2a 1 G806BE ADD: ASTRO DIGITAL CAI
OPERATION
$515.00 $386.25 $386.25
2b 1 G442AJ ADD: O5 CONTROL HEAD $432.00 $324.00 $324.00
2c 1 G67BC ADD: REMOTE MOUNT MID POWER $297.00 $222.75 $222.75
2d 1 G398AU ENH: 3 YEAR REPAIR SERVICE
ADVANTAGE
$182.00 $182.00 $182.00
2e 1 GA00179AB ADD: NO REMOTE CABLE NEEDED ---
2f 2 W22BA ADD: PALM MICROPHONE $72.00 $54.00 $108.00
2g 1 G444AE ADD: APX CONTROL HEAD
SOFTWARE
---
2h 1 G89AC ADD: NO RF ANTENNA NEEDED ---
2i 2 G831AD ADD: SPKR 15W WATER RESISTANT $60.00 $45.00 $90.00
2j 1 G48BD ENH: CONVENTIONAL OPERATION
APX6500
$500.00 $375.00 $375.00
2k 1 GA00092AC ADD: DUAL-CONTRL HD HARDWARE $570.00 $427.50 $427.50
Estimated Tax Amount $1,203.52
Total Quote in USD $16,247.52
6.h
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: h - Purchase quote Motorola Radio, Command Vehicle (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
This pricing utilizes LA Contract Master Purchase Agreement MA-IS-1240419-2
PO Issued to Motorola Solutions Inc. must:
>Be a valid Purchase Order (PO)/Contract/Notice to Proceed on Company Letterhead. Note: Purchase Requisitions cannot be accepted
>Have a PO Number/Contract Number & Date
>Identify "Motorola Solutions Inc." as the Vendor
>Have Payment Terms or Contract Number
>Be issued in the Legal Entity's Name
>Include a Bill-To Address with a Contact Name and Phone Number
>Include a Ship-To Address with a Contact Name and Phone Number
>Include an Ultimate Address (only if different than the Ship-To)
>Be Greater than or Equal to the Value of the Order
>Be in a Non-Editable Format
>Identify Tax Exemption Status (where applicable)
>Include a Signature (as Required)
6.h
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: h - Purchase quote Motorola Radio, Command Vehicle (1251 : Fleet Replacement Acceleration)
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Gamaliel Anguiano, Transit Manager
SUBJECT: SLO TRANSIT VEHICLE REPLACEMENT BUDGET AUGMENTATION
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Approve a budget amendment to increase the budget for Transit Vehicle Replacement Project
Specification No. 91447 by $96,393; and
2. Amend the purchase order with Gillig Corporation in an amount not to exceed $1,551,093 for
three SLO Transit Vehicles.
DISCUSSION
Background
In August of 2014, SLO Transit and the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) received approval
from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOG), RTA Board and City Council for a funding exchange. Specifically, SLO Transit
exchanged $644,000 in FTA 5307 money for $1,125,000 in RTA’s Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program funds. For the City of San Luis Obispo, this
exchange allowed CMAQ funds to be used for up-to 80% of the cost of three vehicles scheduled
for replacement. The remaining matching funds would come from working capital
Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds. As approved by the City’s purchasing policies
and with these funds now in hand, the city was then able to exercise its participation in a
purchase consortium done in cooperation with Contra Costa County, and a few other transit
systems, for the vehicle purchase with Gillig.
The original request to Council reflected a total purchase price for the three vehicles equivalent
to 80% Federal CMAQ support and 20% TDA local match as the base price for the total cost for
all three vehicles. At the August 19th, 2014 meeting, Council authorized the use of $329,700 in
State TDA funds for this purpose.
SLO Transit vehicle specifications were largely based on San Luis Obispo historical
specifications from prior fleet purchases. The final cost assessment is a result of changes to prior
SLO Transit vehicle specifications, addition of new equipment/technology, and the final
calculation of taxes and fees. This Council report requests approval of the use of un-programmed
Transit Fund working capital (for State funding sources) to increase the local match of the three
vehicles and place the final order with Gillig by 4.5% of the previously reported total cost. A
summary of the financial impacts are summarized in the below table.
7
Packet Pg. 57
FISCAL IMPACT
The original 2014 fund programming for the purchase of the three vehicles was solely a strict
application of a maximum 80% Federal subsidy and 20% local match. Now with a true cost
assessment and quote from Gillig the purchase price for each vehicle should adjusted from
$484,900 per bus to $517,031 (including 2% contingency) per bus as shown in the table below.
Base Price Amount
(2014)
Revised 2016*
Amount w/ Taxes
Change from Base
Federal CMAQ $1,125,000 $1,125,000 0
Local Match (TDA) $329,700 $396,093 $66,393
2% Contingency (per
bus) $0 $30,000
$30,000
Total: $1,454,700 $1,551,093 $96,393
Price Per Bus: $484,900 $517,031 $32,131
7
Packet Pg. 58
October 16, 2015
Mr. Gamaliel Anguiano
Transit Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
Public Works Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
RE: PRICE QUOTE FOR (3) 40’ BRT+ LOW FLOOR BUSES
Dear Mr. Anguiano,
Thank you for your purchase order for three (3) 40’ BRT+ Low Floor Buses from Gillig LLC
using your options from the CCCTA contract.
Attached you will find the price sheet that pertains to your order. Gillig is pleased to quote the
following:
THREE (3) 40’ BRT+ LOW FLOOR BUSES $503,514.76 each
Price includes California Sales Tax, but excludes any license fees. Price also includes a
$5,000.00 budget for the EPA mandated ’17 emissions changes that have yet to be defined. The
production start date of the buses is currently slated for April, 2017.
We thank you for this opportunity and appreciate your interest in Gillig and our products. We at
Gillig certainly look forward to building another order for the City of San Luis Obispo, and in so
doing, continuing to build our lasting partnership. Should you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact me at 510-264-5091.
Sincerely,
Norm Reynolds
Regional Sales Manager
7.a
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: a - Combined Original Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
10/16/2015
CONSORTIUM MEMBER ON CCCTA CONTRACT
(3) 40' LOW FLOOR DIESEL BUSES, SN: TBD
ITEM CCCTA SAN LUIS OBISPO VARIANCE
BRT PLUS STYLING NO YES $18,950.00
AUXILIARY ENGINE OIL FILTER SPINNER II, 976 NO -$545.00
ENGINE FUEL FILTER DAVCO 384, HEATED STD FLEETGUARD -$349.00
STARTER DELCO MT42 DELCO MT42 $0.00
ALTERNATOR EMP (450 AMP) NIEHOFF C803 (500 AMP)INCL
ELECTRIC RADIATOR EMP MODINE E-FAN -$3,033.00
E-COAT RAD/CAC, HYD COOLER NO NO $0.00
RADIATOR TANK GUARD NO NO $0.00
ENGINE OIL EXTRACTOR PORT NO TITAN 0D1014 $44.00
TRANSMISSION VOITH D864.5 ALLISON B400R $2,812.00
TRANS OIL EXTRACTOR PORT NO TITAN 0D1014 $44.00
AXLE HUB SEALS C/R OIL SEALS C/R OIL SEALS $0.00
WHEEL MOUNTING HUB PILOT HUB PILOT $0.00
HUBODOMETER ENGLER DATA TRAC PRO 600-9999 $54.00
HUBODOMETER GUARD NO NO $0.00
AUTO TRACTION CONTROL NO NO $0.00
BRAKES DRUMS, W/ S-CAMS DRUMS, W/ S-CAMS $0.00
MGM E-STROKE NO NO $0.00
WHEELS
(8) MACHINE FINISHED
ALUMINUM,
W/ DURABRIGHT
(6) FULL-POLISHED
ALUMINUM,
W/ DURABRIGHT $402.00
DURAFLANGE NO NO $0.00
TIRES
(8) CUSTOMER
FURNISHED
(6) GILLIG FURNISHED
MICHELIN 305/85R22.5 $3,917.00
ELECTRIC ASSIST STEERING TRW EASY STEER NO -$1,895.00
FUEL FAST FILL (1) EMCO WHEATON (1) GRAVITY FILL -$263.00
FUEL GAUGE NO YES $171.00
ENGINE HOURMETER YES NO -$50.00
A/C HOURMETER YES NO -$50.00
OIL PRESSURE GAUGE IN ENGINE
COMPARTMENT MECHANICAL ELECTRIC -$60.00
TEMPERATURE GAUGE IN ENGINE
COMPARTMENT MECHANICAL ELECTRIC -$60.00
REAR HAND THROTTLE MORSE MORSE $0.00
ELECTRICAL TOW CONNECTION COLE HERSEE #12063 NO -$134.00
PING TANK AUTO-DRAIN VALVE NO YES N/C
BATTERIES DEKA 8D ODYSSEY GROUP 31 AGM $998.00
BATTERY JUMP START CONN (2) ANDERSON 350 (1) ANDERSON 350 -$85.00
ENGINE SKID PROTECTION NO NO $0.00
WHEELCHAIR RAMP LIFT-U, LU-18 LIFT-U, LU-18 $0.00
HVAC MOTORS (TK) GE FIELD WOUND EBM BRUSHLESS $1,733.00
HVAC COMPRESSOR (TK) X426 X426 $0.00
FRESH AIR INTAKE (20%) YES NO -$156.00
A/C PRESSURE DISPLAY NO YES $313.00
1 of 3
7.a
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: a - Combined Original Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
10/16/2015
CONSORTIUM MEMBER ON CCCTA CONTRACT
(3) 40' LOW FLOOR DIESEL BUSES, SN: TBD
ITEM CCCTA SAN LUIS OBISPO VARIANCE
DRIVERS HEATER MOTORS BRUSHLESS BRUSHLESS $0.00
DRIVERS DASH FAN (1) NO -$71.00
AUXILIARY COOLANT HEATER NO NO $0.00
REAR DOOR 34" SWING 34" SWING $0.00
REAR DOOR CONTROLS TOUCH BARS (V-TOUCH) FULL DRIVERS CONTROL -$783.00
EXTERIOR AD FRAMES NO NO $0.00
INTERIOR AD FRAME NO NO $0.00
PASSENGER INFO STATION YES YES $0.00
DRIVERS SEAT RECARO ERGO METRO RECARO ERGO METRO $0.00
DRIVERS SEAT SHOULDER BELT ORANGE ORANGE $0.00
DRIVERS SEAT BELT ALARM NO YES N/C
ELECTRICAL EQUIP'T CABINET STD 33" TALL STD 33" TALL $0.00
PASSENGER SEATS
(38) AMSECO INSIGHT
TRANSIT LAYOUT
(32) AMSECO INSIGHT
PERIMETER,
W/LUGGAGE RACK $237.00
HINGED SETTEE SEATS YES YES $0.00
WHEELCHAIR RESTRAINTS
AMSECO ARM, W/ STD
Q'STRAINT BELTS &
RETRACTORS
AMSECO ARM, W/ STD
Q'STRAINT BELTS &
RETRACTORS $0.00
PASSENGER SIGNALS PULL CORDS PULL CORDS $0.00
NYLON GRAB STRAPS NO NO $0.00
PASSENGER WINDOWS
RICON FULL-FIXED
(BONDED)
DURA FULL-FIXED
(BONDED)-$1,432.00
HEADLIGHTS (4) LED (4) HALOGEN -$554.00
AUXILIARY BRAKE LAMPS BOTTOM OF HVAC DOOR BOTTOM OF HVAC DOOR $0.00
SIDE MOUNTED TURN SIGNALS (2) PER SIDE (4) PER SIDE $115.00
REAR L.E.D. YIELD SIGN NO YES $600.00
FOG LIGHTS NO NO $0.00
INTERIOR LIGHTS I/O (LED) I/O (LED)$0.00
CEILING MTD FAREBOX LAMP NO NO $0.00
2-WAY RADIO NO NO $0.00
2-WAY RADIO ANTENNA NO TRI-BAND INCL
VOICE ANNUNCIATOR &
PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM PART OF ITS SYSTEM CLEVER DEVICES DR700 $13,936.00
INTELLIGENT VEHICLE SYSTEM
(COMPLETE SYSTEM) CLEVER DEVICES IVN III NO -$16,899.00
PLEASURE RADIO & ANTENNA NO NO $0.00
FAREBOX NO NO $0.00
FAREBOX GUARD NO YES $187.00
DESTINATION SIGNS
TWIN VISION AMBER LED
(FRT, C'SIDE & RR RUN)
TWIN VISION AMBER LED
(FRT, C'SIDE & RR RUN)$0.00
DASH MTD FRONT RUN SIGN NO TWIN VISION AMBER LED $594.00
FLOORING MATERIAL RCA RUBBER ALTRO $400.00
ROOF HATCHES (1) (2)$317.00
2 of 3
7.a
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: a - Combined Original Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
10/16/2015
CONSORTIUM MEMBER ON CCCTA CONTRACT
(3) 40' LOW FLOOR DIESEL BUSES, SN: TBD
ITEM CCCTA SAN LUIS OBISPO VARIANCE
EXTERIOR MIRRORS
HIGH MOUNTED (BOTH SIDES)
10X11, 2-PC, ALL
W/ REMOTE CONTROLS
8X11, 1-PC, W/5X7 CONVEX
W/O REMOTE CONTROLS $63.00
DRIVERS DASH GAUGES (2) (5)$150.00
ADJUSTABLE PEDALS YES YES $0.00
DRIVERS CUP HOLDER NO BIG GULP $35.00
TRASH CAN HOLDER NO SSTL $75.00
EXTERIOR PAINT / GRAPHICS 4-PAINTED COLORS 3-PAINTED COLORS -$941.00
FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM AMEREX V-25 AMEREX V-25 $0.00
BIKE RACK, SPORTWORKS DL2, POWDER COATED MTG BRKTS ONLY -$680.00
BIKE RACK DEPLOYED LAMP NO YES $30.00
VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
UTC PENTA DIGITAL,
7-CAMERA
SEON DX12 W/1 TB DRIVE,
12-CAMERA -$765.00
MEDICAL AID KIT NO 24 UNIT $69.00
WEB BELT CUTTER NO YES $25.00
EXT WARRANTY (ENGINE) 5 YEARS/300,000 MILES 2 YEARS/UNLIMITED MILES -$4,400.00
EXT WARRANTY (TRANSMISSION) 5 YEARS/300,000 MILES 2 YEARS/UNLIMITED MILES -$2,150.00
EXT WARRANTY
(STRUCTURE & CORROSION) 12 YEARS/500,000 MILES 7 YEARS/350,000 MILES -$1,000.00
EXT WARRANTY (WATER LEAK) 6 YEARS/200,000 MILES 1 YEAR/50,000 MILES -$250.00
TRAINING PACKAGE CUSTOM CCCTA NO -$2,399.00
$7,267.00
CCCTA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE (AUG '13) $414,722.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE (AUG '13)$421,989.00
PPI 1413 ADJUSTMENT 235.6 (JUL '15) / 226.4 (AUG '13) = 4.06% $17,133.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS ADJUSTED TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE $439,122.00
SPARES / TOOLING BUDGET $0.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE $439,122.00
CCCTA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT (AUG '13)$24,954.00
ADJUSTMENT TO NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT (AUG '13)-$2,147.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT (AUG '13)$22,807.00
PPI 1413 ADJUSTMENT 235.6 (JUL '15) / 226.4 (AUG '13) = 4.06% $926.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT $23,733.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE $439,122.00
BUDGET FOR '17 EMISSIONS CHANGES $5,000.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT $23,733.00
NON-TAXABLE DELIVERY COST $530.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS BASE UNIT PRICE $468,385.00
CALIFORNIA SALES TAX (8.00 %) $35,129.76
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS PRICE (10/16/2015) $503,514.76
CONFIDENTIAL
This pricing information is intended only for the personal and confidentail use of the recipient(s) to whom it was originally sent. If you are
not an intended recipient of this information or an agent responsible for delivering it to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you
have received this information in error, and that any review, dissemination distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited
TOTAL SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA VARIANCES
NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT
FINAL BUS PRICING INCLUDING CA SALES TAX
3 of 3
7.a
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: a - Combined Original Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
November 4, 2015
Mr. Gamaliel Anguiano
Transit Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
Public Works Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
RE: REVISED PRICE QUOTE FOR (3) 40’ BRT+ LOW FLOOR BUSES
Dear Mr. Anguiano,
Thank you for your purchase order for three (3) 40’ BRT+ Low Floor Buses from Gillig LLC
using your options from the CCCTA contract. Attached you will find the price sheet that pertains
to your order. This revised quotation reflects the requested changes from your 10/22/2015 email
and our 10/26/2015 phone call.
Gillig is pleased to quote the following:
THREE (3) 40’ BRT+ LOW FLOOR BUSES $507,030.84 each
Price includes a $5,000.00 budget for the mandated ’17 emissions changes that have yet to be
defined. Price also includes California Sales Tax (8.0%), but excludes all bank fees, license fees
and registration fees. The production start date of the buses is currently slated for April, 2017.
We thank you for this opportunity and appreciate your interest in Gillig and our products. We at
Gillig certainly look forward to building another order for the City of San Luis Obispo, and in so
doing, continuing to build our lasting partnership. Should you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact me at 510-264-5091.
Sincerely,
Norm Reynolds
Regional Sales Manager
7.b
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: b - Combined Revised Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
11/4/2015
CONSORTIUM MEMBER ON CCCTA CONTRACT
(3) 40' LOW FLOOR DIESEL BUSES, SN: TBD
ITEM CCCTA SAN LUIS OBISPO VARIANCE
BRT PLUS STYLING NO YES $18,950.00
AUXILIARY ENGINE OIL FILTER SPINNER II, 976 NO -$545.00
ENGINE FUEL FILTER DAVCO 384, HEATED STD FLEETGUARD -$349.00
STARTER DELCO MT42 DELCO MT42 $0.00
ALTERNATOR EMP (450 AMP) NIEHOFF C803 (500 AMP)INCL
ELECTRIC RADIATOR EMP MODINE E-FAN -$3,033.00
E-COAT RAD/CAC, HYD COOLER NO NO $0.00
RADIATOR TANK GUARD NO NO $0.00
ENGINE OIL EXTRACTOR PORT NO TITAN 0D1014 $44.00
TRANSMISSION VOITH D864.5 ALLISON B400R $2,812.00
TRANS OIL EXTRACTOR PORT NO TITAN 0D1014 $44.00
AXLE HUB SEALS C/R OIL SEALS C/R OIL SEALS $0.00
WHEEL MOUNTING HUB PILOT HUB PILOT $0.00
HUBODOMETER ENGLER NO -$40.00
HUBODOMETER GUARD NO NO $0.00
AUTO TRACTION CONTROL NO NO $0.00
BRAKES DRUMS, W/ S-CAMS DRUMS, W/ S-CAMS $0.00
MGM E-STROKE NO NO $0.00
WHEELS
(8) MACHINE FINISHED
ALUMINUM,
W/ DURABRIGHT
(6) FULL-POLISHED
ALUMINUM,
W/ DURABRIGHT $402.00
DURAFLANGE NO NO $0.00
TIRES
(8) CUSTOMER
FURNISHED
(6) GILLIG FURNISHED
MICHELIN 315/80R22.5 $3,913.00
ELECTRIC ASSIST STEERING TRW EASY STEER NO -$1,895.00
FUEL FAST FILL (1) EMCO WHEATON (1) GRAVITY FILL -$263.00
FUEL GAUGE NO YES $171.00
ENGINE HOURMETER YES NO -$50.00
A/C HOURMETER YES NO -$50.00
OIL PRESSURE GAUGE IN ENGINE
COMPARTMENT MECHANICAL ELECTRIC -$60.00
TEMPERATURE GAUGE IN ENGINE
COMPARTMENT MECHANICAL ELECTRIC -$60.00
REAR HAND THROTTLE MORSE MORSE $0.00
ELECTRICAL TOW CONNECTION COLE HERSEE #12063 NO -$134.00
PING TANK AUTO-DRAIN VALVE NO YES N/C
BATTERIES DEKA 8D ODYSSEY GROUP 31 AGM $998.00
BATTERY JUMP START CONN (2) ANDERSON 350 (1) ANDERSON 350 -$85.00
ENGINE SKID PROTECTION NO NO $0.00
WHEELCHAIR RAMP LIFT-U, LU-18 LIFT-U, LU-18 $0.00
HVAC MOTORS (TK) GE FIELD WOUND GE FIELD WOUND $0.00
HVAC COMPRESSOR (TK) X426 X426 $0.00
FRESH AIR INTAKE (20%) YES NO -$156.00
A/C PRESSURE DISPLAY NO YES $313.00
1 of 3
7.b
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: b - Combined Revised Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
11/4/2015
CONSORTIUM MEMBER ON CCCTA CONTRACT
(3) 40' LOW FLOOR DIESEL BUSES, SN: TBD
ITEM CCCTA SAN LUIS OBISPO VARIANCE
DRIVERS HEATER MOTORS BRUSHLESS BRUSHLESS $0.00
DRIVERS DASH FAN (1) (1)$0.00
AUXILIARY COOLANT HEATER NO NO $0.00
REAR DOOR 34" SWING 34" SWING $0.00
REAR DOOR CONTROLS TOUCH BARS (V-TOUCH) FULL DRIVERS CONTROL -$783.00
EXTERIOR AD FRAMES NO NO $0.00
INTERIOR AD FRAME NO NO $0.00
PASSENGER INFO STATION YES YES $0.00
DRIVERS SEAT RECARO ERGO METRO RECARO ERGO METRO $0.00
DRIVERS SEAT SHOULDER BELT ORANGE ORANGE $0.00
DRIVERS SEAT BELT ALARM NO YES N/C
ELECTRICAL EQUIP'T CABINET STD 33" TALL STD 33" TALL $0.00
AMSECO PASSENGER SEATS
(38) INSIGHT, W/STD
TRANSIT LAYOUT & FLIP-
UPS IN W/C AREA ONLY
(37) INSIGHT PRIME +,
FULL-PERIMETER, W/ALL
FLIP-UPS IN LOW FLOOR $504.00
HINGED SETTEE SEATS YES YES $0.00
WHEELCHAIR RESTRAINTS
AMSECO ARM, W/ STD
Q'STRAINT BELTS &
RETRACTORS
AMSECO ARM, W/ STD
Q'STRAINT BELTS &
RETRACTORS $0.00
PASSENGER SIGNALS PULL CORDS PULL CORDS $0.00
NYLON GRAB STRAPS NO NO $0.00
PASSENGER WINDOWS
RICON FULL-FIXED
(BONDED)
DURA FULL-FIXED
(BONDED)-$1,432.00
HEADLIGHTS (4) LED (4) LED $0.00
AUXILIARY BRAKE LAMPS BOTTOM OF HVAC DOOR BOTTOM OF HVAC DOOR $0.00
SIDE MOUNTED TURN SIGNALS (2) PER SIDE (4) PER SIDE $115.00
REAR L.E.D. YIELD SIGN NO YES $600.00
FOG LIGHTS NO NO $0.00
INTERIOR LIGHTS I/O (LED) I/O (LED)$0.00
CEILING MTD FAREBOX LAMP NO YES $84.00
2-WAY RADIO NO NO $0.00
2-WAY RADIO ANTENNA NO TRI-BAND INCL
VOICE ANNUNCIATOR &
PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM PART OF ITS SYSTEM CLEVER DEVICES DR700 $13,936.00
INTELLIGENT VEHICLE SYSTEM
(COMPLETE SYSTEM) CLEVER DEVICES IVN III NO -$16,899.00
PLEASURE RADIO & ANTENNA NO NO $0.00
FAREBOX NO NO $0.00
FAREBOX GUARD NO YES $187.00
DESTINATION SIGNS
TWIN VISION AMBER LED
(FRT, C'SIDE & RR RUN)
HANOVER WHITE LED
(FRT, C'SIDE & RR RUN)$487.00
DASH MTD FRONT RUN SIGN NO TWIN VISION AMBER LED $594.00
FLOORING MATERIAL RCA RUBBER ALTRO $400.00
ROOF HATCHES (1) STD HATCH (3) SKY LIGHT HATCHES $1,030.00
2 of 3
7.b
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: b - Combined Revised Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
11/4/2015
CONSORTIUM MEMBER ON CCCTA CONTRACT
(3) 40' LOW FLOOR DIESEL BUSES, SN: TBD
ITEM CCCTA SAN LUIS OBISPO VARIANCE
EXTERIOR MIRRORS
HIGH MOUNTED (BOTH SIDES)
10X11, 2-PC, ALL
W/ REMOTE CONTROLS
8X11, 1-PC, W/5X7 CONVEX
W/O REMOTE CONTROLS $63.00
DRIVERS DASH GAUGES (2) (5)$150.00
ADJUSTABLE PEDALS YES YES $0.00
DRIVERS CUP HOLDER NO BIG GULP $35.00
TRASH CAN HOLDER NO SSTL $75.00
EXTERIOR PAINT / GRAPHICS 4-PAINTED COLORS 3-PAINTED COLORS -$941.00
FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM AMEREX V-25 AMEREX V-25 $0.00
BIKE RACK, SPORTWORKS DL2, POWDER COATED MTG BRKTS ONLY -$680.00
BIKE RACK DEPLOYED LAMP NO YES $30.00
VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
UTC PENTA DIGITAL,
7-CAMERA
SEON DX12 W/1 TB DRIVE,
12-CAMERA -$765.00
MEDICAL AID KIT NO NO $0.00
WEB BELT CUTTER NO NO $0.00
EXT WARRANTY (ENGINE) 5 YEARS/300,000 MILES 2 YEARS/UNLIMITED MILES -$4,400.00
EXT WARRANTY (TRANSMISSION) 5 YEARS/300,000 MILES 2 YEARS/UNLIMITED MILES -$2,150.00
EXT WARRANTY
(STRUCTURE & CORROSION) 12 YEARS/500,000 MILES 7 YEARS/350,000 MILES -$1,000.00
EXT WARRANTY (WATER LEAK) 6 YEARS/200,000 MILES 1 YEAR/50,000 MILES -$250.00
TRAINING PACKAGE CUSTOM CCCTA NO -$2,399.00
$7,518.00
CCCTA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE (AUG '13) $414,722.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE (AUG '13)$422,240.00
PPI 1413 ADJUSTMENT 235.6 (JUL '15) / 226.4 (AUG '13) = 4.06% $17,143.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS ADJUSTED TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE $439,383.00
SPARES / TOOLING BUDGET $0.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE $439,383.00
CCCTA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT (AUG '13)$24,954.00
ADJUSTMENT TO NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT (AUG '13)-$1,352.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT (AUG '13)$23,602.00
PPI 1413 ADJUSTMENT 235.6 (JUL '15) / 226.4 (AUG '13) = 4.06% $958.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT $24,560.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS TAXABLE BASE UNIT PRICE $439,383.00
BUDGET FOR '17 EMISSIONS CHANGES $5,000.00
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT $24,560.00
NON-TAXABLE DELIVERY COST $530.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS BASE UNIT PRICE $469,473.00
CALIFORNIA SALES TAX (8.00 %) $37,557.84
CURRENT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 40' LOW FLOOR BUS PRICE $507,030.84
CONFIDENTIAL
This pricing information is intended only for the personal and confidentail use of the recipient(s) to whom it was originally sent. If you are
not an intended recipient of this information or an agent responsible for delivering it to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you
have received this information in error, and that any review, dissemination distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited
TOTAL SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA VARIANCES
NON-TAXABLE ADA EQUIPMENT
FINAL BUS PRICING INCLUDING CA SALES TAX
3 of 3
7.b
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: b - Combined Revised Gillig Quote (1246 : SLO Transit Vehicle Replacement Budget Augmentation)
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Deanna Cantrell, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Melissa Ellsworth, Senior Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE 2016-17 GRANT APPLICATION FOR
DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL
RECOMMENDATION
1. Authorize the Police Department to submit a grant application to the Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control for 2016-17 in an amount not to exceed $35,000; and
2. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with the State of
California if funding is awarded; and
3. If the grant is awarded, authorize the City Manager to execute all grant related documents and
authorize the Finance Director to make the necessary budget adjustments upon the award of the
grant.
DISCUSSION
In January staff received notification that the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) had
opened its 2016-17 grant solicitation to local governments. The purpose of the grant funding is to
enable agencies to expand their efforts in addressing alcohol related problems through a
comprehensive ABC program that encompasses various strategies. The Police Department has been
awarded grant funds from the ABC in prior years to conduct education and compliance activities
related to businesses that hold alcohol licenses. The City’s Grant Management Policy requires
Council approval of all grant applications greater than $5,000.
The goals of the ABC grant program include:
1. Achieving the goals and objectives of the local enforcement agency's grant agreements.
2. Establishing a close working relationship between ABC district offices and the grant
agencies.
3. Prioritizing law enforcement efforts and targeting those licensed outlets that cause alcohol-
related crimes.
4. Reduce the sales of alcoholic beverages to underage persons.
5. Assisting in the training of local law enforcement.
Proposal for Funding
Staff is seeking authorization to submit a grant application that focuses efforts on reducing
underage access/consumption of alcohol at licensed establishments, reducing the sale of alcohol
8
Packet Pg. 67
to the habitual and obviously intoxicated, and taking enforcement against businesses and
individuals that violate the law.
Grant activities, if approved, would include:
1. On-Sale Minor Decoy operations: Licensed on-sale establishments will be checked
for compliance of lawful sales through the use of minor decoys.
2. Off-Sale Shoulder Tap operations: Licensed off-sale establishments shall be checked
for compliance of refusing to sell alcohol to habitual and obviously intoxicated
subjects.
3. Shoulder Tap operations: Officers will conduct operations of licensed establishments
in order to discourage the purchase of alcohol for minors by adults.
4. Education is also a key component and SLOPD will coordinate and conduct IMPACT
(Informed Merchants Preventing Alcohol-Related Crime Tendencies) education
and/or inspections with licensed establishments that tend to generate a high response
for police service.
The City’s application will seek funding for overtime reimbursement for existing officers to
conduct the grant-related activities. The grant application requires the Council adopt a resolution
memorializing its action and authorizing the City Manager to execute the appropriate contract
and other grant-related documents. The State requires that the grant funding be used for activities
above and beyond those currently funded through the City budget.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact on the City’s General Fund associated with this action. City matching funds
are not required for this grant, and all grant related activities will be conducted using existing
officers on overtime. Grant funding is not awarded up front; staff is responsible for submitting
quarterly reimbursement requests based on overtime expended on grant activities during the
reporting period.
ALTERNATIVE
Council may direct staff to not submit an application for ABC grant funding. Staff does not
recommend this alternative as the funding will enhance the Police Department’s efforts in
addressing alcohol-related problems and reducing under age and high-risk drinking.
8
Packet Pg. 68
RESOLUTION NO. ________ (2016 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR
FUNDING PROVIDED THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGE CONTROL TO INCREASE EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT
PROGRAMS FOCUSING ON REGULATING RETAIL ALCOHOL OUTLETS
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Police Department through the City of San Luis Obispo desires to
undertake programs to increase education and enforcement to focus on regulating retail alcohol outlets in the
community; and
WHEREAS, grant funds are available through the Grant Assistance Program (GAP) administered by
the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as
follows:
SECTION 1. The Chief of Police or her designee is hereby authorized to submit grant applications
consistent with program requirements to pursue a GAP grant administered by ABC.
SECTION 2. The City Manager of the City of San Luis Obispo is authorized to execute all grant
related documents, including the State of California Standard Agreement, any extensions or amendments
thereof, and any subsequent contract with the State in relation thereto.
SECTION 3. The City agrees that any liability arising out of the performance of this contract,
including civil court actions for damages, shall be the responsibility of the grant recipient and the authorizing
agency and acknowledges that the State of California and ABC disclaim responsibility for any such liability.
SECTION 4. Grant funds received hereunder shall not be used to supplant expenditures controlled
by this body.
SECTION 5. This award is not subject to local hiring freezes.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
8.a
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: a - Resolution (1284 : FY 2016-17 Grant Application for Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
8.a
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: a - Resolution (1284 : FY 2016-17 Grant Application for Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control)
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Lee Price, Interim City Clerk
SUBJECT: SCHEDULE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR 2016
RECOMMENDATION
1. Reschedule the Regular City Council Meeting of June 7, 2016 to June 14, 2016; and
2. Reschedule the Regular City Council Meeting of July 5, 2016 to July 12, 2016.
DISCUSSION
The City Council is requested to consider changing the dates of the Regular City Council
meetings, as follows:
1. June 7, 2016: Council Members Christianson and Ashbaugh, City Manager Katie Lichtig
and Community Development Director Michael Codron plan to represent the City and attend
the International Town and Gown Association conference in Chicago, Illinois on June 5,
2016 - June 8, 2016. It is recommended that this meeting be rescheduled to June 14, 2016.
2. July 5, 2016: Mayor Marx will be on vacation and given the holiday it is recommended this
meeting be rescheduled to July 12, 2016.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with rescheduling a Regular Council meeting.
9
Packet Pg. 71
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Deanna Cantrell, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Brian Amoroso, Police Sergeant
SUBJECT: POLICE DEPARTMENT FIVE -YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN 2016-2020
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the Police Department’s Five-Year Strategic Plan.
DISCUSSION
Purpose of the Police Department’s Strategic Plan
The San Luis Obispo Police Department has developed a Five-year Strategic Plan. The purpose
of this plan is to identify and implement a variety of strategies to enhance and/or create service
deliverables for the betterment of the Department, City, and the community. Employees at all
levels within the organization were engaged in the process and continued participation will be a
key component to the overall success of the plan. Additionally, the plan will include continued
outreach to other City employees, residents, business organizations, and identified stakeholders
to enhance its relevance and support the implementation of the many outcomes identified within
the plan.
Informational Inputs for the Police Department’s Strategic Plan
Since 2013, the Police Department has been gathering data to assist in the development and
direction of its strategic plan. The results from these sources serve as a foundation for the plan.
Some of the data and informational points include:
1. SLOPD Department wide survey issued in February 2014
2. Staff Team Building Workshop in March 2014
3. Peace Officer Standards and Training Management Study completed March 2014
4. Employee feedback provided beyond the initial survey in February 2014
5. Community survey completed in May 2014
6. Chief’s Roundtable Assessment in October 2014
7. Employee Survey prepared by The Centre for Organizational Effectiveness in Summer 2014
8. Consultant Input and Guidance – Sostrin Consulting
9. Steering Committee Discussions and Recommendations
10
Packet Pg. 72
Sostrin Consulting’s Assistance
With the receipt and Council approval of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
($10,150), the Police Department hired Dr. Jesse Sostrin of Sostrin Consulting to provide
facilitation services during the creation of the Police Department’s strategic plan. Dr. Sostrin has
provided consulting services to a variety of clients including Hyatt, Sprint, Walmart and
Microsoft. Sostrin Consulting Services is based out of San Luis Obispo and the company has a
knowledge and perspective of our area and its needs. Dr. Sostrin’s company focuses on
leadership and organizational development with a mission to “partner with socially responsible
organizations to accelerate their performance and leverage that success for the greater good.”
Steering Committee
Through consultation with Dr. Sostrin, the overall strategic planning process was led by a
Steering Committee consisting of ten Police Department employees that represent diverse
segments within the organization. The Committee also included five managers from different
departments within the City. These managers were active participants in meetings and provided
unique perspectives and feedback during the process. The committee met several tim es between
June and October of 2014.
The purpose of the Steering Committee was to provide focused attention and evaluation of the
data received thus far. With this knowledge they were tasked with incorporating assistance from
their peer work groups and other stakeholders. These efforts encouraged conversation and further
participation in the creation of the plan. This feedback was used by the committee to ensure plan
objectives were being met and new thoughts and ideas were being represented.
The committee evaluated the Department’s existing Mission and Vision statements to ensure
recommendations would be consistent and aligned with our purpose and goals. At its conclusion
the Committee provided feedback to the Department’s executive staff in the form of Strategic
Directions and Objectives. The Committee, along with solicited employee input, provided
specific strategies to assist Department management in defining detailed strategies that are
represented in the written strategic plan.
10
Packet Pg. 73
Strategic Plan Highlights
There are five strategic directions contained in the Police Department’s Strategic Plan as follows:
1. Reduce Crime
2. Promote Organizational Excellence
3. Enhance Internal & External Relationships
4. Advance Technology
5. Enhance Infrastructure
Each of the strategic direction sections contains two strategic objectives which are more specific
in nature and define the scope even further in order to capture multiple individual strategies. A
total of 53 different strategies have been identified with a plan to complete them over the life of
the five-year strategic plan.
EXAMPLE
Strategic Objective Strategy
1.1 1.1.8
Strategic Direction #1
Strategic Objective Strategy
1.2 1.2.3
Implementation and Action Plan
Each of the 53 strategies includes defined expectations that are assigned to interested personnel
or relevant staff members to oversee the completion of a given strategy. The le ad is the position
responsible for completing the given strategy during the assigned time period. While the number
of annual objectives is highest in years one and two, some of these are exploratory in nature with
the implementation of the item coming the following year or further into the plan.
Reduce Crime
Enhance Crime
Prevention
Initiatives
Enhance
Enforcement
Initiatives
Create a Diversion
Program for Muni-
Code Violations
Expand Community
Civility and
Outreach
10
Packet Pg. 74
The plan will be used as part of the Department’s employee work programs and annual report to
ensure the work effort is being completed and reported to the Council and community. The
annual report will include a summary of our progress and restate objectives and strategies for the
upcoming year. This report will be shared with Council, citizens and other stakeholders.
The strategic plan is intended to be dynamic and flexible document that can be adjusted over
time to meet the Community and Department’s needs. In addition to working on the specific
strategies each year, the Department management team will review the upcoming year’s
objectives to insure they are still valid given existing and/or changed condition s. All objectives
and strategies will be evaluated and tracked monthly in our department staff meeting to ensure
consistency and effort towards these goals. Some strategies may be added, amended, deferred or
removed based upon staffing, resources, budget or other unforeseen circumstances. Community,
stakeholder and employee input will always be valued and can drive the creation or alteration of
any of the objectives or strategies.
FISCAL IMPACT
Receiving and filing the plan does not result in a direct fiscal impact. The plan was designed so
that many of the strategies were attainable with limited need for additional resources. Because
the strategies will be completed in-house, by Police Department staff, direct costs will be kept to
a minimum. In cases where completion of strategies results in a recommendation for additional
resources, the Department will determine first if resources exist anywhere within the
Department’s program budgets. Should those resources not be available, additional resources
will be requested as part of a financial planning process.
10
Packet Pg. 75
1 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
San Luis Obispo Police Department
Strategic Plan
2016-2020
10.a
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
2 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
MESSAGE FROM THE DEPARTMENT ·········································································· 3
STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK ··························································································· 4
ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW ···················································································· 5
VISION, MISSION & VALUES ······················································································· 6
STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENTS ················································································ 7
EVOLUTION OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN ······································································· 8
PLANNING PROCESS ·································································································· 9
IMPLEMENTATION & EVALUATION ············································································12
STRATEGIC PLAN DIRECTIONS ···················································································13
STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS
#1 Reduce Crime ····································································································14
#2 Promote Organizational Excellence ····································································16
#3 Enhance Internal & External Relationships ························································18
#4 Advance Technology ··························································································20
#5 Enhance Infrastructure ······················································································22
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ·····························································································24
10.a
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
3 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
MESSAGE FROM THE DEPARTMENT
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
On behalf of the men and women of the San Luis Obispo Police Department we are
pleased to introduce our 2016-2020 Strategic Plan. Our employees have been engaged in
the process of building this 5-year plan for some time and are pleased to see it come to fru-
ition. The implementation of a strategic plan is new territory for our agency and we are ex-
cited as to what it will deliver for our community in the form of continued quality service,
professionalism and organizational excellence.
This Strategic Plan will be a flexible, living document that will prepare the department for
the future as we remain true to our vision and goals. Through the plan we will confront
emerging issues, introduce progressive police practices and perform our duties with pur-
pose in order to reduce crime, build relationships and enhance the quality of life for all we
serve.
We look forward to working in partnership with the community to accomplish these goals
as outlined in this Strategic Plan.
Members of the San Luis Obispo Police Department
10.a
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
4 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
The San Luis Obispo Police Department has embarked on the implementation of a 5-year
Strategic Plan. The purpose of the plan is to identify, navigate and complete a variety of
objectives to enhance our organization’s ability to serve the community. Employees at all
levels within the organization have been and will continue to be engaged in the develop-
ment and execution of this plan to maximize our ability to achieve success.
The development of the plan included several analytical components. The San Luis
Obispo Police Department partnered with California Peace Officer Standards and Training
(POST) to conduct a work assessment study in December 2013. The results provided an
analysis and evaluation of the Department’s calls for service and staffing needs based on
several different models.
Outcomes from the assessment were used as a foundation for a series of planning efforts,
including a management team building workshop, workforce and community surveys and
the development of a Steering Committee made-up of a cross section of police depart-
ment employees and other City management personnel. Sostrin Consulting was selected
to
provide facilitation experience to integrate all aspects of the planning process and to
provide a series of facilitated meetings with the Steering Committee to position the
organization to achieve its strategic objectives.
This strategic plan is intended to be dynamic and has the ability to be augmented based
upon critical inputs such as fiscal constraints and crime trends to meet emerging needs.
The plan not only provides direction but is intended to enhance accountability and
improve efficiencies that translate to improved public safety and an enhanced quality of
life.
10.a
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
5 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
The San Luis Obispo Police Department consists of 86.5 (FTE) employees, 60 of which are
sworn police officers. The Department is divided into two bureaus, with a Police Captain
commanding each. The Operations Bureau handles Patrol Services, the Traffic Safety Unit,
and Neighborhood Services. The Administrative Services Bureau handles all administrative
and fiscal services as well as the Investigative Division, the Communications Division, and
the Records Unit. The Department employs a temporary part-time Operations Support Clerk
and several temporary part-time Student Neighborhood Assistance Program (SNAP) employ-
ees that respond to noise complaints.
Total Employees: 86.5 FTE’s
Sworn: 60
Civilian: 26.5
Chief of Police
Operations Bureau Captain Administrative Bureau Captain
SNAP
(temp)
Night
Patrol
Lieutenant
Day
Patrol
Lieutenant
Comm & Records
Manager
Admin.
Sergeant
Admin. Asst
Sr Admin.
Analyst
Comm
Techs
Comm
Supervisors
Records
Clerks &
Ops Sup
Records
Supervisor
SET Officers
S.O. Narc Ofc.
SET Sergeant
Property &
Evidence
Clerk
Property
Crimes
Persons
Crimes
School
Resource
Officer
Night
Patrol
Sergeants
Patrol
Officers
Day/Night
Bicycle
Officers
Bicycle
Sergeant
Patrol
Officers
Day
Patrol
Sergeants
Traffic
Sergeant
Chief ‘s Admin.
Assistant
Neighborhood
Outreach
Manager
Investigations
Lieutenant
Evidence
Tech
Traffic &
DUI Officer
10.a
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
6 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
Our Vision:
“To be recognized by our community and employees as a
model of excellence in the law enforcement
profession.”
Our Mission:
“The mission of the San Luis Obispo Police Department is
to maintain a safe city by working in partnership with
the community to protect life and property, prevent and
reduce crime, and improve the quality of life in our
neighborhoods while preserving the rights of all
through a commitment to Service, Pride, and Integrity.”
Our Values:
Service, Pride, and Integrity
10.a
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
7 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENTS
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
A statement of the general
purpose of the organization.
An image of how the organization
desires to operate in the future.
Derived from the Department’s Mis-
sion & Vision. High level statements
of what the organization would like
to achieve.
Derived from & support the Strategic
Directions. Objectives are statements
of the general means by which the
organization will work to meet the
Strategic Directions.
Statements of how each Objective will
be addressed. Strategies might incor-
porate multiple initiatives & are de-
signed to produce measurable results.
10.a
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
8 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
STRATEGIC PLAN EVOLUTION
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Finalized Strategic Plan
Grant Funded Consultant Identified to Facilitate Plan
SLOPD Department Wide Survey to Establish Climate and Goals
State Funded Staff Team Building Workshop and Strategic Planning Assessment
State Funded Management Study
Community Survey & Chief’s Roundtable Assessment
Creation of a Strategic Plan Steering Committee
Steering Committee Meetings with Facilitator to Identify Strategic Objectives
Creation and Affirmation of Department Vision, Mission and Values
Executive Summary Developed to Guide Planning Process
Consultant Assessment and Executive Management Review of Plan
Employee Team Meetings for Input
The Centre for Organization Effectiveness Employee Survey
Steering Committee Final Review
10.a
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
9 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
A strategic planning team was formed and a mix of internal and external stakeholders worked
together in a series of facilitated group discussions. The design of the strategic planning
process built upon the consolidated reports from the initial efforts to include a POST
assessment, a leadership retreat, two staff surveys, and a community input process. Focused
activities were completed to confirm the departments vision, mission, and values, and to
further explore areas of challenges and opportunities that would serve as the starting place
for strategic directions. The following summary captures the results of each phase of the pro-
cess.
*bold and italicized wording emphasizes stakeholder input
COMMUNITY:
An assessment of both internal and external trends indicated our agency has an established
solid reputation and has developed strong partnerships within our community. Our work
product is largely meeting our community’s needs , however, we can do better in addressing
the transient population engaged in adverse or illegal behaviors that negatively impact our
community.
CULTURE:
Our strongest asset is our people. Positive relationships have been built between our police
officers association and management teams. We have a strong leadership team which
encourages professional growth, and is receptive to innovative ideas. We stress the im-
portance of customer service and are a culturally healthy and functional department which
is a good model in the law enforcement industry.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY:
The department is fortunate to have a detached state of the art dispatch facility commonly
referred to as the Emergency Communication Center. In 2015, our field personnel began to
leverage cutting edge mobile technology as well as other new tools. Technology in many
areas of law enforcement is advancing at an exponential rate. It is difficult to keep up with
the advances of our own existing technology coupled with the desire to take on new technol-
ogies that create even more efficiencies in productivity and performance.
INFRASTRUCTURE:
Police Headquarters is an aging building with space limitations that inhibits growth and
storage for personnel, vehicles, equipment and evidence/property. Aging infrastructure is-
sues which include plumbing, fixtures and electrical have created a need to look at alterna-
TRENDS, FINDINGS & OBSERVATIONS
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
10.a
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
10 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Budget processes and framework limitations set by legislation and policy will define how
and when public funds are expended. Voter approval of Measure G will enhance fiscal
stability for the next eight years. Immediate needs will not necessarily be realized with
competing interests across the City. Community input has helped shape the City’s FY 15/17
financial plan with increasing revenues balanced by employee negotiations and funding
retirement liabilities. Strategic initiatives that require funding from the general fund will
need to be balanced with other needs within the City and community expectations.
CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES:
There is a strong desire to enhance and renew police headquarters to accommodate ex-
isting and future growth needs while continuing to provide superior service. As the city
grows in both size and population as a result of new development, there will be a need to
assess and implement ways to continue to meet service demands.
We intend to review new scheduling practices, improve the ability to investigate technology
related crimes, improve investigative clearance rates, become more efficient in crime
analysis, identify a redundant Emergency Operations Center, assign dedicated IT staff and
develop a succession plan for future leadership and career opportunities.
EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS:
The department identified residents, the business community, visitors, the City Council,
other City departments, Cal Poly, Cuesta, Neighborhood advocates and various community
organizations as our primary stakeholders. The overwhelming majority of stakeholders
indicated they have strong community relationships with the police. Outreach to stakehold-
ers identified general priorities to include keeping SLO a safe place to live; improving
efforts and results in combating crime; reducing “town and gown” friction and related
order maintenance offenses; increasing effectiveness in responding to calls for service; and
improving crime prevention
efforts. Specific stakeholder
needs were to demonstrate
better responsive-ness to alcohol,
drugs and transi-ent issues.
THE PLANNING PROCESS
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
10.a
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
11 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
INTERNAL STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS:
Internal stakeholders were identified as all police department employees. An objective of
the strategic planning process was a desire to understand what our own people expect
and need.
Culture: In general there was a sentiment that we could improve on communication and
increase accountability at all levels. There was also a desire to improve upon the existing
employee evaluation tools beyond statistical based performance measures.
Staff: There was an identified need to propose increased support personnel, specifically in
Dispatch and Records.
Infrastructure: There was a reiterated desire to update existing facilities, to create space,
enhance safety and improve functionality in a contemporary and new police department
building. As the City looks to the future to potentially build a new facility there is an
immediate need to improve existing infrastructure and increase efficiency with the existing
police building.
Programs: There was an expressed interest in expanding or creating new programs to
enhance service and efficiencies. Ideas included looking at comprehensive methods in
analyzing data to focus resources, examining alternative ways to support patrol services or
creating youth or citizen oriented programs to foster community relationships, just to name
a few.
FUNDING AVAILABILITY AND/OR RESOURCE DEPENDENCE:
Some objectives may be dependent upon fiscal or personnel resources that may not be
readily available at or during implementation. Additionally, other identified needs or goals
may take prece-
dent over others
dependent upon
assessed needs at
the time. These
initiatives will be
THE PLANNING PROCESS
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
10.a
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
12 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Sponsorship & Accountability:
The Department’s leadership team is committed to the successful implementation and exe-
cution of the Strategic Plan. The Chief is responsible for the oversight of the strategic plan
objectives are guided by staff members who in team settings inspire participation and bal-
ance resources as the Department moves forward with the Plan.
Strategic Plan Review, Tracking & Measurement:
Progress toward the Strategic Plan is reviewed and tracked during monthly staff meetings.
Tracking will include detailed information about each objective, and includes key
accomplishments, percent complete, current status, timelines, history of extensions and
any issues that need to be addressed. It is expected that some strategies will be accelerat-
ed,
deferred, delayed, or even deleted in some cases based on a variety of factors.
Annual Review & Update of the 5-Year Plan:
The Strategic Plan is reviewed and updated on a continual basis at the end of each calendar
year. The Department’s overall Objectives and Strategies are assessed and reprioritized if
necessary, based on operating expenses, service indicators, industry statistics, or special
initiatives. Other considerations will include community input and Council direction through
the development of Major City Goals and other important objectives.
An annual strategic planning report will detail the outcome of each active strategy. This
process ensures reliability of the Strategic Plan as a tool that can be used for annual
operating budget development, Capital Improvement Project (CIP) development and
equipment and personnel planning.
The report is available for download from the City’s website at http://www.slopd.org
10.a
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
13 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
STRATEGIC PLAN DIRECTIONS
Strategic Direction #1
Strategic Direction #3
Strategic Direction #2
Strategic Direction #4
Strategic Direction #5
10.a
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
14 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
REDUCE CRIME
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #1
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 1.1 Enhance Crime Prevention Initiatives
Strategy 1.1.1 Implement Spillman Dashboard Module &
Crime Analysis Capabilities 2016 Melissa Ellsworth
Senior Admin. Analyst
Strategy 1.1.2 Enhance Educational Outreach to Reduce
Property Related Crimes 2016
Lt. Smith
Christine Wallace,
Neighborhood Outreach Mgr.
Strategy 1.1.3
Develop and Expand Crisis Intervention
Training Trainer Program for Officers,
Dispatch & Patrol
2016 Sgt. Hixenbaugh
Ofc. Inglehart
Strategy 1.1.4 Enhance Directed Giving Campaign beyond
the end of the April 2016 pilot program 2016 Capt. Storton
Strategy 1.1.5 Create Drug Awareness Educational
Program for Grade School Children 2018 Lt. Smith
SRO Officer
10.a
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
15 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
REDUCE CRIME
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #1
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 1.2 Enhance Enforcement Initiatives
Strategy 1.2.1 Expand Public Safety Video Capabilities 2016 Lt. Smith
Sgt. Amoroso
Strategy 1.2.2 Refine Active Shooter Protocol and Training 2016 Lt. Smith
Sgt. Mickel
Strategy 1.2.3 Expand Community Civility Outreach & Edu-
cation 2016 Christine Wallace,
Neighborhood Outreach Mgr
Strategy 1.2.4
Enhance Mobile Field Force Capabilities
Through Advanced Training &
Collaboration
2016 Sgt. Mickel
Strategy 1.2.5
Enhance Mobile Field Force Capabilities
Through Advanced Training &
Collaboration
2016 Sgt. Mickel
Strategy 1.2.6
Research & Draft Proposal for a K-9
Program
2017 Officer Shalhoob
Strategy 1.2.7 Complete assessment of Team Based
Scheduling 2017 Sgt. Amoroso
Ofc. Schafer
10.a
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
16 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 2.1 Develop and Recognize Employees
Strategy 2.1.1 Enhance Employee Recognition Program 2016 Sgt. Goodwin
Strategy 2.1.2 Create Employee Peer Support & Critical
Incident Stress Program 2016 Sgt. Hixenbaugh
Ofc. Kemp
Strategy 2.1.3
Support & Encourage Department Volun-
tary
Involvement in PACE
2016 Captain Storton
Strategy 2.1.4 Career Advisement Program 2017 Capt. Storton
Capt. Staley
PROMOTE ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #2
10.a
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
17 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
PROMOTE ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #2
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 2.2 Develop the Organization
Strategy 2.2.1
Create Risk Management Liaison to develop
and implement risk and liability reduction
strategies
2016 Lt. Smith
Strategy 2.2.2 Create Use of Force Annual Review Process 2016 Lt. Smith
Strategy 2.2.3
Assess Feasibility of Replacing
Administrative Sergeant Position with a
Civilian Employee
2016 Lt. Bledsoe
Sgt. Goodwin
Strategy 2.2.4 Assess Management Structure in
Investigations 2016 Lt. Smith
Sgt. Pfarr
Strategy 2.2.5 Study Need for Civilian Cyber Crime
Investigator 2016 Lt. Smith
Evid. Tech. Lehr
Strategy 2.2.6 Develop an Employee Physical Fitness
Program 2017 Ofc. Dinsmore
Strategy 2.2.7
Study Work Load for Sworn Staffing Needs
in the Patrol Division in Preparation for the
2019-2021 Financial Plan
2017 Capt. Storton
Strategy 2.2.8
Study Work Load and Staffing Needs in the
Support Services Division in Preparation for
the 2019-2021 Financial Plan
2017
Tera Rapp, Records Mgr.
Mark Anselmi, Comm. Sup.
Christine Steeb, Comm. Sup.
Strategy 2.2.9
Study Work Load and Staffing Needs in the
Administration Division in Preparation for
the 2019-2021 Financial Plan
2017 Melissa Ellsworth,
Senior Adm. Analyst
Strategy 2.2.10
Study Work Load for Non-Sworn Staffing
Needs in the Patrol Division in Preparation
for the 2021-2023 Financial Plan
2017 Capt. Staley
10.a
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
18 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ENHANCE INTERNAL & EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #3
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 3.1 Strengthen Community Relationships
Strategy 3.1.1 Develop Chaplain Program 2016 Sgt. Goodwin
Strategy 3.1.2
Examine Potential Use of Technology to
Support Neighborhood Collaboration &
Interaction
2016 Sgt. Booth
Strategy 3.1.3 Expand Volunteer Program 2016
Christine Wallace,
Neighborhood Outreach
Mgr.
Strategy 3.1.4
Enable Community Access to Web Based
Crime Mapping through the Spillman
Dashboard
2016 Melissa Ellsworth
Senior Admin. Analyst
Strategy 3.1.5 Create an SLOPD Citizens Academy 2017 Ofc. Berrios
Strategy 3.1.6 Create an SLOPD Explorer's Post 2017 Ofc. Berrios
10.a
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
19 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ENHANCE INTERNAL & EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #3
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 3.2 Strengthen Inter/Intra Governmental
Relationships
Strategy 3.2.1
Draft, implement and monitor MOU
agreement with Cal Poly to Expand UPD
Enforcement Role Beyond Campus
Boundaries
2016 Capt. Staley
Strategy 3.2.2
Collaborate with City and Community stake-
holders to produce video messaging aimed
at promoting safety
2016 Capt. Staley
Strategy 3.2.3 Collaborate with School District to Expand
Campus Centered Critical Incident Training 2016 Lt. Smith
Strategy 3.2.5 Develop a joint protocol with the Fire
Department for Arson Investigations 2016 Lt. Smith
10.a
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
20 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ADVANCE TECHNOLOGY
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #4
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 4.1 Technology Support & Infrastructure
Strategy 4.1.1 Improve Dispatch Center Audio Recording
Equipment 2016 Kerri Rosenblum,
Records/Dispatch Mgr.
Strategy 4.1.2 Acquire and Integrate Tactical Robot Into
the Regional SWAT Protocol 2016 Capt. Staley
Strategy 4.1.3 Replace Work Scheduling Program 2016 Lt. Proll
Strategy 4.1.4 Create a Digital SLOPD Historical
Photograph Library 2016 Sgt. Booth
Strategy 4.1.5
Partner with IT to Coordinate a Police
Database Integrity/Security Assessment
Conducted by an Outside Consultant
2016 Capt. Staley
Strategy 4.1.6 Complete Next Generation Text to 911
Upgrades 2016 Kerri Rosenblum,
Records/Dispatch Mgr.
Strategy 4.1.7 Complete Next Generation Video & Images
911 Upgrades 2018 Kerri Rosenblum,
Records/Dispatch Mgr.
10.a
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
21 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ADVANCE TECHNOLOGY
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #4
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 4.2 Advance Communication Technology
Strategy 4.2.2 Implement a Pilot Program for a Body Worn
Camera Program and Expand if Feasible 2016 Capt. Storton
Strategy 4.2.3
Research, Request and Implement Mobile
Fingerprint Scanning Technology if Cal-ID
Funding is Secured
2016 Sgt. Pfarr
Strategy 4.2.4
Research, Request and Implement Facial
Recognition Technology if Cal-ID Funding is
Secured
2017 Sgt. Pfarr
Strategy 4.2.1 Implement Electronic Citation and Report
Writing 2017 Tera Rapp,
Records Supervisor
10.a
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
22 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ENHANCE INFRASTRUCTURE
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #5
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 5.1 Enhance Existing Police Facility
Strategy 5.1.1 Remodel Men’s Shower/Bathroom 2016 Lt. Proll
Strategy 5.1.2 Remodel of Upstairs Break Room 2016 Lt. Proll
Strategy 5.1.3 Improve Patrol Equipment Inventory Sys-
tem and Storage Capabilities 2016 Sgt. Goodwin
FST Barrett
10.a
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
23 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ENHANCE INFRASTRUCTURE
STRATEGIC DIRECTION #5
San Luis Obispo Police Department Strategic Plan: 2016-2020 YEAR
Strategy Leader &
Co-Leader
Strategic Objective 5.2 Address Long Term Public Safety Fa-
cility Needs
Strategy 5.2.1 Implement a facility assessment for a new
police building at its existing location 2016
Capt. Staley
Melissa Ellsworth,
Sr. Admin. Analyst
Strategy 5.2.2 Draft a Shooting Range & Training Center
Improvement plan 2018 Lt. Smith
Sgt. Mickel
10.a
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
24 S T R A T E G I C P L A N 2016 -2020
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
We appreciate the participation provided by City staff and the public at large and for their
contributions to our SLOPD 2016-2020 Strategic Plan. However, the involvement of the
Strategic Plan Steering Committee provided the substance and direction for our 5-year en-
deavor. We would like to thank the following personnel for their interest and involvement
in leading our department into the future:
Brian Amoroso - Police Sergeant
Doug Carscaden - Ranger Services Manager, Parks and Recreation Dept.
Jake Dinsmore - Police Officer
Melissa Ellsworth - Police Senior Administrative Analyst
Greg Hermann - Special Projects Manager, Community Development Dept.
Christy McCornack - Police/Fire Dispatcher
Marjorie Menesez - Police Records Clerk
Melissa Mudgett - Recreation and Public Art Manager, Parks and Recreation Dept.
Chad Pfarr - Police Sergeant
Sue Sanders - Administrative Assistant to the Chief of Police
Trevor Shalhoob - Police Detective
Chris Staley - Police Operations Captain
Keith Storton - Police Administrative Captain
Eric Vitale - Police Detective
Greg Zocher - Human Resources Manager, Human Resources Dept.
The execution of the SLOPD Strategic Plan would not be possible without the leadership
and support of the San Luis Obispo City Council and City Manager Katie Lichtig.
10.a
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: a - 2016 SLOPD Strat Plan Final.kas (1271 : Police Department Strategic Plan)
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
Prepared By: Jon Ansolabehere, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: DEMOCRACY VOUCHER FUNDING FOR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Discuss the citizen proposed “Ordinance to create a system of Democracy Voucher funding for
municipal elections” and provide direction whether the Council desires staff to further review
and analyze the proposed ordinance for further Council consideration.
DISCUSSION
Report in Brief
The City Council received a request from Mr. William Ostrander to consider an ordinance
regarding the public funding of municipal elections. The ordinance proposes to amend Chapter
2.40 of the City’s Municipal Code and establish a comprehensive structure to allow public
funding of municipal elections via a “democracy voucher” system. This system would allow
registered voters to “assign” their $20 democracy voucher to any candidate that elects to
participate in this system. The voucher is proposed to be funded from the City’s General Fund,
although other potential sources of revenue are identified. A candidate who elects to participate
in this program may only use the voucher funds to pay for his or her campaign, and may not
receive funds from other sources, with a few exceptions. Candidates who do not elect to
participate in the program can continue to receive campaign contributions subject to existing law.
In addition, the proposed ordinance establishes an ethics committee which, among other things,
investigates ethics violations, including violations of the City’s election campaign rules.
Background
At its August 18, 2015 meeting, the City Council received a request from Mr. William Ostrander
to consider an ordinance regarding the public funding of municipal elections. The o rdinance is
entitled “An Ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo Amending the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code to Create a System of ‘Democracy Voucher’ Funding for Municipal Elections
and to make other Revisions to the City’s Election Campaign Regulations” (the “Ordinance”). A
copy of the Ordinance is attached as Attachment A. During the meeting, the City Council
directed staff to place the Ordinance on the agenda for Council discussion.
11
Packet Pg. 100
This report provides a high level overview of the Ordinance, as follows:
1. Current City Election Regulations;
2. Breakdown of how the Ordinance functions;
a. The Democracy Voucher Fund;
b. The Democracy Voucher Program;
c. Creation of the Ethics Commission and Oversight controls;
d. Other modifications;
3. Organizational Impacts;
a. City Clerk’s Office;
i. Needed staff;
ii. Needed equipment;
b. City Attorney’s Office; and
c. Other Departments.
This report is intended to provide a high level analysis of the Ordinance. What this staff report
does not do is provide a detailed analysis or review of the legalit y of the Ordinance or any of its
components. Further, at this time, City staff is not making any recommendations or suggested
changes to the Ordinance in regards to operation, management or consistency with the City’s
other functions and rules and regulations. If the City Council directs staff to place the Ordinance
on the agenda for further consideration, a more detailed review and analysis of the Ordinance
will be performed and modifications will be recommended if deemed necessary.
Project Analysis
Current City Election Regulations.
The City’s current election campaign regulations are set forth in Chapter 2.40 and are attached to
this report as Attachment B. The main components of these regulations are as follows:
1. Contribution limitations (§ 2.40.040): This section limits the amount each person can
contribute to any candidate or controlled committee1, or the amount each candidate or
controlled committee can solicit from or accept from any person, to $300. These
limitations do not apply to contributions from the candidate’s “immediate family.” This
section further limits the amount any candidate can accept from anonymous contributions
to $50.
2. Election campaign accounts (§ 2.40.050): This section mandates individuals who run for
a city elective office to open a campaign bank account with a bank located within the
City. This section further requires that such accounts be open to the City Clerk.
1 A “controlled committee” is defined as a committee that is controlled directly or indirectly by a
candidate or state measure proponent or that acts jointly with a candidate, controlled committee, or state
measure proponent in connection with the making of expenditures. A candidate or state measure
proponent controls a committee if he or she, his or her agent, or any other committee he or she controls
has a significant influence on the actions or decisions of the committee. See SLOMC § 2.40.030 and Gov.
Code § 82016.
11
Packet Pg. 101
3. Campaign statements (§ 2.40.060): This section requires campaign treasurers to file
certain statements with the City Clerk.
4. Campaign signs (§ 2.40.070): This section sets forth certain size, time, place and manner
restrictions on the placement of campaign signs within the City.
In addition to the City’s campaign regulations, the City regulates “Municipal Advocates” which
is defined as “Any person, business entity or other organization, including an individual contract
lobbyist, which contracts for economic consideration to communicate with any officer or
employee of the City of San Luis Obispo for the purpose of influencing local legislative or
discretionary action on behalf of any other person.” With some exceptions, Municipal Advocates
are required to register with the City.
The Proposed Democracy Voucher Ordinance.
The Ordinance is being proposed by Mr. William Ostrander of Citizens Congress, 2014 Inc., a
non-profit organization devoted to campaign finance reform. The proposed Ordinance would be
one of the first in the Country to utilize a “Democracy Voucher” system for publicly funded
elections.2 Some states and other cities, however, do have some form of publicly financed
campaigns including: Los Angeles, San Francisco, Richmond, Seattle, Tallahassee,
Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Boulder, and New York.
The following is a breakdown of the various components of the Ordinance:
1. The Democracy Voucher Fund. Section 6 of the Ordinance proposes a new section
2.40.082 be added to the City’s Municipal Code. This section establishes the “Democracy
Voucher Fund” and appropriates $20 per registered voter per year from the City’s General Fund
for this account. The City currently has 24,971 registered voters which would equal a fund
amount of $499,420. Section 6 also authorizes “other sources of revenue” to be deposited into
the fund including: (a) unspent voucher funds from the prior election; (b) fines levied against
candidates for violations of election laws; (b) voluntary donations; (c) other funds appropriated
by the Mayor and City Council; (d) interest made on deposits; and (e) other sources of revenue
designated by the Mayor and Council.
It should be noted that Section 7 of the proposed Ordinance includes a $50,000 limit that
any candidate may receive in Democracy Voucher funds for any single election. The result is
that this limit acts as a stop gap measure for this fund. For example, in order for the fund to be
pretty much fully depleted in any election, there would need to be ten candidates, each of whom
elect to participate in this program, and each of whom obtain the maximum amount of voucher
funds. The corollary would be that each of the 24,971 register voters would use his or her
voucher. In the November 4, 2014 general election, the City of San Luis Obispo had eight
candidates for one Mayoral seat and two council seats and experienced an approximately 46%
and 79% voter turnout, respectively.
2 In early November of last year, Seattle passed a similar democracy voucher program.
11
Packet Pg. 102
2. The Democracy Voucher Program. Section 7 of the Ordinance proposes a Democracy
Voucher Program wherein a $20 pre-loaded “Democracy Voucher Debit Card” is mailed to each
registered voter for each election within the City’s jurisdiction. Candidates may then only receive
funds from holders of the Democracy Voucher via a secure online assignment if the candidate
meets certain eligibility requirements, files a statement with the City Clerk to participate in the
program and agrees that the sole source of the candidate’s campaign funds will be from
Democracy Vouchers assigned to the candidate by the registered voter and the candidate’s
personal funds.3
The Democracy Voucher Program includes certain limitations on the amount of and
when assigned funds may be redeemed by the candidate. Specifically, the Ordinance provides
the following redemption schedule for each candidate who chooses to participate in the program:
(a) No more than $10,000 in funds may be redeemed prior to September 1st of
the municipal election year; and
(b) No more than $50,000 in funds may be redeemed in any election year.
Democracy Voucher Funds may only be used for campaign costs or debts and any unspent
proceeds must be returned to the City. In the event a candidate uses such funds for non-campaign
related expenses, enforcement action would be needed in order to recover the costs.
3. Ethics Commission and Oversight Controls. Section 8 of the Ordinance proposes the
creation of a City Ethics Commission. The Commission would be a five member body whose
duties and responsibilities are to:
(a) Audit disclosure statements and investigate violations of the City’s
elections rules and to report findings to the City Attorney and other
appropriate agencies;
(b) Make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council regarding
campaign finance reform;
(c) Make adjustments based on CPI4;
(d) Prescribe forms related to the Democracy Voucher and campaign
regulations;
(e) Prepare and public manuals and instructions related to campaign
regulations;
(f) Develop an education program related to campaign regulations;
(g) To develop and approve its own budget; and5
(h) To receive grants and other appropriations.
3 The amount of personal funds is limited to $300.
4 It is unclear from the proposed Ordinance what section 2.40.086.C.3 means, however, any fees or other
similar City charges are usually set and/ or amended by Council Resolution.
5 Article VIII of the City’s Charter sets forth the process for budget adoption and specifies that the Budget
is to be adopted by the Council after public hearing.
11
Packet Pg. 103
In addition to the above duties, the Ordinance includes specific provisions related to
“Investigations and Enforcement Proceedings.” See proposed section 2.40.086.F. This section
provides that the Commission shall investigate alleged violations of state law, City Charter or
City ordinances related to “…campaign finance, lobbying, conflicts of interest and governmental
ethics” upon the determination of “sufficient cause” of such violation based on the receipt of a
sworn complaint or on the Commission’s own initiative. This section creates an administrative
enforcement process separate and apart from the City’s administrative citation process.6 The
Ordinance also proposes provisions related to the appointment of a special prosecutor and the
establishment of a separate fund in an undetermined amount to finance those services.
Section 8 of the proposed Ordinance also establishes an Executive Director who would
serve at the will of the Commission. As written, the salary of the Executive Director would be set
by Council based on a recommendation of the City Manager.
4. Other Modifications. The Ordinance also proposes certain modifications to the City’s
existing campaign regulations set forth in sections 2.40.040 and 2.40.060. The most significant
modification to these sections is the proposed requirements related to “independent
expenditures.” As defined by this Ordinance, an independent expenditure means an a payment or
a promise of payment totaling $500 or more “…that clearly identifies a candidate for elective
City office, or for a communication that clearly identifies a candidate for elective office, but does
not expressly advocate the election or defeat of the candidate, and that is disseminated,
broadcast, or otherwise published within 45 days of an election…” The Ordinance requires any
person who makes such an expenditure to file a report with the City Clerk within 48 hours of
making or promising such payment disclosing the “name of the person, address, occupation, and
employer, and the amount of the payment.”7 This section also has reciprocal reporting and
disclosure requirements by the person receiving the payment or the promise of payment for an
independent expenditure.
CONCURRENCES
The Finance and Information Technology Department concurs with the analysis in this report.
FISCAL IMPACT
The following is an educated estimate of the minimum additional resources that will be needed
in order to implement the proposed Ordinance.
6 Please note that this process has not been evaluated for legality under Government Code section
53069.4.
7 It should be noted that this provision would need to be revised to be with internally consistent
Government Code section 82031.
11
Packet Pg. 104
START UP COSTS (ONE-TIME)
Democracy Voucher Fund $499,420
Webpage design $20,000
Public Education/ Outreach $20,000
Equipment: (two workstations, Valuecard equipment
(tablet reader @ $400) and software development to
work with City computers)
$12,500 - $16,000
Democracy Voucher Cards ($.60 each)
$15,600
Software development for “secure online assignment”
program
$15,000 to $25,000
Program Manager
.5 FTE Special Projects Manager
$54,234
TOTAL: $636,754 - $650,254
OPERATIONAL COSTS (ONGOING)
Amount needed to “replenish” the fund after
initial funding: 8
$124,855@50% disbursement9
$49,942 @20% disbursement
$24,971@10% disbursement
Staff:10
City Clerk’s Office:11
.3 FTE City Clerk
.2 FTE Assistant City Clerk
.5 FTE Deputy City Clerk
.75 FTE Admin. Assistant
$37,500
$18,000
$35,438
$45,000
8 It is unclear how much of this fund will be consumed for each election. Citizens Congress has proposed
a figure of a 20% consumption rate which would require bi-annual “replenishment” of approximately
$99,884, or annual replenishment rate of $49,942, as noted above.
9 Note that this amount is the annual amount. The total fund is divided by two to account for the election
cycle. Please also note the stop gap limitations discussed above in the Democracy Voucher Fund section.
10 Implementation of the Ordinance will affect other City departments both directly and indirectly. At this
time, it is difficult to estimate what additional resources will be necessary for these departments to absor b
the additional work that would result from the Ordinance, however, we believe that such additional work
will be significant. For example, the City’s Finance Department will need to oversee and manage the
Democracy Voucher Fund and the City’s IT Department will need to address software issues with the
Voucher Card. If significant investigation and/ or legal action is needed in order to enforce the
Ordinance, then those costs can also be significant.
11 It should be noted that we anticipate work flow to “ebb and flow” with the election year.
11
Packet Pg. 105
City Attorney’s Office:
.3 FTE Assistant City Attorney
Plus any additional special prosecutor and/ or
special investigator costs
$40,500
Information not available
Mailing $2,197
($4,394 per election cycle for bulk mail)
Public Education and Outreach $2,500 - $5,000 per year
Equipment maintenance/replacement $5,000
Democracy Voucher Card Replacement $7,800
($15,600 per election cycle)
Ethics Commission Compensation $0 - $6,150 (5 members @$1,230 per year,
same as PC)
Ethics Commission Executive Director $50,000
Total Annual Operational Cost12: $240,500 – $377,440
ALTERNATIVES
Because this is a discussion item only there are no proposed alternatives.
12Range of costs includes election and non-election years and will vary depending on the utilization of the
Democracy Voucher Fund.
11
Packet Pg. 106
11.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
11.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: a - Democracy Voucher Ordinance (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
Chapter 2.40 ELECTION CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS*
Page 1/4
Chapter 2.40
ELECTION CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS*
Sections:
2.40.010 Title.
2.40.020 Purpose and intent.
2.40.030 Definitions.
2.40.040 Contribution limitations.
2.40.050 Election campaign accounts.
2.40.060 Campaign statements.
2.40.070 Campaign signs.
2.40.080 Responsibilities of city clerk.
2.40.090 Criminal misdemeanor actions.
2.40.100 Civil actions.
2.40.110 Injunctive relief.
2.40.120 Cost of litigation.
2.40.130 Construction of provisions.
2.40.140 Council study committee.
2.40.150 Expiration of provisions.
*Prior legislation: Prior code §§ 2800—2812, as amended by Ord. 1067 § 1, 1986, Ord. 1191 § 1, 1991, and Ord. 1254 § 1, 1994.
2.40.010 Title.
This chapter may be cited as the election campaign regulations of the city. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 §
1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998)
2.40.020 Purpose and intent.
A. It is the purpose and intent of this chapter:
1. To promote integrity, honesty, fairness, and transparency in municipal election campaigns.
2. To prevent corruption, or the appearance of corruption, which results from the real or imagined influence of
large contributions on the conduct or actions of candidates elected to office.
3. To ensure a level of discussion of public issues adequate for a viable campaign by providing voters with the
information necessary to make an assessment of each candidate or measure before voting.
4. To require public disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures made in support of or in opposition
to candidates or measures in municipal elections.
5. To place realistic and enforceable limits on the amounts persons may contribute in municipal election
campaigns.
6. To ensure that funds contributed to a campaign committee are used solely for campaign purposes.
7. To provide full and fair enforcement of all the provisions of this chapter.
B. By enacting this chapter, the council does not intend to deprive or restrict any citizen of the exercise of rights
guaranteed under the United States Constitution and the California Constitution.
C. The city council takes specific notice of the findings and declarations made in the Political Reform Act and finds
and declares them applicable to San Luis Obispo and a basis for enacting this chapter.
D. It is the intent of this chapter to impose limits on the amount of money that may be contributed to a candidate or
controlled committee to achieve the purposes specified in this section. This chapter is not intended, and shall not be
construed, to establish any reporting, filing, or procedural requirement in addition to, or different from, the Political
The San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1627, passed December 15, 2015.
11.b
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: b - Chapter 2.40 (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
Chapter 2.40 ELECTION CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS*
Page 2/4
Reform Act or the regulations adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), except as specifically set
forth in Sections 2.40.050 and 2.40.090 infra. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1
(part), 2005: Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998)
2.40.030 Definitions.
The terms used in this chapter shall have the same definitions as specified in the Political Reform Act and FPPC
regulations. In those cases where definitions in the Political Reform Act or FPPC regulations contain a specific
reference to any state election, candidate, or electoral criteria, the definition shall be modified to reflect the
municipal equivalent, or, in the absence of a municipal equivalent, to delete the specific reference. (Ord. 1599 § 2
(part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1407 § 1, 2002; Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998)
2.40.040 Contribution limitations.
A. Contributions by Persons to Candidates and/or Controlled Committees. No person shall make any contribution to
a candidate and/or any controlled committee connected with that candidate, with respect to any single election,
which would cause the total amount contributed by such person to the candidate and any controlled committee
connected with that candidate, when combined, to exceed three hundred dollars.
B. Acceptance or Solicitation by Candidates or Controlled Committees. No candidate or controlled committee shall
solicit or accept any contribution from any person which would cause the total amount contributed by such person,
with respect to any single election, to the candidate and/or any controlled committee connected with that candidate,
when combined, to exceed the sum of three hundred dollars.
C. Contributions by Candidates. The provisions of subsections A and B of this section shall not apply to
contributions from a candidate or from his or her immediate family to any controlled committee connected with that
candidate, nor to the expenditure, by the candidate, of his or her personal funds. For purposes of this section,
“immediate family” means a candidate’s or elected officeholder’s spouse or domestic partner, and/or dependent
children.
D. Anonymous Contributions. No candidate or controlled committee shall accept anonymous contributions, with
respect to any single election, which exceed fifty dollars. Subject to the provisions of state law, in the event a
candidate or controlled committee receives an anonymous contribution that would result in a violation of this
subsection, the candidate or controlled committee shall promptly pay that sum to the city for deposit into the general
fund to be used to defray the costs of municipal elections. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010:
Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1407 § 3, 2002; Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.050)
2.40.050 Election campaign accounts.
A. Campaign Bank Accounts. An individual who plans to run for a city elective office and who plans to accept
contributions and make campaign-related expenditures must set up a campaign bank account at a financial
institution with a branch located in the city of San Luis Obispo.
B. Access to Records by City Clerk. The city clerk shall have full access at all reasonable hours to the bank’s
records concerning all election campaign accounts. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord.
1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1407 §§ 4, 5, 6, 2002; Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.060)
2.40.060 Campaign statements.
A. Required Filing Schedule. Every campaign treasurer shall file with the city clerk campaign statements as required
by the provisions of the Government Code and in a format acceptable to the city clerk.
B. Contents. Each state campaign statement filed shall contain the information required under the provisions of the
Government Code and any contributions greater than fifty dollars.
C. Filing. Each document required to be filed in this chapter shall be filed with the city clerk during business hours,
and elsewhere as may be required by the Government Code.
D. Publication. The city clerk shall promptly, following receipt for filing, post a copy of each campaign statement on
the city of San Luis Obispo’s website for public inspection, redacting personal information in accordance with state
law. The city clerk shall report on the website of any candidate and/or committee that has failed to comply by the
The San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1627, passed December 15, 2015.
11.b
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: b - Chapter 2.40 (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
Chapter 2.40 ELECTION CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS*
Page 3/4
required deadline with the campaign statement requirements pursuant to this section or state law. In addition, the
city clerk shall cause to be published a display ad in a newspaper of general circulation advising the public how and
where to access copies of the filed campaign statements on the city of San Luis Obispo’s website, at the time mail
ballots are distributed for said election. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part),
2005: Ord. 1407 § 7, 2002; Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.070)
2.40.070 Campaign signs.
A. Severability. This section is a separate and severable provision of the election campaign regulations.
B. Campaign Signs. Campaign signs shall not exceed three square feet per sign in residential zones and ten square
feet per sign in nonresidential zones, and shall be removed no later than ten days following the election.
C. Definition. “Campaign sign” means a sign intended to draw attention to or communicate a position on any issue,
candidate, or measure in any national, state, local, college or university campus election, the placement of which is
in conformity with Section 15.40.300 (Prohibited signs); and which otherwise is not subject to regulation under
Chapter 15.40 (Sign Regulations). (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part),
2005: Ord. 1407 § 14, 2002. Formerly 2.40.080)
2.40.080 Responsibilities of city clerk.
A. Duties. In addition to any other duties required of the city clerk under this chapter, the city clerk shall:
1. Prescribe and furnish, without charge, appropriate forms for all campaign statements, documents and reports
required to be filed by this chapter.
2. Determine whether required statements and declarations have been filed and, if so, whether they conform on
their face with the requirements of this chapter.
3. Promptly notify all persons who have failed to file a statement in the form and at the time required by this
chapter.
4. Report, in writing, apparent violations of this chapter to the city attorney.
5. Promptly, following receipt for filing, post a copy of each campaign statement on the city of San Luis
Obispo’s website for public inspection. The city clerk shall report on the website of any candidate and/or
committee that has failed to comply by the required deadline with the campaign statement requirements
pursuant to this section or state law. In addition, the city clerk shall cause to be published one display ad in a
newspaper of general circulation advising the public how and where to access copies of the filed campaign
statements on the city of San Luis Obispo’s website.
6. Compile and maintain a current log of all filed statements pertaining to each reporting committee. (Ord. 1599
§ 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1407 § 8, 2002; Ord. 1333 § 1
(part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.090)
2.40.090 Criminal misdemeanor actions.
Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person who causes any other
person to violate any provision of this chapter, or who aids and abets any other person in the violation of any
provision of this chapter, shall be liable under the provisions of this section. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 §
1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.100)
2.40.100 Civil actions.
A. Any person who intentionally or negligently violates any provision of this chapter shall be liable in a civil action
brought by the city attorney or by a person residing within the city for an amount not more than three times the
amount of the unlawful contribution or expenditure.
B. If any person files an original city campaign statement after any deadline imposed by this chapter, he or she shall
pay, in addition to any other penalties provided for under this chapter, the sum of one hundred dollars per day after
the deadline until the statement or report is filed. Liability may not be enforced if on an impartial basis the city clerk
The San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1627, passed December 15, 2015.
11.b
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: b - Chapter 2.40 (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
Chapter 2.40 ELECTION CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS*
Page 4/4
determines that the late filing was not willful and that enforcement of the liability will not further the purposes of
this chapter. In addition, the city clerk may assess any applicable fines in accordance with state law.
C. If two or more persons are responsible for any violation, they shall be jointly and severally liable.
D. Any person, before filing a civil action pursuant to this section, shall first file with the city attorney a written
request for the city attorney to commence the action. The request shall contain a statement of the grounds for
believing a cause of action exists. The city attorney shall respond within ten days after receipt of the request
indicating whether he or she intends to file a civil action. If the city attorney indicates in the affirmative and files a
suit within thirty days thereafter, no other action may be brought unless the action by the city attorney is dismissed
without prejudice.
E. In determining the amount of liability, the court may take into account the seriousness of the violation and the
degree of culpability of the defendant. If a judgment is entered against the defendant or defendants in an action, the
plaintiff shall receive fifty percent of the amount recovered. The remaining fifty percent shall be deposited into the
city treasury. In an action brought by the city attorney, the entire amount shall be paid to the city treasury.
F. No civil action alleging a violation of any provision of this chapter shall be filed more than four years after the
date the violation occurred. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord.
1407 § 9, 2002; Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.110)
2.40.110 Injunctive relief.
The city attorney or any person residing in the city may sue for injunctive relief to enjoin violations or to compel
compliance with the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 §
1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.120)
2.40.120 Cost of litigation.
The court may award to a plaintiff or defendant who prevails in any action authorized by this chapter his or her costs
of litigation, including reasonable attorneys’ fees; provided, however, no costs of litigation or attorneys’ fees shall
be awarded against the city. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord.
1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.130)
2.40.130 Construction of provisions.
A. This chapter shall be in addition to all other city and state laws applicable to municipal elections. Unless the
contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the definitions and terms set forth in the Government Code
shall govern the interpretations of terms used in this chapter. This chapter shall be construed liberally in order to
effectuate its purposes.
B. If any provision of this chapter, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the
validity of the remainder of the chapter and the applicability of such provision to other persons and circumstances
shall not be affected thereby. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005:
Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.150)
2.40.140 Council study committee.
A. Appointment. At least nine months prior to the expiration of this chapter, the council shall appoint a committee of
at least five citizens to study the efficacy of this chapter. The committee shall complete its deliberations and report
its findings to the city council on or before January 31, 2018. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part),
2010: Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1407 § 10, 2002: Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.160)
2.40.150 Expiration of provisions.
Unless readopted, this chapter shall expire on June 30, 2018. (Ord. 1599 § 2 (part), 2014: Ord. 1538 § 1 (part), 2010:
Ord. 1483 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 1407 § 11, 2002: Ord. 1333 § 1 (part), 1998. Formerly 2.40.170)
The San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1627, passed December 15, 2015.
11.b
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: b - Chapter 2.40 (1280 : Democracy Voucher Funding for Municipal Elections)
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Carrie Mattingl y, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Utilities Deputy Director, Water
SUBJECT: FULL ALLOCATION OF THE NACIMIENTO WATER PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, Adopting an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Nacimiento Water Project and Authorizing an Amendment No. 3 to the Nacimiento Project
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract Reflecting an Additional Allocation of Water to the City.”
DISCUSSION
Background
Nacimiento Water Project History
In 1959, the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District)
entered into an agreement with Monterey County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
now Monterey County Water Resources Agency) to secure rights to 17,500 acre-feet of water
per year from the Nacimiento Reservoir. The reservoir has a storage capacity of 377,900 acre-
feet and, in addition to providing water to San Luis Obispo County, serves various purposes,
such as flood protection, recreational opportunities, and groundwater recharge for the Salinas
Valley.
After many years of negotiations and in collaboration with Paso Robles, Templeton and
Atascadero Mutual Water Company (known collectively as “project participants”), the City
Council adopted a resolution on July 29, 2004, approving an agreement with the District for the
design, construction and operation of facilities required to deliver the water from Nacimiento
Reservoir to participants. Through these initial negotiations, the District agreed to contribute a
portion of its general ad valorem taxes to offset project debt service costs until such time as the
total project entitlement to water was allocated and subscribed to by all of the project
participants.
The project was completed at a cost of approximately $173 million. The City’s share of this
capital cost is currently just under $74 million. The City’s budgeted project costs for 2015 -16
are $6,552,743. This amount includes $4,698,580 debt service and $1,854,163 for operations,
maintenance and capital reserve.
12
Packet Pg. 127
Request for Additional Allocation
In September 2015, the City Council authorized the City Manager to sign a request for additional
allocation of water from the Nacimiento Project (detailed in Attachment A, September 2015 staff
report). This letter was jointly signed by the 1) City of Paso Robles, 2) Templeton Community
Services District, and 3) Atascadero Mutual Water Company. It served as notification to the
District of the project participants’ intent to fully allocate the Nacimiento reserve water
proportionately among those participants.
The request provided a 60-day notice to the only other current participant, County Service Area
(CSA) 10-A (Cayucos), that the other participants were requesting full allocation of the reserve
water. CSA 10-A followed by taking the action to participate in the full allocation.
Even though not required by contract, the 60-day notice was also sent to all entities who
participated in the original 2004 Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Santa Margarita Ranch and
Bella Vista Mobile Home Park both opted to purchase a permanent allocation of Nacimiento
water. The cost of a permanent allocation of water is consistent with the like-contracts held by
the existing partners and required by the Nacimiento contract. The cost of a permanent allocation
includes all past debt payments proportionate to the amount of water allocated. Santa Margarita
Ranch paid $1,458,099 for 80 acre-feet per year (afy) and Bella Vista Mobile Home Park paid
$209,867 for 10 afy of permanent allocation. This money is currently being held by the District
until the contract is amended. The current and proposed water allocations are shown in Table 1
below.
Table 1: NWP Proposed Full Allocation
Water Allocation
Participant
Current Delivery
Entitlement
Proposed Share
of Reserve Water
New Participants Total at Full
Allocation
City of San Luis Obispo 3,380 2,102 - 5,482
City of Paso Robles 4,000 2,488 - 6,488
Atascadero Mutual
Water Company
2,000 1,244 - 3,244
Templeton Community
Services District
250 156 - 406
County Services Area 10A
(Cayucos)
25 15 - 40
Bella Vista Mobile Home
Park
0 0 10 10
Santa Margarita Ranch
Mutual Water Company
0 0 80 80
Reserve Water 6,095 0 - 0
Total 15,750 6,005 90 15,750
NOTE: All figures are in acre-feet per year.
12
Packet Pg. 128
Benefits of Full Allocation
With uncertainty of future climatic conditions coupled with aging infrastructure, adding more
Nacimiento water to the City's portfolio will reduce pressure on the use of water supplies in the
relatively small Whale Rock and Salinas reservoirs. It would serve to extend these stored
supplies during future critical water shortage periods.
Full allocation could potentially be of regional benefit in northern San Luis Obispo County.
When Nacimiento water has been fully allocated, the Nacimiento Agreement allows for
temporary water sales that may be sold to any participant or other third party at market pricing
on a temporary basis under certain circumstances.
Fully allocating the reserve water results in the quickest and most economical path forward to
put the entire yearly allocation of Nacimiento Project water to beneficial use. Sales of surplus
water would also provide an opportunity for a revenue stream for the project participants which
would help to offset additional costs.
Amendment No. 3
Amendment No. 3 to the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract (the
“Amendment”) (Attachment D) simply modifies the parametric table to reflect the additional
allocation of reserve water to the participants, including the new participants discussed above.
The Amendment also makes other modifications to make the contract internally consistent.
CONCURRENCES
The Community Development Department and City Attorney’s office were instrumental in the
review of the environmental consultant’s work and ensuring conformity to City processes related
to this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The District was the Lead Agency for the Nacimiento Water Project (NWP) and certified a Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) in 2004. A copy of the FEIR is available for review in the
Council Reading File. The City of San Luis Obispo, as a project participant, was a Responsible
Agency for that environmental document. The FEIR evaluated all potential environmental
effects that could result from construction of the facilities to deliver the entire 17,500 acre-feet of
water from Lake Nacimiento to San Luis Obispo and to other areas in the County. The City of
San Luis Obispo originally requested 3,380 afy from NWP supplies as evaluated in the 2004
EIR.
The NWP FEIR evaluated a wide variety of climatic conditions and historical water levels to
determine potential impacts on water services during both wet and extended dry climatic periods.
As such, the FEIR impact analysis anticipated potential impacts to water resources and
socioeconomic impacts associated with participant water withdrawals during drought conditions.
12
Packet Pg. 129
The 2004 FEIR examined the initial 3,380 afy of water delivery to the City. The proposed
additional 2,102 afy was not studied for availability to accommodate new projects or additional
growth. Because the additional allocation was not included in the FEIR, additional
environmental analysis is required under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) to
evaluate this change.
EIR Addendum
Following the Council’s authorization to pursue full allocation, the City hired Marine Research
Specialists (MRS), the firm who conducted the original Nacimiento FEIR, to evaluate the
potential environmental effects of the proposed full allocation for the City of San Luis Obispo.
CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 through 15164 discuss a lead or responsible agency’s
responsibilities in handling new information that was not included in the project’s final
environmental impact report. When none of the conditions listed in section 15162 are triggered,
for example, when the changes do not create new significant environmental effects, a lead or
responsible agency may prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR.
As noted in the Addendum (Attachment C) the circumstances under which the NWP was
undertaken remain essentially unchanged. The NWP was designed to provide participants with
the flexibility to balance their water demand requirements, recognizing that NWP water would
supplement other sources of water than may not always be available in sufficient quantities to
meet local demand.
The additional allocation of Nacimiento water would not be used to serve the City’s build–out
population (Primary Water Supply), but would instead be added to the City’s Secondary Water
Supply to meet short term losses to the City’s water supply due to events such as drought or
maintenance and repair of infrastructure. The addition of 2,102 afy of Secondary Water Supply
to the City’s current water supply accounting can be seen in Table 2.
Table 2: Water Supply Accounting
Water
Supply
Total Acre
Feet
Primary
Water
Supply
Reliability
Reserve
Secondary
Water
Supply
Current 10,005 7,330 1,174 1,501
Proposed 12,107 7,330 1,174 3,603
Based on their analysis of the proposed project, MRS determined that the proposed changes will
not result in any new impacts or any increase in the severity of impacts addressed in the EIR and
prepared the attached Addendum to the FEIR.
It should be noted that the potential environmental impacts of full development under the City’s
General Plan were evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report for the 2014 Land Use and
Circulation Elements Update (available for review at
12
Packet Pg. 130
http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-
zoning/general-plan). When the City adopted the update and certified that EIR, it acknowledged
that the planned growth would have significant, adverse impacts. These impacts would be:
conversion of prime agricultural land to urban use; increased water usage; unacceptable levels of
service for traffic on most arterial streets; change from rural to urban character; the number of
workers increasing faster than the number of residents; and certain localized impacts due mostly
to street widening or extension projects. Schools would also be further impacted. However, the
EIR and Water Supply Assessment concluded that there was adequate water to serve the
community through buildout.
The additional NWP allocation would be allocated to the City’s secondary water supply and
would not be available to accommodate new projects or additional growth. An increase in City’s
allocation would only serve areas already evaluated and approved for future development
potential consistent with existing specific plan areas and City policies and land use designations
of the City’s General Plan Land Use Element adopted in 2014. Therefore, the proposal to
increase the NWP allocation would not result in any additional growth impacts over those
identified in the NWP EIR.
FISCAL IMPACT
In order to make the project economically feasible for the original participants, the District had
pledged its ad valorem tax collected from properties around Nacimiento Lake. Once full
allocation of the contracted delivery has been reached, the District will no longer be responsible
to provide the ad valorem tax revenue toward the project’s debt service. The City of San Luis
Obispo received an offset from the ad valorem tax revenue in the amount of $430,595 in 2015 -
16. It is expected to be $439,207 in 2016-17.
The impact from the ad valorem tax will be mostly offset by the savings realized by the
Nacimiento project bond refinancing that occurred in August 2015. This refinancing
lowered the debt service to the City by an approximated $350,000 annually for the remainder
of the loan.
The city will also receive a one-time credit of $792,812 from the two new participants in the
project, Santa Margarita Ranch and Bella Vista Mobile Home Park, which have both
purchased permanent allocation in the project. The amount reimburses the City for past and
future debt payments made before these partners came on board. The table below shows that
the net new annual ongoing fiscal impact of adding this new secondary supply is
approximately $75,000-$107,000 per year. The payment of these amounts can be
accommodated in the City’s Water Fund.
12
Packet Pg. 131
SLO Share 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Original Debt
Payment
4,690,340 4,685,131 4,671,263 4,662,313 4,653,852
Tax Revenue
Ceases
439,207 447,991 456,951 466,090 475,412
Debt Refinance (348,353) (353,738) (349,774) (390,266) (388,058)
Total 4,781,194 4,779,384 4,778,440 4,738,137 4,741,206
Difference 90,854 94,253 107,177 75,824 87,354
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may choose to not pursue additional allocation of Nacimiento Project water. Not
participating in the full allocation of reserve water would require the other Initial Participants to
purchase the City’s proportional remainder of the reserve water at the full price, including back
debt payment and interest, before they could receive any additional allocation. The estimated
cost for this purchase of the 2,102 afy would be $17 million dollars. For this reason, without the
City’s involvement, the remaining entities would not likely not be willing to participate in the
full allocation.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
A copy of the 2004 Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) is available for public review in
the City Clerk’s Office and on line.
12
Packet Pg. 132
Meeting Date: 9/15/2015
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Utilities Deputy Director – Water
Dean Furukawa, Water Treatment Plant Supervisor
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO PURSUE FULL ALLOCATION OF NACIMIENTO
PROJECT WATER
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to sign the application of intent to acquire additional delivery
entitlement of Nacimiento Project Water.
DISCUSSION
Nacimiento Water Project History
In 1959, the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District)
entered into an agreement with Monterey County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
now Monterey County Water Resources Agency) to secure rights to 17,500 acre-feet of water
per year from Nacimiento Reservoir. The reservoir has a storage capacity of 377,900 acre-feet
and, in addition to providing water to San Luis Obispo County, serves various purposes, such as
flood protection, recreational opportunities, and groundwater recharge for the Salinas Valley.
After many years of negotiations and in collaboration with Paso Robles, Templeton and
Atascadero Mutual Water Company (known collectively as “project participants”), the City
Council adopted a resolution on July 29, 2004, approving an agreement with the District for the
design, construction and operation of facilities required to deliver the water from Nacimiento
Reservoir to participants. Through these initial negotiations, the District agreed to contribute a
portion of its general ad valorem taxes to offset project debt service costs until such time as the
total project entitlement to water was allocated and subscribed to by all of the project
participants.
The project was completed at a cost of approximately $173 million. The City’s share of this
capital cost is currently just under $74 million. The City’s budgeted project costs for 2015 -16 are
6,552,743. This amount includes $4,698,580 debt service and $1,854,163 for operations,
maintenance and capital reserve.
Proposal for Full Allocation of the Nacimiento Water Project
Current project participants have subscribed to 11,405 acre-feet of the 17,500 acre-feet available.
6,095 acre-feet remain unallocated or in “reserve.” Reserve water is the water available above
what is currently allocated among the project participants.
17
Packet Pg. 327
12.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: a - Application for Additional Delivery Entitlement, September 2015 staff report (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
It was anticipated once the pipeline project was built, other entities would come forward to
purchase a permanent allocation from the reserve water. Other entities purchasing a permanent
allocation would begin carrying a commensurate proportion of debt service cost and reimburse
that proportion of carrying costs since debt service inception to the original project participants.
Although there have been inquiries, no entity has come forward to-date to purchase a permanent
allocation from the available reserve water. The current participants, off-set by the District’s ad
valorem tax contribution, pay the full cost of all debt service as well as all other costs associated
with the project.
Since no entities have stepped forward to permanently purchase water since deliveries began,
even in these extraordinary drought conditions, the Nacimiento Project Partners have conducted
an analysis which concludes that the full allocation of the reserve water to the current
participants as the best opportunity to manage the project’s assets (infrastructure and water) to
maximum benefit.
Article 29 of the Nacimiento Agreement contract provides a method for the participants to obtain
the additional water. This Article requires a 60-day notice to existing participants of the request
for additional entitlement. Attachment A is the draft letter which all the project partners would
sign requesting full allocation of the reserve water.
Should other entities come forward to purchase reserve water during the 60 -day period stipulated
in the contract, the project partners would support the allocation to come from the 6,095 acre-feet
currently in reserve, with the remainder going proportionately to the project partners.
Benefits of Full Allocation
With uncertainty of future climatic conditions, regulation and aging infrastructure, adding more
Nacimiento water to the City’s portfolio
will reduce pressure on use of water
supplies in the relatively small Whale
Rock and Salinas reservoirs. It would serve
to extend these stored supplies during
future critical water shortage periods.
Full allocation of the Nacimiento Project
would potentially be of regional benefit in
northern San Luis Obispo County. The
Nacimiento Agreement allows for
temporary water sales of ‘surplus’ water.
This surplus water, created only when the
reserve water has been fully allocated,
may be sold at market pricing on a
temporary basis under certain
circumstances.
17
Packet Pg. 328
12.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: a - Application for Additional Delivery Entitlement, September 2015 staff report (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Fully allocating the reserve water results in the quickest and most economical path forward to
put the entire yearly allocation of Nacimiento Project water to beneficial use. Sales of surplus
water would also provide an opportunity for a revenue stream for the project participants which
would help to off-set additional costs.
Contract provisions allow for the marketing of surplus water by the District. The partners desire
to work cooperatively on pricing and water sales to the benefit of all participants.
CONCURRENCES
The cities of San Luis Obispo and Paso Robles, Atascadero Mutual Water Company and
Templeton Community Services District desire to partner with one another and concurrently
request the full allocation of reserve water to these original project participants.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The District was the Lead Agency in the Nacimiento Project’s final environmental impact report
2003). This EIR contemplated full allocation of the project’s 17,500 acre-feet of water.
A section of this EIR focused on reviewing the environmental impacts of providing the City of
San Luis Obispo with 3,380 acre-feet of water annually. Due to the original intent of including
future partners, the original EIR did not consider the currently proposed additional delivery of
approximately 2,139 acre-feet of water being delivered to San Luis Obispo. This additional
amount is intended to be used to protect the City’s existing water supplies and could be utilized
outside the City for short-term beneficial uses. Uses that were not initially studied during the
project’s initial EIR would require a supplemental study.
A statement of overriding consideration related to significant and unavoidable impacts related to
growth inducement and air quality was adopted by the San Luis Obispo County Board of
Supervisors (as the District’s Board) when it adopted the EIR. The City, as a Responsible
Agency, also adopted a follow-up resolution including a statement of overriding consideration to
support the District’s findings.
The City of San Luis Obispo has adopted growth management and land use policies that dictate
how and how much the city will grow. An additional layer of water resource protection is found
in the City’s Charter requirement to provide a water reliability reserve. The City’s General Plan
water and wastewater management element contains a formula that details the application of the
primary and secondary water supplies as well as the reliability reserve to the City’s water
resources.
The recommended action in this report does not commit the City to receiving extra allocated
reserve water. The signing of the attached letter would start the notification process to the other
project participants and the District as defined in Article 29 of the contract. If this step is
approved, staff would return to Council after the 60-day notification period with any needed
environmental review, the final water volume to be received along with associated costs, and an
amended Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract for consideration.
17
Packet Pg. 329
12.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: a - Application for Additional Delivery Entitlement, September 2015 staff report (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
FISCAL IMPACT
In order to make the project economically feasible for the original participants, the District
pledged its ad valorem tax collected from properties around Nacimiento Lake. This amount was
budgeted at $1,077,250.00 in fiscal year 2015-16.
Per contract, at full allocation the District is no longer obligated to provide its ad valorem tax
revenue toward the project’s debt service. The additional costs associated with the loss of the
District’s contribution will be allocated among the project participants following the contract
provisions. For the City of San Luis Obispo this equals approximately $377,000 annually. This
amount is estimated due to the possible purchase of reserve water during the 60-day period
following the signing of the above mentioned letter.
The impact on operating expenses will be partially offset by the savings realized by the
Nacimiento project bond refinancing that occurred in August 2015. This refinancing lowered the
debt service by approximately $92,000 in 2015-16 and $380,000 annually for the remainder of
the loan.
While not a guaranteed revenue source, it is the intent of the project participants to make any
water not needed by participants (surplus water) available for short-term sales. This would result
in revenue proportionate to the amount each participant contributed to the surplus water pool that
could be used to offset the loss of the ad valorem tax contribution and/or other operating
expenses. Since this revenue is not a certainty, no changes to the budget or Financial Plan are
recommended. Any appropriate changes will be proposed at Mid-Year or Financial Plan
Supplement next June.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Council may choose to not pursue additional allocation of Nacimiento Project water.
Attachments:
a - Application for Additional Delivery Entitlement Sept 15
17
Packet Pg. 330
12.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: a - Application for Additional Delivery Entitlement, September 2015 staff report (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
September 16, 2015
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control & Water Conservation District CSA 10A
Attn: Wade Horton, Director of Public Works c/o Wade Horton
Department of Public Works Department of Public Works
County of San Luis Obispo County of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center County Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
SUBJECT: Application for Acquisition of Additional Delivery Entitlement
In accordance with Article 6(D) and other applicable provisions of the “Nacimiento Project Water
Delivery Entitlement Contract” dated August 17, 2004, as amended, each Initial Participant does hereby
apply for additional delivery entitlement. Specifically, Initial Participants apply to acquire the 6,095
acre-feet per year of Reserve Water and Reserved Capacity.
Attached is the revised Table 1 containing the parametric information (entitlement share, unit
percentage share, etc.) resulting from this action and as called for in accordance with the Second
Amendment to the “Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract” dated August 2007.
Written notice is also hereby given to County Service Area No. 10A of the Initial Participant’s
application for additional Delivery Entitlement of Reserve Water / Reserved Capacity. In accordance
with Article 29 (B), CSA 10(A) has 60 days (i.e. November 23, 2015) to likewise apply for an additional
Delivery Entitlement of Reserve Water / Reserved Capacity.
Sincerely,
CITY OF EL PASO DE ROBLES CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
James L. App, City Manager Katie Lichtig, City Manager
ATASCADERO MUTUAL WATER COMPANY TEMPLETON COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
John Neil, General Manager Jeff Briltz, General Manager
17.a
Packet Pg. 331
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
a
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
E
n
t
i
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
S
e
p
t
1
5
1
1
1
0
N
a
c
i
m
i
e
n
t
o
F
u
l
l
A
l
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
12.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: a - Application for Additional Delivery Entitlement, September 2015 staff report (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NACIMIENTO
WATER PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO
THE NACIMIENTO PROJECT WATER DELIVERY ENTITLEMENT
CONTRACT REFLECTING AN ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION OF
WATER TO THE CITY
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is a municipal corporation and charter
city;
WHEREAS, the City is a participant pursuant to the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery
Entitlement Contract (“NWP contract”);
WHEREAS, the City was a responsible agency under the Nacimiento Water Project
Final Environmental Impact Report (the “NWP FEIR”) which was certified on January 6, 2004;
WHEREAS, under the NWP contract, the City is entitled to receive 3,380 acre feet of
Nacimiento water;
WHEREAS, the City joined other participants in applying for an additional delivery
entitlement in accordance with applicable provisions of the NWP contract;
WHEREAS, the action would proportionally distribute reserve water as an “additional
delivery entitlement share” among participants. In the City’s case, it would receive an additional
delivery entitlement of 2,102 acre feet of water (the “Additional Allocation”);
WHEREAS, the City has analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the Additional
Allocation and has prepared an Addendum to the NWP FEIR (the “Addendum”) pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15164, because some changes or additions are necessary and none of
the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines section 15162 calling for preparation of a
subsequent EIR have occurred;
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has caused notice to be duly given of a hearing in this matter
in accordance with law.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
1. That the City Council hereby adopts the Addendum attached hereto as Exhibit A and
finds that it has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State Guidelines.
2. That pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21152 and CEQA Guidelines section
15094, the City Clerk shall cause a Notice of Determination to be filed with the San
Luis Obispo Clerk Recorder and the State Office of Planning and Research.
12.b
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: b - Resolution Adopting Addendum to FEIR and Amendment No.3 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Resolution No. (2016 Series)
Page 2
3. That the City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 3 to
the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract reflecting an additional
allocation to the City estimated at 2,102 acre feet per year substantially in true form
attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of March, 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Lee Price
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Lee Price
Interim City Clerk
12.b
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: b - Resolution Adopting Addendum to FEIR and Amendment No.3 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)
Addendum
Nacimiento Water Project
Environmental Impact
Report (ED-00-603)
SCH #2001061022
EIR Certified January 6, 2004
Prepared for:
City of San Luis Obispo
Utilities Department
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, California
93401-2710
Prepared by:
Marine Research Specialists
3140 Telegraph Road, Suite A
Ventura, California
93003
February 2016
mrs
12.c
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
12.c
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Table of Contents
February 2016 i Nacimiento Water Project
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... i
1.0 Introduction and Background ......................................................................................... 1
2.0 Project Location and Regional Setting ........................................................................... 2
3.0 Description of the Approved Nacimiento Water Project .............................................. 5
4.0 Description of Proposed Changes to the Project ............................................................ 7
5.0 Evaluation of Environmental Effects .............................................................................. 9
6.0 Environmental Impact Analysis ...................................................................................... 9
6.1 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................... 10
6.1.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 10
6.1.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 11
6.1.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 11
6.2 Geology, Seismicity, and Soils ......................................................................................... 11
6.2.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 11
6.2.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 12
6.2.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 12
6.3 Drainage, Erosion and Sedimentation............................................................................... 12
6.3.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 12
6.3.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 13
6.3.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 13
6.4 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................ 13
6.4.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 13
6.4.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 14
6.4.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 24
6.5 Noise ................................................................................................................................. 24
6.5.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 24
6.5.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 24
6.5.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 25
6.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................... 25
6.6.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 25
6.6.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 26
6.6.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 26
6.7 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 26
12.c
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Table of Contents
February 2016 ii Nacimiento Water Project
6.7.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 26
6.7.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 27
6.7.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 27
6.8 Cultural and Paleontological Resources ........................................................................... 27
6.8.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 27
6.8.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 28
6.8.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 28
6.9 Land Use ........................................................................................................................... 28
6.9.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 28
6.9.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 29
6.9.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 29
6.10 Utilities and Public Services ............................................................................................. 29
6.10.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 29
6.10.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 30
6.10.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 30
6.11 Transportation/Circulation ................................................................................................ 30
6.11.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 30
6.11.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 31
6.11.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 31
6.12 Aesthetics/Visual Resources ............................................................................................. 31
6.12.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 32
6.12.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 32
6.12.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 33
6.13 Agricultural Resources...................................................................................................... 33
6.13.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 33
6.13.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 33
6.13.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 34
6.14 Recreational Resources ..................................................................................................... 34
6.14.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 34
6.14.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 35
6.14.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 35
6.15 Socioeconomic Resources ................................................................................................ 35
6.15.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 35
6.15.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 36
12.c
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Table of Contents
February 2016 iii Nacimiento Water Project
6.15.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 36
6.16 Environmental Justice ....................................................................................................... 36
6.16.1 Analysis of the Revised Project .............................................................................. 36
6.16.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the
Project is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance ...................... 37
6.16.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 37
7.0 Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................................ 37
7.1 Interlake Tunnel Project .................................................................................................... 37
7.2 Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................ 38
8.0 Growth Inducement ........................................................................................................ 38
9.0 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 39
10.0 References ........................................................................................................................ 39
List of Figures
Figure 1 Schematic of Treated Water Option ......................................................................... 3
Figure 2 Schematic of Raw Water Option .............................................................................. 4
Figure 3. NWP Water Allocation ............................................................................................. 7
List of Tables
Table 1 Tentative Nacimiento Water Project Allocations ..................................................... 6
Table 2 Operational GHG Emissions, metric tonnes ........................................................... 23
12.c
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 1 Nacimiento Water Project
1.0 Introduction and Background
The Nacimiento Water Project (NWP) Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), adopted in
2004, contains a comprehensive disclosure and analysis of potential environmental effects
associated with the construction and operation of water delivery pipelines. The purpose of this
Addendum is to provide clarification of the changes to the Project water allocations and to
provide explanation supported by substantial evidence as to why these proposed changes will not
result in any new impacts or any increase in the severity of impacts addressed in the EIR.
California Code of Regulations title 14 ("State CEQA Guidelines"), sections 15162 through
15164 discuss a lead or responsible agency's responsibilities in handling new information
that was not included in a project's final environmental impact report.
Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides:
(a) When an EIR has been certified... for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for
that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the
light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR ... due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative
Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not
have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR
was certified as complete... shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous
EIR;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.
In the alternative, where some changes or additions are necessary to the previously
approved Final EIR, but none of the changes or additions meet the standards as provided for
a subsequent EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, section 15162, then the lead agency
12.c
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 2 Nacimiento Water Project
or responsible agency is directed to prepare an Addendum to the Final EIR. (State CEQA
Guidelines, section 15164). Further, the Addendum should include a "brief explanation of the
decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162," and that "explanation
must be supported by substantial evidence." (State CEQA Guidelines, section 15164, subd.
(e).) The addendum need not be circulated for public review, but may simply be attached to the
Final EIR (Ibid.; State CEQA Guideline, section 15164, subd. (c)).
2.0 Project Location and Regional Setting
The NWP included two equal water delivery options that were evaluated and compared equally
throughout the EIR: a Treated Water Option and a Raw Water Option. The proposed project
location is shown in Figures 1 and 2 for the two co-equal alternatives that were considered in
EIR. The proposed local water distribution pipelines and facilities are located throughout a wide
area of San Luis Obispo County between Lake Nacimiento and the City of San Luis Obispo. San
Luis Obispo County is bordered by Monterey County to the north, Kern and King Counties to
the east, and Santa Barbara County to the south. Lake Nacimiento is located 16 miles west of the
City of El Paso de Robles (Paso Robles), near the northern border of San Luis Obispo County.
Elevations in the project area range from sea level, near Cayucos along the coastal plain, to 1,577
feet above mean sea level (msl), north of the Cuesta Grade.
The project area transects three broad physiographic regions: coastal mountains and valleys,
interior mountains and valleys, and a coastal plain. Lake Nacimiento is located in the Santa
Lucia coastal mountain range. The Santa Lucia, Temblor, Caliente, and La Panza ranges form a
part of the Coast Range Mountains which extend across the County in a northwest to southeast
orientation. The highest peaks, many over 3,000 feet msl, are located in the Santa Lucia and
Caliente ranges. Although none of the mountain ranges in the proposed project area are
particularly high, the terrain is quite rugged.
The cities of Paso Robles and Atascadero, and the communities of Templeton and Santa
Margarita, are located in the interior valley within the La Panza Range. Major water courses in
the interior valley north of the Cuesta Grade are the Nacimiento and Salinas rivers and Santa
Margarita Creek. Major streams include Paso Robles, Santa Rita, Graves, Atascadero, San
Marcos Creek and Yerba Buena creeks. South of the Cuesta Grade, major water courses in the
project area include Stenner and San Luis Obispo creeks, Laguna Lake, and the Morro Bay
Estuary. Major drainage basins include the Lake Nacimiento Watershed and the Salinas River.
Several westwardly trending lesser drainages in the Morro Bay and Cayucos areas occur along
the coast. The Salinas River system drains a large basin in the northern interior of San Luis
Obispo County. This river is the largest single watershed in the Central Coast area and flows
northward into Monterey County and eventually discharges into Monterey Bay.
12.c
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 3 Nacimiento Water Project
Figure 1 Schematic of Treated Water Option
Source: San Luis Obispo County, 2003.
12.c
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 4 Nacimiento Water Project
Figure 2 Schematic of Raw Water Option
Source: San Luis Obispo County, 2003.
12.c
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 5 Nacimiento Water Project
3.0 Description of the Approved Nacimiento Water Project
The proposed project was in response to San Luis Obispo County’s need for future water
supplies and to supplement existing groundwater sources. The NWP would potentially supply up
to 16,2001 acre feet per year (afy) of water to augment the existing water supplies in various
communities within San Luis Obispo County.
The main objective of the NWP was to provide a reliable supplemental water source for a variety
of uses within San Luis Obispo County by supplementing the local ground and surface water
supplies with a new surface water source. The objective was also to increase reliability of water
deliveries, to improve water quality and to lessen the extent of future ground water pumping to
existing residents and provide sufficient supplies to support planning objectives in various
communities of San Luis Obispo County. The objective of the project was, therefore, to ensure
better management of water resources throughout the County.
The San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has a 17,500 afy
entitlement from Lake Nacimiento per agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. Of
this 17,500 afy, 16,200 afy was slated for this project and the remaining 1,300 afy was reserved
for local lakeside use.
Fifteen (15) purveyors submitted their requests for Lake Nacimiento water. Of the 16,200 afy
available for the project, 13,575 afy was being requested; the remaining 2,625 afy was
considered a County-owned contingency capacity. Table 1 shows each purveyor allocation
request and requested peaking factor (percent of extra project capacity requested by the
purveyor) that was evaluated in the EIR. After the Nacimiento Water Project was approved, only
four purveyors decided to join the County and participate in moving forward with the project:
Paso Robles, Templeton, Atascadero and the City of San Luis Obispo.
The NWP included two co-equal water delivery options that were evaluated and compared
throughout the EIR: Treated Water Option and Raw Water Option. Both options include
construction of the water intake at Lake Nacimiento, water storage tanks, pump stations and a
64-mile water transmission pipeline. The differences between the options are that the Raw Water
Option includes construction and operation of three water discharge facilities. Construction and
operation of these water discharge facilities would be the responsibility of the purveyors
benefiting from the water (Paso Robles, Templeton, and Atascadero). The Treated Water Option
also includes construction and operation of a central Water Treatment Plant near Lake
Nacimiento on Camp Roberts’ property.
Numerous potentially significant impacts were identified for the proposed project, most of which
could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant (Class II). Two significant (Class I)
impacts were identified for the proposed project, both the Treated and Raw Water Options, and
are summarized below. Significant (Class I) impacts are associated, in general, with two aspects
of the proposed project: the significant air pollutant emissions in the region that would occur
during construction and growth induced by availability of additional water in the region, which
are summarized as follows:
1 One acre foot equals 325,853 gallons.
12.c
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 6 Nacimiento Water Project
Table 1 Nacimiento Water Project Allocations Evaluated in the EIR
Water Purveyor1
Allocation Peaking Factor Flow Rate
afy % * mgd cfs
San Miguel CSD 610 10 0.60 0.93
Paso Robles City 4,000 30 4.64 7.18
Templeton CSD 250 30 0.29 0.45
Atascadero MWC 3,000 30 3.48 5.38
Santa Margarita Ranch 200 10 0.20 0.30
CSA 23–Santa Margarita 100 30 0.12 0.19
San Luis Obispo City 3,380 10 3.32 5.14
Camp San Luis Obispo 200 10 0.20 0.30
San Luis CUSD–Morro Bay 55 10 0.05 0.08
CSA 10A Cayucos 80 10 0.08 0.12
Lewis Pollard Trust–Cayucos 50 10 0.05 0.08
Morro Rock MWC–Cayucos 30 10 0.03 0.05
CSA 22–Airport Area 890 10 0.87 1.35
Fiero Lane WC–Airport Area 30 10 0.03 0.05
Edna Valley MWC–Airport Area 700 10 0.69 1.06
Subtotal 13,575 15.25 23.59
San Luis Obispo County (Contingency) 2,625 10 2.57 3.98
Pipeline Total 16,200 17.82 27.57
Reserved for Lakeside use 1,300 NA NA NA
Total Allocation 17,500
Note: * Peaking factor is the percent of extra capacity requested by the purveyors to allow short term flows higher than the
average of their yearly allocation. For the purveyors that requested no peaking, 10% has been added to allow for system
downtime.
afy =acre feet per year; mgd=million gallons per day; cfs=cubic feet per second; MWC=Mutual Water Company;
CSD=Community Services District; CSA=County Service Area; WC=Water Company;
NA=Not Applicable
1. Participating purveyors include Paso Robles, Templeton CSD, Atascadero, the City of San Luis Obispo and CSA 10A
Cayucos and are collectively referred to as the Nacimiento Project Partners.
Air Quality
AQ.1 Construction activities would generate air emissions that would impact air quality
in the area. Air pollutant emissions during pipeline and facility construction
would exceed the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District’s
significance thresholds, even after implementation of all feasible mitigations. This
impact would only last during the construction of the project, with air quality
impacts during project operations being less than significant.
Growth
G.1 Countywide, the growth inducing impacts of accepting supplemental water
supplies from the NWP could be considered significant, adverse and unavoidable.
However, local impacts could vary depending on how project supplies are used by
each project participant.
12.c
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 7 Nacimiento Water Project
Several less-than-significant impacts were also identified for the Raw and Treated Water Options
of the Project. Again, most of these impacts were identical for both options. While these impacts
are considered less than significant, they represent the only differences between the two options
that can be used to evaluate advantages or disadvantages of each option.
4.0 Description of Proposed Changes to the Project
Current Nacimiento Project Partners have subscribed to 11,405 acre-feet of the 17,500 acre-feet
available. 6,095 acre-feet remain unallocated or in “reserve.” Reserve water is the water
available above what is currently allocated among the project participants (see Figure 3).
Figure 3. NWP Water Allocation
The Nacimiento Partners anticipated that once the NWP was built, other entities would come
forward to purchase a permanent allocation from the available reserve water. Since no entities
had requested to permanently purchase water since deliveries began in 2010, even in the
extraordinary drought conditions in effect in 2015, the Nacimiento Project Partners conducted an
analysis which concluded that the full allocation of the 6,095 acre-feet of reserve water to the
current participants as the best opportunity to manage the project’s assets (infrastructure and
water) to maximum benefit.
12.c
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 8 Nacimiento Water Project
Article 29 of the Nacimiento Agreement contract provides a method for the participants to obtain
the additional water. This Article requires a 60-day notice to existing participants of the request
for additional entitlement.
The City of San Luis Obispo would increase their allocation of 3,380 acre-feet by 2,139 acre-
feet, for a total allocation of 5,519 acre-feet, should no other entities come forward to purchase
reserve water during the 60-day period stipulated in the contract. If other entities were to come
forward, the project partners would support the allocation to come from the 6,095 acre-feet in
reserve, with the remainder allocated proportionately to the project partners. This revised
allocation would not require any new construction.
With uncertainty of future climatic conditions, regulation and aging infrastructure, adding more
Nacimiento water to the City’s portfolio will reduce pressure on use of water supplies in the
Whale Rock and Salinas reservoirs. It would serve to extend these stored supplies during future
critical water shortage periods.
Full allocation of the Nacimiento Project would potentially be of regional benefit in northern San
Luis Obispo County. The Nacimiento Agreement allows for temporary water sales of ‘surplus’
water. This surplus water, created only when the reserve water has been fully allocated, may be
sold at market pricing on a temporary basis under certain circumstances. Fully allocating the
reserve water results in the quickest and most economical path forward to put the entire yearly
allocation of Nacimiento Project water to beneficial use.
The County Flood Control District was the Lead Agency in the Nacimiento Project’s final
environmental impact report (2003). This EIR contemplated full allocation of the project’s
17,500 acre-feet of water. As evaluated in the EIR, the City of San Luis Obispo requested an
allocation of 3,380 afy to meet future demand and provide more reliable in City water supplies.
The requested entitlement would meet the projected water needs of the City of San Luis Obispo
through build-out of the General Plan. The requested entitlement also included 2,000 afy of
water that would establish a Reliability Reserve. The Reliability Reserve is water that would help
meet community water demand during a drought cycle, but would not be available to support
growth or land development. On May 14, 2002, the City Council eliminated the policy that
would require the establishment of a Reliability Reserve. However, in order to maintain the
highest degree of flexibility and keep every option open, the City Council decided to maintain
the current allocation request of 3,380 afy of water from the Nacimiento Water Project.
The City of San Luis Obispo’s Water Conservation Program is considered to be very successful
and has been in place since around 1985. The City’s requested entitlement of water from the
NWP took into account the City’s ongoing water conservation efforts.
A section of the 2004 EIR focused on reviewing the environmental impacts of providing the City
of San Luis Obispo with 3,380 acre-feet of water annually. Due to the original intent of including
future partners, the 2004 EIR did not consider the currently proposed additional delivery of
approximately 2,139 acre-feet of water being delivered to San Luis Obispo. This volume is
estimated due to the possible purchase of reserve water during the 60-day period following the
signing of the above mentioned letter. This additional amount is intended to be used to maintain
the City’s existing water supplies and delivery capabilities. The NWP was designed to provide
participants with the flexibility to balance their water demand requirements, recognizing that
NWP water would supplement other sources of water that may not always be available in
12.c
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 9 Nacimiento Water Project
sufficient quantities to meet local demand. As is the case with the current drough t, participants
have seen decreases in the availability of water from other sources, and the proposed increase in
the NWP allocation would be used to offset the loss of water from other sources. Uses that were
not initially studied during the project’s 2004 EIR would require environmental review.
A statement of overriding consideration related to significant and unavoidable impacts related to
growth inducement and air quality was adopted by the San Luis Obispo County Board of
Supervisors (as the District’s Board) when it adopted the EIR. The City, as a Responsible
Agency, also adopted a follow-up resolution including a statement of overriding consideration to
support the District’s findings.
The City of San Luis Obispo has an adopted General Plan that includes land use and growth
management policies that specify how and how much the City will grow. An additional layer of
water resource protection is found in the City’s Charter requirement to provide a water reliability
reserve. The City’s General Plan Water and Wastewater Management Element, updated in 2010,
includes policies related to primary, reliability reserve, and secondary water supplies to provide
adequate water resources to the community.
5.0 Evaluation of Environmental Effects
The following environmental analysis provided in Section 6.0 supports a determination that
approval and implementation of the changes to the Nacimiento Water Project identified in
Section 4.0, would not result in any previously-undisclosed significant environmental impacts or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously disclosed impacts or additional significant
environmental impacts beyond those previously covered under the Final EIR for the Project.
Documents containing the environmental analysis supporting the County Board of Supervisor’s
action in approving the Project include the Final EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, CEQA Findings, and additional responses provided for comments submitted after
publication of the Final EIR.
Section 6.0 analyzes eleven areas of environmental concern, and discusses whether the proposed
Project modifications described in Section 4.0 trigger CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 in each
of these areas. For each impact area, a reference to the Final EIR discussion is provided,
followed by an analysis of the revised Project as it relates to each of these sections. Finally, an
analysis is presented to determine whether there are any changed circumstances or new
information relative to the revised Project.
6.0 Environmental Impact Analysis
The City developed the following impact analysis based on the information provided in Sections
1 through 5 above. All impacts in this document have been classified according to the following
criteria:
Class I – Significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated to insignificance: Significant
impacts that cannot be effectively mitigated. No measures could be taken to avoid or reduce
these adverse effects to insignificant or negligible levels.
12.c
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 10 Nacimiento Water Project
Class II – Significant impacts that can be mitigated to insignificance: These impacts are
potentially similar in significance to those of Class I, but can be reduced or avoided by the
implementation of mitigation measures.
Class III – Adverse but insignificant impacts: Generally, no mitigation measures are required
for this Class of impacts.
Class IV – Beneficial impacts: Effects that are beneficial to the environment.
No Impact. Generally, the proposed changes to the Nacimiento Water Project would not
result in any new impacts due to the proposed changes in water allocations.
The term “significance” is used throughout the 2004 EIR and this Addendum to characterize the
magnitude of the projected impact. For the purpose of this Addendum, a significance impact is a
substantial or potentially substantial change to resources in the local proposed project area or the
area adjacent to the proposed project.
In the discussions of each issue area, criteria used to distinguish between significant and
insignificant impacts were provided in the Final EIR. To the extent feasible, distinctions are also
made between local and regional significance and short- versus long-term duration.
As noted previously, the 2004 EIR evaluated two co-equal projects: a Treated Water Option and
Raw Water Option. Since the Raw Water Option was selected and constructed, the evaluation of
potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed changes will be compared to the
raw water project as evaluated in the EIR.
6.1 Hydrology and Water Quality
Analysis of Hydrology and Water Quality impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved NWP Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.1, and Section 11.0 Responses
to Comments.
6.1.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the 2004 NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
WQ.1 Potentially significant impact of degradation of surface water quality and
groundwater quality due to contamination by fuel or other materials related to
construction activities.
Class II
WQ.2 Increased turbidity impacts from construction work within the water bodies. Class III
Operations
WQ.3 Potentially significant impact from reduction of water deliveries during drought
and resulting water shortages to the participants.
Class II
WQ.4 Potential impact of prolonged (over one week) shutdown of releases from Lake
Nacimiento during minimum pool conditions, resulting in water shortages at
Water World Resorts and Heritage Ranch.
Class II
WQ.5 Impacts to groundwater from sea water intrusion in Salinas Basin. Class III
WQ.6 Potential degradation of groundwater quality resulting from aquifer discharge
using Lake Nacimiento water containing elevated metals concentrations.
Class II
12.c
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 11 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
WQ.7 Potential nuisances caused by the presence of vegetation in the ponds and/or
eutrophication.
Class II
WQ.8
WQ.9
Impacts from lack of sufficient capacity of the Paso Robles Discharge Area to
take full NWP deliveries;
and
Impacts from lack of sufficient capacity of the City of Paso Robles’ Thunderbird
well field to extract the total combined water right to Salinas River underflow
after adding the NWP water right.
Class II
Class II
Construction impacts WQ.1 and WQ.2 would not change since the revised water allocations
would not require any new construction. Impacts WQ.6 through WQ.9 are not applicable to the
City of San Luis Obispo since the city receives raw water directly from the NWP pipeline and
does not use discharge basins and groundwater recovery.
Impacts WQ.3 through WQ.5 were evaluated in the 2004 EIR based on the San Luis Obispo
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 17,500 afy entitlement from Lake
Nacimiento per agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. The proposed increase in
participant allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluated in the
NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation
increases.
6.1.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The circumstances under which the NWP was undertaken remain essentially unchanged. The
NWP was designed to provide participants with the flexibility to balance their water demand
requirements, recognizing that NWP water would supplement other sources of water that may
not always be available in sufficient quantities to meet local demand. As is the case with the
2015 drought, participants have seen decreases in the availability of water from other sources,
and the proposed increase in the NWP allocation would be used to offset the loss of water from
other sources.
6.1.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to water quality as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, potential impacts would be
considered less than significant.
6.2 Geology, Seismicity, and Soils
Analysis of Geology, Seismicity, and Soils impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of
the approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.2, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.2.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
12.c
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 12 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Operations
GS.1 Ground rupture along the Rinconada fault could damage project facilities. Class II
GS.2 Locating the Rocky Canyon Water Storage Tank and Happy Valley Pump Station
near the Rinconada fault zone may result in poor foundation conditions.
Class II
GS.3 Excavation in rock or soils containing asbestos may cause risk to human health. Class II
Impacts GS.2 and GS.3 are related to the construction of the pipeline and pump station facilities,
and would not be affected by the proposed allocation increases. Likewise, Impact GS.1 evaluated
potential impacts to project facilities that are independent of water allocations.
6.2.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
There is no potential for significant changes in geological, seismic or soils resource conditions
within the area of potential effect of the Project since the time of certification of the Final EIR,
because such resources are relatively static. Additionally, no new information regarding
unknown hazards, conditions or resources has become available. Therefore, no changes in
circumstances and no new information of substantial importance relative to geological, seismic
or soils resource have been identified.
6.2.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to Geology, Seismicity, and Soils as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there
would be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.3 Drainage, Erosion and Sedimentation
Analysis of Drainage, Erosion and Sedimentation impacts and EIR-identified mitigation
measures of the approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.3, and Section 11.0
Responses to Comments.
6.3.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
DE.1 Potentially significant impact of changes to surface water flow patterns during
construction.
Class II
DE.2 Potentially significant impact of damage to construction sites if flood flows occur
while a pipeline is being installed in a streambed.
Class II
DE.3 Potentially significant impacts to surface waters of increased turbidity and
sedimentation, and to groundwater recharge in streams crossed and paralleled due
to clearing, grading, trenching, and backfilling activities.
Class II
Operations
12.c
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 13 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
DE.4 Potentially significant impact of erosion and downstream sedimentation from a
pipeline rupture.
Class II
DE.5 Potentially significant impact of scouring occurring in stream channels that expose
buried pipeline or undermine suspended pipe crossing abutments or cable
caissons.
Class II
DE.6 Potentially significant impact of increased or concentrated storm runo ff flowing
onto erodible soils from impervious surfaces.
Class II
DE.7 Potentially significant impact of high river flow or bank erosion resulting in
damage to branch pipelines or discharge piping in the three discharge areas.
Class II
Construction impacts DE.1 through DE.3 would not change since the revised water allocations
would not require any new construction. Impact DE.7 is not applicable to the City of San Luis
Obispo since the City receives raw water directly from the NWP pipeline and does not use
discharge basins and groundwater recovery.
Impacts DE.4 through DE.6 evaluated potential impacts to project facilities that are independent
of water allocations. The proposed increase in participant allocations would not exceed the
17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no
additional impact associated with participant allocation increases.
6.3.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
There is no potential for significant changes in Drainage, Erosion and Sedimentation conditions
within the area of potential effect of the Project since the time of certification of the Final EIR,
because such resources are relatively static. Additionally, no new information regarding
unknown hazards, conditions or resources has become available. Therefore, no changes in
circumstances and no new information of substantial importance relative to Drainage, Erosion
and Sedimentation have been identified.
6.3.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to Drainage, Erosion and Sedimentation as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore,
there would be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.4 Air Quality
Analysis of Air Quality impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the approved Project
are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.4, and Section 11.0 Responses to Comments.
6.4.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
12.c
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 14 Nacimiento Water Project
AQ.1 Construction activities would generate air emissions that would impact air quality
in the area.
Class I
Operations
AQ.2 Operation of the project facilities would generate air emissions that could impact
air quality in the area.
Class II
AQ.3 Increased emissions of toxic compounds due to the project could result in
increased health risks.
Class III
AQ.4 Project Conformity with the Clean Air Act. Class III
AQ.5 Project Consistency with the County Clean Air Plan. Class III
Construction impact AQ.1 would not change since the revised water allocations would not
require any new construction. Impacts AQ.2 through AQ.4 evaluated potential impacts to project
facilities that are independent of water allocations. The proposed increase in participant
allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluated in the NWP EIR.
Therefore, there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation increases.
Given recent changes in legislation regarding climate and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
Impact AQ.5 has been reevaluated in the following section to determine if project operations
pose a potentially significant source of GHG emissions.
6.4.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The Final EIR for the NWP was certified prior to the passage of AB 32, the l andmark legislation
addressing global warming and greenhouse gas emissions. As such, potential impact associated
with the NWP have not been evaluated to determine if the project would be considered a
significant source of GHG emissions. The following sections contain background information on
the changes that have taken place regarding GHG legislation and evaluation requirements, as
well as an evaluation of potential project impacts.
International Regulations
Kyoto Protocol
The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty made under the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change, which was signed on March 21, 1994. The Convention was the first
international agreement to regulate GHG emissions. It has been estimated that if the
commitments outlined in the Kyoto Protocol are met, global GHG emissions would be reduced
by an estimated 5 percent from 1990 levels during the first commitment period from 2008 until
2012. However, while the US is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, Congress has not ratified it;
therefore, the US is not bound by the Protocol’s commitments.
Climate Change Technology Program
In lieu of the Kyoto Protocol’s mandatory framework, the US has opted for a voluntary and
incentive-based approach toward emissions reductions. This approach, the Climate Change
Technology Program, is a multi-agency research and development coordination effort, led by the
Secretaries of Energy and Commerce, who are charged with carrying out the President’s
National Climate Change Technology Initiative.
12.c
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 15 Nacimiento Water Project
Federal Regulations
Clean Air Act
In the past, the US EPA has not regulated GHG under the Clean Air Act. However, the US
Supreme Court held that the EPA can, and should, consider regulating motor-vehicle GHG
emissions. In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 12 states and cities, including
California, in conjunction with several environmental organizations sued to force the EPA to
regulate GHG as a pollutant pursuant to the Clean Air Act (US Supreme Court No. 05-1120;
127 S.Ct. 1438 (2007)). The Court ruled that GHG fit within the Clean Air Act’s definition of a
pollutant and that the EPA’s reason for not regulating GHG was insufficiently grounded.
40 CFR Section 98 specifies mandatory reporting requirements for a number of industries. The
final 40 CFR part 98 applies to certain downstream facilities that emit GHG, and to certain
upstream suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial GHG. For suppliers, the GHG emissions
reported are the emissions that would result from combustion or use of the products supplied.
The rule also includes provisions to ensure the accuracy of emissions data through monitoring,
recordkeeping and verification requirements. The mandatory reporting requirements generally
apply to facilities that produce more than 25,000 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year.
State Regulations and Programs
Executive Order S-3-05
The 2005 California Executive Order S-3-05 established the following GHG emission-reduction
targets for California:
By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and
By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
The Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) is charged with
coordinating oversight of efforts to meet these targets and formed the Climate Action Team to
carry out the Order. Emission reduction strategies or programs developed by the Climate Action
Team to meet the emission targets are outlined in a March 2006 report (CalEPA 2006). The
Climate Action Team also provided strategies and input to the CARB Scoping Plan.
Assembly Bill 1493
In 2002, the legislature declared in AB 1493 (the Pavley regulations) that global warming was a
matter of increasing concern for public health and the environment in the state. It cited several
risks that California faces from climate change, including reduction in the state’s water supply,
increased air pollution due to higher temperatures, harm to agriculture, and increase in wildfires,
damage to the coastline, and economic losses caused by higher food, water, energy, and
insurance prices. Furthermore, the legislature stated that technological solutions for reducing
GHG emissions would stimulate California’s economy and provide jobs. Accordingly, AB 1493
required the CARB to develop and adopt the nation’s first GHG emission standards for
automobiles. The CARB responded by adopting CO2-equivalent fleet average emission
standards. The standards will be phased in from 2009 to 2016, reducing emissions by 22 percent
in the “near term” (2009 to 2012) and 30 percent in the “mid-term” (2013 to 2016), as compared
to 2002 fleets.
12.c
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 16 Nacimiento Water Project
The legislature passed amendments to AB 1493 in September 2009. Implementation of AB 1493
requires a waiver from the EPA, which was granted in June 2009.
Assembly Bill 32
AB 32 codifies California’s GHG emissions target and requires the state to reduce global
warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. It further directs the CARB to enforce the statewide
cap that would begin phasing in by 2012. AB 32 was signed and passed into law by Governor
Arnold Schwarzenegger on September 27, 2006. Key milestones of AB 32 include: June 20,
2007 - Identification of “discrete early action GHG emission-reduction measures.”
January 1, 2008 - Identification of the 1990 baseline GHG emissions levels and approval of a
statewide limit equivalent to that level. Adoption of reporting and verification requirements
concerning GHG emissions.
January 1, 2009 - Adoption of a scoping plan for achieving GHG emission reductions.
January 1, 2010 - Adoption and enforcement of regulations to implement the actions.
January 1, 2011 - Regulatory adoption of GHG emission limits and reduction measures.
January 1, 2012 - GHG emission limits and reduction measures become enforceable.
Since the passage of AB 32, the CARB published Proposed Early Actions to Mitigate Climate
Change in California. This publication indicated that the issue of GHG emissions in CEQA and
General Plans was being deferred for later action, so the publication did not discuss any early
action measures generally related to CEQA or to land use decisions.
California Senate Bill 1368
In 2006, the California legislature passed SB 1368, which requires the Public Utilities
Commission (PUC) to develop and adopt a “greenhouse gases emission performance standard”
by March 1, 2007, for private electric utilities under its regulation. The PUC adopted an interim
standard on January 25, 2007, requiring that all new long-term commitments for base load
generation involve power plants that have emissions no greater than a combined cycle gas
turbine plant. That level is established at 1,100 lbs/MWh of CO2. The California Energy
Commission has also adopted similar rules.
Senate Bill 97 – CEQA: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In August 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law SB 97 – CEQA: Greenhouse Gas
Emissions stating, “This bill advances a coordinated policy for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions by directing the Office of Planning and Research and the Resources Agency to
develop CEQA guidelines on how state and local agencies should analyze, and when necessary,
mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.” Specifically, SB 97 requires the Office of Planning and
Research (OPR), by July 1, 2009, to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency
guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions, as
required by CEQA, including, but not limited to, effects associated with transportation or energy
consumption. The Resources Agency would be required to certify and adopt those guidelines by
January 1, 2010. OPR would be required to periodically update the guidelines to incorporate new
information or criteria established by the CARB pursuant to the California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006. SB 97 also identifies a limited number of t ypes of projects that would be
exempt under CEQA from analyzing GHG emissions.
12.c
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 17 Nacimiento Water Project
On January 7, 2009, OPR issued its draft CEQA guidelines revisions pursuant to SB 97. On
March 16, 2010, the Office of Administrative Law approved the Amendments, and filed them
with the Secretary of State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations. The Amendments
became effective on March 18, 2010.
Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory and Preliminary Draft CEQA Guidelines
Amendments for Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Consistent with SB 97, on March 18, 2010, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to include
references to GHG emissions. The amendments offer guidance regarding the steps lead agencies
should take to address climate change in their CEQA documents.
According to OPR, lead agencies should determine whether GHG may be generated by a
proposed project, and if so, quantify or estimate the GHG emissions by type and source. Second,
the lead agency must assess whether those emissions are individually or cumulatively significant.
When assessing whether a project’s effects on climate change are cumulatively considerable,
even though its GHG contribution may be individually limited, the lead agency must consider
the impact of the Project when viewed in connection with the effects of past, current, and
probable future projects. Finally, if the lead agency determines that the GHG emissions from the
proposed project are potentially significant, it must investigate and implement ways to avoid,
reduce, or otherwise mitigate the impacts of those emissions.
The Amendments do not identify a threshold of significance for GHG emissions, nor do they
prescribe assessment methodologies or specific mitigation measures. The Preliminary
Amendments maintain CEQA discretion for lead agencies to establish thresholds of significance
based on individual circumstances.
The guidelines developed by OPR provide the lead agency with discretion in determining what
methodology is used in assessing the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions in the context of a
particular project. This guidance is provided because the methodology for assessing GHG
emissions is expected to evolve over time. The OPR guidance also states that the lead agency can
rely on qualitative or other performance based standards for estimating the significance of GHG
emissions.
On December 11, 2008, the CARB adopted the Scoping Plan as directed by AB 32 (CARB
2008). The Scoping Plan proposes a set of actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in
California. The numerous measures in the Scoping Plan approved by the Board are being
implemented in phases with Early Action Measures that have already been implemented.
Measures include a cap-and-trade system, car standards, low carbon fuel standards, landfill gas
control methods, energy efficiency, green buildings, renewable electricity standards, and
refrigerant management programs.
The Scoping Plan provides an approach to reduce emissions to achieve the 2020 target and to
initiate the transformations required to achieve the 2050 target. The 2008 Scoping Plan indicated
that a 29 percent reduction below the estimated “business as usual” levels would be necessary to
return to 1990 levels by 2020. The 2011 supplement (Functional Equivalent Document) to the
Scoping Plan emission inventory revisions indicated that a 16 percent reduction below the
estimated “business as usual” levels would be necessary to return to 1990 levels by 2020. This
revision was due to the slowing economy between 2008 and 2010 and to reduction measures that
were already in place (CARB, 2011). An update of the Scoping Plan has occurred with a release
12.c
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 18 Nacimiento Water Project
of a Draft Discussion Document in October, 2013 and a 2014 Update (see below). Another
update is required in 2018.
CARB underwent an extensive and rigorous process in developing and approving the Scoping
Plan. For a detailed discussion of this process, see Association of Irritated Residents et. al. v.
State Air Resources Board et. al., Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District,
Division Three (206 Cal. App. 4th 1487; 143 Cal Rptr. 3d 65; 2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 718; 42
ELR 20127, June 19, 2012, p. 5 – hereafter “AIR.”). Among other things, CARB considered
several alternatives to achieve the mandated maximum technologically feasible and cost -
effective reductions in GHGs and submitted its analyses and recommendations for peer review
and public comment on many occasions (AIR p. 5). In affirming CARB’s adoption of the
Scoping Plan, the Court of Appeal of California concluded as follows:
“The Governor and the Legislature have set ambitious goals for reducing the level of greenhouse
gas emissions in California and to do so by means that are feasible and most cost-effective. The
challenges inherent in meeting these goals can hardly be overstated. [C]ARB has been assigned
the responsibility of designing and overseeing the implementation of measures to achieve these
challenging goals. The scoping plan is but an initial step in this effort, to be followed by the
adoption of regulations, the first of which are already in effect, and plan updates no less than
every five years. As the plan itself indicates, there is still much to be learned that is pertinent to
minimizing greenhouse gas emissions. It is hardly surprising that the scoping plan leaves some
questions unanswered and that opinions differ as to [the] many complex issues inherent in the
task. After reviewing the record before us, we are satisfied that the Board has approached its
difficult task in conformity with the directive from the Legislature, and that the measures that it
has recommended reflect the exercise of sound judgment based upon substantial evidence.
Further research and experience likely would suggest modifications to the blueprint drawn in the
scoping plan, but the plan’s adoption in 2009 was in no respect arbitrary or capricious.” (AIR, p.
13.)
Executive Order S-03-05 sets a goal that California emit 80 percent less GHGs in 2050 than it
emitted in 1990. CARB's Scoping Plan, including the October, 2013 Discussion Draft, provides
additional direction and insight as to how it anticipates California would achieve the 2050
reduction goal in Governor Schwarzenegger's Executive Order S-03-05:
"Reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent would require California to develop new
technologies that dramatically reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and shift into a landscape of
new ideas, clean energy, and green technology. The measures and approaches in this plan are
designed to accelerate this necessary transition, promote the rapid development of a cleaner, low
carbon economy, create vibrant livable communities, and improve the ways we travel and move
goods throughout the state" (CARB 2008).
"[T]he measures needed to meet the 2050 goal are too far in the future to define in detail . . ."
(Ibid.) The CEC and CARB also have published an alternative fuels plan that identifies
challenging but plausible ways to meet 2050 transportation goals. The majority of the measures
identified by the CEC/CARB (renewable power requirements, the low carbon fuel standard, and
vehicle emissions standards) relate to technology improvements beyond both the control of the
Applicant and the scope of the proposed Project. But, these technological improvements would
reduce the demand for crude oil through a reduction in demand for gasoline and diesel fuels.
12.c
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 19 Nacimiento Water Project
Scoping Plan 2011 Re-Approved Document
In August 2011, the initial Scoping Plan was re-approved by the ARB, and includes the Final
Supplement to the Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document. In the 2011 re-approved
Scoping Plan, ARB updated the projected business as usual (BAU) emissions based on current
economic forecasts (i.e., as influenced by the economic downturn) and GHG-reduction measures
already in place. The BAU projection for 2020 GHG emissions in California was originally, in
the 2008 Scoping Plan, estimated to be 596 MMTCO2e. ARB subsequently derived an updated
estimate of emissions in a 2013 Draft Discussion Document by considering the influence of the
recent recession and reduction measures that are already in place. The revision estimates the year
2020 emissions at 507 MMTCO2e (as the BAU estimate).
The 2011 Re-Approved Scoping Plan concluded that achieving the 1990 levels by 2020 meant
cutting approximately 16 percent, compared to the original 2008 Scoping Plan that estimated a
29 percent reduction (CARB 2011). The 2011 Scoping Plan sets forth the expected GHG
emission reductions from a variety of measures, including the Pavley I automobile standards and
the Renewables Portfolio Standard, neither of which were assumed in the 2008 Scoping Plan.
Scoping Plan 2014 First Update
CARB approved the first update to the Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014 with recommendations for
a mid-term target (between 2020 and 2050) and sector-specific actions. The First Update
addresses issues such as a revision to the GWP for gasses (to a 20 year instead of the 100 year
timeframe), the establishment of a mid-term 2030 goal (of between 33-40 percent reduction over
1990 levels), and the development of post-2020 emissions caps related to Cap-and-Trade to
reflect the establishment of a 2030 midterm target. This first revision also provides an update on
climate science and a report on progress toward the 2020 target, including achievements of the
2008 and 2011 Scoping Plans, an update on the inventory of GHG emissions, and an update of
the economy and its potential affect on future emissions’ forecasting. It also addresses post-2020
goals, including Executive Order S-3-05.
California Air Resource Board Cap-and-Trade Regulation
The California Air Resource Board has implemented a cap-and-trade type program, as per the
AB-32 directed Scoping Plan, applicable to specific industries that emit more than 25,000
MTCO2e annually. The AB 32 Scoping Plan identifies a Cap-and-Trade program as one of the
strategies California would employ to reduce GHG emissions that cause climate change. Under
cap-and-trade, an overall limit on GHG emissions from capped sectors would be established by
the Cap-and-Trade program, and facilities subject to the cap would be able to trade permits
(allowances) to emit GHGs. The program started on January 1, 2012, with an enforceable
compliance obligation beginning with the 2013 GHG emissions for GHG emissions from
stationary sources. The petroleum and natural gas systems sector is covered starting in 2013 for
stationary and related combustion, process vents and flare emissions if the total emissions from
these sources exceed 25,000 MTCO2e per year. Suppliers of Natural Gas and transportation
fuels are covered beginning in 2015 for combustion emissions from the total volume of natural
gas delivered to a non‐covered entity or for transportation fuels.
CARB’s rationale for adopting Cap-and-Trade was prominently noted by the Court of Appeals’
opinion upholding the ARB Scoping Plan as follows:
The final scoping plan explains the Board's rationale for recommending a cap-and-trade program
in combination with the so-called "complementary measures" by citing the rationale outlined by
12.c
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 20 Nacimiento Water Project
the market Advisory committee and quoting from the report of the economic and technology
advancement advisory committee, in part, as follows: " A declining cap can send the right price
signals to shape the behavior of consumers when purchasing products and services. It would
also shape business decisions on what products to manufacture and how to manufacture them.
Establishing a price for carbon and other GHG emissions can efficiently tilt decision-making
toward cleaner alternatives. This cap and trade approach (complemented by technology-forcing
performance standards) avoids the danger of having government or other centralized decision -
makers choose specific technologies, thereby limiting the flexibility to allow other options to
emerge on a level playing field. Complementary policies would be needed to spur innovation,
overcome traditional market barriers ... and address distributional impacts from possible higher
prices for goods and services in a carbon-constrained world. "(AIR 206 Cal.App.4th at p. 1499.)
Cap-and-Trade is designed to reduce the emissions from a substantial percentage of GHG
sources (approximately 80 percent of GHG emissions would come under the program) within
California through a market trading system. The system would reduce GHG emissions by
reducing the available GHG “allowances” over time up until the year 2020. The program
beyond the year 2020 has not been designed yet, but the program is intended to extend beyond
that timeframe.
Facilities are required to obtain an “allowance”, either through purchasing on auction or through
freely allocated “industry assistance” allowances from CARB, for each MTCO2e of GHG they
emit.
CARB issues the “industry assistance” allocations for free for a number of industries. These are
based, in part, on a pre-defined “benchmark” of GHG emissions per unit of production. For the
thermally enhanced oil recovery (TEOR) production sector, allowances are provided as a
function of the amount of crude oil produced, thereby establishing, in effect, a level of efficiency
in regards to GHG emissions for that sector. Other sectors are also allocated allowances based
on their own respective activities.
If an operation within the TEOR sector operates less efficiently than the specified “benchmark”,
thereby receiving an insufficient number of “free” allowances to cover their emissions,
implementation of efficiency improvements or the purchase of additional allowances from the
CARB auction would be required. Some availability of “offsets” is also included in the program,
which can be obtained from specific, allowable offset programs, such as GHG reduction projects
related to forestry, livestock and ozone depleting chemicals. Offsets outside of these three
options are not allowed at this time.
The first group of sectors began trading in allowances in 2012. That group includes the oil and
gas sector as well as most stationary sources. A second group is planned to begin the program in
2015, which would include the transportation fuels sector. CARB auctioned about 23 million
allowances in November 2012 to be used for the 2013 year.
For subsequent periods after the initial 2013 period, allowances are planned to be distributed
freely through the “industry assistance” program or auctioned off. Industry assistance
allowances would decrease each year as per a “cap adjustment factor”. The cap adjustment
factor would be approximately two to three percent annually through 2020. The total allowances
allowed to be allocated each year (either freely allocated or auctioned) are limited by the defined
12.c
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 21 Nacimiento Water Project
allowance budget, which decreases each year through 2020 and is currently set at approximately
159 million MTCO2e for the year 2014.
An operator is required to participate in the Cap-and-Trade program if its facility emits more
than 25,000 MTCO2e annually. Annual reporting of GHG emissions is required under the
CARB Mandatory Reporting Rule.
As only a limited number of allowances are issued, based on the original emissions estimates
prepared by the CARB, and these allowances are reduced each year by a given percentage to
achieve the year 2020 goals, any operator who commences operations after the Cap-and-Trade
program is in effect would be required to obtain allowances from the given limited pool. Any
increase in GHG emissions at a facility would therefore be allowed through a reduction in GHG
emissions at some other location with the net GHG emissions statewide not increasing. This
mechanism would serve to ensure that the goals of AB 32 are achieved; that emissions statewide
are reduced, even if local GHG emissions increase; and that, ultimately, emissions of GHG and
atmospheric CO2 concentrations are stabilized, thereby reducing impacts. This produces, in
effect, mitigation for this cumulative impact.
Note that GHG emissions produce no immediate, local health effects (such as criteria pollutants
or ozone), and therefore GHG emissions reduced in another County, for example, could be used
to offset the GHG emissions occurring at a project site.
The evolution of the Cap-and-Trade program past 2020 may render certain industries with higher
GHG emissions economically infeasible. Many oil and gas projects may no longer exist by 2050
as the remaining unextracted resources may no longer be economically recoverable due to the
cost of obtaining allowances. In addition, the goals of the State programs are to move the
demand-side away from fossil fuels. As per the Scoping Plan, “Reducing our greenhouse gas
emissions by 80 percent [by 2050] will require California to develop new technologies that
dramatically reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and shift into a landscape of new ideas, clean
energy, and green technology. The measures and approaches in this plan are designed to
accelerate this necessary transition, promote the rapid development of a cleaner, low carbon
economy…”
SB 375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008
SB 375 supports the State's climate action goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
through coordinated transportation and land use planning with the goal of more sustainable
communities.
Under the Sustainable Communities Act, ARB sets regional targets for GHG emissions
reductions from passenger vehicle use. In 2010, ARB established these targets for 2020 and
2035 for each region covered by one of the State's metropolitan planning organizations (MPO).
ARB will periodically review and update the targets, as needed.
Each of California’s MPOs must prepare a "sustainable communities strategy" (SCS) as a part of
its regional transportation plan (RTP). The SCS contains land use, housing, and transportation
strategies that, if implemented, would allow the region to meet its GHG emission reduction
targets. The Sustainable Communities Act also establishes incentives to encourage local
governments and developers to implement the SCS or the APS. Developers can get relief from
certain environmental review requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act
12.c
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 22 Nacimiento Water Project
(CEQA) if their new residential and mixed-use projects are consistent with a region’s SCS (or
APS) that meets the targets (see Cal. Public Resources Code §§ 21155, 21155.1, 21155.2,
21159.28.).
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) released their Draft Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) in December 2014. The plan would reduce vehicle miles traveled per
capita from 30.2 in 2005 to 28.2 in 2035, an 8.5 percent reduction. The RTP would also reduce
per capita CO2 emissions by 10.9 percent, exceeding the region’s target of 8 percent. The plan
was adoption in April 2015.
California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol
The California Climate Action Registry is a program of the Climate Action Reserve and serves
as a voluntary GHG registry. The California Climate Action Registry was formed in 2001 when
a group of chief executive officers, who were investing in energy efficiency projects that reduced
their organizations’ GHG emissions, asked the State to create a place to accurately report their
emissions history. The California Climate Action Registry publishes a General Reporting
Protocol, which provides the principles, approach, methodology, and procedures to estimate such
emissions.
California Air Resource Board Proposed Mandatory Reporting Regulation
The Air Resources Board approved a mandatory reporting regulation in December 2007, which
became effective January 2009 (which appears at sections 95100-95133 of Title 17, California
Code of Regulations), which requires the mandatory reporting of GHG emissions for specific
industries emitting more than 10,000 - 25,000 MTCO2e depending on the process source type.
Status of California GHG Reduction Efforts
The State is required to monitor the effectiveness of the state programs on an annual basis.
According to the State report card for 2013, the Pavley Standard achieved a 2.2 million MTCO2e
(MMT) of reductions in 2011 (the last year of available data in the 2013 report) with a goal of
29.9 MMT by 2020; the Low Carbon Fuel Standard program achieved a 0.7 MMT reduction in
2011 with a goal of 15 MMT by 2020; and the Renewable Portfolio Standard program for power
generation achieved a reduction of 3.5 MMT in 2011 with a goal of 19.3 MMT. The Cap-and-
Trade program was started in 2013 and has reported few problems, but specific reductions have
not been quantified yet. Its goal is a reduction of 18 MMT by 2020. Total reductions in all state
programs total 9.1 MMT in 2011 (6.3 percent of the goal), with a goal of 146 MMT reductions
by 2020.
Local Regulations and Programs
County Climate Action Plan
The City adopted a Climate Action Plan on July 17, 2012, and summarizes strategies for reducing
greenhouse gas emissions. Community strategies for climate change adaptation and reduction of
GHG emissions are divided into six chapters: Buildings, Renewable Energy, Transportation &
Land Use, Water, Solid Waste, and Parks & Open Space. Strategies that will help reduce GHG
emissions associated with City Government Operations were also included in a separate chapter.
County Climate Action Plan
The County adopted a Climate Action Plan (EnergyWise Plan) on November 22, 2011, as a
blueprint for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, a Green Building Ordinance to
12.c
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 23 Nacimiento Water Project
improve energy efficiency in new and existing development effective January 1, 2013. The CAP
focuses on local actions to reduce GHG emissions through energy efficiencies, including:
retrofitting existing buildings; reversing rural sprawl; and increasing use of non-fossil fuels such
as solar and wind energy (SLOC 2011).
County General Plan, Conservation, and Open Space Element
The County Board of Supervisors in 2010 adopted a comprehensive Conservation and Open
Space Element with a focus on reducing GHG emissions, increasing energy efficiency, and using
local renewable energy. The County's EnergyWise Plan (adopted in 2011) included an inventory
of GHG. The EnergyWise Plan is required by the Conservation and Open Space Element of the
General Plan. The Inventory found that the unincorporated San Luis Obispo community emitted
917,710 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) in 2006.
SLOCAPCD
The SLOCAPCD adopted GHG thresholds on March 28, 2012 and updated their CEQA
Handbook in April, 2012, to incorporate the new thresholds (SLOCAPCD 2012).
Significance Thresholds
For stationary-source projects, the threshold is 10,000 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e.
Stationary-source projects include land uses that would accommodate processes and equipment
that emit GHG emissions and would require an SLOCAPCD permit to operate. This threshold is
applied to emissions within San Luis Obispo County.
For construction, the GHG emissions from construction are amortized over the life of the project
(50 years for residential projects and 25 years for commercial and industrial projects) and added
to the operation GHG emissions.
Impact Analysis
Impact # Impact Description Phase Impact
Classification
AQ.6
Operational activities associated with the Proposed Project
could generate GHG emissions that exceed SLOCAPCD
thresholds.
Operations Class III
The NWP does not directly utilize fossil fuels or emit greenhouse gases. However, the project
requires electrical power generated offsite to power the pipeline pump stations and end receiver
water treatment plants. Table 2 shows the GHG emissions associated with the NWP Project.
As shown in Table 2, project-related GHG emissions at full capacity would be less than the
SLOAPCD significance threshold of 10,000 metric tonnes per year. Therefore, potential project
impacts would be considered adverse but insignificant (Class III).
Table 2 Operational GHG Emissions, metric tonnes
Source CO2 CH4 N2O MTCO2E
Pump Station 2,275 0.1 0.0 2,284
Water Treatment 5,056 0.2 0.0 5,077
Total Emissions 7,332 0.3 0.1 7,361
12.c
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 24 Nacimiento Water Project
SLOAPCD Threshold
10,000
Note: MTCO2E-metric tons CO2 equivalent.
6.4.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions as evaluated in the NWP EIR and the GHG
analysis above. Therefore, there would be no impact associated with the proposed water
allocation increase.
6.5 Noise
Analysis of Noise impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the approved Project are
contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.5, and Section 11.0 Responses to Comments.
6.5.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
N.1 Construction noise would temporarily increase ambient daytime noise levels along
the pipeline route and near the pump station and WTP sites.
Class II
Operations
N.2 Operations noise from pumps would increase long-term ambient noise levels. Class III
N.3 Periodic testing and emergency use of generators would increase short -term
ambient noise levels near the pump stations.
Class II
Construction impact N.1 would not change since the revised water allocations would not require
any new construction.
Impacts N.3 and N.3 were evaluated potential impacts to project facilities that are independent of
water allocations. The proposed increase in participant allocations would not exceed the 17,500
afy entitlement that was evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no additional
impact associated with participant allocation increases.
6.5.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
There is no potential for significant changes in noise conditions within the area of potential effect
of the NWP since the time of certification of the Final EIR, because such resources are relatively
static. Additionally no new information regarding unknown conditions or resources has become
available. Therefore, no changes in circumstances and no new information of substantial
importance relative to noise have been identified.
12.c
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 25 Nacimiento Water Project
6.5.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to noise impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no impact
associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Analysis of Hazards and Hazardous Materials impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of
the approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.6, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.6.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
HM.1 During construction of the proposed pipeline on the Camp Roberts property,
unexploded military ordnance could be encountered, which could expose
construction workers to explosion hazards.
Class III
HM.2 Earth-moving operations during construction could uncover contaminated soils
and other hazardous materials, including naturally occurring asbestos, creating
health risks to construction workers and public.
Class II
HM.3 During construction, hazardous utilities could be damaged by construction
equipment. This could expose construction workers and public to hazardous
materials transported by the damaged pipelines.
Class II
HM.4 Releases of hazardous or flammable materials during construction could pose
risks of fire or contamination.
Class III
HM.5 Contaminated materials in the soil could enter into the pipeline expose water users
to contamination and pose health risks.
Class III
Operations
HM.6 During operation of the WTP, the employees and public could be exposed to the
hazardous chemicals transported to, used, and stored at the plant.
Class II
HM.7 Accidental release of large quantities of treated water into a fresh water body
could be harmful to the organisms in the water body.
Class III
Construction impacts HM.1 through HM.5 would not change since the revised water allocations
would not require any new construction. Impact HM.6 is not applicable to the City of San Luis
Obispo since the City receives raw water directly from the NWP pipeline and the water treatment
plant that was evaluated in the NWP EIR was never constructed. Chemicals are used to treat raw
water deliveries, which would slightly increase with the proposed allocation increase of NWP
water, as well as differences in pH levels of the water from Lake Nacimiento. However, since the
water from the increased NWP allocation would be used to displace other sources of water,
overall chemicals to treat raw water use within the City would not change appreciably with
potential impacts considered less than significant (Class III).
12.c
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 26 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact HM.7 evaluated potential impacts of treated water spills that are independent of water
allocations, but are instead related to the demand for treated water delivery to customers. There
would be no project-related changes to the City’s water distribution network that would change
the probability or magnitude of a treated water spill. Therefore, there would be no additional
impact associated with participant allocation increases.
6.6.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to hazards or hazardous materials impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore,
there would be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.6.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in the use of hazardous materials or potential impacts to public safety as evaluated in the NWP
EIR. Therefore, there would be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.7 Biological Resources
Analysis of Biological Resources impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.7, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.7.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
BR.1 Potentially significant impacts to terrestrial biological resources from heavy
construction machinery and various construction activities.
Class II
BR.2 Impacts to riparian, water, and wetlands habitats and their biological resources
from construction activities.
Class II
BR.3 Impacts to wildlife from noise due to the project construction and operation
phases.
Class II
BR.4 Impacts to wildlife in drainages due to erosion, sedimentation and dewatering. Class II
BR.5 Impacts to plants from dust emission due to the project construction phase. Class II
BR.9 Impacts to riparian habitat due to construction of the water discharge areas in the
vicinity of Salinas River.
Class II
Operations
BR.6 Impacts to aquatic life from treated water spills in case the treated water pipeline
ruptures during operational phase of the project.
Class III
BR.7 Impacts to fish in Lake Nacimiento due to pumping through the water intake
during operational phase of the project.
Class III
BR.8 Impacts to fisheries during operational phase of the proposed project. Class III
Class II
12.c
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 27 Nacimiento Water Project
Construction impacts BR.1 through BR.5 and BR.9 would not change since the revised water
allocations would not require any new construction. Impact BR.6 evaluated potential impacts of
treated water spills that are independent of water allocations, but are instead related to the
demand for treated water delivery to customers. There would be no project-related changes to the
City’s water distribution network that would change the probability or magnitude of a treated
water spill. Therefore, there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation
increases. Impacts BR.7 and BR.8 were evaluated in the EIR based on the San Luis Obispo
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 17,500 afy entitlement from Lake
Nacimiento per agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. The proposed increase in
participant allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluat ed in the
NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation
increases.
6.7.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to biological resource impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would
be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.7.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to biological resources as evaluated in the NWP EIR, which mainly focused on
potential impacts to biological resources during project construction. Therefore, there would be
no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.8 Cultural and Paleontological Resources
Analysis of Cultural and Paleontological Resources impacts and EIR-identified mitigation
measures of the approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.8, and Section 11.0
Responses to Comments.
6.8.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
CR.1 Soil moving construction activities (e.g., trenching, excavating) could impact
significant and important paleontology resources.
Class II
CR.2 Soil moving construction activities (e.g., trenching, excavating) could impact
significant and important geology resources.
Class III
CR.3 Soil moving construction activities (e.g., trenching, excavating) could impact
significant and important geomorphology resources.
Class II
12.c
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 28 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
CR.4 Soil moving construction activities (e.g., trenching, excavating) could impact
significant and important prehistoric cultural resources.
Class II
CR.5 Soil moving construction activities (e.g., trenching, excavating) could impact
significant and important historical cultural resources.
Class III
CR.6 Construction of the proposed project adjacent to or in the vicinity of
archaeological or historical sites may result in the looting, vandalism or
destruction of cultural resources by construction employees or persons visiting the
construction site.
Class II
Operations
None Class II
All of the potential impacts to Cultural and Paleontological Resources that were evaluated in the
NWP Final EIR involved construction activities and the potential disturbance of sensitive
resources. Construction impacts CR.1 through CR.6 would not change since the revised water
allocations would not require any new construction. Therefore, there would be no new impacts.
6.8.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to cultural or paleontological resource impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR.
Therefore, there would be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.8.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to cultural or paleontological resources as evaluated in the NWP EIR, which mainly
focused on potential impacts to cultural or paleontological resources during project construction.
Therefore, there would be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.9 Land Use
Analysis of Land Use impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the approved Project
are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.9, and Section 11.0 Responses to Comments.
6.9.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The NWP Final EIR found that there would be no significant impacts to land use resulting from
the proposed project as the proposed project is compatible with the underlying land use
designations outlined in San Luis Obispo County’s General Plan, and with those of affected
Federal, State, and local government entities.
12.c
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 29 Nacimiento Water Project
6.9.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to land use impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no
impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.9.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to land use as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Please see Section 8.0 for a discussio n of
potential project-related growth inducement impacts.
6.10 Utilities and Public Services
Analysis of Utilities and Public Services impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.10, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.10.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
UP.1 Impacts to Water Services during construction. Class III
UP.4 Impacts to Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services. Class II
UP.5 Impacts to Law Enforcement. Class III
UP.6 Impacts to Waste Disposal Services. Class III
UP.8 Impacts to roads and road maintenance. Class III
Operations
UP.2 Impacts to Water Services during operation. Class IV
Construction and Operations
UP.3 Impacts to Energy Resources. Class III
UP.7 Impacts to school facilities. Class III
Construction impacts UP.1, UP.4, UP.5, UP.6 and UP.8 would not change since the revised
water allocations would not require any new construction. Operational Impact UP.2 was
considered a beneficial impact for water services since it provided project participants with more
flexibility and capacity to provide service to their customers. As is the case with the 2015
drought, participants have seen decreases in the availability of water from other sources, and the
proposed increase in the NWP allocation can be used to offset the loss of water from those other
sources, which is considered a beneficial impact of the project.
Impact UP.3 noted the less than significant impact associated with fossil fuel use during project
construction, and electricity use during normal project operations associated with the pump
stations and water treatment at full capacity. The impact analysis was evaluated in the EIR based
12.c
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 30 Nacimiento Water Project
on the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 17,500 afy
entitlement from Lake Nacimiento per agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. The
proposed increase in participant allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was
evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no additional impact associated with
participant allocation increases.
Impact UP.7 identified a less than significant adverse impact associated with growth and
potential increases in school enrollment. The proposed water allotment increase would only
support growth consistent with the City’s approved General Plan. Therefore, the potential impact
to schools would remain adverse but less than significant.
6.10.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The NWP Final EIR evaluated a wide variety of climatic conditions and historical water levels to
determine potential impacts on water services during both wet and extended dry climatic periods.
As such, the Final EIR impact analysis anticipated potential impacts to water resources and
socioeconomic impacts associated with participant water withdrawals during drought conditions.
In response to mandatory water use reductions, the City’s 2015(Water Year 2015 covers October
2014 through September 2015) per capita water use was 97.3 gallons per capita per day (gpcd).
Based on WWME policies, the City uses the ten-year gpcd average to project water required to
serve build-out population. The ten-year average water use is 114.4 gpcd. Therefore, the current
drought does not pose a situation that was not anticipated in the EIR analysis and does not
change the relative significance of potential impacts that were identified in the Final EIR.
6.10.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to public services and utilities as evaluated in the NWP EIR. The NWP was designed
to provide participants with the flexibility to balance their water demand requirements,
recognizing that NWP water would supplement other sources of water that may not always be
available in sufficient quantities to meet local demand. As is the case with the 2015 current
drought, participants have seen decreases in the availability of water from other sources, and the
proposed increase in the NWP allocation would be used to offset the loss of water from other
sources. Please see Section 8.0 for a discussion of potential project-related growth inducement
impacts.
6.11 Transportation/Circulation
Analysis of Transportation/Circulation impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.11, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.11.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
12.c
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 31 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
T.1 Construction associated with the project would temporarily add to local road
traffic.
Class II
T.2 Pipeline construction would require partial road closures and reduce the number
of travel lanes during peak traffic periods for roadways with an LOS of D or
worse, resulting in a disruption of traffic flow and/or traffic congestion.
Class II
T.3 Partial street closures would temporarily restrict access to and from private
property and adjacent land uses.
Class II
T.4 Construction activities could interfere with emergency response by ambulance,
fire, paramedic, and police vehicles.
Class II
T.5 Pedestrian circulation would be affected by project activities if pedestrians are
unable to pass through a construction zone.
Class III
T.6 Construction activities could result in physical damage to road surfaces. Class II
Operations
T.7 Operation of WTP, pump stations and pipeline would add truck traffic on local
roads.
Class III
T.8 A pipeline failure could disrupt traffic during repairs. Class II
Construction impacts T.1 through T.6 would not change since the revised water allocations
would not require any new construction. Impact T.7 is not applicable to the proposed project
since the County selected the Raw Water Option and never constructed the water treatment plant
at Camp Roberts. Impact T.8 is a baseline condition within the City of San Luis Obispo since the
existing water distribution would be utilized and no new construction has been proposed as part
of the increased allocation.
6.11.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to transportation impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would be no
impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.11.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to transportation and circulation as evaluated in the NWP EIR, which mainly focused
on potential impacts during project construction. Therefore, there would be no impact associated
with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.12 Aesthetics/Visual Resources
Analysis of Aesthetics/Visual Resources impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.12, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
12.c
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 32 Nacimiento Water Project
6.12.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Operations
VR.1 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of water intake structures at Nacimiento
Dam.
Class II
VR.2 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of WTP, WTP storage tanks, and the
pump station
Class III
VR.3 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of Salinas River suspended pipe
crossing.
Class III
VR.4 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of surge tank in the vicinity of
Templeton treated water pipeline turnout site.
Class II
VR.5 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of Rocky Canyon Road storage tank and
Happy Valley pump station.
Class II
VR.6 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of Cuesta Tunnel Storage Tank Class III
VR.7 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of turnouts and air release valves. Class III
VR.8 Visual impacts due to change in the Lake Nacimiento water levels resulting from
the release of additional water.
Class III
VR.9 Visual impacts due to long-term presence of river discharge facilities. Class III
Construction impacts VR.1 through VR.7 and VR.9 would not change since the revised water
allocations would not require any new construction. Impact VR.2 is not applicable to the
proposed project since the County selected the Raw Water Option and never constructed the
water treatment plant at Camp Roberts and the existing pump stations would not change as a
result of the project.
The impact analysis was evaluated in the EIR based on the San Luis Obispo County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District 17,500 afy entitlement from Lake Nacimiento per
agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. The proposed increase in participant
allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluated in the NWP EIR.
Therefore, the NWP Final EIR adequately evaluated the visual impact of low lake levels and
there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation increases.
6.12.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The circumstances under which the NWP was undertaken remain essentially unchanged. The
NWP was designed to provide participants with the flexibility to balance their water demand
requirements, recognizing that NWP water would supplement other sources of water that may
not always be available in sufficient quantities to meet local demand. As is the case with the
current 2015 drought, participants have seen decreases in the availability of water from other
sources, and the proposed increase in the NWP allocation would be used to offset the loss of
water from other sources. Even under the current drought conditions, the Lake Nacimiento lake
level of approximately 719 feet (as of 12/3/15) remains above the minimum and dead pool levels
of 688 and 670 feet, respectively. The County’s 17,500 afy entitlement represents less than 10
12.c
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 33 Nacimiento Water Project
percent of the overall annual release volume of 200,000 afy and has only a minor impact on lake
level variations.
6.12.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to visual resources as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, potential impacts would
be considered less than significant.
6.13 Agricultural Resources
Analysis of Agricultural Resources impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.13, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.13.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
AG.1 Water pipeline construction within the roads ROW has the potential to adversely
impact access to and maintenance of agricultural operations.
Class II
AG.2 Water pipeline construction (including fence removal and trenching) along
property boundaries has the potential to impact ranching and livestock operations.
Class II
AG.3 Water pipeline construction and placement of staging areas on agricultural lands
have the potential to permanently impact soils on grazing and croplands due to
improper soil replacement and/or reseeding efforts.
Class II
AG.4 Water pipeline construction activities have the potential to adversely impact
agricultural lands through the spread of noxious weeds or wind-borne dust.
Class II
Operations
None Class II
All of the potential impacts to agricultural resources that were evaluated in the NWP Final EIR
involved construction activities and the potential disturbance of sensitive resources. Construction
impacts AG.1 through AG.4 would not change since the revised water allocations would not
require any new construction. Therefore, there would be no new impacts.
6.13.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to agricultural resource impacts as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, there would
be no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
12.c
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 34 Nacimiento Water Project
6.13.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to agricultural resources as evaluated in the NWP EIR, which mainly focused on
potential impacts to agricultural resources during project construction. Therefore, there would be
no impact associated with the proposed water allocation increase.
6.14 Recreational Resources
Analysis of recreational resources impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.14, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.14.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
REC.3 Open trench construction along the following reaches would result in short-term
impacts to bicyclists: Rocky Canyon Road to Santa Margarita, Santa Margarita to
the Cuesta Tunnel, Cuesta Tunnel to San Luis Obispo WTP, San Luis Obispo
WTP to Highway 227/Santa Fe Road, and Highway 227.
Class II
REC.4 Partial loss of access to recreational opportunities at Laguna Lake Park due to
water pipeline installation activities along Reach No. 10 (Sta. 2520+00-2935+00)
near Dalidio Drive in San Luis Obispo.
Class II
REC.5 Portions of the adopted Salinas River Trail System may need to be re -routed due
to the construction of water discharge facilities.
Class II
Operations
REC.1 The partial relocation of a log boom 500 feet from the intake location would
prohibit all recreational activity on approximately 2 additional acres of lake
surface area.
Class III
REC.2 Implementation of the proposed project could result in adverse impacts to
recreational resources at Lake Nacimiento, as compared to historic conditions, due
to the additional lowering of water levels to elevations below 748 feet during
periods of drought.
Class III
Construction impacts REC.3 through REC.5 would not change since the revised water
allocations would not require any new construction. Impact REC.1 would remain the same since
the proposed allocation increases would not alter the location of the log boom near the dam.
The impact analysis was evaluated in the EIR based on the San Luis Obispo County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District 17,500 afy entitlement from Lake Nacimiento per
agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. The proposed increase in participant
allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluated in the NWP EIR.
Therefore, the NWP Final EIR adequatel y evaluated the visual impact of low lake levels and
there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation increases.
12.c
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 35 Nacimiento Water Project
6.14.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The circumstances under which the NWP was undertaken remain essentially unchanged. The
NWP was designed to provide participants with the flexibility to balance their water demand
requirements, recognizing that NWP water would supplement other sources of water that may
not always be available in sufficient quantities to meet local demand. As is the case with the
2015 drought, participants have seen decreases in the availability of water from other sources,
and the proposed increase in the NWP allocation would be used to offset the loss of water from
those other sources. Even under the current drought conditions, the Lake Nacimiento lake level
of approximately 719 feet (as of 12/3/15) remains above the minimum and dead pool levels of
688 and 670 feet, respectively. The County’s 17,500 afy entitlement represents less than 5
percent of the overall storage capacity of 377,900 afy and has only a minor impact on lake level
variations.
6.14.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to recreational resources as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, potential impacts
would be considered less than significant.
6.15 Socioeconomic Resources
Analysis of Socioeconomic Resources impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.15, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.15.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
SE.1 Water pipeline construction activities located within the road ROWs near business
centers (Paso Robles, Santa Margarita, and San Luis Obispo) have the potential to
cause adverse impacts to industries located within and adjacent to project areas by
impeding standard business practices. The majority of businesses that would be
affected for the short-term are those located within or adjacent to construction
areas on North River Road, El Camino Real in Santa Margarita, at the intersection
of Dalidio Drive and Madonna Road, along Dalidio Drive, Prado Road extension,
and Highway 227. These businesses may experience short-term impedance to
business caused by road closures in front of businesses, some difficulties
accessing store fronts, and nuisance to patrons from construction activities. This
impedance to business would average one to two days during construction (based
on construction of 50 to 100 feet of pipeline per day).
Class III
12.c
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 36 Nacimiento Water Project
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Operations
SE.2 Implementation of the proposed project would result in insignificant adverse
impacts to businesses that rely on tourism/recreational activities at Lake
Nacimiento, as compared to historic conditions, due to the additional lowering of
water levels to elevations below 748 feet.
Class III
SE.3 Implementation of the proposed project would result in insignificant adverse
impacts to property values surrounding Lake Nacimiento resulting from changes
in lake levels.
Class III
Construction impact SE.1 would not change since the revised water allocations would not require
any new construction.
Impacts SE.2 and SE.3 were evaluated in the EIR based on the San Luis Obispo County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District 17,500 afy entitlement from Lake Nacimiento per
agreement executed in 1959 with Monterey County. The proposed increase in participant
allocations would not exceed the 17,500 afy entitlement that was evaluated in the NWP EIR.
Therefore, there would be no additional impact associated with participant allocation increases.
6.15.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The circumstances under which the NWP was undertaken remain essentially unchanged.
6.15.3 Conclusion
The proposed increase in the City’s water allocation would not result in any appreciable increase
in impacts to socioeconomic resources as evaluated in the NWP EIR. Therefore, potential
impacts would be considered less than significant.
6.16 Environmental Justice
Analysis of Environmental Justice impacts and EIR-identified mitigation measures of the
approved Project are contained in the Final EIR, Section 5.16, and Section 11.0 Responses to
Comments.
6.16.1 Analysis of the Revised Project
The following impacts were identified in the NWP EIR:
Impact Impact Description Residual Impact
Construction
EJ.1 Construction and operational impacts would adversely impact disadvantaged
segments of the population in San Luis Obispo County.
Class III
Construction impact EJ.1 would not change since the revised water allocations would not require
any new construction.
12.c
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 37 Nacimiento Water Project
6.16.2 Substantial Changes with Respect to the Circumstances under which the Project
is Undertaken/New Information of Substantial Importance
The circumstances associated with Impact EJ.1 or any other potential environmental justice
impacts have not changed.
6.16.3 Conclusion
The proposed changes in water allocations would not have any adverse impact on environmental
justice issues. The increase allocation would enable the City to maintain water service at an
overall cost that would be lower than other new sources of water that are currently available or
possible in the future. Minimizing potential increases in water costs would be beneficial to
disadvantaged populations where basic utilities represent a significant percentage of their
disposable income.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
There is one current cumulative project that would directly affect potential impacts associated
with the City’s proposed NWP allocation increase. The Interlake Tunnel Project and associated
impacts/benefits are described in the following sections.
7.1 Interlake Tunnel Project
The Interlake Tunnel Project has been proposed by Monterey County to create a tunnel between
Lake Nacimiento and Lake San Antonio. Lake Nacimiento and Lake San Antonio are manmade
reservoirs within the Salinas River Basin that provide a number of vital functions to the area.
These functions consist of flood control, water supply and recreation. Rain water and runoff
from the surrounding watershed is typically stored during winter months and then released in a
controlled fashion during the dry summer months. The water supply is used for ground water
recharge in the Salinas Valley via releases from both lakes which combine in the upper Salinas
River. Water from Lake Nacimiento is used for distribution via the San Luis Obispo County
NWP Nacimiento Pipeline project. Flood control is achieved by retaining water and limiting
flow in the Nacimiento and San Antonio rivers during winter storm events. The watershed
feeding Lake Nacimiento is more productive, filling it in nearly three times faster than Lake San
Antonio. At times water releases are made from Lake Nacimiento during the winter months
because the lake is at capacity while Lake San Antonio has excess storage available. The goal of
the Nacimiento–San Antonio Interlake Tunnel Project is to provide a pathway would be to
redirect water that would be effectively washed out to sea and use it to fill the excess capacity
typically available in Lake San Antonio.
The Interlake Tunnel Project would consist of intake and exit structures connected by a 10,000
foot long tunnel or piping. The intake structures may have grating or other mechanism to
restrict fish passage from one lake to the next. The tunnel, approximately 10 feet in diameter,
would be small enough to easily maintain and accessed by standing workmen yet large enough to
handle the expected high flow rates during storm events. Numerous smaller diameter pipes may
be substituted based on efficiency or cost effectiveness in order to support power generation. An
in-tunnel turbine or set of turbines may be developed in order to maximize the generation of
hydro-electric power from the passing water. Since the maximum elevation of Lake San
Antonio is 20 feet lower than that of Lake Nacimiento power generation turbines would be
12.c
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 38 Nacimiento Water Project
optimized for flow between the lakes. Additional turbines may be defined or developed to
capture power generation from the exit into Nacimiento or San Antonio rivers.
7.2 Cumulative Effects
As proposed, the Interlake Tunnel Project would allow Lakes San Antonio and Nacimiento to
capture and store up to an average additional 60,000 acre feet per year. In addition, the Interlake
Tunnel Project would have the potential to improve flood control capabilities for the two lake
system, allow for greater aquifer recharge, augment supplies to the Salinas River Diversion
Facility (SRDF), reduce lower Salinas River salt water intrusion, enhance aquatic environments
in both lakes and along the Salinas River and provide surface water for future projects.
There would not be any adverse cumulative impacts associated with the City’s proposed NWP
allocation increase. While the Interlake Tunnel Project has the potential to increase water storage
up to 60,000 afy in Lake San Antonio, it is unclear if the diversion from Lake Nacimiento would
result in any changes in water allocations within the County’s 17,500 afy entitlement.
8.0 Growth Inducement
The City of San Luis Obispo provides water service to residents, businesses, and institutions
within city limits. The City’s Municipal Code prohibits the provision of water service to anyone
outside the city limits, with a few exceptions. These exceptions include the County Airport, since
it is seen as an essential service benefiting the city. Another exception is a small number of
residents and cattle troughs along the Highway 101 corridor just north of town. The City’s
requirement to serve water to these properties is in accordance with agreements that date back to
the early 1900’s. There is also an exception for temporary interim water service to the Fiero Lane
Annexation area although that water use was contemplated under the General Plan. Other
exceptions exist where individual properties were provided with service prior to adoption of the
ordinance.
The City originally requested 3,380 afy from NWP supplies as evaluated in the 2004 EIR. This
amount was based on the City’s adopted General Plan at the time the EIR was prepared. It
included 880 afy for new development over the next 30 years, 500 afy to compensate for
projected yield reductions at Santa Margarita Lake (Salinas Reservoir) and Whale Rock
Reservoir due to siltation over that time. (The EIR reflected the City vote to eliminate the
“reliability reserve” from its calculation of future water demand, thus reducing the city’s
requirement for additional supplies to serve its buildout population of 56,000. The City has since
included a reliability reserve in the latest Water and Wastewater Management Element Update in
2010, San Luis Obispo obtains water from Santa Margarita Lake and Whale Rock Reservoir,
which have a coordinated yield of 6,940 afy, from the NWP, which has a contract limit of 3,380
afy, 185 afy from recycled water, and a deficit of 500 afy to address siltation. The combined safe
yield/available water for the city from these sources is 10,005 afy. Of the 10,005 afy available in
the City’s water supply portfolio, 7,330 afy is the City’s primary2 water supply, 1,174 afy is
2 Primary water supply is the amount needed to meet the General Plan build-out of the City. The quantity of water
needed for the City’s primary water supply needs is calculated using a ten -year average of actual per-capita water
use and the City’s build-out population.
12.c
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 39 Nacimiento Water Project
allocated to the reliability reserve3, and 1,501 afy is considered as a secondary water source. The
increased NWP allocation would be allocated to the City’s secondary4 water supply.
Potential Impacts
The City of San Luis Obispo’s projected population in 2035 is 56,686 based on one percent
annual growth. The projected population number does not include current or potential residents
of the Cal Poly campus which is within the urban reserve line but outside the city limits , while
water planning includes the urban reserve population of 57,200.
The potential environmental impacts of full development under the City’s General Plan were
evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report for the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Elements
Update (available for review at http://www.slocity.org/government/department-
directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan). When the City adopted the
update and certified the EIR, it acknowledged that the planned growth would have significant,
adverse impacts. These impacts would be: conversion of prime agricultural land to urban use;
increased water usage; unacceptable levels of service for traffic on most arterial streets; change
from rural to urban character; the number of workers increasing faster than the number of
residents; and certain localized impacts due mostly to street widening or extension projects.
Schools would also be further impacted.
As noted in Section 3.0, potential growth-related impacts were considered a significant adverse
impact that cannot be mitigated to insignificance. The additional NWP allocation would be
allocated to the City’s secondary water supply and would not be available to accommodate new
projects or additional growth. An increase in City’s allocation would only serve areas already
evaluated and approved for future development potential consistent with existing specific plan
areas and City policies and land use designations of the City’s General Plan Land Use Element
adopted in 2014. Therefore, the proposal to increase the NWP allocation would not result in any
additional growth impacts over those identified in the NWP EIR.
9.0 Conclusion
This document identified all Project changes, changed circumstances, and new information and
memorializes in detail the City's reasoned conclusion that the revised Allocation Project as
described in Section 4.0 does not create the conditions requiring the preparation of a Subsequent
or Supplemental EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, sections 15162 and 15163.
10.0 References
AEP 2007. Recommendations by the Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) on How
to Analyze Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA Documents.
Comment Draft. White Paper. March.
AIHA 2014, Emergency Response Planning Guideline.
3 Reliability reserve provides a buffer for future unforeseen or unpredictable long -term impacts to the City’s
available water resources such as loss of yield from an existing water supply source and impacts due to climate
change.
4 Secondary water supply is the amount needed to meet peak water demand periods or short-term loss of City water
supply sources. The City’s secondary water supply is identified as any water supply resources above those needed to
meet the primary water supply and reliability reserve.
12.c
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
EIR Addendum
February 2016 40 Nacimiento Water Project
API 2004, Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the Oil And Gas
Industry.
CalEPA 2006, California Environmental Protection Agency. Climate Action Team, Executive
Summary. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the California
Legislature; March; Sacramento, CA.
CARB 2006, California Air Resources Board AB 32 Text, September 27, 2006.
CARB 2007, California Air Resources Board. Climate Change: Information Regarding ARB's
Climate Change Program Pursuant to 2006 Assembly Bill 32. Available from
www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm.
CARB 2008. California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan, December 2008.
CARB 2011, California Air Resources Board, Attachment D: Final Supplement to the AB 32
Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document, August 19, 2011.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/fed.htm.
CARB 2012, Regulation For The Mandatory Reporting Of Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/reporting/ghg-rep/ghg-rep.htm.
CARB 2014, First Update to the Scoping Plan", May 2014.
CARB 2014, GHG Inventory, http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/inventory.htm.
CSA 2014, California State Assembly, Sea-Level Rise: a Slow-Moving Emergency.
IPCC 2007, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (. Climate change 2007: The physical
science basis, summary for policy makers. Working Group 1 Fourth Assessment Report;
February. Available from http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf.
IPCC 2014, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Climate change 2014: Synthesis
Report). Available from http://www.ipcc.ch/.
NOAA, 2013. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2013, website for
global climate data, Earth System Research Lab.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/global.html#global_growth.
SLOC 2011, EnergyWise Plan, November 2011, http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PL/CAP-
LUCE/final/SLOCoCAP_Board_Approved-Complete+Doc.pdf.
SLOCAPCD 2012, CEQA Handbook, April 2012.
SLOCAPCD 2012, GHG Thresholds and Supporting Evidence, March 28, 2012.
12.c
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: c - Exhibit A - CEQA Addendum to 2004 Nacimiento Water Project EIR (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
THIRD AMENDMENT (FULL ALLOCATION)
TO NACIMIENTO PROJECT
WATER DELIVERY ENTITLEMENT CONTRACT
This Third Amendment (Full Allocation) to the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery
Entitlement Contract (“Amendment”) is entered into by and between the San Luis Obispo
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, a Flood Control and Water Conservation
District duly established and existing under the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District Act, Act 7205 of the Uncodified Acts of the California Water Code
(the “District”), and the City of San Luis Obispo (the “Participant”).
R E C I T A L S
WHEREAS, the Participant has contracted with the District pursuant to that certain
Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract, effective August 17, 2004, and as
subsequently amended by the Memorandum of Understanding dated May 24, 2005 (First
Amendment to Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract) and as subsequently
amended by the Second Amendment to Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
dated August 28, 2007 (collectively, the “Contract”) for an annual Delivery Entitlement to
Nacimiento Project Water; and
WHEREAS, the Contract is a Like-Contract that is substantially identical to the
Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contracts between the District and the Other
Participants; and
WHEREAS, Article 29, subdivision (A) of the Contract contains a list of priorities for
the District’s use of its Reserve Water, giving fourth priority to “adding to and supplementing the
Delivery Entitlements for the Participant and/or the Other Delivery Entitlements for the Other
Participants who are Initial Participants as provided for by Article 6(D)” and giving fifth priority
to providing a water supply to “additional and New Participants [as defined in Article 29,
subdivision (C) of the Contract] who were not Initial Participants;” and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 6, subdivision (D) and Article 29, subdivision (B) of the
Contract, the Participant has the right to acquire additional Delivery Entitlement from the District
by entering into an amendment to the Contract with the District subject to certain requirements,
including, without limitation, the requirement that the Participant pays the District a Purchase of
Reserve Water Delivery Entitlement and Reserved Capacity Fee which shall be applied as a
credit to the obligations of the Participant and the Other Participants based on their respective
Unit Percentage Share; and
WHEREAS, the Participant and the Other Participants (i.e. All Participants) have elected
to exercise their rights under Article 6, subdivision (D) and Article 29, subdivision (B) of the
12.d
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: d - Exhibit B - 2016.02.24 City of SLO Amendment 3 ver 004 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 2
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
Contract and each purchase a portion of the currently unsubscribed Reserve Water (6,095 acre-
feet) in accordance with their Delivery Entitlement Shares minus the combined entitlement of
two New Participants, namely SMR Mutual Water Company (80 acre feet per year) and Bella
Vista MHP, LLC (10 acre feet per year), such that the Total Delivery Entitlement Obligation
shall equal 15,750 acre feet per year and the total amount of Reserve Water shall equal 0.0 acre
feet per year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 17, subdivision (B)(5) of the Contract, when there is no
longer any Reserve Water, the District will no longer have any obligation to apply any portion of
the ad valorem taxes allocated to the Nacimiento Water Fund of the District to the Reserved
Capacity Construction Cost Component; and
WHEREAS, given that the Participant and the Other Participants are simultaneously
purchasing a share of Reserve Water equal to their Delivery Entitlement Shares, the Participant’s
and each Other Participant’s Reserved Capacity Fee is equal to the credit to which they are
entitled under Article 29, subdivision (B) of the Contract; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this Amendment is to increase the Participant’s Delivery
Entitlement consistent with Article 29, subdivision (B) of the Contract and all other contractual
requirements, including, without limitation, those set forth in Article 32 of the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the
Participant and the District as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated
herein by this reference.
Section 2. Defined Terms. Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein
shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in Article 1 of the Contract.
For purposes of this Amendment, “Other Participants” shall exclude SMR Mutual
Water Company and Bella Vista MHP, LLC. The Nacimiento Project Water Delivery
Entitlement Contracts with SMR Mutual Water Company and Bella Vista MHP, LLC provide
that they are not entitled to any credit against their respective financial obligations as a result of
this Amendment and the Like-Amendments.
“Like-Amendment” shall mean an Amendment (Full Allocation) to Nacimiento
Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract that is substantially identical to this Amendment,
except for Participant information, dates, Unit Participations, Participant’s Unit Percentage Share
and Delivery Entitlement Share.
Section 3. Notice. Participant acknowledges that it received the notice required by
Article 29, subdivision (B) of the Contract in connection with each Other Participant’s
acquisition of its proportionate share of Reserve Water.
12.d
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: d - Exhibit B - 2016.02.24 City of SLO Amendment 3 ver 004 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 3
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
Section 4. Amendment to Article 16, Subdivision (C)(5). The second sentence of
Article 16, subdivision (C)((5) of the Contract is hereby amended and restated in its entirety and
shall hereafter be and read as follows:
There is apportioned to the Participant 34 and 806/1000 percent (34.806%) of the
District’s said remaining costs, including the Required Additional Project Costs and Master
Water Contract Costs.
Section 5. Amendment to Table 1. Table 1 (Parametric Information for the Water
Delivery Entitlement Contract of the Nacimiento Project) is hereby replaced with the revised
Table 1 (Parametric Information for the Water Delivery Entitlement Contract for the Nacimiento
Project) attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. Said revised
Table 1 reflects the Participant’s increased Delivery Entitlement and the Participant’s revised
cost share obligations upon the Effective Date of this Amendment.
Section 6. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Amendment shall be the date
upon which the Participant and all Other Participants have executed and delivered this
Amendment and the Like-Amendments to the District, and the District has executed this
Amendment and each Like-Amendment.
Section 7. Severability. Any provision of this Amendment that is prohibited,
unenforceable or not authorized in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to
the extent of such prohibition, unenforceability or nonauthorization without invalidating the
remaining provisions hereof affecting the validity, enforceability or legality of such provision in
any other jurisdiction.
Section 8. Governing Law. This Amendment shall be interpreted, governed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California applicable to contracts made and
performed in such State.
Section 9. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in several counterparts,
each of which shall be regarded as an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same
document.
12.d
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: d - Exhibit B - 2016.02.24 City of SLO Amendment 3 ver 004 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 4
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have each executed this Amendment on the dates
set forth below:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By __________________________________
Authorized Representative
Date _________________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
By ________________________________
Date _______________________________
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
By __________________________________
Date _________________________________
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL AND WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
By __________________________________
Chairperson, Board of Supervisors
Date _________________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL EFFECT:
RITA L. NEAL
District Counsel
By
Deputy District Counsel
Date
ATTEST:
DISTRICT CLERK
By __________________________________
Deputy District Clerk
Date _________________________________
12.d
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: d - Exhibit B - 2016.02.24 City of SLO Amendment 3 ver 004 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 5
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
EXHIBIT A - TABLE 1
Parametric Information for the Water Delivery Entitlement Contract of the Nacimiento Project
Date Table 1 is effective: March 15, 2016Name of Participant:
(from Contract front page)
City of San Luis Obispo
Initial or Other Participant
(Article 1 definition)
Initial Participant
Contract Amemendment Number 3
Delivery Entitlement
acre-feet each Water Year [Article 6(A)]
5482
Delivery Entitlement Share
(Article 1 definition)
34.806%
Nacimiento Project Water
acre-feet each Water Year (Article 1 definition)
15750
Total Delivery Entitlement Obligation
acre-feet each Water Year (Article 1 definition)
15750
Reserve Water
acre-feet each Water Year (Article 1 definition)
0
Maximum instantaneous rate of flow
cubic feet per second [Article 6(B)]
8.20
Maximum monthly delivery volume of water
acre-feet [Article 6(B)]
498.40
Participant's Unit Percentage Share of
Capital Reserve Costs and Operation and
Maintenance Costs
[Article 16(C)(1)]
Participant's Unit Percentage Share of All
Other Construction Costs
[Article 16(C)(3)(c)]
Project Segment
Systemwide Operating Cost 34.806% N/A
Unit No. A 34.806% 34.806%
Unit No. A1 34.806% 34.806%
Unit No. B 59.188% 46.997%
Unit No. C 34.806% 34.806%
Unit No. C1 34.806% 34.806%
Unit No. D 59.188% 46.997%
Unit No. E 61.902% 48.354%
Unit No. F 97.684% 66.245%
Unit No. F1 59.188% 46.997%
Unit No. F2 97.684% 66.245%
Unit No. G 97.684% 66.245%
Unit No. G1 99.096% 66.951%
Unit No. G2 99.096% 66.951%
Unit No. H 99.096% 66.951%
Unit No. H1 99.096% 66.951%
Unit No. T2 N/A N/A
Unit No. T4 N/A N/A
Unit No. T6 N/A N/A
Unit No. T11 99.096% 99.096%
N/A means Not Applicable
12.d
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: d - Exhibit B - 2016.02.24 City of SLO Amendment 3 ver 004 (1281 : Nacimiento Full Allocation)
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager/Interim Finance and IT Director
Prepared By: Greg Hermann, Principal Analyst
SUBJECT: SUPPORT OF THE NATIONAL REVENUE-NEUTRAL CARBON FREE DIVIDEND
ACT
RECOMMENDATION
Consider a Resolution expressing the City’s support for the National Revenue-Neutral Carbon Fee and
Dividend Program.
DISCUSSION
It is well documented that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, such as the burning of fossil
fuels, are the key contributor to the current rise in global temperatures. Research from the National
Academy of Sciences indicates that a reduction in the concentration of greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere, from the current 400 parts per million to 350 parts per million, is needed to avoid future
disruptive environmental, health, agricultural, and economic harm.
A recent 2014 study by the non-partisan Regional Economic Models, Inc. found that a Revenue Neutral
Carbon Fee and Dividend Program would be the most successful in lowering CO2 emissions. If widely
implemented, this program would likely result in CO2 levels at or below 350 parts per million by 2050.
CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.
This issue was discussed by community members during public comment at the March 1, 2016, City
Council meeting and the City Council directed staff to place the item on the agenda of the next meeting.
Passage of this Resolution would confirm the City of San Luis Obispo’s support for Citizen Climate
Lobby’s National Revenue-Neutral Carbon Fee and Dividend Act.
By approving the attached Resolution, the City of San Luis Obispo requests that the United States
Congress immediately enact legislation and the United States President sign into law a National Revenue
Neutral Carbon Fee and Dividend Program. Further, the attached Resolution would direct the Mayor to
send a letter no later than 30 days after passage of this Resolution by the San Luis Obispo City Council to
all Mayors and City Councils, County Boards of Supervisors, School Boards, and State and Federal
legislators in San Luis Obispo, Monterey and Santa Barbara Counties, the Governor of California, and the
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments urging support for a National Revenue Neutral Fee and
Dividend Act and urging them to adopt a resolution in Favor of National Revenue-Neutral National
Carbon Fee and Dividend Legislation.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no direct fiscal impacts associated with this action.
13
Packet Pg. 190
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may choose not to support the Resolution or make modifications. If changes are desired, the
Council should specify the items that require revision.
13
Packet Pg. 191
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, REGARDING THE NATIONAL REVENUE-
NEUTRAL CARBON FEE AND DIVIDEND PROGRAM
WHEREAS, having determined that the Carbon Fee and Dividend legislative principles
proposed by the non-partisan Citizens Climate Lobby, attached hereto as Exhibit A, would
provide an efficient approach to shifting the incentives that keep the United States reliant on
fossil fuel energy and would, thereby, help support the rapid deployment of cleaner energy
alternatives; and
WHEREAS, having determined that this approach would be fair to everyone and would
protect middle and low income households by providing them with a dividend (also known as a
rebate) that, on average, would be higher than the increased costs for energy for two-thirds of all
households (specifically the lowest income two-thirds) during the transition to cleaner energy;
and
WHEREAS, per the non-partisan study by Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI),
this approach would ensure a substantial increase in private investment in cleaner energy options
because they will become significantly less expensive relative to fossil fuels within a known time
frame; and
WHEREAS, this approach would encourage consumers and businesses to keep their
carbon footprint smaller while still ensuring that all households would be able to afford the
energy they need during the transition to cleaner energy; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to respond to these challenges with a business minded
focus, and
WHEREAS, having determined that early adoption of the National Revenue Neutral
Carbon Fee and Dividend Legislation in the United States would grow our economy, add nearly
two million jobs, help make us a world leader in cleaner-energy technology, and help establish
the United States as a leader in future global climate negotiations; and
WHEREAS, the national revenue-neutral carbon fee and dividend has already garnered
widespread support from Republicans as well as Democrats as evidenced by recent op-eds and
public statements in 2015 by prominent political leaders.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the City
Council requests that the United States Congress immediately enact legislation and the United
States President sign into law a national revenue-neutral carbon fee and dividend program, as
provided for in Exhibit A, in order to protect the economy and the climate for future generations;
and
13.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: a - Resolution (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of San Luis Obispo directs the Mayor to
send a letter no later than 30 days after passage of this Resolution by the San Luis Obispo City
Council to all Mayors and City Councils, County Boards of Supervisors, School Boards, and
State and Federal legislators in San Luis Obispo, Monterey and Santa Barbara Counties, the
Governor of California, and the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments urging support for a
National Revenue Neutral Fee and Dividend Act and urging them to adopt a resolution in Favor
of National Revenue-Neutral National Carbon Fee and Dividend Legislation.
Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of March, 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Lee Price
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Lee Price
Interim City Clerk
13.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: a - Resolution (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
1
APPENDIX A
To the Resolution in Favor of the
National Revenue-Neutral Carbon Fee and Dividend Legislation
Findings:
1. Causation: there is a consensus1, 2 among climate scientists, domestic and international
science bodies such as the National Academy of Sciences and the International Panel
on Climate Change and the World Meteorological Organization (IPCC, WMO), that
greenhouse gas emissions from human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels are
driving the current rise in global temperatures and climate change,3
2. Mitigation (Return to 350 ppm or below): the weight of scientific evidence also indicates
that a return from the current concentration of more than 400 parts per million (“ppm”) of
carbon dioxide (“CO2”) in the atmosphere to 350 ppm CO2 or less is necessary to slow
or stop the rise in global temperatures,4
3. Endangerment: further increases in global temperatures pose imminent and substantial
dangers to human health5, the natural environment6, the economy7, national security8,
and an unacceptable risk of medium and long-term future harm9,
a. Climate change caused by global warming-related greenhouse gas emissions
including CO2 already is leading to large-scale problems including increasing
acidity of oceans and rising sea levels; more frequent, extreme, and damaging
weather events such as heat waves, storms, heavy rainfall and flooding, and
droughts; more frequent and intense wildfires; disrupted ecosystems affecting
biodiversity and food production; and an increase in heat-related deaths10; and
b. We are approaching a dangerous threshold whereby, if it is crossed, humans will
no longer be able to influence the course of future global warming, as tropical
forests, peat bogs, permafrost and the oceans11 switch from absorbing carbon to
releasing it; and
4. Local effects on agriculture: the following effects of climate change are likely to occur if
we do not reduce our CO2 emissions to 350 ppm by 2050:
a. It’s predicted that by 2100 in the Modesto region the summer maximum average
will likely rise to 99°F from the current 91°F12 if we do not decrease current
emissions.
b. Given increased heat waves, droughts and higher temperatures13,14, California
farmers will face an increasingly uncertain future, where current crops may fail
and water may be even more scarce,15, 16, 17
c. If heat-trapping emissions continue to rise at today’s levels the snowpack in the
Sierra Nevada is likely to decline as much as 40% from historical levels by 2050
and as much as 90% by 2100, thus severely reducing the availability of water in
summer. However if we make significant emissions reductions the decline by
2050 could be as little as 12%.18
13.b
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: b - Exhibit A (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
2
d. Two thirds of California’s 2,400 endemic plants could lose more than 80% of their
current ranges if climate change worsens,19
e. The number of chilling hours at the end of this century is expected to be half or
less than during the 20th century such that many currently lucrative crops will no
longer be commercially viable in large areas of California,20, 21, 22
f. We can expect a range expansion and rapid increase in populations of insects
already present and the arrival of new insect pests to newly warmer regions amid
ecosystem changes thus negatively affecting agriculture and health,23, 24
5. Local effects on health: the following effects of climate change are likely to occur if we do
not reduce our CO2 emissions to 350 ppm by 2050 especially given that the San
Joaquin Valley air basin is one of the two most polluted air basins in the United States
that consistently violates the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)25:
a. Higher temperatures will likely lead to a doubling of peak ozone pollution
concentrations and an increase in small particle pollution at lower elevations
such as the San Joaquin Valley thus increasing asthma rates in children as well
as increases in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, allergies, and pulmonary
disease.26, 27, 28, 29
b. By the end of the century, under both the IPCC’s medium (B1) and medium-high
(A2) scenarios, the number of extreme heat days during the summer months is
projected to at least double and in some areas increase by 500 percent. Impacts
will be largest in the inland parts of California30 including Modesto.
6. The present costs of fossil fuels are externalized: Presently the environmental, health,
and social costs of CO2 emissions are not included in prices paid for fossil fuels, but
rather these externalized costs are borne directly and indirectly by all Americans and
global citizens; and
7. Co-Benefits: the measures proposed in this legislation will benefit the economy, human
health, the environment, and national security, even without consideration of global
temperatures, by correcting market distortions, reducing in non-greenhouse-gas
pollutants, reducing the outflow of dollars to oil-producing countries and improving in the
energy security of the United States,31
8. Benefits of Carbon Fees: phased-in carbon fees on greenhouse gas emissions (1) are
the most efficient, transparent, and enforceable mechanism to drive an effective and fair
transition to a domestic-energy economy, (2) will stimulate investment in alternative-
energy technologies, and (3) give all businesses powerful incentives to increase their
energy-efficiency and reduce their carbon footprints in order to remain competitive,32
9. Equal Monthly Per-Person Dividends: monthly dividends (or “rebates”) from carbon fees
paid equally to every American household will stimulate the American economy and help
ensure that families and individuals can afford greenhouse gas-free energy,
13.b
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: b - Exhibit A (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
3
Therefore the National Revenue Fee and Dividend Act33 contain the following elements:
1. Collection of Carbon Fees/Carbon Fee Trust Fund: The Act would impose a carbon fee
on all fossil fuels and other greenhouse gases at the point where they first enter the
economy. The fee shall be collected by the Treasury Department. The fee on that date
shall be $15 per ton of CO2 equivalent emissions and result in equal charges for each
ton of CO2 equivalent emissions potential in each type of fuel or greenhouse gas. The
Department of Energy shall propose and promulgate regulations setting forth CO2
equivalent fees for other greenhouse gases including at a minimum methane34, nitrous
oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons, and nitrogen
trifluoride. The Treasury shall also collect the fees imposed upon the other greenhouse
gases. All fees are to be placed in the Carbon Fees Trust Fund and be rebated 100% to
American households as outlined below.
2. Emissions Reduction Targets: To align US emissions with the physical constraints
identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to avoid
irreversible climate change, the yearly increase in carbon fees including other
greenhouse gases, shall be at least $10 per ton of CO2 equivalent each year. Annually,
the Department of Energy shall determine whether an increase larger than $10 per ton
per year is needed to achieve program goals. Yearly price increases of at least $10 per
year shall continue until total U.S. CO2-equivalent emissions have been reduced to 10%
of U.S. CO2-equivalent emissions in 1990.
3. Equal Per-Person Monthly Dividend Payments: Equal monthly per-person dividend
payments shall be made to all American households (½ payment per child under 18
years old, with a limit of 2 children per family) each month. The total value of all monthly
dividend payments shall represent 100% of the total carbon fees collected per month.
4. Border Adjustments: In order to ensure that U.S.-made goods can remain competitive at
home and abroad and to provide an additional incentive for international adoptions of
carbon fees, Carbon-Fee Equivalent Tariffs shall be charged for goods entering the U.S.
from countries without comparable Carbon Fees/Carbon Pricing. Carbon-Fee-Equivalent
Rebates shall be used to reduce the price of exports to such countries and to ensure
that U.S. goods can remain competitive in those countries. The Department of
Commerce will determine rebate amounts and exemptions if any.
1 Anderegg, William R. L. et al. “Expert Credibility in Climate Change.” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 107.27 (2010): 12107–12109. www.pnas.org.
2 Doran, Peter T., and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman. “Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate
Change.” Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 90.3 (2009): 22. CrossRef.
3 IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom
and New York, NY, USA: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013. Climate Change
2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
13.b
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: b - Exhibit A (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
4
4 Hansen, J. et al. “Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?” The Open Atmospheric
Science Journal 2.1 (2008): 217–231. arXiv.org.
5 McMichael, Anthony J, Rosalie E Woodruff, and Simon Hales. “Climate Change and Human
Health: Present and Future Risks.” The Lancet 367.9513 (2006): 859–869. CrossRef.
6 Hughes, I. “Biological Consequences of Global Warming: Is the Signal Already Apparent?” Trends
in ecology & evolution 15.2 (2000): 56–61.
7 Nordhaus, William D. “A Review of the ‘Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change.’”
Journal of Economic Literature 45.3 (2007): 686–702
8 Hagel, Chuck. Department of Defense: 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap. Alexandria,
VA: Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, 2014.
9 Borgerson, Scott G. “Arctic Meltdown.” Foreign Affairs Apr. 2008. Foreign Affairs.
10 IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers.
11 Archer, David, Bruce Buffett, and Victor Brovkin. “Ocean Methane Hydrates as a Slow Tipping
Point in the Global Carbon Cycle.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106.49
(2009): 20596–20601. www.pnas.org.
12 Weare, Bryan C. “How Will Changes in Global Climate Influence California?” California
Agriculture 63.2 (2009): 59–66.
13 Agricultural Water Management Plan for 2012. Modesto Irrigation District, 2012.
14 Moser, Susanne, Julia Ekstrom, and Guido Franco. Our Changing Climate 2012 - Vulnerability &
Adaptation to the Increasing Risks from Climate Change in California - A Summary Report on
the Third Assessment. California Climate Change Center, 2012.
15 Gleick, Peter H. Water -- the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change for the
Water Resources of the United States. Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment,
and Security, 2000. agris.fao.org.
16 Joyce, B. et al. Climate Change Impacts on Water Supply and Agricultural Water Management in
California’s Western San Joaquin Valley, and Potential Adaptation Strategies. California
Climate Change Center, 2009.
17 Purkey, D. R. et al. “Robust Analysis of Future Climate Change Impacts on Water for Agriculture
and Other Sectors: A Case Study in the Sacramento Valley.” Climatic Change 87.1 (2007): 109–
122. link.springer.com.
18 Cayan, Dan et al. Climate Change Scenarios and Sea Level Rise Estimates for the California 2009
Climate Change Scenarios Assessment. California Climate Change Center, 2009.
13.b
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: b - Exhibit A (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
5
19 Meadows, Robin. “UC Scientists Help California Prepare for Climate Change” in California
Agriculture.” California Agriculture 63.2 (2009): 56–58.
20 Weare, Bryan C.
21 Baldocchi, Dennis, and Simon Wong. “Accumulated Winter Chill Is Decreasing in the Fruit
Growing Regions of California.” Climatic Change 87.1 (2007): 153–166. link.springer.com.
22 Luedeling, Eike, Minghua Zhang, and Evan H. Girvetz. “Climatic Changes Lead to Declining
Winter Chill for Fruit and Nut Trees in California during 1950–2099.” PLoS ONE 4.7 (2009):
e6166. PLoS Journals.
23 Trumble, John T., and Casey D. Butler. “Climate Change Will Exacerbate California’s Insect Pest
Problems.” California Agriculture 63.2 (2009): 73–78.
24 Bale, Jeffery S. et al. “Herbivory in Global Climate Change Research: Direct Effects of Rising
Temperature on Insect Herbivores.” Global Change Biology 8.1 (2002): 1–16. Wiley Online
Library.
25 Kleeman, M. J., S.-H. Chen, and R.A. Harley. Climate Change Impact on Air Quality in California:
Report to the California Air Resources Board. N.p., 2010.
26 Cooley, H., M. Heberger, and L. (Pacific Institute) Allen. Social Vulnerability to Climate Change in
California. California Energy Commission, 2012.
27 Gould, Solange, and Kathy Dervin. Climate Action for Health: Integrating Public Health into
Climate Action Planning. California Department of Public Health, 2012
28 Bedsworth, Louise Wells. Clearing the Air in the San Joaquin Valley: Developing an Action Plan
for Regulators, Legislators, and the Public. Kirsch Foundation, Union of Concerned Scientists,
2004.
29 “Climate Effects on Health.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. N.p., 22 Dec. 2014.
30 Cooley, H., M.
31 Nystrom, Scott, and Patrick Luckow. The Economic, Climate, Fiscal, Power, and Demographic
Impact of a National Fee-and-Dividend Carbon Tax. Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI)
and Synapse Energy Economics, Inc., 2014.
32 Nystrom, Scott, and Patrick Luckow (REMI study)
33 “Carbon Fee and Dividend.” Citizens’ Climate Lobby. N.p., n.d
https://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-fee-and-dividend/. 12 Apr. 2015.
34 Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 with both direct and indirect effects contributing to warming.
It is therefore important to place a fee on methane that leaks to the atmosphere. Some of this leakage will occur after
13.b
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: b - Exhibit A (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
6
the fee has been assessed on methane under the assumption that it will be burned to yield the less potent CO2. To
ensure the integrity of the program and that markets receive accurate information with regard to the climate forcings
caused by various fossil fuels, the carbon fee shall be assessed on such leaked methane at a rate commensurate with
the global warming potential (“GWP”) of methane including both its direct and indirect effects. Given the
importance of tipping points in the climate system, the 20-year GWP of methane shall be used to assess the fee, and
not the 100-year GWP. As proper accounting for such leakage is necessary for honest assessment of progress
towards program goals, reasonable steps to assess the rate of methane leakage shall be implemented, and leaked
methane shall be priced accordingly. The entity responsible for the leaked methane shall be responsible for paying
the fee.
13.b
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: b - Exhibit A (1289 : Revenue-Neutral Carbon Free Act)
Meeting Date: 3/15/2016
FROM: Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
SUBJECT: 2016 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt a resolution establishing a Legislative Action Platform for 2016.
2. Provide direction to staff on limiting the application of the platform to legislative action and
restricting use of the platform as a basis for advocacy for or against particular projects or
adjudicative acts before other jurisdictions’ governing bodies.
3. Appoint the Mayor, City Attorney and City Manager to act as the primary legislative liaisons
between the League of California Cities and the City of San Luis Obispo.
DISCUSSION
Legislative Action Program
Attached for the Council’s consideration is a resolution establishing the City’s 2016 Legislative
Action Platform. Similar resolutions have been adopted by the Council since 1993. The City
Attorney's Office coordinates the Legislative Action Program with assistance from the
Administration Department and from various City departments, as appropriate. This resolution
authorizes staff to respond to legislative issues affecting the City (via letters signed by the Mayor or
relevant Department Head), provided that the positions taken in the letters are consistent with the
priorities identified in Exhibit A to the resolution (Attachment - A) and League of California Cities
advocacy efforts.
By establishing a broad legislative platform and delegating responsibility to the Mayor and staff to
respond to proposed legislation and recommendations from the League of California Cities, the City
is better able to react quickly to changed circumstances and urgent requests than it would be if each
item were brought to the Council at its regular meetings. The process has been efficient given the
limited City resources available, and the City continues to be active in communicating its positions
on Federal and State legislation. In 2015, the Mayor, on behalf of the City Council, sent 8 letters
pertaining to pending legislation utilizing the Council Legislative Action Platform, as well as
engaging in advocacy calls and direct outreach to legislators.
In preparing this year’s draft program, input was solicited from all City Departments. Staff was
asked to take a critical look at the items within their scope of operations and expertise and evaluate
whether there was an opportunity to narrow or focus the platform. With that look, no significant
14
Packet Pg. 200
revisions were recommended by reviewing departments. All changes, including language clean-ups
and issue consolidations, are shown in the legislative draft of the 2015 Platform attached to this
report (Attachment - B).
In addition to Council’s substantive direction on the platform, staff also is seeking direction as to the
application of the platform to City positions on particular projects or applications that
Councilmembers believe raise issues related to the platform. Historically, the platform has been
utilized primarily to advocate for or against a particular piece of legislation and not for or against a
particular project or permitting application (adjudicative acts before other jurisdictions’ legislative
bodies). Staff recommends that the scope be expressly limited to legislative action to ensure
consistent understanding among both Councilmembers and administering staff, but requests explicit
direction from the Council majority on that issue to ensure clarity moving forward.
Legislative Liaison Appointments
The League of California Cities encourages cities to appoint a council member and a staff person to
act as legislative liaison between the League and the City. It is recommended that Mayor Jan Marx
act as the Council legislative liaison and the City Attorney and the City Manager serve as the staff
liaisons.
FISCAL IMPACT
Because no additional staff workload is anticipated as a result of this ongoing program, no new
fiscal impact will be incurred. Fiscal impacts are limited to staff time researching requests for
action under the platform and preparing correspondence on those requests determined to be within
the platform.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may wish to include other issues, not included in the current draft or to consolidate
certain issues. However, it is also important to note that the Legislative Platform allows the City to
take action on any legislative priorities or actions formally supported by the League of California
Cities. It is staff’s recommendation that desired additions to the Platform are fairly generally crafted
and flexible to allow for quick responses to legislation important to cities.
14
Packet Pg. 201
R ____
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2016 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE CITY LEGISLATIVE
ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2016 AND APPOINTING THE COUNCIL
MEMBER AND STAFF PERSON TO ACT AS LIAISON BETWEEN THE
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES
WHEREAS, a major objective of the City Council is to adopt an aggressive legislative
action platform which strengthens local government, promotes City goals and defends the City
against legislative actions by State and Federal governments that would weaken local government
and/or take away traditional revenue sources; and
WHEREAS, it is vital to the fiscal health and the self determination of the City to
effectively communicate with State Legislators and Federal representatives in order to favorably
influence State and Federal legislation, regulations and grant requests; and
WHEREAS, the League of California Cities conducts a legislative analysis and advocacy
program on behalf of cities for State issues and major Federal issues; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to be proactive and involved in the governmental decision
making processes directly affecting the City legislative priorities identified in Exhibit “A,” and other
selected issues as may from time to time be recommended by the League of California Cities; and
WHEREAS, a key component of the City’s Legislative Action Platform is face-to-face
meetings between City representatives and elected officials at the Federal, State, and County levels,
and coordination with similar efforts made by other local government entities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo does hereby:
1. Establish the Legislative Action Platform for 2016 as set forth in the attached Exhibit
“A” and authorize the Mayor and designated staff to take positions on legislation generally
consistent with the Legislative Action Platform and such other resolutions and recommendations of
the League of California Cities as may be from time to time presented to the City; and
2. Appoint Mayor Jan Marx to act as Council Member legislative liaison and City Manager
Katie Lichtig and City Attorney Christine Dietrick to act as staff legislative liaisons with the League
of California Cities.
14.a
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: a - 2016 Resolution - Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Resolution No. XXXX (2016 Series) Page 2
Upon motion of ____________________ , seconded by ________________, and on the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this ___ day of __________ 2016.
___
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
_______________________
Lee Price
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________________, __________.
_______________________
Lee Price
Interim City Clerk
14.a
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: a - 2016 Resolution - Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
1
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2016
Community Development
1. Promoting reforms of the entire State mandated HCD Regional Housing Need
Allocations process to recognize local resource limitations.
2. Providing funding (i.e. through Cap and Trade or other sources) for
communities to pay for public infrastructure that meet mandated greenhouse reduction
goals.
3. Providing funding to implement programs and related action items contained in
Climate Action Plans to quantitatively reduce greenhouse gases.
4. Promoting funding sources to accomplish retrofitting of unreinforced masonry
buildings.
5. Promoting funding of on-campus housing at Cal Poly for student and faculty
housing and University acquisition of single family residences for staff and faculty
housing.
6. Preserving local control of planning and zoning matters.
7. Supporting efforts to increase funding for affordable housing and supportive
housing services for very low, low and moderate income individuals and/or families
for all cities and communities and opposing the erosion of local inclusionary housing
and in-lieu fee programs.
8. Supporting continued funding of National Housing Trust Fund and streamlined
and efficient implementing regulations at the state level.
9. Promoting additional state funding to implement SB 375 through local general
plan updates that implement the regional sustainable communities plan and alternative
planning strategy, if needed.
10. Promoting funding for the identification, acquisition, maintenance and
restoration of historic sites and structures.
11. Supporting continued or expanded funding for CDBG program.
14.b
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
2
12. Supporting reinstatement of protections from imposition of additional building
or site conditions prior to issuance of a building permit for seismic related
improvements to buildings subject to a mitigation program established according to
state law (City URM Program) as previously provided in Government Code Section
8875.10 (this section was repealed effective January 1, 2009).
13. Supporting continued local control over mobile home park rent stabilization and
the conversion of mobile home parks to other uses. Encourage the amendment of
Section 66427.5 of the California Government Code and other relevant law for the
purpose of ensuring that mobile home park residents are not involuntarily removed
from homes or otherwise economically impacted if parks are subdivided or
converted.
14. Promoting financing for and implementation of AB 811 property-assessed
clean energy districts.
15. Encouraging continued viability of inclusionary housing provisions and
avoidance of conflicts with Costa-Hawkins Act.
16. Encouraging consistency in state legislation dealing with transportation,
housing and land use issues and eliminating potential conflicts between regional
housing requirements, smart growth mandates and environmental legislation.
17. Enabling the issuance of parking citations on private property.
18. Advocating full funding of authorized programs under the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act, including providing more flexibility in the use of Federal
funds on the local level to address housing for the homeless.
18.19. Supporting legislation that provides funding sources for appropriate human
service agencies that support the mi ssion of the Human Relations Commission.
19.20. Supporting responsible review and revision of CEQA to ensure sound
environmental determinations.
Economic Development
20.21. Promoting funding and/or legislation using tax credits or other incentive
programs to encourage research and development by businesses in California.
14.b
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
3
21.22. Supporting funding and policies for the promotion of California as a place to
locate businesses.
22.23. Supporting funding for the state tourism promotion program.
23.24. Supporting the effective and efficient use of all communications technologies
including voice, video, data, and information services over wired and wireless
transmission technologies.
24.25. Supporting telecommunications reform legislation and other measures that
preserve local control over public rights-of-way, protect local resources and
guarantee access to, funding for, and local flexibility in utilizing funds for public,
educational and government (PEG) access television.
25.26. Supporting the expansion of public infrastructure financing tools and funding
for infrastructure to provide economic development opportunities.
26.27. Promoting development of green business and head of household jobs.
Finance
27.28. Supporting meaningful fiscal reform that allows each level of government to
adequately finance its service responsibilities while continuing to support efforts to
protect the City from loss of revenues due to State take-aways and unfunded State or
Federal mandates.
28.29. Endorsing legislation that provides local government with a fair share tax on
catalog and Internet sales; and opposing legislation that limits state or local authority
to tax catalog or Internet sales.
29.30. Supporting efforts to collect the full amount of local transient occupancy tax
from online sales of lodging.
30.31. Supporting the continuation of California Specialized Training Institute
activities within San Luis Obispo County.
31.32. Opposing legislation that removes the municipal bond tax exemption.
32.33. Supporting clarity regarding local regulatory control and revenue equity for
14.b
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
4
cities in any statewide regulation or permitting of medical marijuana establishments or
uses.
Human Resources/Employee Relations/Human Relations
33.34. Supporting additional workers compensation reforms that lower employers'
costs while still protecting workers.
34.35. Supporting pension and retiree health benefits reform efforts in concert with
the League of California Cities and the California Public Employees Retirement
System (PERS) Board of Directors.
35.36. Opposing the expansion of the "Peace Officers' Bill of Rights," "Firefighters'
Bill of Rights," or other attempts to curtail management rights.
Supporting legislation that provides funding sources for appropriate human service
agencies that support the mi ssion of the Human Relations Commission.[Note:
Moved to Community Development priorities to reflect reassignment of HRC ].
36.37. Supporting legislation to protect the City's continued ability to administer its
Cafeteria benefit Plan.
37.38. Supporting reforms that limit the financial impacts of joint and several
liability on public entities.
38.39. Supporting the clarification, modification or repeal of AB 646 fact finding
requirements.
39.40. Opposing the expansion of procedural rights and requirements in administrative
disciplinary proceedings that increase costs and expand the timeframe and scope of
administrative processes.
Public Safety
40.41. Continuing State and Federal funding support for school safety, disaster
preparedness, earthquake preparedness, Homeland Security, hazardous material
response, State COPS program and other local law enforcement activities.
14.b
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
5
41.42. Preserving the City's authority to investigate police misconduct.
42.43. Supporting efforts to expand the scope of parental responsibility for crimes
committed by minors.
43.44. Preserving the authority of local control on issuance of concealed weapons
permits.
44.45. Supporting legislation to help curb alcohol-related criminal behavior and
underage drinking.
45.46. Opposing new or increased state fees for state provided law enforcement
services.
46.47. Supporting the fair and efficient allocation of radio spectrum that provides
quality frequencies, free from interference, for all local public safety
communication needs.
47.48. Supporting efforts to reduce retention periods for video monitoring tapesdata
not related to an identified incident or operation .
48.49. Preserving the City's right to regulate activities with adverse health and safety
impacts on local streets, sidewalks and right-of-ways.
49.50. Supporting legislation to improve and enhance the safety of cargo transported
via rail, including but not limited to: safety enhancements for rail vessel construction
with an emphasis on efforts to rapidly improve the safe transport of volatile crude oil
and limit the use of older, “grandfathered” containers and vessels; enhancements in
remote monitoring and control of railcar speeds; reduction of railcar speeds in
populated areas like San Luis Obispo; enhancements in communications, notifications
and information dissemination to local governments, especially public safety agencies.
50.51. Supporting legislation to preserve and enhance local control, at the City level,
for the provision of public safety services, including the scope and provision of medical
and non-medical emergency services.
Public Works
51.52. Supporting increased the availability of grant funding to replace aging
14.b
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
6
infrastructure of all types, e.g. streets, bridges, water, sewer, parks, and storm sewer
systems, etc.
52.53. Supporting increased funding for projects that improve flood protection for the
City.
53.54. Supporting funding for implementation of clean stormwater / low impact
infrastructure replacement.
54.55. Ensuring cooperation and prompt approval from Federal and State regulatory
agencies (such as the Department ofFish & Game, Regional Water Quality Control
Board and the Army Corps of Engineers) for necessary projects involving the City's
creek system.
55.56. Exempting assessments for vital infrastructure from Proposition 218
requirements.
56.57. Supporting monetary incentives or grant funding for alternative fuel vehicles
for replacement of municipal fleet equipment.
57.58. Supporting monetary incentives or grant funding for retrofitting municipal
buildings with Energy Management Systems to centrally control all lighting and
HVAC systems.
58.59. Supporting realistic municipal clean stormwater requirements at the State Board
or legislative level.
Parks and Recreation and Natural Resources
59.60. Supporting State and Federal funding and other measures to promote the
acquisition, protection, preservation and restoration of natural resources, open space,
coastal resources, signature land forms, wetlands and park development, including
continued funding for the Land and Water Conservation Grant Program and for the
California Conservation Corps.
60.61. Supporting the expansion of National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of San
Luis Obispo County to protect this fragile habitat from offshore oil and gas
development.
61.62. Opposing any development under existing or new offshore oil and gas leases
off the Coast of San Luis Obispo County.
14.b
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
7
62.63. Supporting measures to prohibit discharge of pollutants into the ocean (e.g.
selenium contaminated waters from the San Joaquin valley).
63.64. Supporting placement of the new water bond (Proposition 1) and encouraging
the Resources Agency and its departments to expedite the distribution of bond funds to
take advantage of the many favorable opportunities for land and easement acquisition
and enhancement project contracting that exist at this time.
64.65. Seeking legislative exemption from property taxes on lands dedicated to
open space purposes which are outside the boundaries of the jurisdiction owning
such lands.
65.66. Protecting funding for vital regional and community services that negatively
impact Californian's access to parks, open space, after school programming, senior
services, facilities that promote physical activity, protect natural resources, and
strengthen safety and security.
66.67. Promoting policies that recognize the benefits of parks and recreational
facilities in the advancement of "sustainable communities" and curbing greenhouse
gas emissions, including: strengthening policies that fund parks, open-space, bike
lanes and non-motorized trails through the development and implementation of a
carbon credit and offset program, and advocating for the strong integration of local
and regional park and non-motorized transportation improvements into "Smart
Growth Scenarios" pursuant to SB 375.
67.68. Supporting access to joint use of schools; parks and open space;
development of streets and trails that encourage physical activity and healthy
living.
68.69. Supporting extension or permanent legislation at the federal level of enhanced
tax deductions for charitable donations of Conservation Easements
Transportation
69.70. Supporting changes in gas tax laws that allow local tax for transportation
purposes based on a majority vote of the public.
14.b
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
8
70.71. Supporting the continuation of, and increased funding sources for street
maintenance projects, transportation improvements, transit operations and bicycle
facility projects.
71.72. Supporting clean air transit funding for San Luis Obispo County, in
particular funding that provides for alternative modes of transportation with clean
air benefits.
72.73. Supporting actions to: (1) promote cooperation and mutual support between
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) agencies and local transit providers, and
(2) discourage trends toward " MPO agencies/regional "control" of local transit
providers.
73.74. Encouraging private transportation companies (such as Union Pacific
Railroad) to reach agreements for sharing of properly secured right of way corridors
for other compatible uses such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
74.75. Opposing the proposed diversion of any funding source for transportation
that reduces amounts designated for transit operations.
75.76. Supporting funding for projects to implement adopted complete street plans
demonstrated to improve public health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
76.77. Supporting provision of Cap and Trade funding for intercity rail.
Utilities
77.78. Supporting clean water funding programs.
78.79. Supporting recycling and waste diversion programs such as green waste
composting and enhancing local government's ability to comply with solid waste
reduction requirements.
79.80. Supporting measures that require the State Water Resources Control Board
and Regional Water Quality Control Boards establish a process to evaluate, in
advance of adoption, the costs of compliance for pending and future regulatory
actions on NPDES permitees.
80.81. Supporting legislation that requires the State's environmental agencies to
conduct peer review of proposed regulations to ensure that the proposal is based on
14.b
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
9
sound science.
81.82. Supporting measures that require the State Water Resources Control Board
and Regional Water Quality Control Boards establish a process to evaluate, in
advance of adoption, the costs of compliance for pending and future regulatory
actions on NPDES permitees.
82.83. Supporting the elimination of mandatory penalties for violations of NPDES
Requirements and returning discretionary control to the Regional Water Quality
Control Board Executive Officers (i.e. repeal SB 709).
83.84. Supporting measures to ensure reasonableness in the administration of
NPDES permit governing City operations, including pursuing a municipal
representative on the Regional Water Quality Control Board
84.85. Promoting the safe, responsible, and cost-effective reuse of Exceptional
Quality or better biosolids.
85.86. Supporting any appropriate streamlining the state regulatory processes.
86.87. Supporting sustainable energy programs.
87.88. Supporting incentives for distributed energy generation projects such as solar
power.
88.89. Supporting legislation allowing cities/agencies to establish fees for the costs
of operating mandated water quality programs such as, but not limited to, municipal
storm water and total maximum daily loading.
89.90. Supporting federal legislative action to transfer Salinas Reservoir from Army
Corps of Engineers Military Project to Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works
Project.
90.91. Supporting the implementation of the California Urban Water
Conservation Council's Best Management Practices regarding urban water
conservation and compliance with AB 1420.
91.92. Supporting amendments to the Urban Water Management Planning Act to
recognize past investment in water conservation and the City's ability to comply with
SBx7-7.
14.b
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
10
92.93. Supporting legislation eliminating departing load charges which discourage the
use of alternative energy resources.
93.94. Allowing the use of Public Goods Funds for the development and installation of
energy saving or green energy generating projects to benefit local government.
94.95. Promoting the protection of water resources, including water quality, watershed
protection, and treatment discharge measures.
95.96. Supporting the protection of our natural resources from invasive species.
96.97. Promoting sustainability of our water resources through the use of recycled
water and other best practices.
County/Regional Priorities
97.98. Supporting legislation and other policy considerations to expand funding for the
delivery of case management, drug, alcohol, and detoxification services, mental health
services, and the establishment of shelter facilities.
98.99. Working with the County to assure land use practices that are consistent with
the Memorandum of Agreement adopted by the City Council and County Board of
Supervisors in 2005 regarding development near the edges of the City.
99.100. Encouraging participation by County in providing nearby parking for
County employees and clients, and alternate transportation and parking demand
reduction.
100.101. Supporting County development of a local ordinance providing
additional local oversight and regulation of the land application of Pollutant
Concentration (PC) or better biosolids.
101.102. Working cooperatively with the County to solve City/County flood
problems.
102.103. Supporting the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District's
legislative program, where consistent with the City's adopted policies and platform.
103.104. Supporting the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments' legislative
programadvocacy activities, where consistent with the City's adopted policies, and
platform and public project objectives.
14.b
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Attachment 1
11
105. Supporting County efforts to enhance dangerous animal regulation and
enforcement.
104.106. Supporting the streamlining, clarification and simplification of conflict
of interest regulations applicable to local officials.
14.b
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: b - 2016 Draft Legislative Platform (1287 : 2016 Legislative Platform)
Page intentionally left
blank.