Jan 19, 2023 LAFCO Meeting

I HOPE NOT. ALL RIGHT.

[00:00:02]

[I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER ]

BUT IT'S 10:15 NOW, SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.

SO WE'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

AND COMMISSIONER BERTAO, WOULD YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THE FLAG SALUTE? YES SIR. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER THREE IS ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS.

MR. NICHOLSON. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER.

START FROM THE RIGHT SIDE.

COMMISSIONER ESPINOZA. PRESENT.

COMMISSIONER BERTAO.

HERE. AND ACTING CHAIR SILVEIRA.

PRESENT. OKAY.

AND WE DID HEAR THAT CHAIR SERRATTO WAS NOT GOING TO MAKE IT TODAY.

AND AS YOU MENTIONED, WE'RE EXPECTING COMMISSIONER HOGUE TO SHOW UP AT ANY TIME.

BUT WE DO HAVE A QUORUM FOR TODAY'S BUSINESS.

PERFECT. ALL RIGHT, MOVING RIGHT ALONG.

ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

[IV. CONSENT CALENDAR ]

MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

ROD, YOU WANT A SECOND THAT? SORRY. YES.

ALL RIGHT. SECOND THAT.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BERTAO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ESPINOZA.

NO FURTHER COMMENTS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY 3 TO 0.

ALL RIGHT, CITIZENS COMMUNICATION TESTIMONY IS LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES OR LESS PER PERSON.

THIS IS THE PUBLIC'S OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OVER WHICH THE LAFCO HAS JURISDICTION.

ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? NOT SEEING ANY. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX PUBLIC HEARINGS.

[Items VI.A. & VI.B. ]

THIS IS THE REMOVAL OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 53 ACRES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND EXTENDING THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE TO INCLUDE A LARGER 94 ACRE PORTION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY OF VOLTA, IN ADDITION TO APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES INVOLVING A FOUR MILE LONG AND 60 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF TERRITORY RUNNING ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF HENRY MILLER ROAD BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES.

LAFCO FILE NUMBER 1063 B THE ACTIONS REQUESTED ARE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED BY THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEQA FOR THE PROJECT, AND THE COMMISSION ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE MITIGATION MEASURES AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CONTAINED IN THE IS/MND AND FINDS THAT NO ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT ALL CHANGES, ALTERATIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ARE WITHIN THE RESPONSIBILITY AND JURISDICTION OF THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND OTHER AGENCIES, NOT THE COMMISSION.

AND WE WILL TURN IT OVER TO MR. NICHOLSON FOR A PRESENTATION.

CHAIRMAN SILVEIRA COULD YOU ALSO READ THE NEXT ITEM? I KNOW THAT WAS A LONG WINDED THING, BUT I'M GOING TO DO ONE PRESENTATION TO SAVE TIME AND NOT OVERLAP.

PERFECT. SO THEN WE WERE ALSO GOING TO BE CONSIDERING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM B, THIS IS THE DISSOLUTION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT LAFCO FILE NUMBER 0695 AND THE RELATED ANNEXATION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY, CONSISTING OF 94 ACRES INTO THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

LAFCO FILE NUMBER 0696 FOR THE PURPOSES OF INSTALLING A NEW WATER WELL AND RELATED POTABLE WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND TO TAKE OVER OPERATIONS OF THE PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM IN THE COMMUNITY.

THE BOUNDARY OF THE ANNEXATION AREA IS LOCATED ON WEST OF VOLTA ROAD, NORTH OF GRAND ROAD, SOUTH OF HENRY MILLER ROAD AND INGOMAR GRADE, AND AN IRREGULAR BOUNDARY ON THE WEST, EXTENDING ALONG PORTIONS OF SECOND STREET, THIRD STREET, AND INCLUDING THE VOLTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND A PARCEL EXTENDING 496 FEET WEST OF THE SCHOOL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HENRY MILLER ROAD.

THE ACTION REQUESTED ARE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDER THE INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED BY THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEQA FOR THE PROJECT, AND THE COMMISSION ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE MITIGATION MEASURES AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CONTAINED IN THE IS/MND AND FINDS THAT NO ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT ALL CHANGES, ALTERATIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ARE WITHIN THE RESPONSIBILITY AND JURISDICTION OF THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND OTHER

[00:05:01]

NOW WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. NICHOLSON FOR A PRESENTATION.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LET ME TAKE A BREATH AND REALLY QUICKLY LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER HOGUE IS PRESENT.

THANK YOU. WELCOME.

SORRY. NO, NO, YOU'RE GOOD.

OKAY. YEAH. SO EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND TWO SEPARATE STAFF REPORTS AND RESOLUTIONS, I DECIDED TO PUT IT ALL IN ONE PRESENTATION BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF REDUNDANCY.

THE FIRST ACTION IS RELATED TO THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCE OF THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND THE REMOVAL OF THE SPHERE FOR THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT.

AND THE SECOND ACTION IS INVOLVING THE DISSOLUTION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT AND THE ANNEXATION OF THAT AREA, AND A LITTLE BIT LARGER BOUNDARY BY THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

SO FOR PRESENTATION PURPOSES, I'M DOING IT ALL AT ONE TIME SO WE CAN AVOID AGAIN REDUNDANCY.

AND SO YEAH, THAT'S BASICALLY THIS SLIDE IS THAT THE FIRST PART IS THE MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE REORGANIZATION IS THE ACTION WHEN YOU'RE DOING MORE THAN ONE THING, YOU'RE DOING THE DISSOLUTION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT.

THAT DISTRICT WILL GO AWAY IF THIS IS APPROVED AND THE AREA WILL BE ANNEXED INTO SANTA NELLA.

AND THIS WHOLE EFFORT WAS INITIATED AFTER MANY YEARS OF NEGOTIATION AND COORDINATION BETWEEN THE TWO DISTRICTS AND WITH THE STATE WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD DIVISION OF DRINKING WATER TO ADDRESS WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS AND ACTUALLY SUPPLY PROBLEMS TOO FOR BOTH THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE ABOUT FIVE MILES APART ON THE WEST SIDE, WEST OF LOS BANOS.

SO THE STATE SOLUTION, WHICH IS KIND OF THE CARROT FOR EVERYONE, IS APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION DOLLARS IN GRANT FUNDS TO INSTALL A NEW WELL IN VOLTA AND VOLTA HAS GOOD WATER WHEN IT'S DEEP, BUT THE SHALLOW WATER HAS GOT CONTAMINANTS IN IT, AND THAT DEEP WELL WILL SERVE BOTH COMMUNITIES.

IT WILL SERVE SANTA NELLA AS WELL AS VOLTA THROUGH A FIVE MILE LONG PIPELINE THAT CONNECTS WITH A WATER BLENDING FACILITY IN SANTA NELLA.

AND SO THE STATE'S GOT TWO PROBLEMS WITH TWO DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS. AND THE SOLUTION IS TO COMBINE BOTH THESE COMMUNITIES TOGETHER WITH THE ADMINISTRATION BY THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT FOR A LOT OF GOOD REASONS.

SO IT'S AND THEN UNDER NUMBER THREE HERE, IT'S THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL CAPABILITIES OF SANTA NELLA IS A LARGE DISTRICT WITH OVER 600 RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS, HOTELS, ALL KINDS OF COMMERCIAL USES OUT THERE.

AND VOLTA BEING A LITTLE DISTRICT WITH BASICALLY HOMEOWNERS OUT THERE AND EVERYBODY'S VOLUNTEER.

AND IT'S BEEN A REAL STRUGGLE TO HAVE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE OR FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

SO AS A RESULT OF THIS, THE TWO DISTRICTS HAVE AGREED TO EVERY ORGANIZATION WHERE SANTA NELLA WILL TAKE OVER THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL FACILITIES THAT ARE BEING BUILT AND TAKE CARE, BILLING AND ALL THAT.

SO IT'S A GREAT APPROACH AND THE STATE IS ENCOURAGING IT.

SO PART OF THE ANALYSIS WILL BE BOTH THE PHYSICAL BOUNDARY ISSUES AND THEN THE ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES.

OH, AND THE BOUNDARY FOR THE SANTA NELLA AREA WILL INCLUDE THE ENTIRE AREA THAT WAS IN THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT BOUNDARY, WHICH IS ABOUT 53 ACRES AND ADDITIONAL 40 ACRES APPROXIMATELY OF ADJACENT PROPERTY.

AND THIS IS A MAP REPRESENTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES WITH SANTA NELLA ON THE LEFT AND VOLTA ON THE RIGHT AND THIS SHOWS THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCE HIGHLIGHTED.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE ON THIS MAP, BUT YOU HAVE A COLORED MAP IN YOUR PACKET.

AND THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE IS PROPOSED FOR SANTA NELLA TO INCLUDE A STRIP ALONG HENRY MILLER ROAD, THE 60 FOOT WIDE, WHERE THE PIPELINE, THE WATER PIPELINE WOULD BE LOCATED, THAT'LL CONNECT THE TWO.

SO IN THIS SPHERE YOU'D HAVE SANTA NELLA AND VOLTA AND THEN A LITTLE TIE HOLDING THEM TOGETHER.

BUT FOR THE ANNEXATION, THEY'RE ONLY ANNEXING THE VOLTA COMMUNITY.

IT'S LIKE AN ISLAND, A DETACHED ISLAND, SEPARATE BECAUSE THERE'S NO REASON TO ANNEX THE HENRY MILLER ROAD WHERE THE PIPELINE IS GOING TO BE IN THE COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY.

THEY DON'T NEED TO ANNEX THE ROAD BECAUSE THIS IS A COUNTY ROAD ANYWAY.

SO FOR THIS MAP, WE'VE ASKED FOR THE SPHERE PURPOSES.

[00:10:01]

AND THE PRESENTATION WILL KIND OF GIVE A QUICK SUMMARY OF THOSE.

BUT THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT IN YOUR PACKET PROVIDES MUCH MORE DETAIL, INCLUDING THE ATTACHMENTS.

SO IF WE LOOK AT THE PRESENT AND PLANNED LAND USES IN THE AREA, THE PRESENT PROBABLE NEED FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN THE AREA, THE PRESENT CAPACITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SERVICES THAT THE AGENCY PROVIDES OR IS AUTHORIZED TO PROVIDE, THE EXISTENCE OF SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST IN THE AREA THAT THE COMMISSION DEEMS ARE RELEVANT.

AND THEN THE PRESENT AND PROBABLE NEEDS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN DISADVANTAGED UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES OR WE REFER TO THEM LAFCO WORLD AS DUCS, DUCS . SO THIS IS A BLOW UP OF THE VOLTA AREA SHOWING YOU THAT THE 95 ACRE PROPOSED BOUNDARY FOR THE SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

BOTH THIS BOUNDARY WOULD BE BOTH FOR THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND FOR THE ANNEXATION AREA.

SO AGAIN, IT INCLUDES THE EXISTING 53 ACRE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AND AN ADDITIONAL 42 ACRES, WHICH INCLUDES AREA TO THE SOUTH.

THIS LITTLE ARROW POINTER THERE'S THE TRIANGLE AREA TO THE SOUTH IS ADDED.

THE VOLTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THIS WESTERN PART, EVEN THOUGH ITS SCHOOL PROPERTY WAS NOT IN THE DISTRICT BOUNDARY.

THIS PART OF THE SCHOOL WAS BUT NOT ALL OF IT.

AND THE NEW WELL SITE IS GOING CAN BE OFF ON THE WEST SIDE HERE ALONG WITH A WATER STORAGE TANK AND PUMP.

AND SO THE DISTRICT'S ADDING THAT PARCEL THE SANTA NELLA DISTRICT.

AND THEN THIS AREA IS BEING ADDED TO THE NORTH THAT HAS AN EXISTING TRUCKING BUSINESS AND I THINK ON SITE WATER SUPPLY RIGHT NOW WITH A WELL, AND THEN THERE'S SOME PROPERTY IN BETWEEN THAT'S JUST ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY BELOW THE RAILROAD.

THERE'S THIS SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD LINE RUNNING HERE.

SO IT'S A LOT OF THAT AREA IS ACTUALLY RIGHT OF WAY, BUT SOME OF IT IS THESE ADDITIONAL PARCELS.

AND THEN THIS IS AN AERIAL SHOWING THE EXISTING VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT BOUNDARY.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE AREA IS THE MOST, FOR VOLTA THAT'S THE MOST DENSE DEVELOPED AREA.

MOSTLY ALL RESIDENTIAL.

THERE ARE SOME COMMERCIAL IN THAT OR AG COMMERCIAL, BUT IT'S BASICALLY LARGE AND SMALL LOT RESIDENTIAL PARCELS ON THE EXISTING WATER SYSTEM, MAYBE SOME PRIVATE LAND WELLS USED FOR LANDSCAPING THAT AREN'T CONNECTED TO THE SYSTEM.

BUT GOING BACK, YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT AREA AS WELL WITHIN THIS LARGER BOUNDARY, PRIMARILY ON THE EAST, THE EASTERN SIDE.

SO THE PRESENT AND PLANNED LAND USES IN THE AREA IS THE FIRST CONSIDERATION.

AND AGAIN, AT VOLTA CONTAINS MORE RURAL AND SMALL AND LARGE LOTS THAT ARE ON THE PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM FROM VOLTA, BUT ALSO THEY'RE ON INDIVIDUAL SEPTIC, WHICH IS A MAJOR LIMITATION FOR GROWTH.

THERE'S ALSO THE MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND AG SUPPORT BUSINESSES OUT THERE.

THE COUNTIES GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR VOLTA IS CALLED A RURAL CENTER, AND THAT IS A DESIGNATION WHERE YOU HAVE A RURAL COMMUNITY THAT'S KIND OF A CONVENIENCE AREA THAT DEVELOPED HISTORICALLY OVER TIME, TYPICALLY HAS A SCHOOL.

A LOT OF THEM HAVE FIRE STATIONS.

THEY WOULD HAVE A GENERAL STORE TYPICALLY, AND KIND OF A CLUSTER OF RURAL HOUSING FOR FARM WORKERS THAT SUPPORT THE LARGER REGION AROUND THEM.

AND SOME EXAMPLES IN THE COUNTY BESIDES VOLTA ARE BALLICO AND CRESSEY.

ON THE EAST SIDE AND SOUTH OF MERCED, THERE'S EL NIDO COMMUNITY.

SO THEY'RE LITTLE CLUSTERS.

YOU DON'T NEED A FULL CITY.

THEY'RE NOT LIKE A DELHI OR A HILMAR OR A SANTA NELLA THAT'S TARGETING GROWTH WITH FULL SEWER SYSTEMS AND ALL THAT.

THEY'RE JUST KIND OF RURAL OUTPOSTS.

SO AGAIN, VOLTA IS NOT TARGETED TO BE A GROWTH CENTER.

AND THIS PROPOSAL IS TO CONTINUE ON WITH THAT, JUST HAVE A SAFER DRINKING WATER SYSTEM.

OKAY THEN THE PRESENT AND PROBABLE NEED FOR FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN THE AREA.

AGAIN, THE CURRENT WATER SYSTEM IN VOLTA EXCEEDS SAFE DRINKING WATER STANDARDS.

THE SHORT TERM FORCE CHROMIUM SIX AND THEY ALSO LACK THEY HAVE [INAUDIBLE] OWNED THAT'S RUN BY THE TOMATO PACKAGING PLANT

[00:15:04]

THE WATER JUST FLOWS AND PEOPLE USE HOWEVER MUCH THEY WANT.

THERE'S NO WAY TO TELL HOW MUCH YOU'RE USING.

SO THAT WAS THE PROBLEM THAT THE STATE WAS DEALING WITH FOR YEARS IN IN VOLTA AND THEN SANTA NELLA, THAT THE SIMILAR PROBLEM IS THEY HAVE GROUNDWATER THAT HAS TWO CONTAMINANTS THAT DON'T MEET SAFE DRINKING WATER STANDARDS.

AND SO OVER THE YEARS, THE SANTA NELLA HAS BLENDED THAT GROUNDWATER WITH SURFACE WATER THEY GET THROUGH THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION.

AND BECAUSE OF THE ONGOING DROUGHTS THAT WATER SUPPLY HAS BEEN CUT BACK.

AND SO THEY'VE HAD A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF GROUNDWATER VERSUS SURFACE WATER.

AND SO THAT LEADS TO MORE CONTAMINANTS IN THE WATER.

AND SO THE STATE WATER BOARD HAS BEEN TRYING TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE AS WELL.

AND AGAIN, THE SOLUTION WAS WHY DON'T WE BRING THESE TWO COMMUNITIES TOGETHER? AND THERE'S NO NEW GOOD GROUNDWATER SUPPLY FOR SANTA NELLA.

SO VOLTA HAS THE GOOD WATER SUPPLY WITH THE NEW DEEP WELL SO THAT THE NEXT.

WELL THIS IS STILL PART OF THAT PRESENT AND PROBABLE NEED.

SO THE STATE FUNDING NOT ONLY WILL INVOLVE THE NEW WELL, A DEEP WELL WITH A PUMP AND WATER STORAGE TANK, BUT IT'LL ALSO CONNECT WITH THIS FIVE MILE LONG PIPELINE GOING DOWN HENRY MILLER ROAD EXTENDING TO THE EXISTING TREATMENT PLANT OR BLENDING PLANT IN SANTA NELLA.

AND THE SANTA NELLA COMMUNITY HAS 651 RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS AND AGAIN, A VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CONNECTIONS, WHEREAS VOLTA ONLY HAS 51.

BUT THIS WILL SERVE BOTH.

THEN IN TERMS OF PRESENT CAPACITY OF SERVICES AND THE ADEQUACY.

AS WE MENTIONED, THE WATER QUALITY HAS BEEN BAD AND THERE'S NOT A GOOD BACKUP WELL, FOR VOLTA.

AND AGAIN, SANTA NELLA'S WATER SUPPLY HAS BEEN CUT BACK FOR THE SURFACE WATER.

SO THEIR BLENDING IS NOT WORKING SO WELL.

AND THE THIRD ISSUE HERE IS THAT THE VOLTA CSD IS A SMALL LITTLE RURAL DISTRICT, HAS A REALLY HARD TIME MANAGING AND GETTING ANY MONEY AND KEEPING UP WITH ALL TRYING TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE STATE.

SO HAVING THE LARGER SANTA NELLA DISTRICT WITH MORE FUNDING AND MORE FULL TIME STAFF IS A BENEFIT TO THE FUTURE FOR BOTH COMMUNITIES.

SO THE NEXT CRITERIA IS ANY SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC COMMUNITY OF INTEREST AND THE FUNDING THAT THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD IS COMING UP WITH IS SET UP FOR COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE ARE DISADVANTAGED AND LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES, AND IT FITS BOTH SANTA NELLA AND VOLTA.

SO THE STRUGGLING SMALL DISTRICT IN VOLTA WILL BE ENHANCED BY HAVING SANTA NELLA TAKE IT OVER.

SO THERE'S A KIND OF THE COMMUNITY OF INTEREST HERE IS HAVING A LARGER, MORE PROFESSIONAL BOARD AND STAFF TAKING OVER THE ONGOING OPERATIONS.

AND THE VOLTA PEOPLE WILL BECOME RESIDENTS OF THAT DISTRICT.

THEY'LL BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND HAVE ALL RIGHTS AS EVERY OTHER LANDOWNER WITHIN THE SANTA NELLA DISTRICT.

YEAH, THAT'S GOOD.

SO THE PRESENT AND PROBABLE NEEDS FOR THE PUBLIC FACILITIES IN DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND AGAIN, THAT'S THE TERM THAT WE USE IN LAFCO AND THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE 80% OR LESS OF THE STATE MEDIAN INCOME.

AND BOTH COMMUNITIES QUALIFY FOR A DUC DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY THAT THE LEGISLATION WAS PUT IN LAFCO LAW DEALING WITH SPHERES OF INFLUENCE UNDER SB 244.

AND VOLTA MEETS THAT DEFINITION.

BUT SANTA NELLA DOESN'T QUITE MEET THE DEFINITION OF A DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY UNDER THE SB 88 STATE LAW FOR THE WATER BOARD FOR FUNDING WATER PROJECTS IN DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES.

SO AND VOLTA QUALIFIES AS A DAC.

THAT'S THE OTHER ACRONYM, DAC VERSUS DUC.

BUT IN ANY EVENT, THIS ENABLES THIS $10 MILLION DOLLARS TO COME TO COMMUNITIES THAT ARE LOWER INCOME AND BOTH COMMUNITIES BENEFIT AND QUALIFY.

SO THIS IS LIKE MONEY FROM HEAVEN, SO TO SPEAK.

SO IT'S A GREAT ADVANTAGE FOR BOTH.

AND BOTH DISTRICTS HAVE SEEN THAT AND THEY'VE ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING THIS REORGANIZATION GOING FORWARD

[00:20:09]

SO IN TERMS OF THE DETERMINATIONS ON THE REORGANIZATION, THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT OVERLAPPING TO THOSE OF THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT.

AND SO AGAIN, I WANTED TO PUT IN THE POWERPOINT COMBINE THESE TOGETHER AND THEN NOT REPEAT A LOT OF THOSE FINDINGS ABOUT DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND ALL THAT AGAIN, AND JUST HIGHLIGHT THE DETERMINATIONS THAT ARE IN ADDITION TO WHAT WAS PRESENTED FOR THE SPHERE PART OF THE APPLICATION.

AND JUST FOR REFERENCE THOSE THE REORGANIZATION IS THE SECOND STAFF REPORT IN YOUR PACKET UNDER AGENDA ITEM 7B AND THE TERMINATIONS ARE ON PAGES TWO THROUGH FOUR OF THE REPORT.

SO I'M JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE ADDITIONAL FACTORS HERE.

SO THE FIRST FACTOR HAS TO DO WITH THE CERTAINTY OF THE BOUNDARIES, AND THIS IS THE ACTUAL SURVEYORS MAP OF THE VOLTA ANNEXATION. SO IT MATCHES THE SPHERE THAT WAS SHOWN ON THE EARLIER MAP.

BUT THIS IS THE DETAILED WHAT'S CALLED THE MEETS AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION.

AND IT'S BEEN REVIEWED AND ALREADY CORRECTED BY THE COUNTY SURVEYOR.

AND THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL SEE AT SOME POINTS WE TALK ABOUT THE ANNEXATION AREA BEING 94 ACRES, BUT AFTER THEY DID MORE DETAILED CORRECTIONS, THEY CAME UP WITH 95 ACRES SO THAT THE DISTRICT AND ITS SPHERE IN THE CENTER AREA WILL BE 95 ACRES AND THE CENTER AREA IS OVER 2,000 ACRES.

THAT WILL STILL REMAIN WITHIN THE DISTRICT.

BUT THE ANNEXATION AREA IS JUST THIS ISOLATED VOLTA PIECE.

SO WE HAVE THE CERTAINTY OF THE BOUNDARY HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY SURVEYOR.

SO WE HAVE THAT IDENTIFIED.

THE OTHER PART OF IT IS DOES IT SPLIT LINES OF ASSESSMENT? AND THERE IS A SMALL AREA THAT SPLITS A PARCEL OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD, AND THERE'S NO REAL JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE THERE.

IT DOESN'T NEED ANY WATER, SO THERE'S NO SERVICE ISSUE.

AND THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE HAS INDICATED THEY'LL ISSUE NEW PARCEL NUMBERS TO REFLECT THE SPLIT OF THAT PROPERTY, PART OF IT IN THE DISTRICT AND PART OF IT OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT.

AND THEN IN TERMS OF ALTERNATIVES, THE SB 88 GRANT FUNDING FROM THE STATE IS AVAILABLE FOR DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES WITH HEALTH AND SAFETY PROBLEMS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SOLVE.

SO THIS AFTER MANY YEARS AND IT WILL GET INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.

BUT IT STARTED A LOT OF IN-DEPTH WORK BACK IN 2017.

SO HERE WE ARE SIX YEARS LATER TRYING TO WRAP IT UP.

SO IF WE GET INTO ALTERNATIVES AND START CHANGING BOUNDARIES AND ADDING MORE PEOPLE OR REMOVING PEOPLE, WE COMPLICATE ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ALL THE PERMITTING.

SO SO IT WOULD BE I'D THINK STAFF AND THE DISTRICT WOULD NOT RECOMMEND WE COME UP WITH ANY NEW ALTERNATIVES.

BUT IT WAS A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE MAY HEAR FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT MAY WANT TO COME IN.

AND I HAVE RECEIVED PHONE CALLS FROM SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY THAT WISH THEY WERE INCLUDED.

BUT IT GOES BACK TO ONE OF THE ISSUES IS THE SUPPLY IS INTENDED TO, THE NEW WELL TO CORRECT EXISTING WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY PROBLEMS FOR BOTH SANTA NELLA AND VOLTA.

IT'S NOT A SYSTEM FOR GROWTH AND THE GRANT MONEY DOESN'T GO TO SERVE GROWTH.

SO LIKE FOR SANTA NELLA, IT DOESN'T SOLVE SOME OF THOSE PROBLEMS TO START APPROVING MORE SUBDIVISIONS OR BIG COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THIS REPLACES WATER THAT WAS LOST.

WHEN THEY DON'T GET BECAUSE OF THE DROUGHT, THEY'RE NOT GETTING AS MUCH SURFACE WATER.

AND THEN IN TERMS OF COST AND ADEQUACY OF SERVICES, ANOTHER FACTOR FOR THE ORGANIZATION, AGAIN, THE FIRST POINT IS IT'S SOLVING AN EXISTING PROBLEM.

BUT THEY, SANTA NELLA DID A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A RATE STUDY AND CAME UP WITH THE IDEA THAT THE RATES GOING TO BE A FLAT RATE PER CUSTOMER OF $41.30, WHICH IS THE SAME AS WHAT THEY CHARGE THEIR CUSTOMERS .

AND AMY MONTGOMERY'S HERE TO CORRECT ME IF I MISSTATE THIS, BUT SAME AS THEIR MOBILE HOME CUSTOMERS IN SANTA NELLA, WHICH IS THEIR LOWEST.

THEY HAVE DIFFERENT TIERS OF RATES AND THE LOWEST TIER, THE MOST INEXPENSIVE IS THE MOBILE HOME SUBDIVISION OF THE TOWN OF SANTA NELLA.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO CHARGE VOLTA CUSTOMERS THAT SAME RATE, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING METERS ON EVERY HOME.

SO IN ADDITION TO THE FLAT RATE, YOU'RE GOING TO BE PAYING FOR YOUR WATER USE, AND IT'S $1.89 PER 100 CUBIC FEET, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT OF ABOUT 750 GALLONS OF WATER.

AND THEIR ESTIMATES WERE THAT THE AVERAGE HOME OUT THERE WOULD USE PROBABLY 600 CUBIC FEET.

[00:25:03]

AND THEN THEY'RE MONITORING THE USAGE.

SO IF SOMEONE IS USING A LOT OF WATER, THEY'RE GOING TO PAY MORE THAN SOMEONE WHO'S MORE FRUGAL WITH THEIR WATER.

QUESTION BILL. YES.

SOMEBODY HAS A WELL, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE HOOKED UP TO THE SERVICE DISTRICT, RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT BEING FORCED TO HOOK UP.

NO. AND THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME EXISTING WELLS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE.

THERE ARE SOME EXISTING WELLS OUT THERE THAT PEOPLE USE FOR IRRIGATION OF THEIR LANDSCAPING.

AND SOME OF THOSE WERE INTERTIED WITH THE WATER SUPPLY OUT THERE UNDER THE VOLTA DISTRICT, WHICH IS ILLEGAL.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO SEPARATE THOSE.

SO THEY'RE NOT TIED TOGETHER.

BUT THOSE WELLS CAN REMAIN AND BE USED FOR IRRIGATION, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT METERS ON THEM SO THEY CAN TELL HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING USED.

AND THEY WILL HAVE TO REPORT FOR SGMA, FOR HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING USED.

YES.

COME UP TO THE MIC YEAH, THAT'S FINE WITH ME. WELL, JUST LET ME JUST GO AHEAD AND I KNOW WE'RE NOT DONE WITH YOUR PRESENTATION, BUT GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SO YOU CAN COME UP AND CLARIFY THAT.

THANK YOU. HOLD ON.

CONCERNING THE EXISTING WELLS, I THINK THERE'S ABOUT 13 PARCELS THAT HAVE EXISTING WELLS.

EVERY SINGLE HOME IN VOLTA IS CURRENTLY CONNECTED TO THE DRINKING WATER SYSTEM, AND IT IS NOT CHLORINATED.

SO THEY'RE GETTING UNCHLORINATED GROUNDWATER FULL OF CHROME SIX.

SO THIS WILL CORRECT THAT PROBLEM.

WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW ANY WELLS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ACTIVE AND PRODUCING WATER TO BE USED FOR IRRIGATION, BUT THEY ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO PUT A BACKFLOW DEVICE ON THAT, WHICH IS PART OF THE PROJECT.

AND WE ARE GOING TO REQUIRE SANTA NELLA IS GOING TO REQUIRE THOSE BE METERED.

WHEN THOSE WELLS GO DRY FOR IRRIGATION, THEN THEY HAVE TO ABANDON THEM.

SO THAT'S THE AGREEMENT THAT WE MADE WITH VOLTA.

THEY WILL NOT BE USING THOSE WELLS FOR DRINKING WATER.

IT WILL VIOLATE OUR DRINKING WATER PERMIT AND WE WILL NOT ALLOW IT.

CAN I MAKE TWO MORE THINGS SINCE I'M UP HERE? YES. YES, I WAS.

JUST QUICK. IT'S A FIXED RATE, NOT A FLAT RATE, BECAUSE FLAT AND FIXED ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

IT'S A FIXED RATE PLUS THE VOLUME RATE.

AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT SANTA NELLA'S WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS ARE NOT GROUNDWATER.

THEY ARE SURFACE WATER.

AND IT'S WE EXCEED A TOTAL TRIHALOMETHANES, WHICH IS A BYPRODUCT OF CHLORINATION.

AND SO THE GROUNDWATER WELL THAT THE STATE IS PAYING FOR US TO DRILL WILL BLEND OUT THOSE TTHMS. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

CAN I ASK, MR. CHAIR? SO THE STARTING LIMIT IS 750 GALLONS OR WHAT'S THE BASE LIMIT LIKE? THE BASE THERE IS THE BASE IS $41.30 WHETHER YOU EVER TURN ON YOUR WATER OR NOT.

OKAY. BUT I MEAN, GALLONS AFTER IT SAYS A DOLLAR 89 PER.

FOR 100 CUBIC FEET IS ABOUT 750 GALLONS.

SO THERE'S NO 10,000 LIMIT GALLONS PER.

NO. IT STARTS AT 750? YEAH.

IT'S A FIXED VOLUME RATE METHOD THAT WE USE IN SANTA NELLA AND WE'RE GOING TO USE THE SAME THERE.

OK. AND THAT FIXED COST GENERATES REVENUE WHEN WATER USAGE IS LOW IS IS THE DESIGN FOR THOSE RATES.

SO BASICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF MONEY IF THEY DECIDE TO WATER THE GRASS, RIGHT.

SO YES.

AND TREES IF THEY HAVE TREES, SO.

IT'S BASED IT'S IT'S ALSO HELPS WITH WATER CONSERVATION.

YES. AND AND PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR THE WATER THAT THEY'RE USING RIGHT NOW.

THEY PAY $40 A MONTH AND THEY THERE'S NO WE DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH WATER THEY'RE PUMPING.

YEAH. IF I COULD JUST SUGGEST AS MUCH ADVERTISING AS POSSIBLE SO THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND AND GO WE USE TEN, 20,000 GALLONS.

THEY THINK THEY CAN WATER THEIR QUARTER ACRE LAWN AND GET A BILL, WHICH IS CAN BE HIGH.

SO I ABSOLUTELY I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.

A NO PROBLEM. YOU GOT IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. SPANISH TO A TRANSLATION TO EVERYTHING IN SANTA ANITA GOES IN BOTH LANGUAGES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY, BILL, I'LL LET YOU GO AHEAD AND WRAP UP.

OKAY. OKAY.

THE NEXT CRITERIA THAT'S UNIQUE TO THE REORGANIZATION IS THE MAINTENANCE PHYSICAL INTEGRITY FOR AGG AND OPEN SPACE LANDS.

AND AGAIN, THE BOUNDARY IS THE EXISTING COMMUNITY AREA, WHICH IS EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AND SOME COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS.

AND IT DOESN'T CONTAIN ANY PROTECTIVE BAG LAND.

THE ADDITIONAL 42 ACRES BEING ADDED INCLUDES RURAL RESIDENCES, SOME COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL USES AND PASTURE, BUT NO PRIME FARMLAND.

[00:30:06]

SO IT'S NOT INTENDED FOR GROWTH.

SO THIS WON'T LEAD TO STIMULATING ADD CONVERSION OR OPEN SPACE IMPACTS IN THE REGION.

AND THEN THE LAST DETERMINATION HERE WAS CORRESPONDENCE.

WE SENT THE NOTICE OF THE APPLICATION TO ALL THE AFFECTED SPECIAL DISTRICTS, SCHOOL DISTRICTS, KID GRASSLANDS AND OTHER DISTRICTS.

AND WE DIDN'T GET ANY RESPONSE EVEN FROM THE SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT WHICH RUNS THE VOLTA SCHOOL AND THEY KNOW ALL ABOUT THE COMMUNITY IS IS AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND WE ALSO MAILED NOTICE TO EVERY REGISTERED VOTER AND PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN THE BOUNDARY.

AND THERE'S ONLY NINE REGISTERED VOTERS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA.

AND UNDER LAFCO RULES, THAT'S CONSIDERED UNINHABITED FOR FOR PROTEST VOTE PURPOSES.

AND SO THAT'S THE LAST ONE IS REDUNDANT.

AND THEN THIS IS JUST SHOWING YOU THE MAP OF THE THE RED AREA IS KIND OF THE BLOCKS, NOT NOT ALL.

WELL, ACTUALLY, IT'S INDIVIDUAL PARCELS BASED ON APMS. AND THEN THAT SURROUNDING THAT OF A DARK BLUE BOUNDARY IS HARD TO PICK OUT, WHICH IS THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION.

AND THEN THE LIGHT BLUE BOUNDARY BEYOND THAT IS A 300 FOOT RADIUS FOR NOTICE.

AND THEN ALL THE PARCELS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE THAT ARE NOT BEING INCLUDED IN THE ANNEXATION, BUT THEY'RE ADJACENT.

AND AGAIN, SOME OF THOSE LANDOWNERS WHO ASK, WELL, CAN WE GET IN, CAN WE GET CONNECTIONS? AND AGAIN, IT'S IT'S LATE IN THE PROCESS, AND I THINK MISS MONTGOMERY WILL MENTION THAT THEY THAT THEY DID YEARS AGO AND THEY ENDED UP WITH WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

AND SO IT'S KIND OF THE TRAIN HAS LEFT THE STATION.

SO FINALLY, IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, THE SENTINEL COUNTY WATER DISTRICT WAS THE LEAD AGENCY UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, CEQA, AND THEY PREPARED AN INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION EVALUATING WHAT WAS CALLED THE SANTA NELLA VOLTA PROPOSED WATER BLENDING PROJECT.

AND IT LOOKED AT BOTH THE PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND IMPACTS FROM THOSE AS WELL AS THE GOVERNMENTAL REORGANIZATION.

AND THEY CAME UP WITH NINE MITIGATION MEASURES THAT THEY ADOPTED IN 2017, AND THOSE ARE LISTED IN SUMMARY FORM ON PAGE SIX OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT FOR THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE, WHICH WAS THE FIRST ITEM FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, ITEM SEVEN A AND THEN THE LAST LITTLE DETAIL HERE IS AFTER ASSUMING THE COMMISSION VOTES TO SUPPORT THIS, THE LANDOWNERS DID NOT SUBMIT A PETITION IN SUPPORT.

SO IT'S IT'S BEEN INITIATED BY RESOLUTION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT AND THE SENTINEL COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

SO UNDER SECTION 570773B OF THE CORTEZ NOX HERTZBERG ACT, WHERE YOU HAVE A REORGANIZATION INITIATED BY AT LEAST TWO LEGISLATIVE BODIES, THE APPROVAL OF SUBJECT TO A PROTEST HEARING AND A POSSIBLE ELECTION DEPENDING ON THE RESULT OF THE PROTEST PROCESS. SO IF THE WORST CASE, IF A MAJORITY OF THE LANDOWNERS PROTESTED, THAT WOULD STOP THEIR ORGANIZATION AND THEY COULDN'T GO FORWARD WITH IT.

IF BETWEEN 25 AND 50% PROTEST, THEN IT WOULD CAUSE AN ELECTION TO BE HELD BY LANDOWNERS.

AND IF LESS THAN 25% PROTEST GETS FILED, THEN IT GOES FORWARD AND THEN WE CAN WE CAN RECORD THE ANNEXATION.

AND AGAIN, BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY NINE REGISTERED VOTERS, IT'S IT'S CONSIDERED UNINHABITED.

SO REGISTERED VOTERS DON'T DON'T GET TO PROTEST ONLY LANDOWNERS.

SO THIS IS A LONG WINDED FINDING FOR THE SECURE DETERMINATIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED IN YOUR REPORT.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO REREAD THAT.

BUT THE THE ACTION I PRESENT SOME CITE FOR THE ACTIONS OF DEPENDING ON.

MAKE A MOTION AND THIS WOULD BE THE MOTION FOR THE SPHERE AND I CAN BRING THESE SLIDES BACK UP AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUES AND THEN YOUR FINDINGS FOR THE REORGANIZATION.

SO I'LL SAVE THOSE THEN UNTIL WE GET THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING.

PERFECT. THANK YOU. SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS IS OPEN.

SO I WILL UNLESS THERE'S ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION, I WILL ASK ANY OF THE FOUR MEMBERS THAT ARE IN THE AUDIENCE IF THEY HAVE ANY MORE COMMENTS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE COMMENTS, BUT I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

OKAY. SO THEN WE WILL ASK THEM NOW TO ASK IT.

[00:35:01]

AFTER THE MOTION TO MEET THE THE WELLS, THE WELLS THAT ARE THERE FOR, THEY'RE GOING TO USE TO IRRIGATE THEIR THEIR GROUND, WHAT ARE THEY FOR? WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT, TO NON-POTABLE WELLS.

PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK THEY NEED THEY SHOULD BE ON A METER BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S INFRINGING ON PERSON'S RIGHT THE GROUNDWATER THEIR GROUNDWATER DOWN BELOW.

I DON'T THINK THE DISTRICT NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH IT.

IF IT GOES DRY AND THEY WANT TO BE CONNECTED, THEN THEY'VE GOT TO FOLLOW THE RULES.

BUT AS LONG AS THEY DON'T.

AND AS LONG AS THEY'RE JUST OPERATING THOSE WELLS FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES AND NOT AND NOT POTABLE OR BEING USED OR CONNECTED TO ANYTHING OF THE DISTRICT, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S ANY OF THE DISTRICT'S BUSINESS.

SO KNOW WHAT THEY DO WITH THOSE WELLS.

THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION.

AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU SHOULD RECONSIDER THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHY DO YOU WANT TO KNOW THAT WATER? YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S BRACKISH AREA, THAT'S ALKALINE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO GROW VERY MUCH OVER THERE ANYHOW.

SO, I MEAN, WHY ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING OUT OF THOSE WELLS FOR THE.

IT'S FOR THE SIGMA.

IT'S FOR SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT.

SAN ADELA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IS A MEMBER OF THE CENTRAL DELTA MENDOTA GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY.

AND THE. AND I ACTUALLY AM THE VICE CHAIR AND TREASURER OF THAT AGENCY.

IT'S A JPA.

AND THE JPA IS GOING TO REQUIRE ALL WELLS WITHIN YOUR SANTA NELLA HAS A REQUIREMENT BECAUSE OF THE THE MONITORING, THE THE GROUNDWATER MONITORING THAT'S REQUIRED UNDER THE GSA TO TO METER THE WELLS.

THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.

THAT'S THE ONLY AGREE WITH THE CITY.

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU 100%.

I HAVE MY OWN OPINION ABOUT SIGMA, BUT UNDER SIGMA WE HAVE TO DO IT.

THANK YOU. SO, AMY, JUST FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THAT AND YOU'RE DONE, RIGHT, COMMISSIONER BARTELL? I'M NOT. IS I THOUGHT THAT NON DE MINIMUS WELLS WEREN'T REQUIRED FOR MONITORING.

I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT THE CENTRAL DELTA, MENDOTA GSA IS GOING TO REQUIRE ALL WELLS TO BE METERED, EVEN EVEN DOMESTIC WELLS.

YES, I AM ON THAT GSA WITH YOU.

AND I DON'T NECESSARILY I THINK THAT YOU'RE.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THESE NON DE MINIMUS WELLS, I UNDERSTAND LIKE WE'RE.

IRRIGATION WELLS, THAT'S YOU'RE TALKING A LOT OF VOLUME THAT AFFECTS THE THE GSA AND THE CSPS.

BUT THESE NON DE MINIMIS WELLS, WHO'S GOING TO MONITOR THEM.

I MEAN IT'S JUST JUST MY OPINION.

I TEND TO AGREE WITH BOB ON THIS IN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THEM TO BE METERED.

WHO IS GOING TO TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY IS.

SANTA NELLA COUNTY TO TAKE TAKING ON THE RESPONSIBILITY NOW TO MONITOR THESE WELLS TO REPORT TO WHAT SENTINEL IS INTENT WOULD BE IS TO HAVE THEM HAVE THE WELLS METERED AND OBTAIN THE THE METER READS FROM THOSE WELLS.

CONCEPTUALLY, PROBABLY JUST GET IT FROM THE LANDOWNER AND REPORT IT TO THE GSA FOR THE GSP FOR THE ANNUAL UPDATES.

YEAH. YEAH. IT JUST IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE ADDING A WHOLE NOTHER LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY.

SO WHAT I CAN DO IS WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MEETING NEXT WEEK WITH THE GSA.

WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL JUST RE REVIEW THE, WELL, METERING POLICY THAT'S GOING TO BE PRESENTED TO THAT BOARD ON MONDAY AND JUST REEVALUATE THAT.

YEAH, I DID. LIKE I SAID, IT'S, I MEAN AND THAT THEY'RE REQUIRING IT IN ALL THAT AREA SO THAT ANY YOU MIGHT HAVE YOU HAVE SOME RESIDENCES IN.

AND I KNOW THIS IS KIND OF MAYBE A LITTLE OFF TOPIC, BUT IN THE GSA, RIGHT.

IN THAT GSA, YOU HAVE JUST A HOUSE THERE THAT DOESN'T HAVE THEY DON'T FARM, RIGHT.

THEY JUST HAVE A RESIDENCE.

NOW YOU'RE BRINGING THEM INTO IT SEEMS. I BELIEVE THAT'S THE DIRECTION IT'S GOING WITHIN THE GSA.

THE DIFFERENCE IS, IS THAT THE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IS IS A WATER DISTRICT.

WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO REPORT HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING PUMPED IN OUR DISTRICT.

SO I WILL REEVALUATE THAT.

AND THEN THE FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, IS IS THAT PART OF THIS THIS WITH THE STATE WATER BOARD, SB 88, I BELIEVE IT IS MONEY.

IS THAT GOING TO PAY TO PUT METERS ON ALL OF THOSE EXISTING WELLS? WE WE INCLUDED THAT IN THE FUNDING, I GUESS.

YEAH. ON TOP OF THAT, NOT NECESSARILY.

THE LANDOWNERS HAVE NO THEY WILL HAVE NO THERE WILL BE NO FINANCIAL IMPACT ON THE, ON ANY LANDOWNER IN VOLTA.

SO IF THE STATE SAYS NO WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR THOSE WELL THOSE METERS THEN WE WOULDN'T DO IT.

PERFECT. YEAH. I WOULD TURN BACK TO THE GSA, SO I'M KIND OF LIKE, CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

I HEAR YOU. IT'S.

IT'S HARD TO BE ON TWO AGENCIES.

SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[00:40:03]

WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING UP.

DID YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT, SIR? COME. COME RIGHT UP THERE AND I WILL EXTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING.

LOT HARDER WITH MORNING PACKING.

LIBERTY PACKING.

WE HAVE THE CONNECTION.

THAT'S THE EMERGENCY BACKUP FOR VOLTA.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH THE EXISTING CONNECTION AND THE EXISTING? WELL, I WOULD I WOULD DEFER TO MISS MONTGOMERY ON THAT AND ALSO RECOMMENDATION BEFORE SUCH TIME AS THE DEEP WATER WELL BE DRILLED THAT YOU CONDUCT A TEST WHOLE TO EVALUATE THE LOW CALL QUALITY.

ON ON THE ON THE NEW ON THE NEW.

WELL THE RECOMMENDATION I'M SORRY I DIDN'T.

DO YOU WANT ME TO RESPOND IN WITH THE I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IF YOU COULD RESPOND TO WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH THE CONNECTION TO THE BACKUP.

WELL, OKAY, SO OUR CONTRACT WITH THE STATE REQUIRES US TO DECOMMISSION AND ABANDON THE EXISTING VOLTAGE WELL AND DISCONNECT THE CONNECTION TO THE MORNINGSTAR.

WELL, THAT'S IT'S IN OUR WE CAN'T THERE'S NO OTHER WAY AROUND IT.

WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO GET RID OF ALL THAT INCUR THE EXPENSE THAT'S PAID FOR BY UNDER THE FUNDING.

AND THEN AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION THAT HE HAD WAS RECOMMENDATION ON DOING A TEST.

WELL, ON WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THE NEW.

WELL, I BELIEVE YOU GUYS DID THAT RIGHT? ALREADY DONE THAT. WE'VE DRILLED THE TEST WELL AND WE'VE.

THAT WE'RE WE'RE IN CONSTRUCTION PHASE.

WE'VE GOT THE FUNDING AND WE'VE ALREADY DRILLED A TEST WELL.

WE'VE PUMPED PUMP TEST IT IN MULTIPLE TIMES.

IT MEETS THE WATER QUALITY.

IT MEETS ALL OF THE DRINKING WATER STANDARDS THAT THAT WERE REQUIRED UNDER OUR PERMIT, OUR DRINKING WATER PERMIT.

AND WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PRODUCTION.

WELL. PERFECT. THANK YOU.

I THOUGHT I KNEW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THEM DOING A TEST WELL, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY KIND OF FOUND THAT RIGHT LOCATION.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO RECONFIRM IT WITH AMY NOT SEEING ANY OTHER COMMENTS.

I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN AND BRING IT BACK.

DOES ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, MR. NICHOLSON, IF I CAN GET YOU TO GO BACK TO THE RECOMMENDATION SLIDE.

AND, UM, SO DO WE WANT TO TAKE THESE AS SEPARATE ITEMS OR CAN WE TAKE THEM BOTH AS ONE ITEM? YEAH, YOU COULD, YOU COULD DO THEM BOTH.

THE SEQUENCE DETERMINATION WORKS FOR BOTH THE SPHERE AMENDMENT AND THE REORGANIZATION.

SO YOU COULD DO ONE APPROVAL OF THE SECRET DOCUMENT.

AND THEN I HAVE AN ACTION FOR THE SPHERE AND THEN AN ACTION FOR THE THE TWO REORGANIZATION APPLICATION.

OKAY. SO THEN, THEN, THEN WE GOT THREE DIFFERENT SEPARATE ACTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE, AND I'M GOING TO HELP THE COMMISSION OUT BY JUST GO AHEAD AND READING THIS AND THEN THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION AFTER THAT BY ONE OF YOU, AND THAT IS TO FIND THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED BY THE SANTA AND COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IN 2017 AND FINDS THAT NO ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT ALL CHANGES, ALTERATIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ARE WITHIN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SANTA ANA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND OTHER AGENCIES, NOT THE COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS OF THE DISTRICT TO OVERSEE AND IMPLEMENT THESE MEASURES AND MITIGATION, MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM.

AND THAT WILL BE OUR FIRST ACTION IN THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

OH, MAKE A MOTION.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ESPINOZA, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BERTO.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS NOT SEEING ANY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSE.

NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY 4 TO 0.

NEXT ITEM IS THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ACTION.

MAKE THE FIVE DETERMINATIONS ON PAGES SIX AND SEVEN OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS REPORT AND APPROVE THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF THE VOTE TO.

COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE AND THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT FOR THE SENTINEL COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 1063B AND THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION AGAIN.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ESPINOZA, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HOKE.

NOT SEEING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSE.

NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY 4 TO 0.

NEXT ACTION IS THE REORGANIZATION ACTIONS.

ONE MAKE THE SEVEN DETERMINATIONS PROVIDED ON PAGE SEVEN OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE REPORT REGARDING THE DISSOLUTION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT.

LAFCO FILE NUMBER 0695 AND THE CURRENT VOLTA ANNEXATION TO THE SANTA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

LAFCO FILE. ZERO NINE EXCUSE ME.

0696. AND TO ASSIGN THE PROPOSED REORGANIZATION THE FOLLOWING SHORT FORM DESIGNATION DISSOLUTION OF THE VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND ANNEXATION TO THE SANTA ANA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

AND THREE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COURT'S NOT HERTZBERG LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000, THE COMMISSION APPROVES THE PROPOSED DISSOLUTION AND ANNEXATION

[00:45:08]

I'M GO AHEAD.

SO MOVE. SO I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PATEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ESPINOZA NOT SEEING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I, I OPPOSE NAY.

THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY 4 TO 0.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE QUICK COMMENT.

HERE IS IS CONGRATULATIONS TO THE COMMUNITIES OF SANTA NELLA AND VOLTA.

I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME IN COMING AND I KNOW THAT THERE IS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH WORKING WITH MR. NICHOLSON TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT ALL THESE THINGS CORRECTED.

THIS IS A WIN FOR FOR THE COMMUNITY OF VOLTA AND SANTA NELLA.

YOU KNOW, THEY I DRIVE RIGHT BY THERE AND THE WELL THAT THEY'RE RUNNING.

AND IT'S IT'S BASICALLY THEY'RE JUST IF THEY'RE OUT IN THE COUNTRY AND THEY HAD A WELL AND IT'S SERVICING THE WHOLE COMMUNITY AND I KNOW THAT THAT AMY AND YOUR STAFF AND YOUR BOARD WORK DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO MAKE SURE TO ADDRESS ANY OF THE ISSUES KIND OF INVOLVED.

THIS DOESN'T ALLOW FOR ANY EXPANSION, BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT WE'RE.

THE SYSTEM AND VOLTA THEY MADE IT WORK NOT ALWAYS UP TO STANDARDS.

AND I KNOW THAT IN GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS YOU GUYS DID THE WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THOSE HAVING CROSS CONNECTIONS AND KNOW ALL THAT IS GOING TO BE ADDRESSED WITH THIS NEW SYSTEM COMING IN.

AND I KNOW I PROBABLY SHOULD ASK IT BEFORE, BUT I DO WANT TO ASK AMY ONE OTHER QUESTION WHEN IT COMES TO.

NOW, SANTA NELLA IS GOING TO BE EXCUSE ME, VOLTA IS GOING TO BE PART OF SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

HAVE YOU GUYS THOUGHT ABOUT IF A PERSON WANTED TO BE RUN FOR THE ELECTED POSITIONS? IS IT IS WILL VOLTA HAVE LIKE AT LEAST LIKE ONE SPOT THAT WOULD COME.

KNOW AND THE WATER CODE WE'RE A COUNTY WATER DISTRICT THAT DOES NOT ALLOW THAT BUT THEY WILL ANY REGISTERED VOTER AND WE JUST FOUND OUT TODAY THAT THERE'S ONLY NINE.

YEAH ANY REGISTERED VOTER WOULD BE WOULD WOULD BE COULD RUN ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AND AND GET A SEAT ON THE BOARD AND I'M HOPING THAT THAT THAT WILL HAPPEN.

YEAH. THERE'S THERE'S A COUPLE OF GOOD FOLKS OUT THERE IN VOLTA THAT THEY WILL BE TREATED JUST LIKE.

SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT CUSTOMER THEY WILL GET ALL THE NOTICES THEY WILL BE TREATED EXACTLY THERE.

NOW THEY'LL BE SANTA NELLA, BASICALLY.

PERFECT. WELL, CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU GUYS.

THANK YOU. I'M HAPPY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN AND WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD IN GOVERNMENT.

THE SLOW WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT TURN VERY SLOWLY.

AND I KNOW THAT I'VE BEEN ON LAFCO FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW.

AND I REMEMBER WHEN THIS ORIGINALLY CAME, AND HERE WE ARE SOME YEARS LATER, FIVE YEARS LATER, AND IT'S FINALLY, FINALLY COMING TO FRUITION.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR HANGING IN THERE.

AND AT LEAST ONE OF MY LAFCO ACTIONS CAME TO.

EXACTLY. AND CELEBRATE THE VICTORY.

GOT ONE MORE QUESTION HERE AFTER THE FACT.

YOUR PIPELINE, IS IT BIG ENOUGH TO HANDLE IF ANYTHING POPS OVER THERE TO MAKE FOR FUTURE CAPACITY? YEAH, IT'S AN EIGHT INCH OK SIZED IT.

WE ORIGINALLY IT WAS DESIGNED AS A SIX INCH AND WE UPSIZED IT.

THAT'S IT. SO I'M VERY PLEASED WITH THE PROJECT.

THE PLANS ARE AT 90%.

WE'RE ALMOST DONE. WE'RE GETTING READY TO GO TO BID.

THIS ACTION WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEEDED TO ACCOMPLISH.

SO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY, REALLY GOOD AND VOLTZ IS GOING TO GET A MUCH BETTER WATER QUALITY.

AND ALL THOSE CROSS CONNECTIONS GO AWAY.

SO AND THEN AND THE LAST THING AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THIS AND IS I KNOW WHEN YOU PUT THAT WHEN YOU GUYS PUT THAT PIPELINE IN AND IT'S NEXT NEAR THE ROADWAY. AND SO JUST KEEPING THAT IN THE FOREFRONT, THAT MAKING SURE THAT YOU'RE TALKING TO DANA OVER AT PUBLIC WORKS AND WE HAVE SUBMITTED THE THE 50% PLANS AND THE 90% WILL GO TO I'M SORRY, THE 100% WILL GO WITHIN TWO WEEKS TO THE SITE COUNTY, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE ROAD NEEDS TO BE THERE'S SOME WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THAT ROAD.

AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN COORDINATE.

AND I'VE ALREADY ALERTED THE STATE AS WELL, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A TENDENCY TO LAG ON GETTING THE FINAL BUDGET APPROVAL.

SO, YOU KNOW, I'M REALLY TRYING TO MOVE THINGS ALONG SO WE CAN MEET THAT.

YEAH. AND AND AND I GOT A COLLEAGUE HERE.

IT'S LIKE DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO BE A HELP ON THAT IF, IF WE RUN INTO ANY PROBLEMS CUZ I KNOW.

OKAY I IF, IF I, IF THE STATE LAGS I'M PROBABLY GOING TO CALL YOU IN TO PUT SOME PRESSURE ON THE STATE TO FINALIZE THAT SO WE CAN GET THAT LINE.

[00:50:07]

AND THAT SECTION OF HENRY MILLER IS KIND OF NEXT ON THE LIST TO GET DONE.

AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE WATER DISTRICT TO GET THEIR PIPELINE IN BEFORE WE DO THE ROAD, BECAUSE IF WE DO THE ROAD AND THEY NEED TO CUT INTO, WE DON'T WE DON'T ALLOW FOR THAT.

AND SO IT'S JUST A MATTER OF COMMUNICATION.

I THINK WE'LL GET AND AND THERE'S GOING TO BE THREE CROSSINGS RIGHT NOW AND THEY'RE ALL BE THEY'LL ALL BE JACK AND BORE SO WE DON'T INTEND TO CUT AT ALL INTO HENRY MILLER JUST SO YOU KNOW PERFECT. OKAY THERE'S NOTHING ELSE.

THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IT'S IT'S MAYBE IT'S ON THE THE THE SOUTH SIDE OF HENRY MILLER.

THE PIPELINES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MANY UTILITY CONFLICTS ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

SO WE MOVED IT TO THE NORTH AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANY COMMENTS BACK, SO WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.

PERFECT. ALL RIGHT.

YOU KNOW, CELEBRATE.

CELEBRATE THE VICTORY.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, PAUL.

MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY SAY, COME BEFORE THEY LEAVE ME.

IF I DON'T KNOW IF TODAY WAS THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING, I PROBABLY WON'T MAKE IT BECAUSE OF THE FLOODS, BUT MAYBE.

OH, YEAH, SORRY. I'M SORRY I'VE BEEN OUT THERE AND SO I'LL TRY TO MAKE IT THERE AS SOON AS I CAN.

APPRECIATE IT. KEEP YOU ON THE LIST.

OKAY? THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD DAY TONIGHT, PAUL.

ALL RIGHT, SIR. THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD DAY.

OKAY, FOLKS, WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO GENERAL BUSINESS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

[VII.A. Update on the appointment of a replacement Alternate Commissioner on LAFCO representing the Cities to replace former Mayor Creighton from Atwater. ]

AND WE'LL GO TO MR. NICHOLSON.

OK. YEAH, THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE.

AND AS I'VE LEARNED TODAY, IT'S A POINT OF ONGOING CONFUSION AMONG THE CITIES.

SO LAFCO HAS A MEMBERSHIP BASED ON STATE LAW AND SOME LAFCO HAVE SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND OUR LAFCO COULD IF THE SPECIAL DISTRICTS WANTED TO, WE CAN'T FORCE THEM AND THEY HAVE NOT CHOSEN TO COME ON.

SO OUR COMMISSION IS TO CITY MEMBERS, TO COUNTY MEMBERS THAT ARE SUPERVISORS AND A PUBLIC MEMBER APPOINTED BY THOSE OTHER FOUR.

AND THERE'S AN ALTERNATE FOR EACH OF THOSE POSITIONS.

THE COUNTY POSITIONS ARE DECIDED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE CITY POSITIONS ARE DECIDED BY WHAT'S CALLED THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE UNDER STATE LAW AND IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY.

THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE IS MADE UP OF THE MAYOR'S COUNCIL, AND THE MAYOR'S COUNCIL MEET QUARTERLY AT THE CITY COUNTY DINNERS THAT ROTATE AROUND THE COUNTY.

AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A MEETING NEXT WEEK.

SO CITIES, JUST LIKE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CITIES DO COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS EVERY EVERY TERM, EVERY YEAR.

AND AS NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS COME ON AND SO MANY CITIES GET CONFUSED ABOUT LAFCO THAT, OH, IT'S JUST ANOTHER COMMITTEE LIKE MSG, ANOTHER BODY WILL PUT SOMEBODY ON.

BUT UNDER STATE LAW IT IS THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE THAT CAN APPOINT THE LAFCO MEMBERS FOR THE CITIES YOU HAVE.

I THINK SANTA CLARA COUNTY HAS 26 CITIES, SO YOU GET THREE.

WELL, ACTUALLY, SAN JOSE GETS A FULL TIME SEAT.

THEY AMENDED STATE LAW, BUT BASICALLY IT'S REALLY HARD.

YOU CAN'T HAVE A CITY TO DECIDE IN THEIR OWN MEMBER WHEN YOU HAVE 26 CITIES.

SO IN OUR COUNTY, THE SIX CITIES HAVE AGREED ON A ROTATION.

AND RIGHT NOW ATWATER'S ON AS THE ALTERNATE AND THEIR FORMER MAYOR CREIGHTON DIDN'T RUN AGAIN.

SO THEY HAVE A NEW MAYOR.

MIKE NELSON.

YES. AND SO THEY'VE DECIDED THEIR CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO PUT I THINK IT'S MR. RAYMOND ON LAFCO AND THEY LET US KNOW BRIAN RAYMOND AND THEY LET US KNOW, HEY, WE GOT THEIR NEW REPS AND THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE WON'T MEET TILL NEXT WEEK, SO IT'S NOT OFFICIAL. THAT'S WHO THEY WANT TO NOMINATE.

AND THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE CAN CONFIRM THAT, BUT IT WON'T HAPPEN UNTIL AFTER THEY MEET.

SO THE NEXT MEETING THAT WE HAVE THAT HE'LL BE THE ALTERNATE IF THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE AGREES.

SO UNFORTUNATELY FOR LIVINGSTON, THEY DON'T HAVE A SEAT RIGHT NOW.

BUT THERE THEY DID A CITY APPOINTMENT OF A REP FOR LAFCO BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A SEAT ON LAFCO.

SO IT WAS AN UNFORTUNATE DIVERSION.

BUT EVEN WHEN THEY DO HAVE AN APPOINTMENT AGAIN, MANY CITIES APPOINT THEIR LAFCO REP WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY IS THE CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE.

SO I PUT THIS ON AS AN INDICATION OF WHAT THE PROCESS IS, AND ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THE CITY IDENTIFIED THAT THEY WANTED THEIR MEMBER TO COME TODAY AND THEY THEY'RE NOT SITTING MEMBER YET.

SO FOR THE NEXT THE NEXT MEETING.

SO THAT WAS REALLY JUST JUST AN UPDATE.

AND JUST REALLY QUICKLY, JUST FOR FOR COUNCILMEMBER SOTO'S, UM, REFERENCE, THE WAY THAT THE THAT THE CITY'S GOT TOGETHER IS BASICALLY THERE'S ONE FROM THE EAST AND ONE FROM THE WEST AND, AND THERE THEY ALTER THEIR SET TWO YEARS APART.

[00:55:07]

SO IN THIS CASE I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE MIRSAD MERCEDES AND THEN DOS PALOS IS IS YOUR TWO YEARS INTO YOUR TERM.

THE ALTERNATE COMES FROM WHOEVER THE LONGEST.

SO THEN IN A COUPLE OF YEARS MERCY IT'LL GO OFF DOES PASS WILL STILL BE THERE ATWATER WILL COME IN AS THE AS THE SECOND SITTING MEMBER AND THEN IT'LL BE A WEST SIDE CITY THAT HAS THE ALTERNATE.

AND THEN SO ON EACH SIDE THEY HAVE A ROTATION IF THEY GO THROUGH THEM.

SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS DECIDED WAY BEFORE I EVER GOT HERE, JUST KIND OF, OKAY, THIS IS THE FAIREST WAY TO DO IT.

WE HAVE WE HAVE AN EAST AND A WEST REPRESENTATIVE AND THEN IN THE ALTERNATE, SO AND THEN AGAIN ACTUALLY THE NEXT LAST MAN.

SO LOS BANUS WOULD HAVE THE ALTERNATE, THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL.

ME I MEAN A MEETING COUNTED IN IT WOULD BE, I THINK CITY COUNCILS, YEAH.

JUSTINE OKAY. AND THEN THEY, AND I KNOW THAT HISTORICALLY THE COUNTY CEO HAS KIND OF IS THE ONE WHO PUTS THE AGENDA OUT AND, AND THEY HAVE, THEY JUST GO TO A LITTLE ROUND TABLE, JUST KIND OF GO SIT OVER BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL DINNER AND THEY SAY, OKAY HEY CITY OF ATWATER RECOMMENDED SO AND SO AND THEN THEY VOTE ON WHETHER THEY APPROVE THAT OR NOT. SO YEP, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TO SHARE THAT OUT WITH MY CITY.

SO THEY WILL PROBABLY THAT INFORMATION WASN'T SURE BUT.

DID YOU HAVE YOUR MEETINGS? JUST. JUST SO YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME.

YEAH. THIS WAS VERY INFORMATIONAL MEAN.

THINGS ARE GOOD. YEP.

PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

IS THERE. IS THERE ANY MR. NICHOLSON, IS THERE ANY REASON WHY THE MAYOR OF ATWATER DIDN'T WANT A POSITION SINCE HE ALREADY HAD LAFCO EXPERIENCE? THAT MAY BE THE QUESTION AND THE ANSWER.

I THINK MAYBE THAT'S THE ANSWER. EXACTLY.

HE JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, I'M GOOD.

VERY GOOD. THEN IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM B, WHICH IS A MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE AND STATUS OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE

[VII.B. Mid-Year Budget update and status of revenue and expenditure accounts. This is for the Commission's information and no action is anticipated. ]

OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU.

THIS IS A PRESENTATION THAT'S BRIEF, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE AT LAFCO IS PROVIDING AN UPDATE ON THE BUDGET UNTIL WE GET TO THE BUDGET PROCESS.

BUT WE DON'T DO, LIKE, QUARTERLY QUARTERLY UPDATES DURING THE FISCAL YEAR.

SO BETWEEN THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND THE SUPPORT STAFF FOR OUR BUDGETING, WHICH IS THROUGH THE COUNTY COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, IT'S NICOLE DESMOND FELT THAT WE SHOULD BE BRINGING YOU KIND OF A STATUS REPORT AS WE GO.

SO JUST IN IN A CONTEXT, OVERALL, LAFCO IS REQUIRED TO BE FUNDED BY THE COUNTY 50% AND BY THE SIX CITIES, AND THEY PAY BASED ON THEIR SHARE OF THE TOTAL REVENUES THAT THEY RECEIVE.

AND BECAUSE LAFCO IS DRIVEN BY SOME STATE MANDATES, LIKE DOING MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS AND LOOKING AT SPHERES OF INFLUENCE, PERIODICALLY, OUR MAIN ACTIVITY IS PROCESSING APPLICATIONS LIKE YOU HAD TODAY.

SO OUR OUR WORK TIME AND ME BEING A CONSULTANT, IT REALLY GOES UP AND DOWN DEPENDING ON THE WORKFLOW THAT WE GET.

AND WE DON'T HAVE A SET BUDGET LIKE RUNNING THE COUNTY OR RUNNING A CITY WHERE YOU HAVE ALL THESE DEPARTMENTS AND FUNCTIONS ONGOING ALL THE TIME.

SO WE, WE BUDGET AN AMOUNT ASSUMING HOW MANY APPLICATIONS WE GET.

AND THIS YEAR, THIS FISCAL YEAR WHERE THE TOTAL BUDGET WAS $192,478.

BUT WE ONLY SPEND WHAT WE NEED TO BASED ON WHAT OUR APPLICATION LOADS ARE.

AND WE HAVE LIKE CAL LAFCO DUES, LIKE $10,500 OR SO IS OUR SHARE, BUT OTHERWISE WE DON'T SPEND AS MUCH MONEY UNLESS WE NEED IT.

SO THIS LITTLE REPORT IS THAT WE'VE SPENT 16,376 OVER THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND ENCUMBERED ANOTHER $17,600 IN EXPENSES THAT WILL BE DUE AND PAYABLE THROUGH THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE.

BUT SO WE'VE WE'RE SPENDING BASICALLY A FRACTION OF WHAT WAS BUDGETED HALFWAY THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR.

WHAT WAS NOT SHOWN UP ON THAT IS MY BILLING.

I SUBMITTED IT LATE FOR THE FIRST QUARTER AND I STILL HAVEN'T SUBMITTED MY SECOND QUARTER BILLING, BUT THAT WAS LIKE $14,500 AND THAT WAS PAID ACTUALLY ON JANUARY 3RD.

[01:00:01]

SO IT SHOWS NO, NO FUNDING FOR CONSULTANT, BUT I DID HAVE EXPENSES AND I WILL HAVE SOME PROBABLY A SIMILAR AMOUNT MORE OR LESS FOR THE NEXT QUARTER.

THEN IN TERMS OF REVENUE, WE HAD $57,000 IN REVENUE, WHICH IS AGAIN WELL SHORT OF WHAT WE BUDGETED.

BUT AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE SPEND ON PROCESSING APPLICATIONS.

SO THIS SENTINELLE APPLICATION WAS A GOOD APPLICATION OF THE SPHERE AMENDMENT AND TWO BOUNDARY CHANGES.

AND OUR JUST TO REPORT IT WAS MAINLY PRIOR YEAR WAS THE REVENUE THAT WE GET FROM THE BALANCE OF SITE APPLICATION. REVENUE COMES FROM HALF FROM THE CITY EXCUSE ME, HALF FROM THE COUNTY, AND THE OTHER SIX CITIES PAY THEIR SHARE AND EVERY CITY HAS PAID UP.

THE COUNTY USUALLY PAYS PRETTY QUICK BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING THIS THROUGH THE AUDITOR.

BUT THE OTHER CITIES WE BUILD THEM AND EVERY EVERY CITY IS PAID UP FOR THE LAST FISCAL YEAR.

SO THAT'S THAT'S GOOD, GOOD NEWS.

SOMETIMES IT TAKES A COUPLE OF YEARS TO GET SOME OF THEM TO PAY.

SO I JUST I PROVIDED ALL THE LEDGER SHEETS IS INFORMATION.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF IF THE COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS AS WE GET INTO THIS MORE AS A ROUTINE EVERY QUARTER, MAYBE WE'LL WE CAN DRILL INTO IT FURTHER.

BUT WE ARE KIND OF COME UP ON THE BUDGET PROCESS FOR THE 2324 FISCAL YEAR.

WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT BY JUNE.

AND SO WE TYPICALLY TRY TO DO A PRELIMINARY BUDGET IN APRIL AND THEN A FINAL BUDGET IN MAY.

SO THE NEXT MEETING, IT PROBABLY WON'T BE FEBRUARY, BUT IT'LL PROBABLY MARCH THAT WE'LL HAVE A MEETING, WE'LL WE'LL GET DISCUSSION AND THEN YEAH, WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION OF PRIORITIES.

AND AND THEN WE'RE KIND OF ON THE DRAFT AND FINAL BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR.

SO WE'LL GET INTO THE NUMBERS A LOT MORE AT THAT POINT.

PERFECT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? BOB, ANY QUESTIONS? NO, I HAVEN'T. SEE IF IT SHOWED HERE.

WHERE. WHERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE? HOW MUCH OF HOW MUCH AHEAD OF THE BUDGET ARE WE RIGHT NOW? WELL, WE BUDGET WE APPROPRIATED 192 AND WE'VE SPENT 16,003.

76. OKAY, WE'RE GOOD.

YEAH. AND THEN CUMBERED ANOTHER ROUGHLY, WELL, 17 FIVE AND EXPENSES.

YEAH. YEAH.

SO WE HAVE SPENT ANOTHER 14 TWO HAVEN'T SHOWN UP TO SHOW UP IN JANUARY.

SO WE'RE. YES, WE'RE WELL, WE'RE WELL ON BUDGET.

YEP. AND WE'RE ALL AWARE THAT, YOU KNOW, AS THERE ARE, IF THERE'S ANNEXATIONS OR THERE'S, THERE'S ACTIONS THAT ARE TAKEN, THEN OUR THE AMOUNT THAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND GOES UP.

BUT A LOT OF THOSE SERVICES WE GET REIMBURSED FOR.

SO I THINK WE'RE DOING WELL.

YEAH, IT WOULD REALLY BE IF WE WANT TO INITIATE ANOTHER MSR, THAT'LL BE WHERE THE BIG MONEY COMES IN HIRING.

IF WE HIRE ECONOMIC AND PLANNING SYSTEMS OR BURKES AND ASSOCIATES FOR THAT.

AND WE WE PROBABLY SHOULD.

OTHERWISE, WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY BE GETTING AN APPLICATION, MAYBE THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR FROM LOS BANOS.

OTHER GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND SO THEY'LL THEY'LL THEY'LL NEED TO DO THE MSR UPDATE AND WE'LL HIRE THE CONSULTANT BUT THEY'LL FUND IT WELL WOULD COME I THINK THAT DOING THOSE MSRS I THINK YOU KNOW LET'S JUST KEEP THEM UP TO DATE IF IF WE SEE YOU KNOW THAT'S KIND OF BEEN OUR APPROACH AS WE TOOK ON WATER DISTRICTS AND DIFFERENT SPECIAL DISTRICTS. AND THEN SO JUST CONTINUING THAT SO THAT WE DON'T GET BEHIND ON THOSE.

AND I THINK IT'S THE COST IS SHARED ACROSS EVERYBODY.

IT BENEFITS ALL OF US.

AND AND THE COUNTY'S PAYING FOR HALF AND THE CITIES ARE PAYING BASED UPON THEIR POPULATIONS, BUT IT BENEFITS THEM NOT HAVING TO GO TAKE IT ON ALONE.

AND THEN I THINK WE GET VOLUME OF SCALE DISCOUNT WHEN WE USE WHEN WE DO A WHOLE GROUP.

SO I THINK THE LAFCO CONFERENCE, THEY MENTIONED ALSO THAT THAT THEY THEY WANT THE LEFT COAST TO KEEP UP ON THEIR MSRS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT BE SPECIAL DISTRICTS OR CITIES OR WHATEVER LOVE DON'T DON'T LET THEM GET BEHIND.

I THINK IT BEHOOVES US TO TO STAY ON TOP OF IT.

WE'VE ALREADY KIND OF, I BELIEVE, STAYING ON A MORE TIMELY PATTERN OF UPDATING THEM PROBABLY SAVES MONEY IN THE LONG RUN VERSUS THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK SO MANY YEARS AND HUNT FOR INFORMATION LIKE WE HAVE A CURRENT ONE AND IT'S.

AND WHAT IS THE TIMEFRAME ON THOSE AGAIN? BILL? WELL, IT SAYS EVERY FIVE YEARS OR AS NECESSARY OR THAT'S KIND OF THE CAVEAT TO GIVE US MORE TIME SO THAT WE DO HAVE WE'RE UP TO DATE ON PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THE WELL, THERE'S THREE THREE CATEGORIES, ONE CEMETERY DISTRICTS, WHICH NOT A LOT CHANGES WITH RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT, WHICH THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES.

SOME ARE NOT VERY ACTIVE AND OTHER ONES ARE VERY ACTIVE.

THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD ONE TO DO.

MAYBE THERE'S SOME CONSOLIDATIONS THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED, NOT THROUGH AN MSR.

YOU CAN IDENTIFY THAT.

AND THEN THE THIRD ONE IS IS CALLED OTHER.

WE HAVE A LEVEE DISTRICT AND WE HAVE A RECLAMATION DISTRICT AND WE HAVE SOME OTHER UNIQUE CATEGORIES WHERE WE GROUP THEM.

[01:05:06]

BUT THAT'S A CATCHALL, AND THAT ONE WOULD EVEN BE PROBABLY LESS IMPORTANT.

BUT I THINK IN THE BUDGET PROCESS I'LL BE PROPOSING THAT WE INITIATE THE UPDATE FOR THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT.

MOST DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MONEY, SO IT'D BE SOMETHING WHERE WE FIND THAT THE COUNTY IN THE CITIES AND THAT WE KEEP WE KEEP THEM UP TO DATE.

THEY'RE NOT VERY ACTIVE ANYHOW, ARE THEY KNOW THE EAST IS THE MOST ACTIVE.

THEY GO AFTER A LOT OF GRASS BEFORE THAT.

YEAH. THAT MAN WAS ALWAYS HERE.

YEAH. RIGHT.

I MEAN OVER THERE FROM OUR SIDE.

YEAH. IT'S NEVER ANY ACTIVE, RIGHT.

THERE'S NOT A LOT AND THERE'S SOME ISSUES THAT THEY'RE NOT ACTIVE.

THE ONE THAT IS ACTIVE IS GRASSLANDS.

AND IT'S THE SAME BOARD FOR THE GRASS TOWN WATER DISTRICT AS A RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT, BUT THERE'S DIFFERENT FUNDING THAT THEY CAN GET.

SO LOS BANOS IS VERY ACTIVE AND THERE'S A JUSTINE ROMERO.

I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE NOT REALLY ACTIVE.

YOU TRY TO FIND WHO'S WHO'S HERE, WHO'S GOING TO GET THE MAIL AND EXISTENCE ANYMORE, OR DO THEY GET BLENDED IN THE HENRY MILLER I. SENATOR MILLER RECLAMATION DID.

HENRY MILLER'S RECLAMATION. I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE COUPLE THEY HAD A RESOURCE CONVERSATION CONSERVATION.

YEAH I'M NOT SURE I DON'T HEAR YOU.

I DON'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.

THEY'RE RUN OUT OF LAND PLAY.

THEY HAD IN TWO OR THREE OF THE PIECES OF STUFF.

THIS WAS A LONG TIME AGO, BUT THAT'S WHAT I THINK WITH THESE WITH THOSE MSR UPDATES IS THAT WE CAN FIND THIS STUFF IN.

REALLY I'M INTERESTED IN IF THERE'S ONES THAT ARE NOT ACTIVE IN WHAT IS THE PROCESS TO JUST DISSOLVE THEM AND BE DONE WITH THEM SO THAT THEY'RE NOT SHOWING UP ON, ON SOMETHING.

WE'RE WE'RE HAVING TO DO AN MSR UPDATE ON SOMETHING THAT IT REALLY THERE'S NO NEED FOR IT.

SO SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT IN THE BUDGET PROCESS.

LET'S LOOK AT THE NEXT STEP AND THEN AND KEEP THOSE UPDATED.

EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. PERFECT.

OKAY, NOW I'M MOVING ON TO.

[VIII. EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS ]

OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, THE LAST MEETING IN, IN DECEMBER, I MADE A STATEMENT OF WHAT I READ IN THE PAPER ABOUT THE LOS BANOS AND LOOKED AT THEIR THEIR MINUTES OF WHAT LOS BANOS DID WITH THEIR GENERAL PLAN AND THOUGHT THEY DIDN'T EXPAND THEIR SPHERE AS PROPOSED.

AND IT TURNED OUT THEY DID, EXCEPT FOR THE AREA ON THE EAST SIDE, NEAR THE SEWER PLANT WHERE THEY HAD PUSHED BACK FROM THE GRASSLANDS BECAUSE THERE'S WETLANDS OUT THERE.

SO THEY THEY PULLED THEIR SPHERE BACK ON THE EAST SIDE.

THERE'S TWO CANALS OVER THERE AND IT WAS THE LAND IN BETWEEN.

BUT FOR THE AREA TO THE WEST AND GOING TOWARDS VOLTA, THEY, THEY, THEY, THEY DID ADOPT THEIR PROPOSED SPHERE, WHICH IS LIKE FOUR SQUARE MILES OF TERRITORY OVER THERE.

AND WE HAD SOME ISSUES ON THE SOUTH BY PIONEER ROAD AND THEIR SPHERE CONTINUES TO HAVE LAND ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

ACTUALLY THEY FOLLOW PIONEER ROAD ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

THEY HAVE THIS OTHER GROWTH BOUNDARY THAT'S LIKE FUTURE FUTURE GROWTH.

IT'S NOT THEIR IMMEDIATE GROWTH BOUNDARY, BUT THEY DID LEAVE THEIR SPHERE ON PIONEER.

SO SO THEY WILL BE COMING WITH THE SPHERE AMENDMENT APPLICATION.

IN ORDER TO DO THAT, YOU HAVE TO DO AN MSAA UPDATE.

SO I'M GOING TO GET SOME COST ESTIMATES FOR THAT AND SHARE THEM WITH THE THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER SO THEY CAN BUDGET.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE DOING AN R FOR A CITY THAT'S UPDATING THE GENERAL PLAN, THEN THEY, THEY TRADITIONALLY HAVE PAID FOR IT.

YEAH. SO, SO THAT WOULD BE COMING.

AND I ALSO JUST SAW NOTICE WHERE THE ANNEXATION OF THE UC MERCED CAMPUS INTO THE CITY MERCED IS GOING TO THEY'RE PLANNING COMMISSION NEXT MONTH AND SO THEN IT'LL GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL SO IT WON'T BE LONG BEFORE WE'LL HAVE THAT.

I'D BE INTERESTED TO SEE THAT HOW THEY'RE GETTING THERE.

I DIDN'T. IT'S BELLEVUE ROAD.

THEY'RE ANNEXING THE CAMPUS AND THE BELLEVUE ROAD STRIP OVER HERE.

I WAS IN LOS BANOS.

YEAH, YEAH, THIS IS.

YEAH, THIS IS UC MERCED.

CONSUMER SAID YES. YEAH. I WAS THINKING MERCED COLLEGE, AND I WAS THINKING I HAD LOS BANOS ON MY MIND.

I WAS LIKE, YEAH, YEAH.

THEY CAN'T. THEY HAVE TO GRAB SOME OTHER LARRY TO GO ALONG WITH IT.

YEAH. YEAH. NO, THIS IS THE SPECIAL LEGISLATION BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME ISSUE HERE, BUT THEY GOT SPECIAL LEGISLATION FOR IT AND THEN THAT'LL TRIGGER A WHOLE SLEW OF OTHER ANNEXATIONS THAT ARE IN PROCESS WITH THE CITY DOING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.

AND NOW. AND NOW YOU KNOW WHY? MAYBE, UH, UH, MIKE NELSON'S I DON'T WANT TO BE IN FAVOR OF LAFCO THAT PARTICULAR ANNEXATION.

WE CAN'T DO THAT FROM THE BOTTOM BECAUSE THEY, THE STATE AUTHORIZE THAT.

NOT CORRECT. NO, IT'S GOT TO GO THROUGH LAFCO THEY STILL HAVE TO GO.

YEAH. SO IT WAS, IT WAS AN APPLICATION WAS THE, THE LEGISLATION THEY CARRIED IN ORDER FOR THEM TO LIKE BASICALLY BE ABLE TO DO IT.

YES. LET THEM GO DOWN.

THEY CAN, THEY CAN ANNEX A ROAD TO GET OUT TO.

IT'S NOT CONTIGUOUS.

YEAH BUT IT DOESN'T. BUT THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND IT, IT STILL HAS TO COME TO LAFCO FOR APPROVAL.

IT'S JUST GIVING THEM THE ABILITY TO EVEN BRING THEY GET THE LEGISLATION.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO THEY GAVE THE LEGISLATION TO MAKE IT AN OPTION FOR THEM, BUT IT STILL HAS TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR FOR APPROVAL.

[01:10:06]

SO THE THE THE OLD TERM IS A ROAD STRIP.

THEY PROHIBITED ROAD STRIP ANNEXATIONS WHERE YOU GO MILES, LIKE THE SAN JOSE, YOU COME DOWN, COME DOWN 101 AND ANNEX A SHOPPING CENTER OR GAS STATION AND THEN SOME HOMES AND THEN GO ANOTHER MILE AND HIT THE NEXT INTERCHANGE AND YOU WOULDN'T ANNEX ANYTHING ELSE AROUND IT, JUST THE ROAD.

AND WE'RE SAID DID THAT THE ANNEX LINE 140 AND GRAB THE BIG INDUSTRIAL PARK BEFORE THEY FILLED FILLED IN MOST OF THAT AREA NOW BUT YEARS AGO THE ANNEX OR IT WAS THE OTHER NAME FOR IT WAS A CHERRY STEM WHERE YOU JUST HAVE A CHERRY STEM CONNECTING YOUR EXISTING CITY AND THEN GRAB THIS AREA SO THAT YOU SEE WILL BE LIKE THAT.

IT'LL BE A BIG CHERRY AT THE END FOLLOWING BELLEVUE ROAD, AND IT WAS PROHIBITED YEARS AGO IN STATE LAW.

SO THERE'S AN EXEMPTION BECAUSE IT'S A YOU SEE, AND IT'S ALREADY STARTED ON CITY SEWER AND WATER, BUT THEN IT OPENS THE DOOR, THEN FOR THE ADJACENT LANDS TO ANNEX THAT ARE CONTIGUOUS TO THE YOU SEE AND THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE LEGISLATION THAT YOU SEE DOESN'T NEED THE ANNEX.

THEY'RE THE STATE.

THEY DO WHAT THEY WANT, BUT IT'S A DEVELOPMENT NEXT DOOR COULDN'T HAPPEN EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT JUST SOUTH OF THE CAMPUS.

BUT THE COUNTY DOESN'T HAVE SEWER, SO TO GET THE SEWER, THE CITY WANTS TO ANNEX IT.

SO AND THEN ALL ALL THOSE SURROUNDING LANDS.

SO THAT'S WHAT THIS LEGISLATION IS FOR, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, KNOW, DO AWAY WITH THE ISLANDS.

YES, RIGHT. SO YEAH, WE'RE CREATING BREEDING ISLANDS.

YEAH, EXACTLY. YEAH.

SO PROGRESS.

YEAH. THERE YOU GO. MIKE NELSON, DO BETTER.

ALL RIGHT. IS THAT CONCLUDES YOUR COMMENTS? YES. OKAY.

ITEM EIGHT B IS COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND WE WILL START WITH COMMISSIONER ESPINOZA.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, I REPORT OUT UNDER THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT I ATTENDED THE, UM, THE LAFCO CONFERENCE A WHILE AGO, AND I JUST, YOU KNOW, SO EVERYBODY KNOWS HERE THAT I ATTENDED THE LAFCO AND I WAS ELECTED, THANKS TO YOU GUYS.

AND YOU KNOW, FOR THE POINT OVER THERE, I.

WAS ELECTED BY THE REGIONAL BOARD MEMBERS, COMMISSIONERS TO THE STATE LAFCO AND WE HAD A MEETING THIS MORNING AT 9:00 TO ALSO, YOU KNOW, CAUSE I GUESS LAFCO 1:00 SO THAT THERE WAS SUSAN AND LAFCO ONE, BUT THEY TRY TO GIVE $4,000 IN THE COURT SAID WE RECEIVE $400,000, BUT WE ACTUALLY COULDN'T GO AFTER THE 4000.

RIGHT. BILL YES, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE LAWSUIT INVOLVING SILENCE OBISPO, LAFCO, WHERE THEY HAD AN AMENDMENT OF IDENTIFICATION AGREEMENT THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD REIMBURSE THEM FOR THEIR COURT COSTS IF THEY GOT SUED.

AND WE WE HAVE PRETTY MUCH EVERY LAFCO IN THE COURT THREW IT OUT ON THE BASIS THAT THERE WAS NO BENEFIT THAT LAFCO ACTUALLY DENIED AN APPLICATION.

THE DEVELOPER SUED AND THE DEVELOPER THEN HAD TO INDEMNIFY LAFCO.

SO IT'S LIKE I GOT TO SUE YOU TO OVERTURN YOUR DECISION AND THEN I GOT TO PAY YOU TO DEFEND THE LAWSUIT THAT I'M FILING AGAINST YOU THAT I WANT YOU TO LOSE, BUT I'M GOING TO PAY YOU. SO THE COURT SAID, HEY, THERE'S NO YOU CAN'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT, AN INDEMNITY AGREEMENT THAT THAT YOU GET NO BENEFIT FROM.

THERE HAS TO BE SOME MUTUAL AGREEMENT.

SO ALL LAFCO EVER SINCE HAVE HAD REAL PROBLEMS ON HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU WORD AN INDEMNITY AGREEMENT.

A LOT OF THEM MAKE IT VOLUNTARY.

WELL, WE DIDN'T FORCE THEM. THEY VOLUNTARILY SIGNED IT AND YOU PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN THE AGREEMENT.

SO THIS LEGISLATION IS PROPOSED TO TRY TO MAKE IT AUTHOR LAFCO ARE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED, DO THEIR UNIQUE NATURE.

WE'RE NOT LIKE A CITY.

WE'RE MADE UP OF COUNTY, CITY AND THE ENTIRE JURISDICTION.

AND SO ANY GIVEN ANNEXATION DOESN'T BENEFIT MOST PARTIES.

IT MIGHT BENEFIT A SPECIFIC CITY OR A SPECIAL DISTRICT.

BUT WHY? WHY WOULD ALL THESE OTHER PARTIES ON LAFCO WANT TO DEFEND LAFCO ACTION? BECAUSE IT'S BUSINESS THAT THE COUNTY AND THE CITIES HAVE TO DO BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE A LAFCO IS THE INDEMNITY CLAUSE WASN'T IN THE STATUTE.

SO THAT'S SO WE VOTED TO AMEND IT AND SEND IT BACK TO THE STATE TO TO GET AMEND AND WE ACTUALLY GOT REIMBURSED BY RISK MANAGEMENT.

SO THAT'S GOOD.

YEAH. THANK YOU.

THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER HOGUE.

I HAVE NOTHING AT THIS TIME OTHER THAN IT'S REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE THESE PEOPLE, THE SMALLER CITIES KIND OF DEVELOP INTO BIGGER CITIES.

THE PROCESS, IT'S IT'S INTERESTING.

SO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME YEAH, IT'S IT'S, IT'S ALL IT'S ALL A GOOD STUFF AND AND REALLY LIKE YOU KNOW DAS PALACE AT SOME POINT WILL BE IF IF THEY WANT TO IF DAS PALACE WANTS TO GROW AT ALL THEY'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED BY LAW TO ANNEX SELF PALACE IN MIDWAY AS THOSE DISADVANTAGED UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES.

AND I'VE SHARED WITH I'VE SHARED WITH FOLKS OVER THERE AND HAVE CHATTED WITH THE FOLKS IN SOUTH HOSPITALS THAT THEY EVENTUALLY AND

[01:15:03]

AND I AND I'VE ENCOURAGED FOLKS OVER THERE AND TO LET'S HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT AND MAKE SURE THAT I DON'T KNOW I WASN'T HERE, BUT WHEN THEY DID IT BEFORE IT SEEMED THEY, THEY TRIED TO ANNEX IT.

IT WAS A SITUATION WHERE THEY DIDN'T ENGAGE THE FOLKS IN SOUTH LOS PALACE OR MIDWAY.

I ENGAGED. THEY DIDN'T WANT IT.

YEAH, WE DON'T HAVE NOTHING TO DO IT.

AND I DON'T KNOW. I HEARD STORIES OF.

YEAH, YEARS AGO.

YEAH. AND BUT I JUST HEARD LIKE THEY FELT LIKE IT WAS A CITY OF DUST PALACE DRIVEN DECISION WITHOUT CONSULTING THEM IN ANY OF IT.

AND THEN YOU KNOW HOW THE RUMOR MILL GETS GOING IN.

SO I DID SHARE WITH THEM.

LIKE WHEN I BEEN OUT THERE A FEW TIMES, I, YOU KNOW, EVENTUALLY THE STATE'S GOING TO FORCE THIS JUST BECAUSE OF WATER QUALITY ISSUES AND, YOU KNOW, SO ANYWAYS, BUT IT'S SO IT'S HELPFUL TO SEE HOW THESE THINGS WORK BECAUSE WHEN SOMEBODY ANNEXES THE COUNTIES, IT'S THE COUNTY IS LOSING IT AND SOMEBODY ELSE IS TAKING OVER THAT JURISDICTION.

AND SO. ALL RIGHT.

COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? I DID. YOU KNOW, BEING AT RCR THIS PAST COUPLE OF DAYS, GOT TO HANG OUT WITH A COUPLE OF CAL LAFCO MEMBERS.

DANIEL PARRA WAS IN ATTENDANCE WITH US AND SO IS CHRIS LOPEZ.

AND CHRIS LOPEZ HAD INFORMED US THAT HE RESIGNED FROM CAL LAFCO.

SO AND DANIEL PARRA SAID HE WAS THINKING ABOUT IT.

SO ANYWAY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SHARE.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER BERTAO, I HAVE NO COMMENTS.

AND SO ACTUALLY I WAS GOING TO HAVE A COMMENT, BUT I HAVE NO COMMENT.

MEETING ADJOURNED. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.