[VI.A. AMG Reorganization (LAFCO File No. 0694) – The proposal involves the annexation of a 31.8-acre parcel into the City of Los Banos, and the detachment of the same parcel from the Central California Irrigation District (CCID) boundary. The property is located at the southeast corner of Overland Avenue and Johnson Road. The actions requested are to make an environmental determination that the Commission has reviewed and considered the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by the City of Los Banos, and approve, deny, or modify the reorganization and make CEQA determinations.]

ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE BACK TO REGULARLY SCHEDULED ITEMS. ITEM SIX IS PUBLIC HEARINGS.

TESTIMONY IS LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES OR LESS PER PERSON.

ITEM 8 OR EXCUSE ME 6A IS THE AMG REORGANIZATION LAFCO FILE NUMBER 0694.

THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES THE ANNEXATION OF 31.8 ACRE PARCEL INTO THE CITY OF LOS BANOS, AND THE DETACHMENT OF THE SAME PARCEL FROM THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOUNDARY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OVERLAND AVENUE AND JOHNSON ROAD.

THE ACTION REQUESTED ARE TO MAKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED BY THE CITY OF LOS BANOS AND APPROVE, DENY OR MODIFY THE REORGANIZATION AND MAKE CEQA DETERMINATIONS, AND WE WILL TURN IT OVER TO MR. NICHOLSON. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. YEAH, I HAVE A POWERPOINT TO WALK THE COMMISSION THROUGH THIS ITEM AND FOR THE PUBLIC'S BENEFIT, TOO.

SO AGAIN, IT'S A ANNEXATION OF A 31.8 ACRE PARCEL INTO LOS BANOS.

IT'S DESIGNATED INDUSTRIAL, AND IT'S FOR FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THERE'S NOT A PROJECT THAT'S WAITING FOR THE ANNEXATION AT THE MOMENT.

THE ACTION IS ALSO OFFICIALLY CALLED A REORGANIZATION BECAUSE BESIDES BEING ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, WE'RE DETACHING IT FROM OR BEING REQUESTED TO DETACH IT FROM THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT CCID TO TRANSFER THE CLASS ONE WATER RIGHTS.

AND THE COMMISSION'S VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS ISSUE IN CCID WORLD, THEY LIKE TO TAKE THE WATER RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE LAND AND MOVE IT TO OTHER PROPERTY, EITHER IN THE DISTRICT OR ANNEX NEW LAND INTO THE DISTRICT TO KEEP THOSE RIGHTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND KEEP IT ON FARMING.

THE CITY OF LOS BANOS PROVIDES THE POTABLE WATER FOR URBAN USES.

SO THE AG WATER, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, RAW WATER GETS, TRANSFERRED.

SO THIS WAS A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND MUTUALLY SUBMITTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LOS BANOS FOR THE ANNEXATION AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CCID FOR THE ATTACHMENT AND THE AGAIN, THE PROPERTIES AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OVERLAND AVE AND JOHNSON ROAD.

LET'S SEE HERE.

THIS IS JUST A PICTURE OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY AND THE IT'S HARD TO SEE IN THE MIDDLE, BUT THE PROJECT SITE IS ALMOST IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS, JUST A LITTLE BIT TO THE NORTH, BUT IT'S KIND OF CENTERED AND IT'S THE GRAY AREA IS THE INDUSTRIAL DESIGNATION SHOWING THE SITE AND THIS IS AERIAL PHOTO.

SO THE ANNEXATION AREA, THE 31 ACRES IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ON THE UPPER LEFT OF THE PICTURE.

ACROSS THE STREET TO THE WEST IS A BIG KAGOME AG PROCESSING PLANT.

SO THERE'S SOME INDUSTRIAL TO THE SOUTH AND SOME MINI STORAGE AS WELL, AND AGRICULTURE TO THE NORTH, AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE EAST.

AND THIS IS A CLOSE UP ON THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS.

SO THE INDUSTRIAL DESIGNATION IS ON THE PROPERTY AND THEN TO THE SOUTH AND WEST IS INDUSTRIAL AND NORTH IS IN AGRICULTURAL USE RIGHT NOW. BUT THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN HAS IT DESIGNATED AS A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

AND THEN TO THE EAST IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

[00:10:01]

AND THIS SHOWS YOU THE LOT SIZES SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE SUBDIVISIONS CURRENTLY ARE IN THE EAST AND THE SUBDIVISION OF THE SOUTH IS INDUSTRIAL PARK.

AND THEN YEAH, LARGER FARMING TO THE NORTH AND INDUSTRIAL TO THE WEST AS WELL.

AND THIS IS JUST A BLOW UP OF THE ANNEXATION MAP.

SO IT'S JUST THE ONE PARCEL BEING ANNEXED CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY LIMITS ON THREE SIDES WEST, SOUTH AND EAST, AND ONLY CONNECTED TO THE COUNTY TO THE NORTH. SO KIND OF FILLING IN A LITTLE KIND OF SURROUNDED AREA OF THE CITY ALREADY.

THIS IS A PHOTO FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER LOOKING EAST SOUTH EASTERLY ACROSS THE PROPERTY.

YOU CAN SEE IT'S ALL IN FARMING GROW CROP USE SOME ALFALFA, SOME KIND OF ROW CROP WAS ON THERE THIS YEAR, BUT IT THEY ROTATE IT.

AND THEN THIS IS FROM THE SOUTHWEST LOOKING NORTHEAST.

AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PICTURE IS PART OF THE INDUSTRIAL USES THAT ARE ON THE SOUTH END.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE FIELD IN THE FOREGROUND IS IN THE CITY LIMITS ALREADY JUST VACANT INDUSTRIAL LAND ALREADY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.

SO WE HAVE, EXCUSE ME, TWO ASPECTS OF OR THE MAIN ACTION HERE IS FOR THE ISSUES FOR THE ANNEXATION. WE ALSO HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION THAT WE'RE IN OUR ROLE AS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY.

WE'RE GOING TO USE THE DETERMINATION BY THE CITY OF LOS BANOS.

SO WE GO THROUGH THE FACTORS OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE ORGANIZATION BOUNDARIES AND ANY ALTERNATIVES TO THE BOUNDARIES.

AND I MENTIONED THAT SURROUNDED BY THE CITY ON THREE SIDES IT'S WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.

AND IT FOLLOWS EXISTING STREETS OR EXISTING PROPERTY LINES.

AND I'VE TALKED ABOUT THE SURROUNDING LAND USES.

THE REMOVAL OF THE CCID IRRIGATION WATER IS, SINCE THERE'S NO IMMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, THAT THE PROPERTY WILL QUALIFY FOR CLASS TWO WATER, AND THEY CAN KEEP FARMING IT UNTIL THEY CEASE OR IF IN CLASS TWO WATER, IF THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF WATER, CCID CAN WITHHOLD THE WATER.

THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO IT AS IF THEY ARE IN CLASS ONE.

BUT AGAIN, THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE BEEN AGREEABLE WITH THAT, AND THE CITY BOARD HAS APPROVED THIS DETACHMENT.

THE CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AGAIN, IT'S DESIGNATED INDUSTRIAL AND THERE'S NO SPECIFIC USE PROPOSED ON IT, BUT IN THE FUTURE, IT'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THE CITY HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR PREPARATION OF A MASTER PLAN WHEN A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COMES IN.

SO THEY WOULD DO A PLAN FOR THE WHOLE SITE AND MAYBE DEVELOP IN PHASES.

AND THEN THE CITY ADOPTED A RESOLUTION 5629 TO INITIATE THE ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS AND DETERMINE THAT THE PROJECT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR GENERAL PLAN.

IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SERVICES, IN THE APPLICATION PAPERWORK THE PLAN FOR JUSTIFICATION PROPOSAL HAS THE CITY'S CAPACITIES FOR SEWER AND WATER.

THEY MENTIONED THERE'S SUFFICIENT REVENUES THAT WILL COME FROM THE PROJECT, FROM PROPERTY TAXES, MAYBE SALES TAXES, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY MANUFACTURE OR PROVIDE.

AND THEY ALSO CREATE SPECIAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS TO PAY FOR IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS STORMWATER AND OTHER THINGS.

AND THEN THE MASTER PLAN WILL DETAIL EXACTLY WHAT SERVICES ARE NEEDED FROM THE CITY, AND THEN THEY'LL HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER MAKE SURE THEY WILL PAY THOSE.

IN TERMS OF NEARBY PUBLIC SERVICES, THERE'S A FIRE STATION A HALF MILE TO THE EAST AND THE POLICE, WHICH POLICE STATIONS AREN'T THAT IMPORTANT BECAUSE THEY HAVE PATROL VEHICLES, BUT THEY SAY RESPONSE TIMES ARE ABOUT THREE MINUTES TO GET HERE.

SO IT'S ACCESSIBLE BY THE CITY.

AND THERE'S. YEAH, THERE'S A TEN INCH WATER LINE RUNNING ALONG OVERLAND AVENUE JUST ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH HAS ADEQUATE CAPACITY.

THE CITY SAID THEY HAVE 10.3 MILLION GALLONS OF CAPACITY AVAILABLE.

AND THE DEMAND FOR THIS PROJECT BEING INDUSTRIAL IS ONLY 0.7 MILLION GALLONS A DAY.

SO THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY FOR IT.

THERE'S ALSO SEWER LINE RUNNING ALONG OVERLAND AVENUE 24 INCH, WHICH COULD ALSO HANDLE THIS PROJECT WITHOUT ANY IMPACT ON THE ULTIMATE CAPACITY FOR THE CITY.

AND THEN STORMWATER WILL BE DIRECTED TO AN EXISTING BASIN NEARBY TO THE CITY'S AIRPORT, WHICH HAS A BASIN WHICH IS SOUTHWEST OF THE SITE.

OPEN SPACE AND AG CONSIDERATIONS THE PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY THE ANNEXATION IS LARGER THAN JUST THE PROPERTY ITSELF BECAUSE IT'S GOT ALL OF OVERLAND DRIVE

[00:15:08]

IN IT. BUT IT'S 28 ACRES OF FARMLAND.

IT'S CONSIDERED PRIME.

AND IT'S BEEN IN CULTIVATION.

IT'S NOT WITHIN THE WILLIAMSON ACT AG PRESERVE.

IT IS ADJACENT TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ON THREE SIDES.

SO THAT IT'S NOT NOT LIKE A PROTRUSION INTO AG LAND.

AND THEN THERE'S STILL FARMING TO THE NORTH.

IN OUR IN THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT, YOU'LL SEE THAT WE HAVE A POLICY FOR FACTORS A THROUGH C TO LOOK AT, IS THERE A DEMAND, ADEQUATE DEMAND FOR THIS TYPE OF USE TO CONVERT THE FARMLAND OR, YOU KNOW, THE TIMELY.

AND THE CITY HAD PROVIDED SOME DETAILS ABOUT HOW MUCH VACANT ACRES OF INDUSTRIAL LAND THERE IS, WHICH IS 30.8 RIGHT NOW.

BUT THEY INDICATED THAT MOST OF THE INDUSTRIAL LAND THAT THEY HAVE IS MADE UP OF SMALLER PARCELS.

SO THEY CAN ACCOMMODATE CERTAIN USES, BUT NOT LARGER FACILITIES LIKE TO THE WEST IS KAGOME.

SO THEY'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING A LARGER SITE LIKE THIS COMING IN THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE AS USES COME UP THAT THERE WOULD BE A BIGGER MORE AND THEY'RE GOING TO REQUIRE MASTER PLAN TOO SO THAT THEY'D HAVE A BIGGER PROPERTY AVAILABLE.

SO, SO THAT'S THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS SITE AT THIS TIME.

THE CITY HAS IN TERMS OF AG CONVERSION TOO.

THEY'VE ADOPTED A POLICY IN THEIR GENERAL PLAN ABOUT REQUIRING AG MITIGATION.

BUT IT HAS A IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM THAT STATES THAT THEY WON'T BE IMPLEMENTING THAT MEASURE UNTIL THE OTHER SIX CITIES IN THE COUNTY ALSO AGREE TO IT. SO THAT'S KIND OF A RUB SPOT FOR LAFCO STAFF ANYWAY.

AND MAYBE THE COMMISSION, BUT WE'RE THE COUNTY HAS AN AG MITIGATION PROGRAM BASICALLY A 1 TO 1 CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON CONVERSION OF AG LAND TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT. AND THE CITY'S ADOPTED A SIMILAR POLICY, BUT THEY'VE COMPROMISED IT BY SAYING WE WON'T DO IT UNTIL THE OTHER CITIES DO IT.

SO ON THIS PROJECT, THEY, DID DO WELL, ACTUALLY, I'LL GET INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW LATER.

THE CITY DID NOT REQUIRE MITIGATION FOR THIS, AND LAFCO CAN RELY ON THAT DOCUMENT FOR THIS, BUT WE I WANTED TO MENTION WE ARE DOING THE MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW UPDATE RIGHT NOW. THAT'S TIED TO THIS NEW CITY'S NEW GENERAL PLAN.

AND WITH THAT WILL BE A SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE.

SO I'M MY VIEW OF THIS WOULD BE THE COMMISSION CAN ADDRESS IT MORE COMPREHENSIVELY OF HOW THE COMMISSION FEELS ABOUT WHAT LAFCO WANTS TO DO REGARDING AG MITIGATION ON THE FUTURE AND NOT MAKE IT AS BIG OF A ISSUE ON THIS ONE, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING RIGHT AWAY. SO SO THAT'S KIND OF LIKE PUNTING THE TOPIC TO THE UPCOMING MSR, WHICH WE ARE DOING.

YOU KNOW, THE CITY GAVE US MONEY FOR THAT.

SO THE MSR IS UNDERWAY.

OKAY. IN TERMS OF CORRESPONDENCE, YEAH, WE'VE GOT FEEDBACK FROM SEVERAL COUNTY DEPARTMENTS.

THE VALUE OF THE LAND HAS A $4.6 MILLION VALUE.

AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED VOTERS ON THE PROPERTY.

THE CCID SUPPORTS THE ORGANIZATION AND THE TRANSFER OF THE WATER.

SO THAT THAT TOOK A WHILE TO NEGOTIATE THROUGH, BUT THEY'RE AGREEABLE TO THIS.

AND SO IT'S THE CITY.

AND JUST ALSO TO MENTION ON THAT ISSUE, CCID IS WORKING WITH THE CITY ON A PROPOSAL TO COME TO LAFCO, WHERE ALL THE EXISTING CCID BOUNDARIES WITHIN THE CITY WOULD BE DETACHED ALL AT ONCE.

THEY'RE SCATTERED PARCELS ACROSS THE CITY AND BRING THAT AS A PROPOSAL TO LAFCO TO DETACH THOSE FROM THE CITY.

JUST ABOUT ALL OF THEM ARE ALREADY DEVELOPED, PAYABLE OR UNDER COMMERCIAL SOME SUBDIVISIONS ON TOP OF THEM.

AND THEY WERE JUST ANNEXED YEARS AND YEARS AGO WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF CCID.

SO CCID THEY'RE ON THE BOOKS AS BEING IN THE DISTRICT, BUT THEY CAN'T.

THEY CAN'T EVEN BE FARMED, LET ALONE RECEIVE ANY CCID WATER.

SO WE'LL GO GET A COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION FROM JOINTLY FROM THE CITY AND CCID.

NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE.

AND THE CCID DID THAT WITH THE CITY OF NEWMAN TO REMOVE LAND WITHIN NEWMAN AND WENT THROUGH STANISLAUS LAFCO A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. SO IT'S A SIMILAR PROPOSAL KIND OF CLEANUP.

IT'S A CLEANUP ISSUE.

SO THAT'S WHAT THEY'D PREFER IN THE LOS BANOS AND AUGUSTINE AREAS TO DETACH THE LAND WHEN IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND NOT KEEP IT IN CCID.

YEAH. AGAIN. SO IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, THE CITY DID PREPARE AN INITIAL STUDY.

AND THEY ALSO OR THEY CALL IT A SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY BECAUSE IT TEARED OFF THEIR, PRIOR GENERAL PLAN, AND THEY DETERMINED THAT

[00:20:07]

THERE WERE SEVERAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.

AND MOST OF THEM COULD BE MITIGATED AND JUST HAS A LIST OF AIR QUALITY AND OTHER THINGS.

START IS RELATED TO LAFCO DIRECTLY.

AND SO NONE OF THE MITIGATION MEASURES THEY ARE ADOPTED ARE UNDER OUR AUTHORITY TO ADOPT AS LAFCO.

SO WE CAN USE THE DOCUMENT THAT THEY'VE PREPARED.

SO BASED ON THE SUMMARY, I WOULD JUST SAY FOR THE COMMISSION, THE ACTIONS TO TAKE ARE TO MAKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING THAT WE'VE REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THEIR DOCUMENT.

AND THAT'S ON PAGE FIVE OF THE REPORT, MAKE EIGHT DETERMINATIONS TO SUPPORT THE ANNEXATION ON PAGES FIVE AND SIX OF THE REPORT.

ASSIGN THE REORGANIZATION THAT WHAT WE CALL THE SHORT FORM DESIGNATION, WHICH IS WHAT THE STATE USES IS THE AMG REORGANIZATION INVOLVING THE CITY OF LOS BANOS AND THEN APPROVE THE ORGANIZATION WITH NO ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

AND THAT COMPLETES MY REPORT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. NICHOLSON.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? NOT RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP.

YEP. MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE? YEAH, I'M GOING TO DO I'M OPENING UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT MY WATCH HERE.

IT SAYS 1032 PUBLIC TESTIMONY IS LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES OR LESS PER PERSON.

GOOD MORNING COMMISSION.

MY NAME IS STACY SOUZA ELMS. I'M FROM THE CITY OF LOS BANOS.

I'M THE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NICHOLSON FOR HIS GUIDANCE THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR A REALLY LONG TIME SINCE 2014.

SO TEN YEARS, IT'S KIND OF EVOLVED, I THINK, THROUGH THE DIFFERENT GENERAL PLANS OF THE CITY AND THROUGH THE GUIDANCE OF YOUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

SO STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE RECOMMENDATION.

THIS PROJECT WILL BE KEY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS EMPLOYMENT GENERATOR FOR THE CITY OF LOS BANOS.

OUR GOAL IS TO TRY TO KEEP OUR COMMUTERS THAT ARE SPENDING MAYBE 3 HOURS TO 4 HOURS IN THEIR CARS A DAY WORKING IN THEIR COMMUNITY THAT THEY LIVE IN.

SO THIS PROJECT WOULD GET US ONE STEP CLOSER TO DOING THAT.

LIKE YOUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SAID WE DO HAVE SMALLER INDUSTRIAL PARCELS, BUT HAVING THIS LARGER PARCEL ADJACENT TO KAGOME, WHICH IS ONE OF OUR LARGEST INDUSTRIES IN THE CITY TO BE ADJACENT TO THAT USE AND TO BE SHOVEL READY WILL PUT THIS PROPERTY IN A GOOD POSITION.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH AND HOPEFULLY WE GET A FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU STACY.

ALL RIGHT. WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.

NOT SEEING ANYONE.

WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:34.

SO WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS WHERE ANY COMMENTS, ANY QUESTIONS OR CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

COMMISSIONER BERTAO.

OKAY. YOU KNOW, I HAD QUESTIONS BEFORE ABOUT THE DETACHMENT FROM CCID.

I SPOKE TO ONE OF THE DIRECTORS AND THE EXPLANATION HE GAVE ME, AND I GUESS IT'S VALID ON THEIR PART IS IF THE LANDOWNER WOULD HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF THE DISTRICT AND EITHER FARMED IT HIMSELF OR RENT IT TO SOMEBODY, THEN THEY WOULD MAYBE NOT ASK FOR THE DETACHMENT UNTIL THE DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

BUT SINCE THIS LANDOWNER IS ABSENTEE OWNER THAT THAT THEN THAT'S WHY THEY USE THAT CRITERIA THAT THAT'S WHAT MANAGEMENT TOLD HIM.

AND I'M GOING TO I GUESS I'M GOING TO ACCEPT WHAT HE SAID.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF I AGREE WITH IT, BUT I MEAN, THAT'S THE WAY IT IS FOR NOW.

SO THEREFORE I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE AMG REORGANIZATION LAFCO FILE NUMBER 694 WITH TWO ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS, THE EIGHT DETERMINATIONS AND THE THREE OTHER DETERMINATIONS BY THE STAFF AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CORTESE-KNOX ACT.

RIGHT. MOVE TO APPROVE IT.

[00:25:01]

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BERTAO IS THERE A SECOND? YEAH, YEAH. YOU'RE.

BECAUSE THE OTHER CITY MEMBER IS NOT HERE TODAY.

YOU GET TO VOTE.

YOU'RE A VOTING MEMBER. I WILL SECOND THAT.

ALL RIGHT. SECOND, BY COMMISSIONER LLANEZ.

AND BEFORE I CALL FOR THE VOTE, I DO WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT THAT'S NEW INFORMATION THAT I'VE NOT HEARD, THAT THAT'S THE WAY THEIR POLICY WORKS. I'VE HAD A LONG STANDING ISSUE WITH CCID'S POLICY OF, I TOTALLY AGREE THAT WHEN DEVELOPMENT STARTS TO HAPPEN THAT THEY SHOULD DETACH THE WATER RIGHTS.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE A DIFFERENT MECHANISM IN THERE THAT TRIGGERS THAT.

SO THAT ALLOWS THAT GROUND, BECAUSE AS OF RIGHT NOW, THIS PIECE DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING PLANNED TO BE ON THERE.

WE ALL KNOW HOW LONG THESE THINGS TAKE.

IT COULD BE TWO, THREE, FIVE YEARS.

AND CLASS TWO, THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO GET CLASS TWO WATER RIGHTS, WHICH THANKFUL FOR.

BUT WHEN YOU'RE IN A CRITICAL WATER YEAR, YOU DON'T GET CLASS TWO WATER RIGHTS.

IF YOU LOOKED AT THE VERY PICTURES THAT WE SAW IN THERE, THEY HAD ALFALFA IN THERE.

ALFALFA IS TYPICALLY A FIVE YEAR CROP.

DEPENDING ON WHEN THE CYCLE IS YOU RUN INTO A CRITICAL WATER YEAR YOU MAKE.

THIS IS A HEAVY INVESTMENT IN PLANTING ALFALFA ON THE FRONT END.

THE SEED'S VERY EXPENSIVE, THE GROUNDWORKS VERY EXPENSIVE.

SO THEN YOU GET INTO SECOND YEAR AND NOW YOU HAVE CLASS TWO WATER RIGHTS, WHICH THEY'RE PAYING A HIGHER RATE FOR.

THEY UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT IN CRITICAL WATER YEARS CLASS TWO DOESN'T GET WATER, ONLY GOES TO CLASS ONE.

SO I HAVE FRUSTRATION WITH THAT.

I CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT OF LOGIC OF IF IT'S AN ABSENTEE OWNER, BUT YOU SAID RENTING, SOMEBODY'S RENTING THE GROUND.

SOMEBODY IS FARMING IT. IT'S JUST NOT FARMING ITSELF.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS TOLD.

I KNOW, AND THIS WHERE THIS STEMS FROM IS, THE VERY THING THAT THAT MR. NICHOLSON MENTIONED IS THEY DID THESE ANNEXATIONS AND THEN THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE CITY AND CCID.

AND SO YOU HAVE THESE PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT HAVE SHOPPING CENTERS ON THEM IN LOS BANOS THAT STILL HAVE STILL HAVE WATER RIGHTS ON THEM.

AND SO AND THAT'S I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT.

I THINK THAT THE WATER SHOULD BE USED FOR FARMING, BUT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO FARM IT UNTIL SUCH TIME TO ME IS WHEN THEY THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FINAL MAP OR SOMETHING THAT THAT TRIGGERS THAT YOU COULD PUT INTO ONE OF OUR CONDITIONS HERE THAT SAYS WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THAT'S WHEN THE DETACHMENT WILL, OCCUR.

THAT ALL BEING SAID, IF THE FARMER IS READY TO JUST LET IT GO AND SEND THE WATER RIGHTS OFF AND OR SELL THEM OR MOVE THEM TO ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY, HEY, GOD BLESS THEM.

BUT FOR US, FOR THEM TO PUT A CONDITION THAT WHEN IT GETS ANNEXED, THAT'S WHEN THE DETACHMENT HAPPENS.

I'VE ALWAYS HAD A LITTLE BIT OF HEARTBURN WITH THAT, BUT I'M WILLING TO ROLL ALONG WITH IT RIGHT NOW IN THE INTEREST OF MOVING THIS FORWARD.

SO WITH THAT, I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

MR. CHAIRMAN. YES.

GO AHEAD. IS THERE A WAY THAT IN THE FUTURE.

AND I'M NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT CCID, I'M TALKING ABOUT IN MAYBE MID I DON'T KNOW HOW THEIR CRITERIA IS.

I THINK EVERYTHING'S IN MID THOUGH, BUT THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE THEM TO CHANGE THEIR POLICY.

I KNOW, AND I'M GOING TO LET MR. NICHOLSON SPEAK, BUT I'M GOING TO MY NOW GOSH, I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S OUT OF THE AGENDA ORDER.

BUT I MEAN. MY LIKE 14 YEARS ON LAFCO.

YEAH PROBABLY NOT. [INAUDIBLE] PROBABLY BE CALLING RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

BUT I WOULD SAY IS, IS THERE'S NOTHING THAT I'VE EVER SEEN THAT SAYS THAT WE HAVE TO DO IT.

WE'RE ALSO WE'RE THE GOVERNING BODY THAT COULD MAKE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND WHATNOT.

BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE STAFF THAT WHEN WE DO THIS, I'D LIKE TO ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY SEE THIS POLICY THAT GETS TALKED ABOUT ON CCID POLICY.

I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO SEE IT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THEY TALK ABOUT ONE, BUT I'VE NEVER ACTUALLY SEEN IT.

SO OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM 6B.

[VI.B. Braden-Severson Annexation to the Ballico-Cortez Water District (LAFCO File No. 0700) and related Sphere of Influence Amendment (LAFCO File No. 1004A) – The proposal involves the annexation and corresponding sphere of influence amendment for two parcels into the Ballico-Cortez Water District. Area A, containing 146 acres, is located on the southwest side of Santa Fe Avenue approximately one-quarter mile north of Linwood Road, and Area B, containing 10 acres, is located on the north side of Sunny Acres Avenue and west of the extension of Sycamore Avenue in the Ballico Area. The actions requested are to make an environmental determination that the actions are exempt from environmental review, and approve, deny, or modify the sphere of influence amendment and annexation.]

THIS IS THE BRADEN-SEVERSON ANNEXATION TO THE CORTES.

EXCUSE ME. BALLICO-CORTEZ WATER DISTRICT LAFCO FILE NUMBER 0700 AND RELATED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO LAFCO FILE NUMBER 1004A THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES THE ANNEXATION AND CORRESPONDING SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT FOR TWO PARCELS IN THE CORTEZ WATER DISTRICT AREA A, CONTAINING 146 ACRES, IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF SANTA FE AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY ONE QUARTER MILE NORTH OF LINWOOD ROAD, AND AREA B, CONTAINING TEN ACRES, IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SUNNY ACRES AVENUE AND THE WEST OF THE EXTENSION OF SYCAMORE AVENUE IN THE BALLICO AREA.

[00:30:01]

THE ACTION REQUESTED ARE TO MAKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION THAT THE ACTIONS ARE EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND APPROVE, DENY OR MODIFY THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT, AND ANNEXATION.

AND WE WILL GO TO MR. NICHOLSON AGAIN. OKAY.

THANK YOU.

TRYING TO GET THE SLIDE TO MOVE.

GO! HOLD ON A MINUTE.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE DONE BACK TO BACK SLIDES, SO I'M NOT SURE THE COMMAND HERE TO GET IT.

THOUGHT I WAS RUNNING IT.

I'M SORRY.

OH, THERE WE GO. GREAT.

OKAY. SO AGAIN THE SUMMARY OR THE SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT IS THERE'S TWO SEPARATE PARCELS OF TOTALING 156 ACRES, A 10 ACRE PARCEL AND A 146 ACRE PARCEL.

AND THEY BOTH WANT TO ANNEX INTO THE DISTRICT.

THEY'RE ALSO OUTSIDE THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE DISTRICT, THE ULTIMATE SERVICE BOUNDARY.

SO THEY'RE BEING THE COMMISSION IS BEING REQUESTED TO AMEND THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AT THE SAME TIME.

AND THE PURPOSE OF THE ANNEXATION AND SPHERE AMENDMENT IS TO PARTICIPATE IN AND BENEFIT FROM FUTURE GROUNDWATER PROTECTION AND RECHARGE EFFORTS OF THE DISTRICT.

AS PART OF THE TURLOCK GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLANNING EFFORTS.

THAT'S THE SUBBASIN THAT THEY'RE IN.

SO THIS IS A KIND OF A FIRST STEP TO PARTICIPATE IN ACTIVITIES THAT ARE GOING ON BY THE DISTRICT.

THIS IS A MAP OF THE CURRENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY.

IT'S KIND OF FRAGMENTED, BUT IT'S UP AGAINST THE COUNTY LINE WITH STANISLAUS COUNTY ALONG SANTA FE AVENUE.

AND THESE PARCELS ARE ON THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE DISTRICT.

AND THIS SHOWS THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROPERTIES.

AND THIS IS ALL THE WATER SUBBASINS THAT ARE UNDERGOING THE SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT SGMA GROUNDWATER PLANNING EFFORTS.

AND SO THESE, THIS PROPERTIES IN MERCED COUNTY.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S WITH OUR LAFCO.

BUT IT'S PART OF THIS MOST OF THAT SUBBASIN IS WITHIN STANISLAUS COUNTY, AND IT'S THE SUBBASIN ACTIVITIES ARE MANAGED IN MORE IN STANISLAUS COUNTY WITH ESPECIALLY THE TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT TIED.

AND THEN THIS IS AN AERIAL PHOTO SHOWING THE BOTH PROPERTIES ARE IN ALMOND ORCHARDS.

ALTHOUGH THE SMALLER SERVICE AND PARCEL HAS A HOME ON IT, THE LARGER PARCELS ARE ALL IN FARMING, AND THIS IS JUST A BLOW UP OF THE ANNEXATION AREAS WITH AGAIN, PARCEL A BEING 146 ACRES AND AREA B BEING TEN ACRES.

AND THEY BOTH, BOTH FARM FAMILIES HAVE OTHER LAND IN THE AREA AND ALSO WITHIN THE CORTES WATER DISTRICT.

SO THIS IS JUST PART OF THEIR HOLDINGS.

SO IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING LAFCO DOES THE DISTRICT ACTED AS LEAD AGENCY.

AND BECAUSE WE'RE JUST THEY'RE JUST CHANGING THE BOUNDARIES OF ADDING THE DISTRICT.

AND THERE'S NO THE DISTRICT'S NOT PROVIDING WATER.

THEY DON'T PROVIDE WATER.

THERE'S NO PHYSICAL CHANGES GOING ON DIRECTLY FROM THIS ANNEXATION, THEY FOUND THAT IT WAS EXEMPT UNDER 15061, THAT IT CAN BE SEEN WITH CERTAINTY.

THERE'S NO POSSIBILITY THE PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.

AND AGAIN, STAFF FEELS THE COMMISSION CAN RELY ON THAT SAME DETERMINATION IN LAFCOS ROLE AS THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCY.

AND SO WE HAVE THIS FACTORS FIRST.

AND THEN I'LL PRESENT THE ANNEXATION FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION UNDER SECTION 56425 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.

LAYS OUT THE FACTORS THAT WE LOOK AT BECAUSE THOSE FACTORS IN THE STATE LAW ARE GENERIC.

THEY TEND TO APPLY MORE FOR URBAN SERVICE DISTRICTS AND CITIES.

SO WHEN YOU HAVE A RURAL DISTRICT LIKE THIS, WE'VE ADOPTED LOCAL POLICIES WHICH WERE REQUIRED TO BY THE STATE LAW.

[00:35:07]

AND SO WE'VE GOT POLICIES MORE GEARED TO RURAL SERVICE DISTRICTS SUCH AS THIS.

SO THE CRITERIA ARE AS FOLLOWS.

THE NEED FOR AND THE CAPACITY OF THE DISTRICT SERVICES.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS A UNIQUE WATER DISTRICT THAT DOESN'T PROVIDE IRRIGATION WATER.

IT'S NOT LIKE MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT OR TID.

BUT THEY'RE WORKING ON TRYING TO HELP THE LONG TERM WATER SUPPLY AND THE PROTECTION OF THE GROUNDWATER AND HOPEFULLY REPLENISHMENT OF THE GROUNDWATER UNDER BASIN. SO THERE THAT'S THE MAIN REASON THAT PROPERTY OWNERS WANT TO ANNEX IT, TO BE SURE THEY GET ANY BENEFITS THAT RESULT FROM THOSE EFFORTS OF THE DISTRICT.

THE CONFORMITY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE DISTRICT'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.

ALL THE LAND IN THIS REGION IS DESIGNATED AGRICULTURAL, AND THE COUNTY GENERAL PLANS IS ZONED FOR AG.

IT'S A1 WITH 20 ACRE MINIMUM PARCEL SIZE.

AND THEN WE ARE PROCESSING A SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT FOR THE ANNEXATION.

SO IT'LL BE CONSISTENT DEPENDING ON THE COMMISSION'S VOTE TODAY.

THE BOUNDARIES, DO THEY CONFORM WITH THE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS AND OTHER, LOGICAL BOUNDARIES.

AND THEY DO. IT BASICALLY FOLLOWS PROPERTY LINES AND YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL, IT'S ALL AG AROUND IT.

SO THESE ARE JUST IN THERE CONTIGUOUS TO THE CURRENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES.

SO THE BOUNDARIES MAKE SENSE.

AND THEN YEAH, THE MAINTENANCE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, SINCE IT'S AG RELATED OPERATIONS, THERE'S NO IT'S ACTUALLY SUPPORTING THE OCCASIONAL SUPPORT, THE LONG TERM CONTINUED FARMING, THEN GOING ON TO THE ANNEXATION ANALYSIS, WHICH IS UNDER THE GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 56668.

AGAIN, WE'VE ADOPTED LOCAL POLICIES TO FOCUS FOR MERCED COUNTY UNDER OBJECTIVE 4A AND THAT OBJECTIVE STATES TO REVIEW OF CHANGE OF ORGANIZATIONS FOR PROPOSALS INVOLVING RURAL SERVICE DISTRICTS SUCH AS BALLICO CORTEZ, TO FOCUS ON FACTORS THAT ARE GERMANE TO NON-URBAN SERVICES, DELIVERY AND RESOURCES.

SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE FOCUS ON.

SO IN THE REPORT THERE'S MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION.

BUT BASICALLY THIS THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THIS ANNEXATION IS SUPPORTED BY STAFF AND IT'S THAT THE DISTRICT DOES SUPPLY IRRIGATION WATER ANY PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS.

BUT THEY ARE MEMBER OF THE EAST TURLOCK GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY, AND THEY'RE REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNERS WITHIN THE DISTRICT FOR THE SUBBASIN GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN.

GSP [INAUDIBLE] GSA AND THAT THE PROPERTIES HOPE TO BENEFIT FROM THIS AND THE DISTRICT WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD AS WELL.

AND ONCE THEY GET ASKED TO THE DISTRICT THAT THE AT LEAST IN THE PAPERWORK, THE FEES, THEY'LL PAY A $3 PER ACRE FEE TO THE DISTRICT TO HELP THEM PAY FOR THE SGMA AND RELATED ACTIVITIES THAT THEY PARTAKE IN.

THEY DON'T RIGHT NOW, THE DISTRICT DOESN'T HAVE ANY FULL TIME PAID STAFF.

SO THE MONEY GOES TO HELP CONTRIBUTE THEIR SHARE TO THE LARGER SGMA GSA ACTIVITIES.

SO AGAIN, THESE LANDOWNERS ARE THEY HAVE OTHER FARMLAND DISTRICTS.

THEY'RE, WELL AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON AND, SUPPORT THOSE ACTIVITIES.

SO IT'S YEAH, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

IT'S NOT A COMPLICATED IT'S NOT CHANGING ANY LAND USES.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT YOU MAKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION WHICH AGAIN, THAT IT'S EXEMPT, WHICH IS ON PAGE SIX OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT THAT YOU SUPPORT THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS THE THREE DETERMINATIONS ON PAGE SIX AND APPROVE THE EXPANSION THAT'S PRESENTED UNDER LAFCO FILE 1004 A AND THEN FOR THE ANNEXATION, MAKE THE SEVEN DETERMINATION OR THE FIVE DETERMINATIONS ON PAGE SEVEN, ASSIGN THE ANNEXATION THE SHORT FORM DESIGNATION OF THE BRADEN-SEVERSON AND ANNEXATION TO THE BALLICO-CORTEZ WATER DISTRICT AND THEN APPROVE THE ANNEXATION, WHICH IS FILE NUMBER 0700 AND OUR AUTHORIZED LAFCO TO COMPLETE PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT ANY FURTHER NOTICE, HEARING OR ELECTION.

AND I SHOULD MENTION, THE LANDOWNERS DID SIGN THE PETITION.

SO WE HAVE THE LANDOWNERS IN AGREEMENT AND THE DISTRICT ADOPTED A RESOLUTION.

SO ALL PARTIES ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATIONS.

BEFORE WE OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

WHEN I READ THROUGH AND I DIDN'T CATCH IT UNTIL NOW, BUT WHEN LIKE DURING LIKE THE RESOLUTION FROM THE WATER DISTRICT, IT TALKS ABOUT 138 ACRES, BUT ON LIKE ON OUR AGENDA ITEM, IT SAYS 146 ACRES.

THAT'S GOOD.

[00:40:01]

TO SET THAT LITTLE PARCEL IS.

AND MAYBE IT'S JUST ARE THE RESOLUTIONS DONE SEPARATELY FOR EACH PARCEL, OR IS IT ONE RESOLUTION THAT COVERS ALL OF THEM? IT WAS ONE RESOLUTION BUT THE AND THEY MAY HAVE DONE THE RESOLUTIONS BEFORE THEY HAD THE MAPS.

YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE ANNEXING, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION DRAWN UP.

AND SO IN THE MAPS THAT ARE SUBMITTED, THE LARGER PARCEL IS 146 ACRES ACCORDING TO THE MAP, AND THEN THE SMALLER PARCEL IS TEN ACRES.

SO THAT GETS TO 156 ACRES.

OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT THE ACTUAL PROPOSED IS 158 146 ACRES IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT HERE.

AND THEN 10 ACRES.

SO A TOTAL OF 156 WHERE I'M JUST SEEING DIFFERENT NUMBERS IN THEIR RESOLUTION.

SO I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

NOT SEEING ANY.

WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AT 10:52.

WOULD ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT.

NOT SEEING ANYONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:52, AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK UP TO THE DAIS, WHERE THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION OR COMMENTS OR WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? ANYBODY. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.

COMMISSIONER BERTAO. GO AHEAD.

IF THAT DISTRICT DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY SERVICES, WHAT'S THE REASON FOR IT? BECAUSE, I MEAN, ARE THEY IN THE TURLOCK IRRIGATED WOULD THAT GROUND BE IS THAT GROUND CONSIDERED PART OF THE TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT ANYHOW? NO. IT WAS NOT.

PART OF THE TURLOCK SUBBASIN.

I KNOW, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT WHERE DO THEY RECEIVE THEIR WATER FROM? WELLS. GROUND.

JUST INDIVIDUAL WELLS.

WELLS. FARMERS. EVERY FARMER HAS GOT THEIR OWN WELLS.

SO THEY'RE NOT RECEIVING ANY TID CANAL WATER.

NO, NO.

OKAY. THE ORIGINAL.

I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE HEADED. THE ORIGINAL [INAUDIBLE] DISTRICT WAS FORMED WAY BACK.

WAS TO GET IRRIGATION WATER FROM TID THROUGH.

I THINK IT WAS CALLED THE EAST SIDE CANAL.

AND YEAH, THEY CAN CORRECT ME, BUT EAST SIDE CANAL IS GOING TO BE BUILT AND BRING WATER TO THE AREA.

SO THEY FORM A DISTRICT TO NEGOTIATE WITH HOW MUCH WATER AND WE'LL DELIVER IT LOCALLY.

BUT IT WOULD NEVER GOT CONSTRUCTED.

IT NEVER HAPPENED. IT NEVER HAPPENED.

SO THE DISTRICT HAS, YOU KNOW, DONE THINGS AND MAYBE BEEN SEMI INACTIVE OVER TIME.

BUT SGMA KICKED IT BACK IN.

AND SGMA REALLY WORKS WITH DISTRICTS MORE THAN INDIVIDUAL FARMERS.

SO THE DISTRICT IS THERE TRYING TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.

YEAH THEY'RE TRYING TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.

AND THERE'S NEW YOU KNOW MORE IDEAS ABOUT GETTING TRYING TO GET SURFACE WATER AND STORMWATER AND BE ABLE TO DIRECT IT THIS WAY AND USE IT NOT FOR IRRIGATION, BUT TO REPLENISH THE GROUNDWATER.

SO IT'S THE LARGER PLAN FOR THE REGION AND THE SUBBASIN AND SUSTAINABILITY.

AND SO THE DISTRICT IS THE, LOCAL THE CORTEZ DISTRICT IS THE LOCAL.

ALL RIGHT, STAKEHOLDER, LET'S SAY FOR THOSE PLANS.

YEAH. SO, SO THESE LANDOWNERS THERE COULD BE MORE LANDOWNERS THAT AREN'T IN ANY DISTRICT NEARBY THAT WILL WANT TO COME IN LATER.

BUT RIGHT NOW, THESE TWO, SINCE THEY HAVE, AS I UNDERSTAND THE PAPERWORK, THEY HAVE OTHER LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT, THEY KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND THEY SEE THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS.

SO THEY WANT TO JUST INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL TERRITORY IN WHAT MAY BE COMING AND BE HOPEFUL.

HOPEFUL BECAUSE, YEAH, THE LIVELIHOOD OF YOUR FARM IS DEPENDING ON THE DECLINING GROUNDWATER THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE WORTH MUCH IF YOU DON'T PROTECT THAT.

THEY WERE TRYING TO GET SO THAT THEY HAD A SEAT AT THE TABLE AT THE GSA.

AND SO THEN I GUESS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION SIMILAR WAS DIFFERENT, BUT MADE ME THINK OF IS AS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIONS THEY'RE CURRENTLY NOT PROVIDE THIS DISTRICT DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY WATER, AND WE'RE MAKING A DETERMINED BASED UPON THAT.

WHAT HAPPENS DOWN THE ROAD IF SOME THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE SOME WATER.

IT DOES. THIS DOESN'T PREVENT THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO BECAUSE NOW THEY'RE A PART OF THE DISTRICT AND CORRECT.

YES. CORRECT.

OKAY. SO IN A CERTAIN WAY, IT'S JUST LIKE THE AMG ANNEXATION.

IT'S BARE GROUND.

IT'S BEING FARMED.

SOMEDAY THEY'LL DEVELOP IT AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT.

BUT IT'S IN THE CITY LIMITS.

WE WON'T SEE IT.

WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH SEWER AND WATER EXACTLY IS GOING TO BE NEEDED.

DEPENDING IT'S A WET MANUFACTURING OR SOMETHING, BUT WE DON'T KNOW.

BUT IT'S ALREADY IN THE CITY, SO IN THIS CASE IT'LL BE IN THE DISTRICT.

AND IF THEY CAN GET IRRIGATION WATER, IF THEY CAN GET OTHER OTHER PROGRAMS GOING AND BUILD FACILITIES, THEY'LL HAVE TO DO THEIR OWN CEQA FOR THOSE AND THEY'LL FIGURE OUT COSTS AND ALL THAT, BUT THEY'RE MANAGING IT WITHIN THE DISTRICT, SO WE WON'T SEE IT AS LAFCO ON THESE PARCELS TO SEE WHAT ARE THEY DOING.

THEY'LL BE TREATED JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PARCEL IN THE DISTRICT.

[00:45:02]

PERFECT. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? BILL IT WOULD BE HELPFUL NEXT TIME IF YOU PUT ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON ONE PAGE.

OR DO WE HAVE TO TAKE THESE AS TWO SEPARATE ITEMS? WE COULD I COULD JUST FLIP THE SLIDE.

IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION, I'LL ONE I'LL JUST FLIP THE SLIDE.

YEAH. GO AHEAD.

COMMISSIONER BERTAO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION? SURE. I WANT TO MAKE THEM ALL.

I'VE GOT A STRONG BACK. OH, YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.

LET ME FIND IT. YOU CAN.

HE HAS THEM RIGHT UP THERE ON THE I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT.

BRADEN-SEVERSON ANNEXATION OF THE BALLICO CORTEZ WATER DISTRICT LAFCO FILE NUMBER 700 AND RELATED TO THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT NUMBER 1004 A AND THAT WE ACCEPT ALL THE DETERMINATIONS, SO FORTH.

OKAY, OKAY.

AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

PERFECT. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND.

SO I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BERTAO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL NOT SEEING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

MOVING RIGHT ALONG.

HEAVY AGENDA TODAY HERE AT LAFCO.

WE'RE MOVING RIGHT ALONG TO ITEM 6C THIS WOULD BE THE ADOPTION OF THE FINAL BUDGET FOR THE 24-25 FISCAL YEAR.

[VI.C. Adoption of the Final Budget for the 2024-25 Fiscal Year.]

OKAY. AND I HAVE POWERPOINT SLIDES IF WE WANT TO GO THERE.

AND OTHERWISE WE CAN JUST TALK THROUGH IT RATHER DO THAT.

I THINK WE COULD JUST TALK THROUGH IT.

EVERYBODY HAS A COPY OF IT.

THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'RE SEEING THIS.

OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT IN THIS MR. NICHOLSON. YES.

THERE IS. YEAH.

SO BASICALLY WE HAD THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND THE FINAL BUDGET, THERE WAS NO CHANGES SO THAT THERE'S, NO NUMBERS.

WE DID DO A POWERPOINT AT THE PROPOSED BUDGET, BY THE WAY.

THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY CHANGES IN ANY DOLLAR AMOUNTS OR ANY ACCOUNTS.

BUT THE HIGHLIGHTS OF IT ARE THAT THE.

SUPPORT FOR LAFCO THAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY BE GETTING FROM THE COUNTY COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS PRETTY MUCH GONE AWAY, EXCEPT FOR DANIELLE BETTENCOURT, OUR CLERK.

YEAH. AND IT'S IT WOULDN'T YOU WOULDN'T BE GETTING YOUR PACKETS IF IT WASN'T FOR DANIELLE IF IT WAS UP TO ME.

[LAUGHTER] BUT BEFORE FOR YEARS THERE WOULD BE PLANNER SUPPORT AND SO I WOULD REVIEW REPORTS OF PLANNERS.

BUT NOW I'M DOING PRETTY MUCH DOING EVERYTHING.

SO I SPENT MORE TIME AT A HIGHER RATE THAN WHAT THE COUNTY STAFF SUPPORT IS.

AND THE STAFF ISN'T BILLING TIME EXCEPT FOR DANIELLE.

SO BASICALLY WHAT'S AFFECTING IS ANOTHER ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

ASK FOR AN ADDITIONAL $20,000 BUDGET.

NOT THAT I'LL SPEND IT ALL, BUT IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR THAT WE'RE FINISHING UP BECAUSE I'M SPENDING MORE HOURS THAN I ANTICIPATED.

AND SO NEXT YEAR INSTEAD OF SPENDING IN THE BUDGET 33 HOURS A MONTH WAS WHAT WE WERE BUDGETING.

I'VE ASKED FOR 45 BECAUSE I'M THINKING IT'S GOING TO BE CAN CONTINUE THAT WAY.

AND THAT'S THE TREND RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE GETTING WE'RE GOING TO START HAVING MEETINGS ALMOST EVERY MONTH.

THIS MONTH WE HAD TWO ITEMS FOR HEARINGS.

AND WE HAVE A UC MERCED ANNEXATION COMING NEXT MONTH.

AND THEN THE MONTH AFTER THAT, WE'LL HAVE THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST ANNEXATION.

AND THESE ARE HEAVY, HEAVY LIFTING PROJECTS THAT ARE COMPLICATED.

SO ANYWAY, IT'S NOT A BIG ISSUE.

BUT THAT'S REALLY THE TREND IS THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE TIME ON THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS SIDE.

SO AND WE ALREADY HAVE A CONTRACT AND IT'S THE COST OF LIVING INCREASE GOES BASED ON THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX EFFECTIVE IN MAY ACTUALLY. SO WE'RE JUST ESTIMATING THAT INCREASE.

BUT IT'S MORE IT'S THE HOURS THAT ARE CHANGING.

SO THE AMOUNT OF HOURS THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

SO OTHERWISE THINGS ARE, ARE GOING WELL, YOU KNOW, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.

AND AT THIS POINT, I'M HANGING AROUND, I'M COMING TO THE FINAL CONCLUSION BEFORE TOO LONG.

BUT I'M HANGING AROUND RIGHT NOW TO SUPPORT THE LAFCO OPERATION.

SO AS LONG AS YOU'LL HAVE ME PUT IT THAT WAY.

GOOD TO HEAR, MR. NICHOLSON.

GOOD TO HEAR. ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IF THERE ARE NO COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS, I AM GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM ON 6C THE ADOPTION.

HOLD ON. LET ME GET TO MY PAGE.

THE ADOPTION OF THE FINAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 24-25.

[00:50:04]

SO WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 11:01.

ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? NOT SEEING ANYONE.

WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AT 11:01, AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS WHERE THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HOGUE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW, I'M GOING TO USE CHAIR'S DISCRETION ONE MORE TIME HERE BECAUSE WE ALREADY DID ITEM 7 A I'M GOING TO SKIP ITEM 7B AND MOVE TO

[VII.C. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding with Merced County for Staff Support for the 2024-25 Fiscal Year]

ITEM 7C, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH MERCED COUNTY FOR THE STAFF SUPPORT FOR 24-25 FISCAL YEAR.

AND THE REASON THAT WE'RE MOVING THIS IS, IS MR. NICHOLSON HAD ALREADY WROTE THE RESOLUTION WITH MY SIGNATURE.

AND IF THE CHAIRMAN CHANGES IT, HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO GO REDO IT.

SO JUST BY TAKING IT ONE STEP FORWARD, I WILL BE THE CHAIR.

AND IF IT PASSES, I CAN SIGN IT AND WE CAN MOVE ALONG.

SO MR. NICHOLSON. YES, THIS IS JUST BECAUSE I'M CONSULTANT DIRECTLY TO LAFCO.

I HAVE A SEPARATE CONTRACT, BUT FOR DANIELLE'S STAFF SUPPORT AND FOR THE USE OF THE COUNTY FACILITIES AND ALL THAT WE GET BILLED LAFCO GETS BILLED FOR TIME AND MATERIALS.

SO WE HAVE WE EXECUTE THAT THROUGH AN MOU WITH MERCED COUNTY AND LAFCO.

SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU, IT'S AN ANNUAL PROCESS THAT WE DO EACH YEAR AND IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE CCID ACCOUNTING STAFF AND ALSO BY COUNTY COUNCIL. SO JUST ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT APPROVAL OF THE MOU AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN.

ALL RIGHT. SO THIS MOU IS FOR $13,196.

YES, YES IT DOES.

ALL RIGHT WOULD THE PUBLIC LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? [INAUDIBLE] I'M LOOKING AT YOU, YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE OUT THERE.

SORRY. OKAY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS.

CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.

I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HOGUE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW WE WILL MOVE ON TO.

WE'LL MOVE BACK UP TO ITEM.

OH, YEAH. I LOST MY PLACE HERE.

HOLD ON A SECOND. YEAH.

ITEM 7B ELECTION OF COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON.

[VII.B. Election of Commission Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson]

SO DID YOU JUST VOLUNTEER TO BE THE CHAIR? I DID NOT. NO JUST FOR THAT VOTE.

FIRST OFF, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A BUSY YEAR WITH, WITH UC MERCED ANNEXATION.

AND WE ALL KNOW THAT FOLLOWING THAT IS THERE ON A PARALLEL PATH IS THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST ANNEXATION.

AND SO I WOULD, IF ANYBODY'S INTERESTED, SPEAK NOW.

IF NOT, CONTINUE WITH WHAT WE HAVE.

I WAS OUR VICE CHAIR.

NOW, BOB IS BOB.

YOU WON'T BE CHAIR.

IF YOU WANT TO BE CHAIR, SAY YES.

I NOMINATE YOU AS CHAIR.

I SECOND THAT NOMINATION.

OKAY, THERE WE GO.

AND IN THE INTEREST OF CONTINUING, APRIL, DO YOU WANT VICE CHAIR? I'M ONLY GOING TO BE HERE UNTIL NOVEMBER.

YEAH. OKAY. YEAH VICE CHAIR, HOW ABOUT BRIAN RAYMOND? WELL, ARE YOU GOING TO BE THE WHO'S GOING TO BE THE REGULAR COUNTY MANAGER AFTER? OH, THAT'S RIGHT. NOW I'LL LET YOU DO THAT BECAUSE I'M ALTERNATE.

YEAH. BUT YOU'RE. YEAH.

I DON'T THINK WE COULD MAKE AN ALTERNATE VICE CHAIR, COULD WE? NO, NO. OKAY.

THAT'S ONLY CAL LAFCO.

YEAH, WELL, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN BACK PERFECT. OKAY, DARREN.

JUST SWITCH SPOTS. I'LL MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.

ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ANYBODY ELSE WANTS IN? WE'RE ALL GOOD WITH THAT. SO THE NOMINATION WOULD BE COMMISSIONER BERTAO AS THE CHAIR AND MYSELF AS THE VICE CHAIR.

CORRECT. WOULD THE PUBLIC LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE COMMENT.

WE HAVEN'T VOTED YET.

YEAH, EXACTLY.

ALL RIGHT. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

OKAY. GOING FORWARD, I AM GOING TO LET BRIAN RAYMOND KNOW THAT WE NOMINATED HIM AS CHAIR.

JUST IF HE. YEAH.

YEAH, YEAH. OKAY.

MOVING ON TO I'M GOING TO JUST FINISH OUT THE MEETING UNLESS YOU WANT TO JUMP IN BOB.

ITEM D APPROVE A BUDGET TRANSFER IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 23-24 BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 INTO ACCOUNT NUMBER 21810 PROFESSIONAL AND SPECIAL SERVICES

[VII.D. Approve a Budget Transfer in the current Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget in the amount of $20,000 into Account No. 21810 “Professional & Special Services – Contractual Agreements” with the funds transferred from the following accounts: $9,600 from Account No. 74000 “Contingencies” and $10,400 from Account No. 21840 “Professional and Special Services – Administrative Services” for an increase in Executive Officer services due to application activity.]

[00:55:03]

CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS WITH THE FUNDS TRANSFERRED FROM THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS 9600 FROM ACCOUNTS, 74,000 CONTINGENCIES AND 10,400 FROM ACCOUNT NUMBER 21840. PROFESSIONAL AND SPECIAL SERVICES.

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES. FOR AN INCREASE IN THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SALARIES DUE TO APPLICATION ACTIVITY.

SO I THINK MR. NICHOLSON KIND OF HIT ON THIS IS UTILIZING LESS OF THE COUNTY'S STAFF.

SO HE'S DOING MORE WORK.

AND AS YOU GUYS SEEN ON TODAY'S AGENDA, THERE WAS TWO ITEMS. SO I DON'T EVEN THINK YOU NEED TO INTRODUCE THE ITEM.

MR. NICHOLSON, I THINK I DID A FAIR ENOUGH JOB OF THAT.

SO WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? A MOTION TO APPROVE. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BERTAO TO APPROVE ITEM 7D WOULD THE PUBLIC LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM. NOT SEEING ANYONE BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

YOU KNOW WHAT? WE DON'T JINX IT, BOB.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD OUR BUDGETS EVERY YEAR AND HISTORICALLY WE'VE BEEN UNDER BUDGET EVERY YEAR.