HomeMy WebLinkAbout5-28-13 Agenda Packet1
City of Morro Bay
City Council Agenda
________________________________________________________________________
Mission Statement
The City of Morro Bay is dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of the quality of life.
The City shall be committed to this purpose and will provide a level of municipal service and
safety consistent with and responsive to the needs of the public.
________________________________________________________________________
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2013
CLOSED SESSION
CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM - 5:00 P.M.
595 HARBOR ST., MORRO BAY, CA
ESTABLISH QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER
SUMMARY OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS - The Mayor will read a summary of Closed
Session items.
CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS - Members of the public may address the City
Council on any matter that is listed on this Closed Session agenda. Unless additional time is
authorized by the City Council, remarks shall be limited to three minutes.
THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MOVE TO CLOSED SESSION
CS-1 GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8; PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS:
Instructing City's real property negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment for
the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property as to three parcels.
Property: Vacant Lot/Corner of Coral/San Jacinto
Negotiating Parties: Jeff Edwards and City of Morro Bay
Negotiations: Voluntary Purchase and Sale
Property: 887 Atascadero Road
Negotiating Parties: Clarice E. Righetti Trust and City of Morro Bay
Negotiations: Voluntary Purchase and Sale
Property: 307 Morro Bay Blvd
Negotiating Parties: Scott Meisterlin and City of Morro Bay
Negotiations: Lease Terms and Conditions
RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION – Announcement of reportable action from closed
session, if any.
2
PUBLIC SESSION
VETERANS MEMORIAL HALL - 6:00 P.M.
209 SURF ST., MORRO BAY, CA
ESTABLISH QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER
MOMENT OF SILENCE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENT - Members of the audience wishing to address the Council on City
business matters not on the agenda may do so at this time. For those desiring to speak on items
on the agenda, but unable to stay for the item, may also address the Council at this time.
To increase the effectiveness of the Public Comment Period, the following rules shall be
followed:
When recognized by the Mayor, please come forward to the podium and state your
name and address for the record. Comments are to be limited to three minutes.
All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual
member thereof.
The Council respectfully requests that you refrain from making slanderous, profane or
personal remarks against any elected official, commission and/or staff.
Please refrain from public displays or outbursts such as unsolicited applause,
comments or cheering.
Any disruptive activities that substantially interfere with the ability of the City
Council to carry out its meeting will not be permitted and offenders will be requested
to leave the meeting.
Your participation in City Council meetings is welcome and your courtesy will be
appreciated.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to
participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk, (805) 772-6205. Notification 72 hours
prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility
to this meeting.
A. CONSENT AGENDA
Unless an item is pulled for separate action by the City Council, the following actions are
approved without discussion.
A-1 APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OF MAY 14, 2013; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as submitted.
3
A-2 EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
FOR $35,000 TO FINALIZE CREATION OF THE MORRO BAY COMMUNITY
QUOTA FUND NON-PROFIT AND TO SUPPORT REGIONAL FISHING
ASSOCIATION DEVELOPMENT; (ADMINISTRATION/HARBOR)
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize execution of the attached $35,000 grant agreement
with The Nature Conservancy (TNC) to provide staff and outside legal counsel
support for formation of the Morro Bay Community Quota Fund (MBCQF) and
support of regional fishing associations..
A-3 ANNUAL UPDATE ON CURRENT LEGISLATIVE BILLS PENDING IN
SACRAMENTO; (CITY ATTORNEY)
RECOMMENDATION: Review this report and if there are any pending Legislative
Bills that are of interest or concern, discuss them with your City Attorney.
A-4 APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 3031 (1885 IRONWOOD AVE.) AND ACCEPT THE
DEDICATION FOR A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (MORRO DEL MAR
PROPERTIES LLC, SUBDIVIDER); (PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Tract Map 3031 with the acceptance of associated
Public Utility Easement.
A-5 STATUS REPORT OF A MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIR PLAN (MMRP) FOR
THE EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this report be received and filed.
A-6 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY,
CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS IN CELEBRATING THE CITY OF
MORRO BAY’S 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF INCORPORATION;
(ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 31-13.
A-7 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY,
CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING INCREASED FUNDING TO THE CALIFORNIA
COASTAL COMMISSION (CCC) TO SUPPORT ENHANCED LOCAL COASTAL
PLAN PLANNING AND UPDATES
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 30-13
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE
D. NEW BUSINESS
4
D-1 WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (WRF) PROJECT STATUS AND
DISCUSSION; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Discuss in open session, the progress to date on the Water
Reclamation Facility (WRF) and provide direction to staff as necessary.
D-2 HISTORY AND STATUS OF WATER RIGHTS ISSUES IN THE CHORRO
VALLEY; (PUBLIC SERVICES/CITY ATTORNEY)
RECOMMENDATION: Review the staff report on the City’s water history and our
current ongoing practices related to the City’s water rights and issues surrounding
the Chorro Valley. After review, public comment and discussion, provide any
further direction to Staff.
D-3 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY BOARD
REGARDING THE REQUEST FROM THE MORRO BAY CITIZEN’S TREE
COMMITTEE FOR LISTING OF LANDMARK TREES; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the listing of the 20 Landmark Trees at ten locations
as recommended by the Public Works Advisory Board (PWAB) on May 23, 2013.
D-4 DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON FUTURE EXPIRING LEASES AND
CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS RECEIVED FOR LEASE SITES 30W-33W
(COAKLEY – BAY FRONT MARINA), 34W (CRIZER), 35W-36W (VACANT), AND
37W (MEYER – MORRO BAY MARINA INC.); (HARBOR)
RECOMMENDATION: Consider alternatives and provide direction to staff.
D-5 REVIEW OF THE 2008 MANAGEMENT PARTNER STUDY (ASSESSMENT OF
CITY ORGANIZATION AND FINANCIAL OPTIONS), INCLUDING PROGRESS
ON THE 21 EXPENDITURE CONTROL STRATEGIES, 13 REVENUE CREATION
STRATEGIES AND 4 LONG RANGE STRATEGIES AND PROVIDE FURTHER
DIRECTION TO STAFF; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Review the attached report on the progress made on the 21
Expenditure Control Strategies, 13 Revenue Creation Strategies and 4 Long Range
Strategies from the 2008 Management Partners Assessment of City Organization
and Financial Options document and provide staff direction.
D-6 STATUS REPORT ON AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 17)
AS IT RELATES TO SECTION 17.48.32 (SECONDARY UNITS), SECTION
17.44.020.1 (NORTH MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL AREA PARKING) AND
SECTION 17.27 (ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Council review the materials presented in the packet by staff
and direct staff to submit to Coastal Commission a Local Coastal Plan amendment
to include all three Zoning Ordinance Amendments.
5
E. COUNCIL DECLARATION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
F. ADJOURNMENT
THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT UP TO 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THE DATE AND TIME
SET FOR THE MEETING. PLEASE REFER TO THE AGENDA POSTED AT CITY HALL FOR ANY
REVISIONS OR CALL THE CLERK'S OFFICE AT 772-6205 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION.
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL
AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION
AT CITY HALL LOCATED AT 595 HARBOR STREET; MORRO BAY LIBRARY LOCATED AT 625
HARBOR STREET; AND MILL’S COPY CENTER LOCATED AT 495 MORRO BAY BOULEVARD
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, IF YOU NEED SPECIAL
ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN A CITY MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE AT LEAST 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING TO INSURE THAT REASONABLE
ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO PROVIDE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE MEETING.
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING – MAY 14, 2013
VETERAN’S MEMORIAL HALL – 6:00P.M.
PRESENT: Jamie Irons Mayor
Christine Johnson Councilmember
Nancy Johnson Councilmember
George Leage Councilmember
Noah Smukler Councilmember
STAFF: Andrea Lueker City Manager
Robert Schultz City Attorney
Jamie Boucher City Clerk
Amy Christey Police Chief
Steve Knuckles Fire Chief
Eric Endersby Harbor Director
Susan Slayton Administrative Services Director
Joe Woods Recreation & Parks Director
Mayor Irons called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ESTABLISH QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER
MOMENT OF SILENCE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CLOSED SESSION REPORT – There was no closed session.
MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS &
PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENT
Colleen Wall, Choir Director at Morro Bay High School, thanked everybody for their support
and commitment to the MBHS Music program. She advertised the upcoming Bands on the Run
event. She then introduced the Chamber Choir who sang “Chattanooga Choo Choo”
Betty Winholtz spoke on Item B-4, the Toro Lane Abandonment proposal stating that this
disturbed her for 3 reasons: ~the community is completely 99% saying don’t abandon; ~the City
Council directed staff to come back with options; and, ~there are no options to choose from.
Steve Shively sat on the Selection Committee for the New WRF Consultant and wanted to thank
all 5 Councilmembers for giving him the opportunity. He felt the process worked well and that
the committee was able to select a very good consultant to move forward with. He encourages
the City utilize this same process in the future. And he also encourages more of the community,
for and against, to be part of the process as it is the way to be heard.
AGENDA NO: A-1 MEETING DATE: 5/28/2013
2
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
Debbie Clark, President of the MBHS Music Boosters, advocated for music on behalf the
booster’s program as they provide for the needs of the MBHS music department and students,
filling the gap between the school budget and the needs of the music program, education and
scholarships. She invited the community to their inaugural event, Bands on the Run with a
spaghetti feed being held on Friday, May 24th and the Fun Run on Saturday, May 25th.
Rigmore thanked the City for the sidewalk repair on Market Avenue between Beach and Surf, it
was a beautiful job. She is now looking forward to tree planting. She also hopes the City will
grant her son a permit to put concrete by the windows on the Sun Bulletin building.
Brian Stacy is looking for help as he feels he has no civil rights and is being blocked access to
law enforcement and civil liberties. He is hopeful that the Council can help get his civil liberty
back.
Trina Dougherty spoke on behalf of Eco Rotary advertising their upcoming event – Green Light
Eco Faire benefitting Unite to Lights solar reading lights which are distributed worldwide to
underdeveloped areas where there is little to no electricity. The event is being held on Sunday,
June 2nd from noon – 5pm at St. Timothy’s. This is a zero waste event, admission is free, and to
date, they have over 30 Eco-focused vendors attending.
Lynda Merrill spoke in support of Item B-2 and B-3, approving the intent to levy the assessments
at North Point and Cloisters. She also spoke on Item B-4, the Toro Land Abandonment proposal
and she asked Council to terminate the abandonment proceedings as open space is rare, this is
priceless property and there may be wonderful future uses. She also supports Item D-1, allowing
the Library to use a City facility; she says no to Item D-2 as she says no special privileges please
and asked Council to carry on with Item D-3, the WRF Status Report.
John Dinunzio spoke on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce/Economic Development Program
advertising 3 upcoming activities/events: ~Morro Bay City Services and Retail Needs Survey
urging residents to please fill it out; ~Event Planners Meeting being held on Wednesday, May
29th from 830-1030am at the Fire Dept; and a Job Seeker Academy on June 9th from 830am-
430pm at the Veteran’s Hall.
Michele Jacquez, Chair of the MBTBID, urged Council’s continued support of the Tourism
Bureau by passing the Resolution levying the TBID assessments.
Joan Solu, on behalf of the Community Foundation, promoted a fundraising event being
sponsored by Studio Fitness benefitting the Community Foundation. She also thanked the City
for their ongoing support of the Foundation. Regarding Item B-1, the MBTBID Assessment, she
stressed that Morro Bay and the MBTBID has a wonderful, open-line of communication with the
Hoteliers and are happy to hear from them at any time. Also, regarding Item A-5, she supports
the Morro Creek project feeling it is a wonderful project for the community.
Dawn Beattie, resident at the Cloisters, brought up a request to direct staff to provide history of
and further direction to, get the raised overlook at the south end of the Cloisters community
beach access rebuilt. And if staff doesn’t have the information, to let the Cloisters residents
know who they can contact in order to move forward.
3
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
Carrie Burton spoke on Item D-5, History and Status of Water Rights Issues in the Chorro
Valley. She stated that when these issues started in the Chorro Valley, residents were told they
had no contracts, they had no rights and they were done. Since that time, she has found 3
contracts issuing her water on 3 different dates. Her issue lately is - does the City even know
what their rights are. She has recently dug up 2 Resolutions from back in 1964 where the
County of SLO transferred over a water district to the City of Morro Bay which also included
assets such as her wells, her pipelines, her property, the land, etc. The Resolutions also talk
about incorporated boundaries and service boundaries of the Chorro Valley.
Susan Stewart encouraged everybody to fill out the Survey that was mailed to residents. It’s
almost a duplicate of a survey done 20 years ago; the value will be in the comparison from then
to now. This is an important way to look at what residents are wanting and feel they are missing
in town.
Mayor Irons closed the public comment period.
A. CONSENT AGENDA
Unless an item is pulled for separate action by the City Council, the following actions are
approved without discussion.
A-1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 23, 2013; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as submitted.
A-2 APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OF APRIL 23, 2013; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as submitted.
A-3 APPOINTMENT OF ONE (1) RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION MEMBER
TO A CURRENT BOARD VACANCY; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Appoint Bob Swain to the vacancy on the Recreation & Parks
Commission for the remainder of the term which expires January 31, 2014.
A-4 AUTHORIZATION TO FILE NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR PROJECT NO.
MB2012-WC01: MORRO BAY LIFT STATION 3 AND SSFM UPGRADE (PUBLIC
SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to file the Notice of Completion for Morro Bay
Lift Station 3 and Sanitary Sewer Force Main Upgrade Project and transfer
required funds from the Sewer Accumulation fund to the Lift Station 3 SSFM
Upgrade project..
4
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
A-5 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MATCHING FUNDS AND GRANT AGREEMENT
FOR THE MORRO CREEK MULTI-USE TRAIL AND BRIDGE PROJECT; (PUBLIC
SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 29-13 authorizing execution of the grant
agreement and approving matching requirements amounting to 20% of project
costs.
Mayor Irons opened up the public comment period for items on the Consent Calendar; seeing
none, the public comment period was closed.
Councilmember Christine Johnson pulled Items A-3 and A-5 from the Consent Calendar.
MOTION: Councilmember Nancy Johnson moved the City Council approve Items A-
1, A-2, and A-4 of the Consent Calendar as presented. The motion was seconded by
Councilmember Smukler and carried unanimously 5-0.
A-3 APPOINTMENT OF ONE (1) RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION MEMBER
TO A CURRENT BOARD VACANCY; (ADMINISTRATION)
Councilmember Christine Johnson pulled this item to recognize Bob Swain for his desire to
serve on the Commission. Councilmember Noah Smukler thanked Bob Swain for his
perseverance.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved the City Council approve Item A-3. The
motion was seconded by Councilmember Nancy Johnson and carried unanimously 5-0.
A-5 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MATCHING FUNDS AND GRANT AGREEMENT
FOR THE MORRO CREEK MULTI-USE TRAIL AND BRIDGE PROJECT; (PUBLIC
SERVICES)
Councilmember Christine Johnson pulled this item stating that in 2012, the bridge over Morro
Creek was the #1 unmet bike and pedestrian need in the City. She feels it would be wonderful if
it were open by July 4, 2014. She thanked staff for bringing this forward. Councilmember
Smukler added that the RFP for this project has been released.
MOTION: Councilmember Christine Johnson moved the City Council approve Item
A-5. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Smukler and carried unanimously 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
B-1 RESOLUTION NO. 28-13 CONTINUING THE PROGRAM AND LEVYING THE
ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2013/14 FISCAL YEAR FOR THE MORRO BAY
TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (MBTBID);
(ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES)
Administrative Services Director Susan Slayton presented the staff report.
5
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
Mayor Irons opened the public comment period for Item B-1; seeing none, the public comment
period was closed.
Councilmember Smukler recognized the work put in getting to this point and has been impressed
to see the new leadership of the Director of Tourism.
Mayor Irons stated there has been positive movement and the transition has been swift and
positive.
MOTION: Councilmember Christine Johnson moved approval of Resolution 28-13,
levying the assessments for the 2013/14 fiscal year for the MBTBID. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Leage and carried unanimously 5-0.
B-2 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ENGINEERS REPORT AND DECLARING THE
INTENT TO LEVY THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH POINT
NATURAL AREA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; (RECREATION & PARKS)
Recreation & Parks Director Joe Woods presented the staff report.
Mayor Irons opened the public comment period for Item B-2; seeing none, the public comment
period was closed.
MOTION: Councilmember Christine Johnson moved to approve Item B-2, approving
the Engineers Report and declaring the intent to levy the annual assessment for the North
Point Natural Area Landscaping and lighting Maintenance Assessment District. The
motion was seconded by Mayor Irons and carried unanimously 5-0.
B-3 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ENGINEERS REPORT AND DECLARING THE
INTENT TO LEVY THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE CLOISTERS
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT;
(RECREATION & PARKS)
Recreation & Parks Director Joe Woods presented the staff report.
Mayor Irons opened up the public comment period for Item B-3.
John Lauffer, a Cloisters resident, urged the Council to review the Engineer’s Report for
accuracy and determination of which costs are applicable. He also supplied a list of questions
that he hoped would assist Council in their review. Is the report current, complete and accurate?
Which of the estimated costs are to maintain areas that are a special benefit to the residents of the
special tax district that are not available to the general public? He maintains that the only special
benefit is the watering and maintenance of each of the parcel parkways, between the sidewalk
and curb.
Dawn Beattie, a Cloisters resident, questioned the dollar amount in the Engineer’s Report. The
$148,944 amount never changes, year to year. She states that the residents have never seen a
6
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
true-bottoms up estimate of what contractually needs to get done at how much that will cost. She
also states that the breakout of dollar amounts in excess of the outside contractor amount have
been hard to come by. Before approving this year’s Engineer’s Report, she requests that the last
section of the report titled “extra work” be expanded to include items in the budget that are not
described anywhere else in the report, especially deferred maintenance.
The public comment period for Item B-3 was closed.
Mayor Irons requested that the questions raised by citizens in public comment be answered in the
next staff report.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved to approve Item B-3, approving the
Engineer’s Report and declaring the intent to levy the annual assessment for the Cloisters
Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District. The motion was seconded
by Councilmember Christine Johnson and carried unanimously, 5-0.
B-4 PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND PROVIDE
FURTHER DIRECTION TO STAFF AND APPLICANT REGARDING A REQUEST
FOR AN ABANDONMENT (E00-103) AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
(CP0-391) TO ALLOW THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC
RIGHT OF WAY (ROW) NOT USED FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES USING
THE PROCEDURES PROVIDED BY THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND
HIGHWAYS CODE, SECTION 8300 ET SEQ. THE ABANDONMENT IS LOCATED
WESTERLY OF THE EXISTING BACK OF CURB OF TORO LANE, BETWEEN
YERBA BUENA AND NORTH POINT SUBDIVISION. (GREG FRYE, 3420 TORO
LANE, APPLICANT); (PUBLIC SERVICES)
Public Services Director Rob Livick presented the staff report.
Applicant Greg Frye made a presentation in which he offered an option for the surplus land
which he felt would provide more usable land for use by the City as well as sell a smaller, less
usable portion of the surplus land. His proposal would require a lot line adjustment trading a
section of his land for a section of City owned land. This proposal would increase the land depth
from 25 – 40 feet on the northern end and from 20-30 feet on the southern end. The City land
would now have a much greater usefulness for our community compared with what the City
owns and is more than adequate for additional perpendicular parking increasing the current 4
spaces to possibly as many as 10 spaces with room for loading and unloading. In addition to the
lot line adjustment, he would be interested in purchasing the remainder of the surplus land
adjacent to his Parcel 1. This surplus land has very little additional use for the City due to the
topography, slope and ESH. The City can also generate some revenue from the sale. He feels
that this proposal represents a win-win solution for both parties. He requests that Council
proceed with a vote for this proposal tonight so that the process can be completed in an efficient
and timely manner. He also requests an appraisal to establish the square footage price of the
surplus land.
Mayor Irons opened up the public comment period for Item B-4.
7
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
Bill Martoney has spoken in the past against the abandonment. He can possibly understand the
tradeoff for parking; but doesn’t want to sell the northern piece as it is the prime piece. That
said, he also doesn’t think that any of this should be abandoned. Before considering
abandonment, the City has options regarding parking and using this property in total without
abandoning it. He would use the northern part as a pocket park.
Dorothy Cutter feels you should save the property until you can think creatively about its future
or keep it and sell it for real market price. This property contains more than just the 6000 square
feet; it is ocean view and could be sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars. There is no benefit
to give it away but it can be of benefit for the future.
Barbara Doerr spoke stating that this idea is short-sighted and counter-productive. She also
requested that we look into something environmentally positive for our community; don’t
transfer public lands to benefit private property owners to create more pollution, hardscape and
urban runoff to pollute the ocean and environmentally sensitive natural areas. She requested we
plan ahead, do an inventory of vacatable lands and then set policy.
Barry Brannin stated that this City property has a path that runs diagonally through it to the
beach. Those that live on the east side of Highway 1 use the path to go down to the beach; this
path is also used by surfers. If the Coastal Commission sees that we’ve cut off coastal access to
the beach, they will be confused. There is no public access being proposed on this project.
Nancy Bast agrees wholeheartedly with the previous speakers. This is one of the most
picturesque ocean view pieces of land in Morro Bay and we own it; keep it for us.
Bob Geller agrees with the previous speakers. He requests denial of the abandonment. The land
is one of our greatest resources, once we give it away, we can never take it back. He urged
Council consider all benefits we could lose by doing this tonight.
Applicant Greg Frye responded to questions raised by those speaking in public comment. First,
when they went into escrow on this property, the prospect of abandonment had already been
raised by the previous owner and had never been on their radar. Second, the City owns the strip
of land and while there is a path that goes across their property, there is trespassing across there;
providing some kind of public access is fine but giving up the surplus land doesn’t change the
access. Third, as far as degrading it, right now it’s been unmaintained for 50 years; any
development would include beautification which could only be a plus. He feels that parking is a
big issue and he has done his best to provide something feasible.
The public comment period for Item B-4 was closed.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson likes the proposed changes the applicant has recommended as it
gives us additional parking that people want and gives him access and property he can use for his
front yard and/or driveway. If we agree to his idea, we aren’t cutting people off to the beach as
there is access up at North Point as well as access on Yerba Buena.
Councilmember Smukler feels that if we want to move forward we need some more details to
include some better understanding of public access possibilities, the parking component as well
8
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
as preliminary financial estimates. He also wants to focus on the strength of the public benefit
today and in the long term. He is interested in moving forward and evaluating the various
options. Knowing the range of property value to both the City and the applicant would be
important when making this decision.
Councilmember Leage likes the idea of the property swap. He agrees its 2 transactions and yes,
there is benefit for the property owner but there is also a lot of benefit to the City. We need to
find out if Mr. Frye is willing to do these separately.
Mayor Irons recognizes that this proposal brings public benefit in the form of additional parking.
Councilmember Smukler feels it’s possible to satisfy the historical public access and that we can
greatly increase the parking opportunities for the public and we can come up with a fair land
value that could be traded or sold. He feels we are fairly close to a win-win situation. His
thought is to direct staff to go back to pursue development scenarios with the applicant, reach out
to the Coastal Commission and come back with a more clear presentation of the existing public
access and the possible new public access and some different parking scenarios.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson feels this is taking more time than it needs to. She thinks we
have a really good compromise out there and wants to move forward with the Resolution of
Intention to Abandon.
Councilmember Leage agrees with moving forward with the Abandonment.
Councilmember Christine Johnson feels that the applicant has had the benefit of time to prepare
a plan while the City hasn’t and we do need to do our due diligence. This North Point parking
lot will be one of the access points for the Cayucos Morro Bay Bike Path. She feels we need to
think about day use parking needs. She also wants to take enough time to ensure we take into
account the public benefit. She would like staff come back with 2 or 3 options for parking;
better maps, clean daytime photos, what the beach access would be; and possible some proactive
dialogue with the neighbors. She also doesn’t feel that the Yerba Buena access point is
comparable to the access point at this property.
Mayor Irons agrees that moving forward in a continuation type of manner as we work out all the
details along with providing a Resolution of Intention. He summarized the item as follows:
explore what setback would look like at 20 feet and compare that to the North Point development
area; since we are talking about the Coastal Trail, we should reach out to SLOCOG to get their
input which can only make it better; parking options; reaching out to the Coastal Commission;
public access through the ESH area; fair value of the property; better maps; daytime photos; and
reaching out to neighbors. He feels we should challenge ourselves to come to the next meeting
with all that information and be prepared.
Staff was directed to bring back the Resolution of Intention along with a staff report answering
the questions above to the next Council meeting.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – NONE
9
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
D. NEW BUSINESS
D-1 CONSIDERATION OF ALLOWING THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO USE
THE FACILITY AT 535 HARBOR STREET FOR AN INTERIM LIBRARY DURING
THE MORRO BAY LIBRARY REMODEL; (ADMINISTRATION)
City Manager Andrea Lueker present the staff report.
Mayor Irons opened up the public comment period for Item D-1.
Barbara Doerr requested Council do anything SLO County wants to assist in preserving our
City’s library access during construction. One of our most valuable public assets in this City is
our library and we should do what we can to accommodate them.
The public comment period for Item D-1 was closed.
Councilmember Smukler agrees it’s a very important service and he is glad we are able to help
them.
Councilmember Christine Johnson presented some library facts. She also stated that reasons to
have a temporary library location is that it will serve as a delivery location for ordered books and
dvd’s. There is also a very vibrant book club/discussion group that will be meeting there. The
ability to check out some books and dvd’s will also be available. There should also be at least 1
public computer on-site. She appreciates the City partnering with the County.
Councilmember Leage approves of this temporary use.
MOTION: Councilmember Christine Johnson moved to approve Item D-1, alternative
#3, allowing the County of SLO to use the facility at 535 Harbor Street for an interim
library during the Morro Bay Library remodel. The motion was seconded by
Councilmember Smukler and carried unanimously 5-0.
D-2 REVIEW OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE AS IT RELATES TO MINOR USE
PERMIT FEES FOR THE BUSINESS PROPOSED FOR 1700 PARK AVENUE.
(TROSS MOBILE AUTOMOTIVE AND R/V REPAIR BUSINESS); (PUBLIC
SERVICES)
Public Services Director Rob Livick presented the staff report.
Mayor Irons opened the public comment period for Item D-2.
Applicant Steve Tross has been trying to get his business started since December 2012 and this
permit fee is holding him up. It’s a lot of money to pay; he even had to show staff where the
location was, they didn’t know as it isn’t on the address book. These types of fees aren’t good
for business as they deter people from opening a business in Morro Bay.
10
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
Barbara Doerr realizes that we can’t waive the fees but maybe we can set up a payment plan if he
truly can’t afford them. She also felt it necessary to establish a moratorium on any further
development of new businesses in that area until we come up with a new General Plan and Local
Coastal Plan.
The public comment period for Item D-2 was closed.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson doesn’t see any reason to waive the fees; she mentioned that
there is an empty auto repair shop on Quintana that wouldn’t necessitate a use permit fee.
Councilmember Smukler stated it would be dangerous for the City to waive fees as it opens the
door to additional requests. The City is only trying to recover its costs. In this case however it
offers up the opportunity to track staff costs as they deliver these kinds of processes which could
allow us to be more efficient.
Mayor Irons remembered that the last time a fee waiver was requested, we denied the waiver but
offered up a payment plan; he thinks the same can be done here. He also thought it might be a
good idea for the applicant to check out other locations that might not require the permit fees.
He would also support staff tracking their time and materials but doesn’t want the applicant to
have to pay more than the specified fee.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved to deny the application for waver of
permit fees; work with the applicant on a payment plan; and direct staff to track all
building and planning permit staff time across the board and return to council in an
appropriate period with a review of the results of that tracking and in this case, do not
exceed $698. The motion was seconded by Mayor Irons and carried unanimously 5-0.
D-3 WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (WRF) PROJECT STATUS AND
DISCUSSION; (ADMINISTRATION)
City Manager Andrea Lueker presented the staff report/time line.
Mayor Irons opened up the public comment period for Item D-3.
Don Boatman thanked the Council for electing him to the WRF Selection Committee. The
discussions held were honest and fair and he was extremely impressed with the selection
committee’s choice.
The public comment period for Item D-3 was closed.
There was no Council discussion on this item.
D-4 AUTHORIZE PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR TO FINALIZE THE CONTRACT
FOR THE PLANNING CONSULTANT FOR THE NEW WRF AND APPROVE THE
DRAFT “SCOPE OF WORK”; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
Public Services Director Rob Livick presented the staff report.
11
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
Mayor Irons opened up public comment for Item D-4; seeing none, the public comment period
was closed.
Councilmember Smukler recognizes how good he feels about this process. He would like to see
additional opportunities to include the public in this sort of capacity whether it’s advisory,
technical or financial committees. He thinks it would be beneficial to have site tours be public in
the form of special public meetings in order to create better understanding and help all of us to be
able to come to the best choice.
Councilmember Christine Johnson stated it was important to recognize that the 5 citizen’s served
the City very well. It should be viewed as a model for the future; by incorporating professionals
who live in Morro Bay into the process was very fortunate for us. This also allowed the process
to be viewed as professional, transparent and rigorous to the applicant. Based on the interview
process, she is confident the team understands Morro Bay and is happy to see the balance that
they bring; they have great project management experience and have lots of technical advisors as
well.
Mayor Irons had some questions with the provided scope of work, amendments were made as
follows: Page 3, Task #3, add …stakeholder group will be identified with the assistance of City
staff and City Council…; Page 6, Deliverables, add …our team will meet with City staff and
Coastal staff to go over the preliminary conclusions…; and Page 10, Task #13, …meeting with
staff and Coastal staff….
MOTION: Councilmember Christine Johnson moved for approval of Item D-4,
authorizing the Public Services Director to finalize the contract for the planning
consultant services for the new WRF and approve the draft “scope of work”. The motion
was seconded by Mayor Irons and carried 5-0.
D-5 HISTORY AND STATUS OF WATER RIGHTS ISSUES IN THE CHORRO
VALLEY; (CITY ATTORNEY/PUBLIC SERVICES)
This item was moved down on the agenda so Council could address Items D-6 and D-7.
Mayor Irons opened up public comment for Item D-5 and Item D-8.
Lexie Bell who works at the Morro Bay National Estuary Program thanked the City for
continuing to work at coming into compliance with their requirements on flow monitoring.
They wanted to let the City know they are working on a number of projects in Chorro Valley and
working with water users there to look at innovative solutions to winter water storage and other
water conservation measures.
Barbara Doerr stated that it appears we are in violation by not having continuous flow
monitoring for Chorro Creek; she suggested that if we postpone this item then we need to do
something about the continuous flow monitoring in the creek.
The public comment period for Items D-5 and D-8 was closed.
12
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
This item was never heard and was continued to a future meeting.
D-6 COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS FOR
CURRENTLY VACANT LEASE SITES 138-139 (BETWEEN NORTH T-PIER
PUBLIC RESTROOM AND CRILL’S), 107W-108W (ADJACENT TO SOUTH T-
PIER), AND 49/49W (SOUTH OF ASSOCIATED PACIFIC CONSTRUCTORS);
(HARBOR)
Harbor Director Eric Endersby presented the staff report.
Mayor Irons opened the public comment period for Item D-6.
Bill Martoney stated that the three lease sites have potential but haven’t been rented due to
limitations. He also brought up the fact that the Morro Bay Marina has 10 more years left on it;
if the Harbor Department is looking at generating revenue, it may be a site that the City can take
over as it’s only slips and shouldn’t be a big add-on to operate. The money could supplement the
loss of income from the power plant.
Barbara Doerr spoke advocating postponement of any action on these RFP’s until you have
reviewed and established suitable building standards for these parcels. She feels the sites are too
small for any development and if developed, may degrade surrounding currently profitable sites.
She also thought that once the Library was done using the 535 Harbor site, then the Harbor
Department could move up there, in a more central City location and leave the coastal dependent
Harbor employees along the Embarcadero.
The public comment period for Item D-6 was closed.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson would like to see the RFP’s put out; with the power plant
closing we need to move forward, even with small projects. You never know when something
has the potential for development unless you try. She does have a small concern with parking at
the 138-139 lease site as there is limited parking there.
Councilmember Smukler thinks it doesn’t hurt to put these RFP’s out. In 138-139, we need to
recognize that there could be a loss of parking.
Mayor Irons spoke on lease site 138-139 stating that he knows this site is being used for parking
and for storage. He questioned whether or not site 107W-108W was useable or not leading to
consideration if the City could build slips on that site. Regarding 49-49W has the potential for
recreational fishing slips there.
MOTION: Councilmember Nancy Johnson moved for approval of Item D-6,
consideration of requests for proposals for currently vacant lease sites 138-139, 107W-
108W, and 4-/49W. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Leage and carried
unanimously 5-0.
13
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
D-7 DISCUSSION ON OPENING THE BATHROOM AT LIFT STATION 2 ON THE
EMBARCADERO DURING SUMMER MONTHS; (RECREATION & PARKS)
Recreation & Parks Director Joe Woods presented the staff report.
As the time was approaching 11:00pm, there was Council discussion on continuing the meeting
or not.
MOTION: Mayor Irons moved to continue the City Council meeting past the
11:00pm hour. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Smukler and carried
unanimously 5-0.
Mayor Irons opened up the public comment period for Item D-7.
Barbara Doerr urged Council open this new restroom to the public for year round use. The
waterfront should serve visitors of all economic levels and that means numerous, clean
restrooms.
The public comment period for Item D-7 was closed.
Councilmember Leage has mixed emotions; any relief for people using restrooms at the
restaurants would be nice but this particular restroom is in a funny location and he doesn’t feel it
will get used very much.
Councilmember Christine Johnson is supportive of opening this restroom on a trial basis over the
summer; she also likes that it will give us the opportunity to sign it and sign the nearby parking
lot.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson is in favor of opening the restroom for visitors and residents
alike. She wants the restroom opened on a year-round basis or at least on weekends in the off
tourist season. She agreed we need to sign the parking lot. If a motion was made to only open
this for the summer, she would have to vote no as she needs to be responsible to the residents
who have repeatedly asked her for this.
Councilmember Smukler definitely agrees with initiating summer usage now, especially pairing
it with signage for the parking lot. Then for next year, take a look during budget for beyond the
summer months.
MOTION: Mayor Irons moved approval of Alternative #2, opening the bathroom at
Liftstation #2 from Memorial Day through Labor Day to include way finding public
restroom and parking lot signs with staff to come back with analysis for additional
review. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Christine Johnson and carried 4-1
with Councilmember Nancy Johnson voting no.
D-8 REVIEW OF THE 2008 MANAGEMENT PARTNER STUDY (ASSESSMENT OF
CITY ORGANIZATION AND FINANCIAL OPTIONS), INCLUDING PROGRESS
ON THE 21 EXPENDITURE CONTROL STRATEGIES, 13 REVENUE CREATION
14
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MAY 14, 2013
STRATEGIES AND 4 LONG RANGE STRATEGIES AND PROVIDE FURTHER
DIRECTION TO STAFF; (ADMINISTRATION)
Mayor Irons opened up public comment for Items D-6 and D-8 earlier in the meeting; there was
no public comment for Item D-8 and the public comment period was closed.
This item was never heard and was continued to a future meeting.
E. COUNCIL DECLARATION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Smukler requested a status report of the State Park Marina Agreement as it
relates to Operations and Management; Mayor Irons and Councilmember Christine Johnson
concurred.
Mayor Irons requested the preparation and discussion of a Parking Plan for uses at the Power
Plant Parking Lot; Councilmembers Christine Johnson and Leage concurred.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:19pm.
Recorded by:
Jamie Boucher
City Clerk
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 21, 2013
FROM: Andrea Lueker, City Manager
Eric Endersby, Harbor Director
SUBJECT: Execution of a Grant Agreement with the Nature Conservancy for $35,000 to
Finalize Creation of the Morro Bay Community Quota Fund Non-Profit and to
Support Regional Fishing Association Development
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council authorize execution of the attached $35,000 grant agreement
with The Nature Conservancy (TNC) to provide staff and outside legal counsel support for
formation of the Morro Bay Community Quota Fund (MBCQF) and support of regional fishing
associations.
ALTERNATIVES
Not applicable.
FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no direct fiscal impact from the grant; granted funds will be used to continue the work
of a part-time contract employee in addition to some outside expenses such as legal counsel. The
City will supply some in-kind services during the course of the grant to include office space in the
Public Services building, telephone, computer use and very limited clerical support.
SUMMARY
To date, the City of Morro Bay has accepted three grants totaling $255,000 toward the establishment
of the MBCQF to support the local commercial fishing industry. What is expected to be the final
grant required to complete the MBCQF process has been secured from TNC, and now requires City
Council authorization to complete.
AGENDA NO: A-2
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
Prepared By: ________ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________ City Attorney Review: ________
2
BACKGROUND
In September, 2010 the City Council approved a $70,000 grant from TNC to fund fisheries support
work in the new West Coast Trawl Individual Quota Program. On May 8, 2012 the City Council
approved an amendment to the original grant agreement to add $50,000 and continue the work until
August 31, 2012, when that agreement expired. Also in May 2012, the City Council approved a
$135,000 grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to create Fishing
Community Sustainability Plans in Morro Bay and Monterey as well as support Regional Fishing
Association development to continue the progress of the Morro Bay Community Quota Fund.
DISCUSSION
On January 1, 2011, the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) implemented a long-planned
Individual Quota (IQ) program in the West Coast Trawl Sector of the groundfish fishery. Each
owner of Trawl permits was given Quota Share (QS) commensurate with their historical catch level
in a 10-year window period. TNC acquired 13 trawl permits in the mid 2000’s, six of which were
historically associated with Morro Bay fishing operations. Those six permits represent a large
proportion of Morro Bay groundfish landings, and keeping these fishing privileges in Morro Bay is
critical to maintaining a level of landings to support necessary commercial fishing infrastructure
such as fuel, ice, fish buying stations, etc.
TNC and the City have worked together to form a non-profit Morro Bay Community Quota Fund to
acquire the QS associated with those six permits and to hold them in the community to be used by
local fishermen to the maximum extent possible for long term social, economic and conservation
benefits of the area.
More information on the MBCQF can be viewed at www.morrobaycommunityquotafund.org
Staff has now obtained what is expected to be the final grant from TNC to complete the formation of
the MBCQF, acquire Trawl Sector QS into the MBCQF, and begin leasing the annual Quota Pounds
out to fishermen, thereby generating revenue for the MBCQF in their efforts to be self-sufficient by
2014. This grant will allow the City to pay a part time temporary employee and potentially one
intern to complete MBCQF stand-up, support regional fishing association development, and some
limited outreach/community representation outside the community as shown in more detail on page
one of the attached TNC grant. The grant agreement will terminate on April 30, 2014 at which time
the MBCQF is expected to have its own employee(s) and be an independent, self supporting non-
profit organization.
CONCLUSION
In 2010 the City of Morro Bay accepted a $70,000 TNC grant to continue the process of
establishing a MBCQF and acquiring QS. In 2012 another $50,000 was added to that grant, and
also in 2012 the City accepted a $135,000 NFWF grant to create a Fishing Community
Sustainability Plan, which was required as part of the community quota fund process. Staff has
secured a $35,000 from TNC to complete the MBCQF start-up process and staff is recommending
authorization to execute the grant agreement.
Prepared By: ________ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________ City Attorney Review: ________
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 22, 2013
FROM: Robert Schultz, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Annual Update on Current Legislative Bills Pending in Sacramento
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that you review this report and if there are any pending Legislative Bills
that are of interest or concern, discuss them with your City Attorney.
ALTERNATIVES
There are no alternatives.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to provide this report. There is a significant amount of time and
expense required to participate in the various committees. These costs have been included in
the City Attorney budget.
SUMMARY
Pursuant to Council direction, each year the City Attorney follows and keeps informed on all
of the legislative bills that are pending in Sacramento and provides Council with a report on
the legislative bills that are important to both the City and the League of California Cities.
This report complies with that direction.
BACKGROUND:
During the annual evaluation of the City Attorney, City Council directed the City Attorney to
continue to be involved in state legislative issues and provide the City Council with reports on
pending legislation. In order to accomplish this goal, the City Attorney has been appointed by
the League of California Cities to sit on the Administrative Services Committee; the Housing,
Community and Economic Policy Committee; the Medical Marijuana Committee; and the
Nomination Committee. These Committees meet four times a year and are comprised of City
Officials from around the state. The Committees help to make League policy by reviewing the
AGENDA NO: A-3 MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
Staff Report
Page 2
2
law and legislation, suggesting broad new policy guidelines and studying key issues impacting
cities.
DISCUSSION
A summary of all of the Legislative Bills (1,732) currently pending is available in the Council
read file and is available for inspection and review by the public at City Hall. These legislative
Bills are being tracked by the League of California Cities and the City Attorney. The
following is a brief discussion of the most important pending legislative Bills that the City
Attorney will be discussing with our Legislature and their Staff in the upcoming months.
1. AB 5 (Ammiano D) Homelessness. Oppose.
This bill would enact the Homeless Person's Bill of Rights and Fairness Act, which
would provide that no person's rights, privileges, or access to public services may be
denied or abridged because he or she is homeless. The bill would provide that every
homeless person has the right, among others, to move freely, rest, eat, share, accept, or
give food or water, and solicit donations in public spaces, as defined, and the right to
lawful self-employment, as specified, confidentiality of specified records, assistance of
legal counsel in specified proceedings, and restitution, under specified circumstances.
2. AB 20 (Waldron R) Obscene matter: minors. Support.
This bill would provide that every person who is convicted of a violation of specified
offenses relating to obscene matter involving minors, as specified, in which the
violation is committed on, or via, a government-owned computer or via a government-
owned computer network, or in which the production, transportation, or distribution of
which involves the use, possession, or control of government-owned property shall, in
addition to any imprisonment or fine imposed for the commission of the underlying
offense, be punished by a fine not exceeding $2,000, unless the court determines that
the defendant does not have the ability to pay.
3. AB 22 (Blumenfield D) Sidewalks: repairs. Oppose
This bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county that has an ordinance in
operation that requires the city, county, or city and county to repair or reconstruct
streets, sidewalks, or driveways that have been damaged as a result of tree growth
from repealing the ordinance without the concurrence of the local electorate by
majority vote. The bill would also declare that this is a matter of statewide concern.
4. AB 28 (V. Manuel Pérez D) Economic development: enterprise zones. Support
This bill would revise various definitions for purposes of the Enterprise Zone Act and
modify specified requirements for designating and administering enterprise zones and
G-TEDAs, collectively. The bill would impose new requirements on the Department
Staff Report
Page 3
3
of Housing and Community Development with respect to the enterprise zone program
and modify department and Franchise Tax Board reporting requirements.
5. AB 116 (Bocanegra D) Land use: subdivision maps: expiration dates. Support
This bill would extend by 24 months the expiration date of any approved tentative map
or vesting tentative map that was approved on or after January 1, 2000. The bill would
additionally require the extension of an approved or conditionally approved tentative
map or vesting tentative map, or parcel map for which a tentative map or vesting
tentative map was approved on or before December 31, 1999, upon application by the
subdivider at least 90 days prior to the expiration of the map, as specified. By adding
to the procedures that local agency officials must follow, this bill would impose a
state-mandated local program.
6. AB 178 (Gaines, Beth R) Highways: exit information signs. Support.
Current law requires the Department of Transportation to adopt rules and regulations
that allow the placement, near exits on freeways in rural areas, of information signs
identifying specific roadside businesses. Current law prohibits the department from
approving the placement of any sign within any urban area with a population of 5,000
or more. This bill would require the department to allow the placement of information
signs within an urban area with a population of 50,000 or less if the urban area has had
a highway bypass completed since 2002.
7. AB 185 (Hernández, Roger D) Open and public meetings: televised meetings.
Oppose.
This bill would provide that an audio or video recording of an open and public meeting
made at the direction of a local agency may be erased or destroyed 2 years after the
recording. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
8. AB 194 (Campos D) Open meetings: protections for public criticism: penalties
for violations. Oppose.
This bill would make it a misdemeanor for a member of a legislative body, while
acting as the chairperson of a legislative body of a local agency, to prohibit public
criticism protected under the Ralph M. Brown Act. This bill would authorize a district
attorney or any interested person to commence an action for the purpose of obtaining a
judicial determination that an action taken by a legislative body of a local agency in
violation of the protection for public criticism is null and void, as specified.
9. AB 229 (John A. Pérez D) Local government: infrastructure and revitalization
financing districts. Support.
This bill would authorize the creation of an infrastructure and revitalization financing
district, as defined, and the issuance of debt with 2/3 voter approval. The bill would
Staff Report
Page 4
4
authorize the creation of a district for up to 40 years and the issuance of debt with a
final maturity date of up to 30 years, as specified. The bill would authorize a district to
finance projects in redevelopment project areas and former redevelopment project
areas and former military bases.
10. AB 265 (Gatto D) Local government liability: dog parks. Support if amended.
This bill would provide that a city, county, city and county, or special district that
owns or operates a dog park shall not be held liable for any injury or death suffered by
any person or pet resulting solely from the actions of a dog in the dog park.
11. AB 325 (Alejo D) Land use and planning: cause of actions: time limitations.
Oppose
The Planning and Zoning Law requires an action or proceeding against local zoning
and planning decisions of a legislative body to be commenced and the legislative body
to be served within a year of accrual of the cause of action, if it meets certain
requirements. Where the action or proceeding is brought in support of or to encourage
or facilitate the development of housing that would increase the community's supply of
affordable housing, a cause of action accrues 60 days after notice is filed or the
legislative body takes a final action in response to the notice, whichever occurs first.
This bill would authorize the notice to be filed any time within 3 years after a specified
action pursuant to existing law. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature
that its provisions modify a specified court opinion.
12. AB 436 (Jones-Sawyer D) Inverse condemnation: comparative fault. Support
Would apply the doctrine of comparative fault to inverse condemnation actions and
would require a court or arbitrator to reduce the compensation paid to a plaintiff in an
inverse condemnation proceeding in direct proportion to his or her percentage of fault,
if any, in the damaging of property that constitutes a taking, as specified.
13. AB 440 (Gatto D) Hazardous substances: releases: local agency cleanup or
remedy. Support
Would authorize a local agency to take any action similar to that under the Polanco
Redevelopment Act that the local agency determines is necessary, consistent with
other state and federal laws, to remedy or remove a release of hazardous substances
within the boundaries of the local agency, pursuant to the procedures specified in the
bill.
14. AB 473 (Ammiano D) Medical marijuana: state regulation and enforcement.
Oppose unless amended.
This bill would create the Division of Medical Marijuana Regulation and Enforcement
within the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The bill would grant the
division all power necessary to, among other things, establish statewide standards for
Staff Report
Page 5
5
the cultivation, manufacturing, testing, transportation, distribution, and sales of
medical marijuana and medical marijuana products, and a statewide fee scale in
relation to these activities. The bill would require the division to assist in the
development of uniform policies for the taxation of medical marijuana businesses and
establish a mandatory commercial registration program, as specified, which would
include an identification card program.
15. 517 (Achadjian R) Occupational safety and health: local public entities: penalty
moneys: grants. Support.
Would require any civil or administrative penalty assessed pursuant to the California
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 against a school district, county board of
education, county superintendent of schools, charter school, community college
district, California State University, University of California, or joint powers agency
performing education functions to be deposited with the Workers' Compensation
Administration Revolving Fund.
16. AB 537 (Bonta D) Meyers-Milias-Brown Act: impasse procedures. Oppose
Would authorize the representatives of the public agency or the employee
organization, if they fail to reach an agreement, to request mediation. The bill would
require that the parties agree upon the appointment of a mediator mutually agreeable to
the parties within 5 days of a request by one of the parties. If the parties fail to agree
on the selection of a mediator within 5 days, the bill would provide that either party
may request the appointment of a mediator, as specified. By requiring a higher level of
service by a local public agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local
program.
17. AB 562 (Williams D) Economic development subsidies: review by local agencies.
Oppose
Current law provides for various programs for economic development activities by
state and local agencies. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2014, require each local
agency to provide specified information to the public before approving an economic
development subsidy, as defined, within its jurisdiction, and to review, hold hearings,
and report on those subsidies at specified intervals.
18. AB 616 (Bocanegra D) Local public employee organizations: dispute: factfinding
panel. Oppose.
The bill would provide that if either party disputes that a genuine impasse, as defined,
has been reached, the issue of whether an impasse exists may be submitted to the
Public Employment Relations Board for resolution before the dispute is submitted to a
factfinding panel.
Staff Report
Page 6
6
19. AB 683 (Mullin D) Local government: fines and penalties: assessments. Support
Would, until January 1, 2020, authorize a city, county, or city and county to, after
notice and public hearing, specially assess any fines or penalties not paid after demand
by the city, county, or city and county against real property owned by the person
owing those fines or penalties, where the fines or penalties are related to ordinance
violations on the real property upon which the fines or penalties would be specially
assessed, and the ordinance violations constitute a threat to public health and safety.
This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to comply with certain notice
requirements.
20. AB 691 (Muratsuchi D) State lands: granted trust lands: sea level rise. Oppose
unless amended.
Would provide that addressing the impacts from sea level rise for all of its legislatively
granted public trust lands shall be among the management priorities of a local trustee,
as defined. The bill would require a local trustee whose gross public trust revenues
average over $250,000 annually between January 1, 2009, and January 1, 2014, to
prepare and submit to the State Lands Commission, no later than July 1, 2019, except
as provided, an assessment of how it proposes to address sea level rise. The bill would
permit, but not require, a local trustee whose gross public trust revenues are $250,000
or less to prepare and submit to the commission an assessment
21. AB 792 (Mullin D) Local government: open meetings. Support
The Ralph M. Brown Act requires that the agenda or notice of both regular and special
meetings be freely accessible to members of the public, and be posted on the local
agency's Internet Web site, if the local agency has one. This bill, if the local agency is
unable to post the agenda or notice on its Internet Web site because of software,
hardware, or network services impairment beyond the local agency's reasonable
control, would specify that the local agency may conduct the meeting as long as the
legislative body meets specified requirements, including, among other things, posting
the agenda or notice immediately upon resolution of the technological problems, as
specified.
22. AB 1229 (Atkins D) Land use: zoning regulations. Support
The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any city or county to
adopt ordinances regulating zoning within its jurisdiction, as specified. This bill would
additionally authorize the legislative body of any city or county to adopt ordinances to
establish, as a condition of development, inclusionary housing requirements, as
specified, and would declare the intent of the Legislature in adding this provision.
Staff Report
Page 7
7
23. AB 1237 (Garcia D) Local government finance. Oppose.
Would specifically require the Controller to prescribe uniform accounting procedures
for cities, conforming to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, and in
consultation with the Committee on City Accounting Procedures, which would be
created by the bill. The bill would specify the composition of the committee.
24. AB 1333 (Hernández, Roger D) Local government: contracts. Oppose.
Would require, with a specified exception, the legislative body of a city, county, or
district to review any contract or memorandum of understanding (MOU) with a private
party, with a total annual value of $250,000 or more and containing an automatic
renewal clause, at least once every three years on or before the annual date by which
the contract may be rescinded.
25. ACA 4 (Olsen R) Legislative procedure. Support
The California Constitution prohibits a bill other than the Budget Bill from being
heard or acted on by a committee or either house of the Legislature until the 31st day
after the bill is introduced, unless the house dispenses with this requirement by rollcall
vote entered in the journal, 3/4 of the membership concurring. This measure would
add an additional exception to this 31-day waiting period by authorizing a committee
to hear or act on a bill if the bill, in the form to be considered by the committee, has
been in print and published on the Internet for at least 15 days.
26. SB 33 (Wolk D) Infrastructure financing districts: voter approval: repeal.
Support.
Would revise and recast the provisions governing infrastructure financing districts.
The bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval for creation of the district
and for bond issuance, and would authorize the legislative body to create the district
subject to specified procedures. The bill would instead authorize a newly created
public financing authority, consisting of 5 members, 3 of whom are members of the
city council or board of supervisors that established the district, and 2 of whom are
members of the public, to adopt the infrastructure financing plan, subject to approval
by the legislative body, and issue bonds by majority vote of the authority by
resolution.
27. SB 64 (Corbett D) Proposition 39: implementation. Support.
Would require the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Commission to develop and administer programs, consistent with the California Clean
Energy Jobs Act, to provide financial assistance to school districts, cities, and counties
to install energy efficiency or clean energy technology in public schools and municipal
Staff Report
Page 8
8
facilities. The bill would appropriate for the 2013-14 fiscal year an unspecified sum
from the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund to the commission for the above purpose,
thereby making an appropriation.
28. SB 211 (Price D) Tax administration: disclosure of information: Franchise Tax
Board and cities. Support
Current law authorizes, until December 31, 2013, a city that has entered into a
reciprocal agreement, as defined, with the Franchise Tax Board, to exchange tax
information, as provided. This bill would extend the authorization until January 1,
2019, and extend the repeal date of the provisions relating to the reciprocal agreements
between the Franchise Tax Board and cities. This bill would add an additional
limitation on the use of the tax data to require the data to be utilized in a form and
manner to safeguard the tax information, as prescribed.
29. SB 313 (De León D) Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act.
Oppose.
Would prohibit a public agency from taking punitive action, or denying promotion on
grounds other than merit, against a public safety officer, because the officer's name
was placed on a “Brady list,” as defined. The bill would further prohibit the
introduction of any evidence in an administrative appeal of a punitive action that the
officer's name was placed on a Brady list, except as provided. The bill would
specifically not prohibit a public agency from taking punitive or personnel action
against a public safety officer based on the underlying acts or omissions for which that
officer's name was placed on the Brady list.
30. SB 388 (Lieu D) Public safety officers and firefighters: investigations and
interrogations. Oppose.
The Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act and the Firefighters
Procedural Bill of Rights Act require that, when any public safety officer or firefighter
is under investigation and subjected to interrogation by his or her commanding officer,
or any other member of the employing public safety department or fire department,
that could lead to punitive action, the interrogation be conducted under certain
conditions, except as specified. This bill would provide that the above-mentioned
conditions apply when any interrogation of a public safety officer or firefighter is
conducted, whether or not an investigation of that public safety officer or firefighter is
being conducted.
31. SB 391 (DeSaulnier D) California Homes and Jobs Act of 2013. Support
Would enact the California Homes and Jobs Act of 2013. The bill would make
legislative findings and declarations relating to the need for establishing permanent,
ongoing sources of funding dedicated to affordable housing development. The bill
would impose a fee, except as provided, of $75 to be paid at the time of the recording
Staff Report
Page 9
9
of every real estate instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be
recorded. By imposing new duties on counties with respect to the imposition of the
recording fee, the bill would create a state-mandated local program.
32. SB 470 (Wright D) Community development: economic opportunity. Support
Would state the intent of the Legislature to promote economic development on a local
level so that communities can enact local strategies to increase jobs, create economic
opportunity, and generate tax revenue for all levels of government. The bill would
define economic opportunity to include certain types of agreements, purposes, and
projects, and declare that it is the policy of the state to protect and promote the sound
development of economic opportunity in cities and counties, and the general welfare
of the inhabitants of those communities through the employment of all appropriate
means.
33. SB 673 (DeSaulnier D) Land use: development project review. Oppose.
Would require a city, county, or city and county, including a charter city or charter city
and county, prior to approving or disapproving a proposed development project that
would permit the construction of a retail or other commercial facility project, as
specified, to cause a cost benefit analysis to be prepared, as specified, which would be
paid for by the project applicant. This bill would provide that the cost-benefit analysis
would include specified assessments and projections including, among other things, an
assessment of the effect that the construction and operation of the proposed
development will have on the ability of the city, county, or city and county to
implement the goals contained in its general plan.
34. SCA 4 (Liu D) Local government transportation projects: special taxes: voter
approval. Support.
Would provide that the imposition, extension, or increase of a special tax by a local
government for the purpose of providing funding for local transportation projects
requires the approval of 55% of its voters voting on the proposition. This measure
would prohibit a local government from expending any revenues derived from a
special transportation tax approved by 55% of the voters at any time prior to the
completion of a statutorily identified capital project funded by revenues derived from
another special tax of the same local government that was approved by a 2/3 vote.
35. SCA 7 (Wolk D) Local government financing: public libraries: voter approval.
Support.
Would create an additional exception to the 1% limit for a rate imposed by a city,
county, city and county, or special district to service bonded indebtedness incurred to
fund public library facilities, that is approved by 55% of the voters of the city, county,
city and county, or special district, as applicable, if the proposition meets specified
requirements.
Staff Report
Page 10
10
36. SCA 8 (Corbett D) Transportation projects: special taxes: voter approval.
Support.
Would provide that the imposition, extension, or increase of a special tax by a local
government for the purpose of providing funding for transportation projects requires
the approval of 55% of its voters voting on the proposition.
37. SCA 9 (Corbett D) Local government: economic development: special taxes:
voter approval. Support.
Would provide that the imposition, extension, or increase of a special tax by a local
government for the purpose of providing funding for community and economic
development projects, as specified, requires the approval of 55% of its voters voting
on the proposition. The measure would also make conforming and technical,
nonsubstantive changes.
38. SCA 10 (Wolk D) Legislative procedure. Support
The California Constitution prohibits a bill other than the Budget Bill from being
heard or acted on by a committee or either house of the Legislature until the 31st day
after the bill is introduced, unless the house dispenses with this requirement by rollcall
vote entered in the journal, 3/4 of the membership concurring. This measure would
add an additional exception to this 31-day waiting period by authorizing a committee
to hear or act on a bill if the bill, in the form to be considered by the committee, has
been in print and published on the Internet for at least 15 days.
39. SCA 11 (Hancock D) Local government: special taxes: voter approval. Support
The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a local
government upon the approval of 2/3 of the voters of the local government voting on
that tax, and prohibits a local government from imposing an ad valorem tax on real
property or a transactions tax or sales tax on the sale of real property. This measure
would instead condition the imposition, extension, or increase of a special tax by a
local government upon the approval of 55% of the voters voting on the proposition.
The measure would also make conforming and technical, nonsubstantive changes.
CONCLUSION
After reviewing this report and the summary of the 1,732 pending legislative Bills, if there any
legislative Bills of special interest to you, contact the City Attorney.
Prepared By: __DH___ Dept Review:_RL____ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 21, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS –Director of Public Services/City Engineer
Damaris Hanson– Engineering Technician IV
SUBJECT: Approval of Tract Map 3031 (1885 Ironwood Ave.) and Accept the Dedication
for a Public Utility Easement (Morro del Mar Properties LLC, Subdivider)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council approve Tract Map 3031 with the acceptance of the associated
Public Utility Easement.
ALTERNATIVES
If City Council believes that the Subdivider has not met the conditions of approval, the City Council
can deny the approval of the Tract Map.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact as a result of this action.
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION
At its regular meeting on February 15, 2012 the Planning Commission approved the request for a
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (S00-107), Use Permit (UPO-316) and Coastal Development
Permit (CPO-349) for Tract Map 3031. This subdivision divides one 0.92 –acre parcel (1885
Ironwood, APN 068-231-018) into 15 lots for the development of 14 townhouse residences and
one common lot.
Since then, the applicant has satisfied all Conditions of Approval and Subdivision Map Act
requirements for the recordation of this map. The Final Map conforms to the approved tentative
map and per 16-4.207 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance, the City Council shall approve if these
requirements are met.
Due to the offer of dedication of the Public Utility Easement (per 16-4.208) the City Council
AGENDA NO: A-4
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
2
shall accept or reject without prejudice the offer of dedication. The Public Utility Easement
offer of dedication is on behalf of several public utilities.
CONCLUSION
Approval of a Tract Map is a "ministerial act", pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act
(Government Code Section 66474 .1), once the map is found to be in substantial conformance with
the approved tentative map. This parcel map has met all City regulations and no further discretionary
approvals are required. Staff recommends the City Council approve Tract Map 3031 with the
acceptance of associated Public Utility Easement shown in Attachment 1 by Resolution No. 32-13.
ATTACHMENT
1. Resolution No. 32-13
2. Tract Map 3031
RESOLUTION NO. 32-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF MORRO BAY APPROVING THE TRACT
MAP FOR AN A 15-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS TRACT 3031 AND
ACCEPTING THE ASSOCIATED PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT DEDICATION
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2012 the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing,
received public testimony, and after closing the public hearing fully considered the various issues
surrounding the case; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did approve the Vesting Tentative Map for Tract
3031, and associated development applications, subject to certain Conditions of Approval; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has previously made findings required by the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Morro Bay procedures for
implementation of CEQA; and
WHEREAS the applicant has since satisfied all Conditions of Approval and requests
permission to record the Tract Map; and
WHEREAS the applicant has installed per the approved Public Improvement Plans the
associated minor frontage improvements and the City Engineer has accepted these improvements as
complete; and
WHEREAS the applicant has offered to dedicate a public utility easement for the City to
accept on behalf of several public utilities; and
WHEREAS, the recordation of the final map is a ministerial act pursuant to the City of
Morro Bay Subdivision Ordinance and California Subdivision Map Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay,
California, that the City hereby approves the final map for Tract 3031 and accepts the associated
dedication of the public utility easement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay, California, at a
regular meeting held on the 28th day of May 2013, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JAMIE L IRONS, Mayor
ATTEST:
JAMIE BOUCHER, City Clerk
Attachemnt 1
Attachemnt 1
Attachemnt 1
Prepared by: __RL__ Dept. Review: RL__
City Manager Review:______
City Attorney’s Review:_____
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 22, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS - Public Services Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Status Report of a Major Maintenance & Repair Plan (MMRP) for the
Existing Wastewater Treatment Plan
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that this report be received and filed.
ALTERNATIVES
As no action is requested, there are no recommended alternatives.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact at this time as a result of this report. Fiscal impact is addressed through the
budget process.
DISCUSSION
Staff presented an update of the MMRP status at the May 9, 2013 JPA meeting with little
transpiring in the subsequent week.
The primary focus of the past month has been the completion of the FY 13/14 budget for the
WWTP and continued investigation of the condition of plant processes and equipment. Plant
staff drained, inspected, and performed minor maintenance on the secondary clarifier. Due to
the lack of redundancy for the secondary clarifier, specialized procedures were developed to
drain and inspect the clarifier while maintaining compliance with the NPDES permit. In
addition, plant staff made arrangements for an evaluation of electrical components utilizing
thermal imaging that is provided free of charge by the California Joint Powers Insurance
Authority (CJPIA). MBCSD staff has continued to meet to discuss the status of the MMRP.
MBCSD staff will continue to focus on reviewing Chapter 6 of the Facility Master Plan
(FMP), the Electrical Facilities Overview (Appendix H) of the FMP, and the previous CIP
developed by Cannon Engineering to continue the process of identifying projects and
prioritizing them. In addition, City staff toured the plant with a structural and electrical
engineer from Cannon Engineering to solicit input on refining the strategy for the MMRP.
MBCSD staff opines that it is premature to solicit proposals from a qualified firm, or firms, to
AGENDA NO: A-5
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
2
provide technical advice and analysis, until further work is performed on the preliminary steps
of the MMRP.
Staff has been working on the preparation of the MMRP items that will be proposed for the
2013/3014 fiscal year budget.
$1.2 M is proposed for the 2013/2014 fiscal year budget for a variety of Major Maintenance
and Repair items as listed below:
Replacement Headworks screens $500K
Cleaning, Coating, and Repairs to Digester #2 $250K
Chlorine Contact Tank Replacement Project $200K
o Repairs to the Chlorine Building $40K
Interstage Pump and Valve Project $50K
Miscellaneous maintenance and repair projects $170K
o 3W Water System Repairs
o Miscellaneous Valve Replacement
o Miscellaneous Minor Pump Repairs or Replacements
The last item in the list, miscellaneous maintenance and repair projects, will be either
performed by existing staff or outside contract depending on workload. It is intended that the
other items will be performed under contract.
CONCLUSION
Staff will continue to bring a status report on the development of the MMRP at City Council
meetings on a monthly basis.
ATTACHMENT
1. Staff Report from the May 9, 2013 JPA meeting – Item A-2
STAFF REPORT
MORRO BAY-CAYUCOS J.P.A.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council, City of Morro Bay
Honorable President and Board of Directors, Cayucos Sanitary District
From: Bruce Keogh, Wastewater Division Manager
Date: May 2, 2013
Subject:
Status Report of a Major Maintenance & Repair Plan (MMRP) for the WWTP
Recommendation:
This Department recommends that this report be received and filed.
Fiscal Impact:
There is no fiscal impact at this time.
Summary:
This staff report is intended to provide an update on the development of the MMRP for the
WWTP. At the February 14, JPA meeting the Council and District Board approved of the
development of an MMRP and made the following motion:
Direct staff to prepare a time sensitive and prioritized MMRP for the WWTP with an
anticipated rolling 2 year budget;
That the JPA solicit proposals from a qualified firm, or firms, to provide technical advice
and analysis on an as needed basis as determined by Morro Bay’s Public Services
Director and Cayucos Sanitary District Manager;
And that the Morro Bay Public Services Director and Cayucos Sanitary District Manager
report back to the JPA on a semi-annual basis on the progress and costs associated with
the MMRP.
Discussion:
Development of a MMRP will assist the City and District in projecting the budgeting of
expenditures required to keep the current plant operating in compliance with regulatory
requirements.
The primary focus of the past month has been the completion of the FY 13/14 budget for the
WWTP and continued investigation of the condition of plant processes and equipment. Plant
staff drained, inspected, and performed minor maintenance on the secondary clarifier. Due to the
lack of redundancy for the secondary clarifier, specialized procedures were developed to drain
Agenda No. Item A-2
Date: May 9, 2013
ATTACHMENT 1
2
and inspect the clarifier while maintaining compliance with the NPDES permit. In addition,
plant staff made arrangements for an evaluation of electrical components utilizing thermal
imaging that is provided free of charge by the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority
(CJPIA). MBCSD staff has continued to meet to discuss the status of the MMRP. MBCSD staff
will continue to focus on reviewing Chapter 6 of the Facility Master Plan (FMP), the Electrical
Facilities Overview (Appendix H) of the FMP, and the previous CIP developed by Cannon
Engineering to continue the process of identifying projects and prioritizing them. In addition,
City staff toured the plant with a structural and electrical engineer from Cannon Engineering to
solicit input on refining the strategy for the MMRP.
MBCSD staff recommends that it is premature to solicit proposals from a qualified firm, or
firms, to provide technical advice and analysis, until further work is performed on the
preliminary steps of the MMRP. In the interim period staff can begin work developing the RFP
to solicit proposals from qualified firms.
Conclusion:
MBCSD staff will continue to bring a status report on the development of the MMRP at future
JPA meetings.
Manager/C//JPA/2013 JPA Meetings/March 14 2013 JPA Meeting/Status Report on the MMRPMay 92013
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 31-13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA,
SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS IN CELEBRATING
THE CITY OF MORRO BAY’S 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF INCORPORATION
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay went from an unincorporated area to an incorporated
municipality on July 17, 1964; and
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay celebrated their 25th Anniversary with several
special events and activities; and
WHEREAS, there is extensive community support for a larger celebration for the City’s
50th Anniversary in 2014; and
WHEREAS, at the March 26, 2013 City Council meeting there was a presentation from
a local citizen’s group providing a concept plan for a potential of an 18 month-long celebration;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed the concept that was presented and was
supportive of partnering with this citizen’s group effort to provide events in celebration of the
Anniversary to include incorporating a theme into the events; and
WHEREAS, the City Council by consensus, designated Councilmembers Nancy
Johnson and George Leage as the City’s liaisons to the City of Morro Bay’s 50th Anniversary
Celebration Committee; and
WHEREAS, the City in support of these efforts, agrees to offer meeting space for the
50th Committee in City facilities, and directs the 50th Committee to work with the Recreation and
Parks Department on securing this meeting space; and
WHEREAS, the City Council will also be considering additional support to these efforts,
including the potential of fee waivers, funding of events, and/or the use of other City resources to
help the City’s 50th Anniversary Celebration Committee as it plans and schedules these
Community Enhancement and Enrichment Programs and Events.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Morro
Bay, California, strongly supports the 50th Anniversary Celebration Committee’s efforts and
gladly provides meeting space for the committee as well as additional support as their planning
efforts continue.
AGENDA NO: A-6 MEETING DATE: 5/28/2013
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay at a regular
meeting thereof held on the 28th day of May, 2013, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
______________________________
JAMIE L. IRONS, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
JAMIE BOUCHER, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 30-13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA,
SUPPORTING INCREASED FUNDING TO THE
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION (CCC) TO SUPPORT
ENHANCED LOCAL COASTAL PLAN PLANNING AND UPDATES
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay as well as many other coastal cities have been
challenged to update their General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) on a regular basis; and
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay is currently using a Local Coastal Plan adopted in
1982 for its coastal planning guide; and
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay is currently using a General Plan adopted in 1988 for
its Community Development guide; and
WHEREAS, State standards, legal requirements, and professional practices for preparing
Local Coastal Plans and General Plans have evolved over the past decades and conditions have
changed significantly, both locally and within the region; and
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay recognizes that after over three decades of use, it is
appropriate to re-evaluate the scope and content of the City’s Local Coastal and General Plan to
make certain that these important documents provide for the community values and vision for
future development and to ensure consistence with the Coastal Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Morro Bay approved updated GP/LCP’s on
February 23, 2004, and July 20, 2005 and submitted them to the California Coastal Commission
(CCC) for certification; and
WHEREAS, on February 28, 2011 the CCC submitted a letter to the City of Morro Bay
informing the City that LCP amendment MRB-1-05 is deemed withdrawn for lack of activity and
because it did not meet the Coastal Act’s minimum public participation requirement for LCP
amendments (which provide that an LCP amendment must have been subject to local public
hearings on the amendment within four years to allow the amendment to be filed for
Commission review and action); and
WHEREAS, the challenges of updating a General Plan and Local Coastal Plan have
included time constraints, financial constraints and staffing constraints; and
AGENDA NO: A-7
MEETING DATE: 5/28/2013
WHEREAS, the CCC, at their December 12, 2012 workshop with local governments
discussed the importance of working cooperatively with local governments in these update
efforts; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2012 the Senate Budget Subcommittee #2 voted to increase
the CCC’s budget to allocate $4 million dollars/year, of which $1 million would be provided to
local governments for Local Coastal Plan planning grants; and
WHEREAS, the CCC is hopeful the Assembly Budget Subcommittee #3 will consider a
similar action and this funding will become part of the final 2013/2014 budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Morro Bay, California, is
committed to updating their GP/LCP and, strongly supports additional funding for the Local
Coastal Program (LCP) planning process established by the California Coastal Act. This funding
should be used to support efforts to increase collaborative state-local planning and streamline the
process for approving and amending or updating Local Coastal Programs, including providing
additional planning staff for the CCC and funding for new State LCP planning grants for local
governments. Additional funding should prioritize Commission staffing and resources to support
early scoping, local coordination and communication on any proposed amendment, to help
identify key issues and address potential conflicts, as early as possible. Early coordination
provides for more predictable and mutually agreeable processing timelines for each stage of the
amendment process, and for mechanisms to provide maximum opportunity for the Commission
and local governments to collaboratively address important and pressing coastal management
issues, including responding to climate change, extreme events, and global sea level rise, and
addressing the need for updated LCPs to support new economic development consistent with
local needs and the California Coastal Act. Early coordination also provides for maximizing
local participation and discussion of LCP issues, and enhancing efficiency and accountability in
the local coastal planning process.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay at a regular
meeting thereof held on the 28th day of May, 2013, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
______________________________
JAMIE L. IRONS, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
JAMIE BOUCHER, City Clerk
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: 05/22/13
FROM: Andrea K. Lueker, City Manager
SUBJECT: Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) Project Status and Discussion
RECOMMENDATION
Discuss in open session, the progress to date on the Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) and provide
direction to staff as necessary.
ALTERNATIVES
Not applicable at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT
Not applicable at this time.
SUMMARY
Staff provides this report as a bi-weekly update to the progress made to date on the new WRF
project.
BACKGROUND
With the denial of the permit for the WWTP project in its current location, the City has embarked on
a process for a WRF. This staff report provides a review of what has occurred to date as well as
provides the City Council an opportunity for open discussion on the WRF project.
DISCUSSION
Below is a brief review of dates, status and accomplishments on the WRF facility project. Note the
bolded information has been added since your last review on 5/14/13.
Date Action_________________________________________________________
01/03/13 Special City Council meeting – City Adopted Resolution No. 07-13
recommending denial of the WWTP project.
01/08/13 WWTP Project denied by the California Coastal Commission (CCC).
01/08/13 January JPA not held due to CCC meeting.
AGENDA NO: D-1 MEETING DATE: 5/28/13
Prepared By: ________ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
2
01/24/13 City Staff, Morro Bay JPA Sub-Committee, Cayucos SD representatives, staff
and attorney meet and discuss strategy and moving forward.
02/14/13 February JPA meeting held, “Discussion and Consideration of Next Steps for
the WWTP Upgrade Project” was on the agenda and discussed.
02/26/13 City Council meeting - draft schedule/project timeline presented to City
Council.
City Council directed staff to prepare an RFP for a project manager.
03/11/13 City Council goal session, WRF established as Essential City Goal.
03/14/13 City Council goal session, WRF established as Essential City Goal.
03/14/13 March JPA meeting held, “Status Report on the Discussion with RWQCB
Staff Renewal Process for the WWTP NPDES Permit No. CA0047881”
and “Verbal Report by the City and District on the Progress of the future
WWTP” were on the agenda and discussed.
03/18/13 RFP issued.
03/26/13 City Council meeting - City Council approves citizens to serve on the RFP
selection committee.
03/27/13 Announcement placed on City website, etc. regarding citizen selection
committee application period.
04/05/13 Citizen selection committee deadline.
04/09/13 City Council meeting - appointment of 5 citizens for the RFP selection
committee at City Council meeting.
04/10/13 Addendum to RFP issued, re: selection committee
04/11/13 April JPA meeting held, “Verbal Report by the City and District on the
Progress of the future WWTP” and Discussion and Approval to
Terminate the Consultant Services Agreements with Delzeit; Dudek,
McCabe and Company; and Montgomery Watson Harza (MWH)” were
on the agenda and discussed.
04/15/13 RFP due.
04/16/13 Study Session on WRF facility announced for April 29, 2013
04/23/13 City Council meeting –reaffirmation of 5 members of citizen
selection committee.
04/25/13 Quarterly Meeting with California Coastal Commission staff, WRF
discussion and status report on the meeting agenda.
04/25/13 Initial meeting with Selection Committee for the RFP for Planning Services
for the WRF.
04/29/13 WRF Study Session at Veteran’s Hall.
05/02/13 Interviews to recommend the individual/team for the WRF project
manage
05/09/13 May JPA meeting held, “Verbal Report by the City and District on the
Progress of the future WWTP” was on the agenda and discussed.
05/14/13 City Council meeting – Approval of John F. Rickenbach, Consulting as the
Preliminary Planning Consultant for the WRF project
5/15/13 Public Services staff continues to work with John F. Rickenbach,
3
Consulting to finalize the consultant contract.
5/28/13 Closed Session Item scheduled to discuss Righetti appraisal.
CONCLUSION
City Council, since the denial of the WWTP permit in January continues to make measured and
deliberate progress in the WRF project, as outlined above.
Staff Report
AGENDA NO: D-2
MEETING DATE: 5/28/13
Prepared By: ______ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 22, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS – Public Services Director/City Engineer
Rick Sauerwein, PE – Engineering Division Manager
Robert Schultz – City Attorney
SUBJECT: History and Status of Water Rights Issues in the Chorro Valley
SUMMARY
This item was agenized for the May 14, 2013 City Council meeting as Item D-5. It became apparent
that there was not enough time to hear all the New Business items that evening; as such, it was
decided to open up this agenda item for public comment for those in attendance and then continue
this item to a future meeting.
Attached is the staff report from the May 14, 2013 meeting in its entirety.
Also attached is a memorandum to Council responding to an email the City received from Linda
Stedjee on this agenda item.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that City Council review the staff report on the City’s water history and our
current ongoing practices related to the City’s water rights and issues surrounding the Chorro
Valley. After review, public comment and discussion, provide any further direction to Staff.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB LIVICK, PE/PLS – PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER
RICK SAUERWEIN, PE – ENGINEERING DIVISION MANAGER
ROBERT SCHULTZ – CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO EMAIL FROM LINDA STEDJEE REGARDING THE HISTORY AND STATUS OF
WATER RIGHTS ISSUES IN THE CHORRO VALLEY STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 23, 2013
In response to the City’ Staff Report for the above reference subject, a citizen, Linda Stedjee sent three
members of the Council an email. Attached is her email. Staff’s response to the email is below in Bold
type.
Ms. Stedjee states in her email:
“The staff report on the Chorro Valley water issues was certainly a heavily-sanitized
version of the real story. Important details have been left out and/or glossed over to
avoid revealing the truth.”
The intent of the City’s Water Report was to provide a high level overview of the activities and
issues in the Water Division related to the Chorro Valley. It was not an exhaustive discussion of
each step in the process that has occurred. It would probably be impossible to create a complete
and exhaustive record of everything that has happened concerning the City’s water rights. Staff
tried to balance providing adequate information to the Council and the Public without spending
an inordinate amount of the time and effort. In addition, much of the information and issues are
very technical.
Ms. Stedjee states in her email:
"During the State Water shut down in 2006, nitrate levels spiked in the Morro well field
and led to health standard compliance issues, forcing the City to substantially reduce
water use from the Morro wells. Nitrate issues have continued to plague Morro Valley
and, together with diminished State Water Project deliveries during this period, the City
has been forced to rely more heavily on the Chorro wells and the treatment of the
contaminated Morro wells at its desalination facility to meet the City's water needs."
CITY OF MORRO BAY
CITY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENT
955 SHASTA AVE. MORRO BAY, CA 93442
805-772-6568
CCoouunncciill MMeemmoo –– RReessppoonnssee ttoo SStteeddjjeeee EEmmaaiill rree:: CChhoorrrroo WWaatteerr SSttaaffff RReeppoorrtt PPaaggee 22 ooff 55
MMaayy 2233,, 22001133
22
Nitrate levels in the Morro Basin are variable and have risen and fallen over time. The Morro
Nitrate study indicates that nitrate levels spiked in 1962, 1966, 1977 and 1986, and 1997. The first
exceedence of the mcl was in 2002 as indicated in Figure 4. Because the nitrate levels have
historically fluctuated in the basin, as of 2002 there was no reason to doubt that they would not
come back down again. The use of the Morro Basin had been greatly reduced from 1997 to 2002
(see figures in staff report that shows significant reductions from historical pumping) and Staff at
that time believed that active pumping the Morro Basin would reduce the nitrate levels. In 2006,
during the State Water shutdown, the levels spiked dramatically during operation of the Morro
wells which led to the violation of the mcl. The Morro Basin Nitrate Study was reviewed and
found to be compelling and accurate by the RWQCB. Staff is unaware of any Engineer,
Hydrologist, regulatory agency or qualified expert that supports Ms. Stedjee’s assertions that the
Main Street trunk line is the source of nitrate contamination. Furthermore, Ms. Stedjee’s theory
does not provide any explanation for extremely high nitrate concentrations observed in private
wells up stream. The possibility for exfiltration of sewage from the Main Street trunk line is
minimal because the elevation of the sewer line is below the water table. This creates a pressure
that causes groundwater to flow into the pipe, but prevents sewage in the pipe from flowing out
under normal conditions.
Ms. Stedjee states in her email:
“What is not mentioned here is that the City NEVER installed the flow meters that were
ordered to be in place in 1997 - and only began to work on this project when the SWRCB
was alerted to the problem just a few years ago. The City just kept using the wells
whenever it wanted without doing any monitoring to see if it was complying with
decision 1633. This is a well-documented fact. Among the supporting documents are
emails exchanged between SWRCB personnel and residents, and between SWRCB
personnel and the City's lawyers - emails which I have.
What is also not mentioned is the fact that the whole problem came to light when the
City, aided by a favored consultant, was conducting a so-called stream flow interference
study on Chorro Creek when it was completely dry.
The documented objective was to get a waiver from the requirements of decision 1633.
Clearly, well usage will not impact surface stream flow when there is no flow to be
interfered with - which appears to many residents to be a trick by which the staff intended
to get the waiver illegally.
When this bogus "test" was brought to the attention of the Council, it was stopped
immediately. Despite the fact that the staff has paid the consultant tens of thousands of
dollars for this, and a subsequent illegal attempt to perform this "study" (the second time,
the proper permits were not obtained) no report has ever been produced. Taxpayers are
out a great deal of money and got nothing for it but trouble - caused by the staff's
unwillingness to abide by the law.”
One condition of the City’s Water Permit required the installation of devices capable of
continuous measurements of surface flow in Chorro Creek by January 1, 1997, one in the vicinity
of Romero well field and the other in the vicinity of Ashurst well field. The Permit Term specified
CCoouunncciill MMeemmoo –– RReessppoonnssee ttoo SStteeddjjeeee EEmmaaiill rree:: CChhoorrrroo WWaatteerr SSttaaffff RReeppoorrtt PPaaggee 33 ooff 55
MMaayy 2233,, 22001133
33
that the devices shall be installed at a location sufficient to detect the full depletion effects of the
City’s diversions at each respective well field, but upstream of the depletion effects caused by
nearby pumpers on surface flows in Chorro Creek, and that in the case of overlapping pumping
effects, a compromise location shall be selected. The measuring devices and their locations were
required to be approved by the Chief of the Division of Water Rights.
Finding appropriate locations for these devices proved difficult due to weather conditions, stream
channel realignments, private property ownership along the Creek, and the sheer complexity of
finding a location that meets the specifications of the Permit Term. The City documented this
situation and its continued efforts in its annual Progress Reports submitted to the State. As
reported in the City’s 1996 Progress Report, high flows and flooding during the latter part of 1996
precluded the installation of the measuring devices, and the City continued to work to locate
appropriate sites for the devices. Storm flows in Chorro Creek in the winter of 1997-1998
necessitated removal of any stream gauges and caused a halt to any further studies. Also in the
winter of 1997-1998, as part of the Natural Resources Conservation Services Chorro Flats Passive
Sediment Control Project, a bypass channel was constructed adjacent to Chorro Creek
downstream from the Ashurst well field that resulted in a change of the primary stream channel.
In 1998, the City again informed the Board that the devices could not be installed due to high
flows and flooding. The City requested permission from the San Luis Coastal Resource
Conservation District (RCD) to install stream gauges in 2001, but the City was unable to do so
because of the instability of the stream channel. The City’s hydrogeologic consultant determined
in 2007 that the stream had finally stabilized to the point where a permanent stream gauge was
feasible. In 2009, the City studied various locations for potential gauge installation and sought out
landowners of property along Chorro Creek to obtain permission to install the gauges.
Preliminary work began on the installation of a gauge in the vicinity of the Ashurst well field in
2009. For the Romero well field, determining an appropriate location for the installation of the
stream gauge proved more difficult. As the City reported to the Division in 2009, the property
owner of the parcel where the City had been performing monitoring activities downstream of the
Romero well field denied access to the City. On April 27, 2010, the City requested the approval of
the Chief of the Division of Water Rights of the proposed location for the Ashurst well field gauge
and one of several proposed locations for the Romero well field gauge. The City met with and
discussed these locations with Division staff on several occasions. On April 2, 2012, the City
received final approval of the gauge locations from the Deputy Director as required by Term 17.
In addition, on April 3, 2012, the Division provided draft amended permits to reflect certain new
conditions related to the approved gauge locations. These amended permits were finalized and
issued to the City on September 14, 2012.
The City has conducted several studies to determine the relationship between pumping of the
Ashurst well field and flows in Chorro Creek. The SWRCB decision 1633 left the City with the
opportunity to demonstrate through these studies that a flow constraint on the Ashurst well field
was inappropriate (Decision 1633 term 6). The 1.4 cfs target flow is extremely low and occurs
intermittently generally speaking in the spring when flows are falling and again in the winter
when the flows come back after the rainy season begins. Furthermore, flows in Chorro Creek are
also highly variable diurnally. During the two most recent interference tests the City stopped one
due to interference between the discharge from the well discharge point downstream and the
upstream measuring point, in another the flows in the Creek were falling and the test was stopped
CCoouunncciill MMeemmoo –– RReessppoonnssee ttoo SStteeddjjeeee EEmmaaiill rree:: CChhoorrrroo WWaatteerr SSttaaffff RReeppoorrtt PPaaggee 44 ooff 55
MMaayy 2233,, 22001133
44
once flows at the measuring locations were consistently below 1.4cfs. Each of these tests provided
the City valuable information that was used in negotiations with the SWRCB on the locations and
future operations of the stream gauges.
Ms. Stedjee states in her email:
“What is glossed over here is that the failed septic systems at Roandoak, adjacent to the
Ashurst well field, have been polluting the Chorro Basin aquifer for some time. This is
not, and never has been a secret. A former City employee has state, in writing (yes, we
have his letter) that the City staff knew full well for years that Ashurst wells were
polluted with sewage, but said nothing - AND knowing that, they still continued
delivering insufficiently-treated well water to Chorro Valley customers. This person has
not worked for the City for many years, so it is clear that staff have known about the
septic system contamination of Ashurst wells for a very long time. The City is extremely
lucky not to have been sued over its blatant failure to safeguard the health of its water
customers.
When this irresponsible and illegal drinking water quality law violation was discovered,
the CDPH ordered the wells shut down. The City never apologized to the victims, even
though there had been cases of giardia, and instead threatened to cut off their City water.
This is certainly a very ugly chapter in the story of the Chorro Valley, but not untypical
of the kind of behavior we have come to expect from City staff.”
In regard to the Chorro Nitrates, the CDPH issued its letter to the City after the City notified its
Chorro customers, in advance of the State Water shutdown, that it would be operating its wells
and that there was a risk in this circumstance of nitrate contamination. Calculated levels of
nitrates never exceeded the limit based on frequent monitoring during that period, so there was no
violation in 2007 or 2008. The Ashurst nitrate study has determined that the agricultural activity
upstream of the well field is the source of contamination. While the septic systems on Chorro
Creek road contribute to the nitrate loading of the basin, based on mass loading calculations in
the report they were ruled out as the source of the overall nitrate contamination of the well field
by the County Environmental Health Department, the lead agency responsible.
The water from the Chorro Wells receives chemical treatment prior to use which provides some
protection against periodical bacteriological contamination that is known to occur. The fact that
there is a risk to having customers connected to the Chorro well pumping line is not disputed and
is the reason for the City working with those customers to disconnect them from the system.
Ms. Stedjee states in her email:
I find it fascinating - and very disturbing - that a resident had to alert the City to the
existence of documents that could be of very great value, and that could mean that the
City has wasted a huge amount of taxpayer money on unnecessary legal fees - all because
the staff once again failed to perform due diligence. Surely, if a private citizen could find
those documents, so could the City staff. That is their job.
CCoouunncciill MMeemmoo –– RReessppoonnssee ttoo SStteeddjjeeee EEmmaaiill rree:: CChhoorrrroo WWaatteerr SSttaaffff RReeppoorrtt PPaaggee 55 ooff 55
MMaayy 2233,, 22001133
55
If Ms. Stedjee is referring to the public comment made by Carrie Burton at the Council meeting
and Staff’s request for copies, Staff did not state it does not have copies of the documents. Staff
requested the documents so it could review them and provide a response. Staff has requested the
documents but has not received them from Ms. Burton. Staff can unequivocally state that Ms.
Burton’s claim at the Council Meeting that County Resolutions that transferred the County
Water Districts property and water rights to the City upon incorporation supersede or
circumvent the State Water Board, the Coastal Commission and Fish & Game and other agencies
authority is without merit. As stated in the Staff report, the State Water Board issued a decision
in 1982 and determined the waters of the Chorro basins to be subject to the Water Board’s
jurisdiction. It then ordered the City to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to
support its permit applications. If there was an argument of lack of jurisdiction to made and
litigated by the City against the State Water Board, it would have had to be done at that time.
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 8, 2013
AGENDA NO: D-5__
Meeting Date: May 14, 2013 __
Prepared By: RL /RS / RSchultz Dept Review: __________
City Manager Review: ________________ City Attorney Review: ________________ Page 1 of 7
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS – Public Services Director/City Engineer
Rick Sauerwein, PE – Engineering Division Manager
Robert Schultz - City Attorney
SUBJECT: History and Status of Water Rights Issues in the Chorro Valley
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council review the comprehensive staff report on the City’s water
history and our current ongoing practices related to the City’s water rights and issues surrounding
the Chorro Valley. After review, public comment and discussion provide any further direction to
Staff.
ALTERNATIVES
1) Continue on the present course to preserve City water rights in the Chorro Valley by
constructing a stream flow gauge in Chorro Creek, and replacing all existing City water
service connections with private wells & single point of use reverse osmosis treatment to
reduce nitrates;
2) Abandon City water rights to Chorro Valley well fields;
3) Evaluate other alternative strategies to provide a replacement water source for Chorro Valley
residents.
FISCAL IMPACT
None at this time.
SUMMARY
The water supply for the City of Morro Bay has four main sources. In order of the quantity supplied,
these sources are: the State Water Project, Chorro groundwater, Morro groundwater, and the
Desalination Plant. Nitrate contamination of both the Chorro and Morro groundwater resources by
Page 2 of 7
agricultural activities has greatly impacted our water supplies. During periods of reduced State
Water Project deliveries, it is necessary to blend our other sources of water together in order to
reduce nitrate levels in the distribution system. The Desalination Plant, which has recently been used
to remove nitrates from the Morro groundwater, is undergoing a series of upgrades to improve the
efficiency in treating brackish water and restore the ability to treat salt water.
The City has produced water from the Chorro groundwater basin to meet water demands. Our
groundwater permits require that stream flows be above 1.4cfs when extractions occur. Currently,
the City is measuring creek flows biweekly. Our permit conditions require continuous flow
monitoring, which has not yet been installed.
In 2009, the City was informed of a complaint filed by Jones to the Division of Water Rights staff at
the SWRCB. The complaint alleged that the City had not complied with the requirements imposed
in the City’s water rights permit for Chorro Creek. Since then the City has contracted with outside
legal counsel to help Staff as it continually works on the water rights issues and the complaint in the
Chorro Valley.
Pursuant to past Council direction, Staff has met with several property owners in the Chorro Valley
and is discussing what facilities property owners will need in order to be disconnected from the
City’s water system.
BACKGROUND
Morro Bay incorporated as a general law city in 1964. Prior to incorporation, two waterworks
districts under the auspices of San Luis Obispo County served the community. The sole historic
source of potable water for the community was groundwater derived from three well fields in two
small coastal valleys: the Morro well field in the Morro valley and the Romero and Ashurst well
fields in the Chorro valley.
In 1972, the City of Morro Bay filed two applications for permits to appropriate water from two well
fields (Romero and Ashurst) in the Chorro Creek underflow. The applications sought to formalize
the City’s rights to appropriate water from the Chorro underflows based upon the City’s historic use
of that water.
State Water Board hearings on the City of Morro Bay’s 1972 applications took place five years later
in 1977. The State Water Board took no further action until it issued a decision in 1982 and
determined the waters of the Chorro basins to be “underflow” subject to the board’s jurisdiction. It
then ordered the City to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to support its permit
applications.
Pursuant to the State Water Board’s 1982 decision, the City prepared an EIR pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. The EIR included significant analysis of
surface-groundwater interaction in the Chorro and Morro well fields, and concluded that
groundwater extraction from the Chorro and Morro wells would have no environmental impact.
The State Water Board conducted additional hearings in 1987 and again in 1995.
On July 20, 1995, the Board issued a final decision on the applications (Decision No. 1633).
Page 3 of 7
Therein, the Board approved the City’s applications and issued permits for 1,142.5 acre feet per year
(afy) from the Chorro Basin wells (Well Nos. 8, 9, 9A, 10, 10A, 11A, 12 and 16). The Board’s Order
contained numerous conditions, including certain conditions that the Board recognized would have
significant impacts on the City’s ability to rely on the Chorro wells. These conditions have been
problematic for the City. Those conditions and the City’s current operations are the subject of the
Jones complaint and are detailed further in this report.
In September 1997, as contemplated in the City’s water right permits, the City began receiving
deliveries of 1,313 afy of water from the State Water Project (SWP). Since 1997, the City has
utilized State Water as its primary source of water, except during periods of State Water Project
maintenance operations. As the chart below indicates, the City’s highest annual use during this
period was 49 afy, until significant reduction in State Water availability in 2005.
In 2005, the annual water production in the Chorro Valley increased significantly due to diminished
State Water Project deliveries and limited production from the Morro Valley.
During the State Water shut down in 2006, nitrate levels spiked in the Morro well field and led to
health standard compliance issues, forcing the City to substantially reduce water use from the Morro
wells. Nitrate issues have continued to plague Morro Valley and, together with diminished State
Water Project deliveries during this period, the City has been forced to rely more heavily on the
Chorro wells and the treatment of the contaminated Morro wells at its desalination facility to meet
the City’s water needs.
Year Chorro Basin
(ac-ft)
Morro Basin
(ac-ft)
R/O
Plant
(ac-ft)
State Water
(ac-ft)
Total
(ac-ft)1
1997 986 249 0 301 1536
1998 38 0 0 1287 1326
1999 34 0 0 1359 1393
2000 4 0 0 1396 1400
2001 12 0 0 1398 1410
2002 1 32 47 1373 1454
2003 3 29 13 1384 1429
2004 49 213 20 1206 1487
2005 204 151 0 1008 1362
2006 257 79 25 1010 1371
2007 276 35 19 1116 1446
2008 184 52 28 1175 1439
2009 235 80 66 1069 1450
2010 86 391 258 873 1609
2011 18 101 84 1144 1347
2012 1 109 70 1130 1310
In summary, from 1997 to 2006, during the period after the City began receiving deliveries from the
1 The total water is overstated in the years that included R/O plant operation since the feed water for the R/O comes
from the Morro Wells. In 2012 the conversion from Million gallons to ac-ft was corrected.
Page 4 of 7
SWP and before the Morro wells were significantly impacted by nitrate contamination, the City
substantially reduced diversions from the Chorro wells. Since 2006, reduced deliveries from the
SWP and the nitrate contamination of the Morro wells have forced the City back to more significant
use of the Chorro wells. More recently, treatment of the brackish Morro wells and conservation
have been used to reduce the demand on Chorro wells, while still meeting demands. The City’s
varied usage history over the past ten years aptly demonstrates precisely the reason why each of the
City’s water sources is so important in providing a redundant and reliable water supply for the
citizens of the City of Morro Bay.
Jones Complaint
On October 1, 2009 the City was informed of Mr. Jones’ complaint by letter from the Division of
Water Rights staff at the SWRCB. The complaint alleged that the City has not complied with
SWRCB Decision 1633 and requirements imposed in the City’s water right permits for Chorro
Creek (Permit Nos. 20866, 20867, and 20868).
The complaint alleges injury to fish and wildlife and public trust resources, as follows, “For the
protection of fish and wildlife habitat and other public trust resources in Chorro Creek and Morro
Bay, surface flow needs to be 1.4 cfs per DFG biologist Charles Marshall to protect endangered
steelhead trout as stated in Decision 1633.” Mr. Jones proposed that the complaint could be resolved
as follows: “Comply with Decision 1633. Install continuous flow meters below Ashurst and Romero
well fields. Cease all pumping until flow meters are in place to comply with minimum flow
requirements.”
The City and Division of Water Rights staff have met on numerous occasions to discuss Mr. Jones’
complaint and other matters related to the City’s Chorro Creek water rights. The parties have
discussed the City’s compliance with various conditions of the Chorro water rights permits. The City
and Division staff have agreed that the City would prepare and submit a report documenting the
City’s compliance with its Chorro and Morro water rights permits and a plan for actions to ensure
continued compliance or corrective measures to bring the City into compliance with all permit
conditions.
On October 25, 2012 the City received approval of its Flow Bypass Compliance Plan from the
Division of Water Rights. This plan outlines the conditions and constraints under which the City
agrees to operate the Chorro Wells until completion of its stream gauge projects and full compliance
with all of the terms and conditions of the revised permits have been met.
For the first half of 2013, City staff has worked with Division of Water Rights staff to prepare,
review, and revise a Petition for Extension of Time for the Chorro Well Permits. This time extension
will give the City the ability to complete all of the compliance activities and take full beneficial use
of the Chorro well water.
Chorro Valley Customers
From time to time since the incorporation of the City, water meters and water services have been
provided to customers outside of the City limits. Currently, the City has water service at nine
locations outside of the City limits. Some of these connections were made following the procedure
outlined in the municipal code with a designation by Council, while others were made in order to
Page 5 of 7
secure access or water for the City. There are others that have no available records pertaining to
their connection.
All of the water service connections that are located within the Chorro Valley receive water from a
single pumping line. When the City’s wells in the Ashurst and Romero well fields are operating,
water from these wells blend in the pumping line and is distributed to Chorro Valley customers prior
to being transported to the King’s tank to blend with water from other sources. When only one well
from the Ashurst well field blends with the water from the Romero well it can still meet the nitrate
standards, but when more than one Ashurst well is running, the blended water will likely exceed the
nitrate limits. When the Chorro Valley wells are not operating, the customers outside of the city
limits receive the same blend of water as all other customers within the City limits, which
consistently meets drinking water standards.
At the time that these connections were made, the water quality in the Chorro Groundwater Basin
was considered safe for drinking and met the State and Federal regulations governing water quality.
In the last few decades water quality has deteriorated in the basin while a number of new Federal
regulations have come into effect governing water supplies.
Because of the degradation to the water quality and the changes in regulations, in December of 2008
the California Department of Public Health inactivated all of the wells in the Ashurst well field until
a reliable method of providing treatment for nitrate removal or blending is in place. Therefore, the
City no longer has the ability to both maintain the pumping of wells in the Chorro Groundwater
Basin as well as provide water that meets all State and Federal standards to the nine customers in the
Chorro basin.
In order to both provide water to the customers outside the City limits and maintain the Chorro
Groundwater resource for the benefit of the customers within the City limits, major modifications to
the City’s infrastructure would be required. These modifications would be needed to effectively deal
with the nitrate contamination while also providing disinfection of the occasional bacteriological
contamination events that impact the Chorro Groundwater Basin.
DISCUSSION
On September 28, 2009, January 11, 2010 and March 22, 2010, the City Council reviewed and
analyzed the following alternatives to maintain sufficient water resources for the residents of the
City from the Romero and Ashurst wells:
1. Water Treatment Plant Alternative: Providing point source treatment of the well
water produced. This would require treatment at the Ashurst well field for nitrates
through either ion exchange or reverse osmosis and disinfection facilities at both the
Ashurst and Romero well sites. While the City currently has disinfection facilities in
place, additional chlorine contact time will need to be provided through the addition
of storage volume. The positive aspect of this project is that the water leaving the
well sites would meet all applicable health and safety standards and would be safe to
deliver to the customers in the Chorro Valley. The negative aspects of this project
would be: difficult permitting through the County because of flood plain issues, the
capital and ongoing maintenance costs of the project, and the need to add additional
Page 6 of 7
staff to cover the operation of these facilities. Installation of sewer disposal facilities
to the Ashurst well field or some other method to dispose of reject/brine effluent
would be required. Capital costs are roughly estimated at $200,000 at Romero, and
$800,000 at Ashurst excluding design/permitting/legal fees and estimating
contingencies. The Water Departments annual operating expenses and staffing levels
would also have to increase.
2. New Pipeline Alternative: Installation of potable distribution pipe main along
Quintana Road, through existing easements, all the way out to the Romero well field.
While not an ideal solution from a water quality standpoint (long dead end lines are
difficult to flush), this is probably more technically feasible than option 1. The
approximate length of this pipeline would be 2.7 miles. Costs to install portable
water lines are approximately $100 to $150 per linear foot depending on the specific
location and the restoration requirements. This leads to a total project cost excluding
design/permitting/legal fees and estimating contingencies of $1,400,000 to
$2,100,000. This option would have no projected impact to the Water Department’s
operating expenses and staffing levels.
3. Nonpotable Water Agreements: Continuing to provide water to customers outside of
the City limits via non-potable water agreements. This alternative will not solve the
potential problems of the Chorro Valley customers, as their water will still not meet
the standards for potable water at times when the Chorro wells are running. This
alternative effectively creates a dual water system of the City’s distribution system,
and complicates its operation. Dual water systems require higher levels of
certification of all of our Water Department staff. These certifications are difficult to
obtain and would likely increase City staffing costs. The City would also have to
take measures to ensure that this non potable water is not used for drinking purposes
in each and every customer’s home in the Chorro Valley. The City, as a public water
system, could not, at the time of these actions by the City Council, install home
treatment devices. While these Point of Entry (POE) or Point of Use (POU) systems
are capable of treating the water from the Chorro Valley to meet safe drinking water
standards, they were not a legal solution for the City to implement. Subsequently, the
California Department of Public Health adopted emergency regulations allowing the
use of POE/POU treatment systems, although the City of Morro Bay cannot meet the
necessary findings to take advantage of this potential approach.
4. Disconnect Customers Outside of the City Limits Alternative: Disconnect customers
outside of the City limits from the pumping line. The benefit of removing water
services from the pumping line is that blending and disinfection can occur within the
pumping line prior to being introduced at the Kings tanks. This will enable a blended
and disinfected product to be introduced at the Kings tanks and will protect the City
from the liability of providing minimally treated well water to customers who
currently are connected to a pumping line. This alternative can be pursued in
conjunction with the second alternative (new potable water line) or individually by
installing individual wells for each owner. Costs for this alternative are estimated to
be $350,000 excluding negotiation costs/staff time. This alternative is consistent with
Page 7 of 7
section 13.14.040 of the municipal code which limits the City’s liability to provide
water outside of the City limits.
On September 28, 2009, Councilmember Smukler moved for the City Council to include the
stakeholders of the National Estuary Program, San Luis Obispo County Regional Water Quality
Control Board and State Water Quality Control Board with a notice of the City’s conversations and
existing situation, and that we elude to our intent for future discussions about Decision 1633 and
collaborative actions to address the water quality issue in the Chorro Basin. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Winholtz and carried unanimously.
On January 11, 2010, Councilmember Winholtz moved the City Council direct staff to terminate the
Agreement between Roandoak and the City of Morro Bay pursuant to Paragraph 9 of the Agreement
which states it will terminate in 120 days; in addition, there will be no discontinuation of water
service until a new agreement is reached. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Borchard
and carried unanimously.
On March 22, 2010, Mayor Peters moved the City Council appoint Councilmember Borchard and
Councilmember Winholtz to serve on the Chorro and Morro Valley Water Rights Ad-Hoc
Committee. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Grantham and carried unanimously.
From January 2010 until October 2012, the City worked with Roandoak and the County of San Luis
Obispo in the Chorro Basin to develop a permitting strategy and template for the removal of systems
from the City’s system. In general, the agreement requires that the City provide a well and POU
treatment system in exchange for termination of City water service. This leaves the property with a
well and a treatment system capable of meeting the needs of that property. The County also required
that the City conduct annual water quality monitoring of those new wells. This robust process and
the agreements developed on this first project will facilitate future well construction and system
disconnections.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the City will continue to actively pursue compliance with all of the terms and
conditions of SWRCB Decision 1633. It is important to note that when the Water Board made
Decision 1633, it recognized that it was effectively eliminating or severely restricting the historic
municipal water source from the City’s water supply portfolio for the benefit of fish and wildlife
resources in a seasonal creek.
In the time period between the advent of State Water in 1997 and the nitrate contamination episode
in 2006, the City had largely reduced its reliance on the Chorro groundwater basin as was intended
by SWRCB Decision 1633. The recent contamination from nitrates in the Morro watershed coupled
with the interruptible nature of the State Water Project have necessitated the City’s turning back to
the Chorro Basin as a vital part of its water portfolio in order to protect the health and welfare of the
residents of Morro Bay. Because the pollution in the Morro basin will not likely be abated any time
soon, and State Water Project deliveries are an interruptible resource, the City is committed to taking
the steps necessary to preserve the full beneficial use of the Chorro basin groundwater.
Staff Report
AGENDA NO: D-3
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
Prepared By: ___RL___ Dept Review:___RL_ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 21, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS - Public Services Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Recommendation from the Public Works Advisory Board Regarding the
Request from the Morro Bay Citizen’s Tree Committee for listing of Landmark
Trees
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the listing of the 20 Landmark Trees at ten
locations as recommended by the Public Works Advisory Board (PWAB) on May 23, 2012.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt Staff Recommendation.
2. Approve a subset of the recommended trees.
3. Reject the listing and provide further direction to staff.
FISCAL IMPACT
Listing a tree within the public right of way as a landmark tree requires proactive maintenance. The
cost of proactively maintaining a landmark tree would require additional expenditures for a
consulting arborist, tree maintenance services and engineering contractor services for concrete
removal and replacement. These costs could add up to $4,000 per landmark tree over a ten year
period ($400 per year per landmark tree). As such, the cost for the 20 requested trees could add
$8000/year to the costs of maintaining the City’s trees which is approximately eight percent of the
annual street tree budget.
BACKGROUND
On October 11, 2010 City Council adopted Ordinance No. 563 adding the recognition of Landmark
Trees to Chapter 12.08. This action was based upon a duly noticed public hearing and
recommendations from both Planning Commission and the Council. The pertinent sections from the
Morro Bay Municipal Code relating to “Landmark Trees” are listed below:
12.08.010 - Purpose.
2
It is in the best interest of the city and of the citizens of Morro Bay that a comprehensive plan for the
planting and maintenance of trees in, on or within the public right-of-way (R/W) within the city
should be established. This chapter is adopted for the purpose of developing and providing for such
a plan and program, and for the purpose of establishing rules and regulations relating to the
planting, care and maintenance of such trees.
12.08.020 - Definitions.
G. "Landmark tree" is any tree existing within city limits, which has been so designated by
resolution of the city council, after review and recommendation by the city's public works advisory
board.
12.08.060 - Tree care, planting, removing and replacement. (excerpt)
… Recognized landmark trees will be protected and proactively maintained for long-life/health,
under the authority of the director of public services. Landmark trees may also be identified with a
sign or plaque, as approved by the public services director. The sign or plaque shall be provided
and maintained by the nominee at no expense to the city of Morro Bay.
12.08.150 - Landmark trees.
Any Morro Bay resident may nominate a tree within the right-of-way to be considered for landmark
tree designation. The nominated tree shall meet at least three of the seven criteria listed below. All
nominated landmark trees shall be reviewed by the public works advisory board. The
recommendation of the public works advisory board shall be forwarded to the city council for
official landmark tree designation.
Landmark tree criteria:
A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty, cultural heritage or habitat
value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for migratory birds and
butterflies;
C. Native trees or groves of historical significance to local indigenous cultures;
D. Specimen tree or grove of agricultural significance and history;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred years;
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks or for city planning
and maintenance;
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early settlers of Morro Bay.
Following the changes to MBMC 12.08 regarding Landmark Trees, the volunteer Citizens Tree
Committee gathered information and met to discuss potential Landmark Trees within the
community. On May 23, 2012, the candidate list from the Tree Committee was presented to PWAB
for their consideration and recommendations. The staff recommendation of the trees at ten locations
for potential Landmark Tree Status was unanimously approved by PWAB. While the PWAB staff
report listed the total number of trees at the ten locations as 15, this was a typographical error. The
actual number of trees at the ten recommended locations is 20. The intent of the PWAB
recommendation was to forward to Council all recommended eligible trees for consideration.
DISCUSSION
The first screening on whether or not a tree is a Landmark Tree as specified in 12.08; is it within the
3
City’s Right of Way? Tree locations designated as 1,3, 12 and 13 on Attachment 2 from the Morro
Bay Citizens Tree Committee are outside the City Right of Way and therefore ineligible as
Landmark Trees under 12.08. Additionally, tree number 15 is recommended for removal by the
Citizen Tree Committee’s arborist and therefore does not make sense to designate this diseased tree
as a Landmark Tree. The remaining ten tree locations appear to meet the minimum criteria as
Landmark Trees and can be designated as such. The recommended trees locations are:
No Location Type (Number of trees) Criteria – As suggested by the Citizens Tree Committee
2 Pacific & Morro Streets
Canary Island Palms – (4) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred
years;
G Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
4 End of Dunes on the bluff Monterey Cypress (1) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred
years;
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
5 Marina & Napa
Monterey Cypress (3) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred
years;
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
6 708 Morro Bay Blvd.
Red Bud Eucalyptus
Silver Dollar Eucalyptus (2)
A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks
or for city planning and maintenance
7 Morro & Anchor
Monterey Cypress (3) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred
years;
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
8 In front of Estero Bay
Graphics on Morro Bay
Blvd.
Blue Gum Eucalyptus (1) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks
or for city planning and maintenance
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
4
No Location Type (Number of trees) Criteria – As suggested by the Citizens Tree Committee
9 Morro & South Street
Blue Gum Eucalyptus (1) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred
years;
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks
or for city planning and maintenance
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
10 Shasta & Dunes
Avocado (1)
A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
D. Specimen tree or grove of agricultural significance and
history
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks
or for city planning and maintenance
11 Monterey & Morro Bay
Blvd
Canary Island Palms (3) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
E. Specimen tree or grove older than eighty to one hundred
years;
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks
or for city planning and maintenance
G. Specimen trees or groves of significance planted by early
settlers of Morro Bay.
14 Market & Dunes
Red Bud Eucalyptus (1) A. Any specimen tree or grove of significant size, beauty,
cultural heritage or habitat value;
B. Specimen tree or grove of significant habitat value for
migratory birds and butterflies
F. Any trees playing very important functional role in city parks
or for city planning and maintenance
Total Trees = 20
CONCLUSION
The Morro Bay Citizens Tree Committee identified trees that they feel meet the requirements for
Landmark Tree status. The City’s Municipal Code does not recognize trees outside the right of way
as meeting the requirements of a City Designated Landmark Tree. Staff does not support the listing
of diseased trees for landmark status, especially the Monterey Pine due to the high mortality rate for
those with pitch pine canker. Therefore, based on the criteria established in Ordinance 12.08.150,
the evaluation of that criteria by the Citizens Tree Committee, concurred to by PWAB at their May
23, 2012 meeting; there are 20 trees eligible for Landmark Tree Status.
ATTACHMENT
1. Excerpt from PWAB Minutes 05-23-2013, Item C-1
2. Morro Bay Citizens Tree Committee Submittal
NEW BUSINESS
C-1 Request from the Morro Bay Citizens Tree Committee for Potential Listing of Landmark Trees - Recommendation: Review and Forward Recommendations to the City Council.
Livick presented the staff report, reviewing the procedure for listing of a landmark tree and noted
that staff is seeking review and potential approval by PWAB to forward onto the City Council.
Livick explained both the average maintenance costs for tree trimming are on average $400 a
year and also the Tree Committee’s evaluation of the 10-15 tree locations. The current City
ordinance does not require proactive maintenance and this would not require an increase in
maintenance costs but rather a better prioritization. This only applies to trees in the street right of
way. One of the goals is to declare landmark trees regardless of public or private property.
Chairperson Makowetski invited Taylor Newton, Tree Committee member, to speak.
Mr. Newton stated the process is designed so anyone could nominate a tree in the City’s public
right of way for a landmark tree designation.
Boardmember Shively asked Newton if the different maintenance needs of trees are considered.
Newton stated the idea is to have trees that people can agree are valuable. A regular
maintenance schedule will be maintained to avoid additional costs. These are all City trees
which already currently require maintenance.
Boardmember Burkhart asked if future designation requests will go before PWAB. Livick
clarified that the ordinance requires that it go to PWAB first for recommendation to City
Council.
Newton added that we need to determine what trees we want for the long term and how do they
represent our heritage. In order for a citizen to get a tree to be declared a landmark tree, the first
step is to contact Rob Livick, Public Services Director via email. Tree committee meetings are
open to the public and are held at the Community Center.
MOTION: Shively moved to approve the recommendation in the staff report by Rob Livick and
forward it to the City Council. The motion was seconded by Burkhart and carried unanimously.
(5-0).
ATTACHMENT 1
1
A.3
AN EVALUATION OF TREES NOMINATED FOR “LANDMARK
TREE” (HERITAGE TREE) STATUS IN MORRO BAY, CA
By Robert Schreiber – Arbor First, December 28, 2011
1. Location: Corner of Sandalwood & Terra Street
Monterey Cypress
DSH = 69”, 34’ tall, 33’ wide / has good color with small amount of
deadwood / approximately 15% of foliage is missing / a few too many
inner branches have been removed / overall good health / tree trimmed to
be too open
2. Location: Pacific & Morro Streets
Canary Island Palms (4)
A. Tree #1 is on corner of Morro & Pacific - DSH [Diameter at Standard
Height which is 4.5’] = 32”, 60’ tall, 30’ wide / has good color and no
visible physical problems
B. Tree #2 is next in line toward Main Street - DSH = 30”, 63’ tall, 33’ wide
/ has no visible problems / color is light - needs magnesium [holes need to
be drilled and filled with a magnesium sulfate solution; depending on
accessibility, if 4 holes are drilled use 1 cup solution per hole / if 8 holes
are drilled use ½ cup solution per hole]
C. Tree #3 is next in line toward Main Street - DSH = 29”, 60’ tall, 30’ wide
/ has good color and no visible physical problems
D. Tree #4 is next in line toward Main Street - DSH = 29”, 61’ tall, 30’ wide
/ has good color and no visible physical problems
3. Location: In front of library on Harbor Street
Island Oak
DSH = 23”, 60’ tall, 60’ wide, good color, signs of caterpillar infestation,
approximately 12% of foliage is missing / live caterpillars gone due to
cold / in spring look for moths / spray tobacco juice –detergent solution
for organic cure / tree seems healthy otherwise with normal shoot growth
4. Location: End of Dunes on the bluff
Monterey Cypress
DSH = 68” minus indentions, 72’ tall, 96’ wide / good color / 6 or 7 larger
branches have been removed / tree in good health
ATTACHMENT 2
2
5. Location: Marina & Napa
Monterey Cypress (3)
A. Tree #1 (one of three largest trees) farthest away from Napa & Marina on
the corner - DSH = 39”, 109’ tall, 112’ wide / some branches need to be
reduced for end weight / color is good
B. Tree #2 (one of three largest trees) - DSH = 41”, 123’ tall, unable to
measure width due to close proximity to other trees and inter-twinning of
branches / some branches need to be reduced for end weight / color is
good
C. Tree #3 (one of three largest trees) - DSH = 53.5”, 124’ tall, unable to
measure width due to close proximity to other trees and inner-twinning of
branches / 8% deadwood / some branches need to be reduced for end
weight / color is good
6. Location: 708 Morro Bay Blvd.
Red Bud Eucalyptus
Silver Dollar Eucalyptus (2)
A. Red Bud Eucalyptus - DSH = 25”, 84’ tall, 83’ wide wide / good color /
too much inner branch removal but with small stature of trees and being
street trees there is no hazard
B. Silver Dollar Eucalyptus #1 - DSH = 27”, 69’ tall, 34.5” wide wide / good
color / too much inner branch removal but with small stature of trees and
being street trees there is no hazard
C. Silver Dollar Eucalyptus #2 - DSH = 28.5, 58.5’ tall, 45’ wide / good
color / too much inner branch removal but with small stature of trees and
being street trees there is no hazard
7. Location: Morro & Anchor
Monterey Cypress (3)
A. Tree #1 - DSH = 45”, 96’ tall, 96’ wide / has co-dominant leader at
approximately 16’ from ground / has old wounds from branches that have
been removed and trying to heal / good color / some inner branches that
have been removed could have been dead branches, broken from the wind
or were too low for traffic
B. Tree #2 - DSH = 24”, 99’ tall, 49.5’ wide, missing 7 branches on
windward side of the tree [6 still have pieces or stubs sticking out]
C. Tree #3 - DSH = 26”, 93’ tall, 46.5’ wide / all trees have approximately
8% deadwood / new shoot growth is good / has a 10° lean toward field /
no target
ATTACHMENT 2
3
8. Location: In front of Estero Bay Graphics on Morro Bay Blvd.
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
DSH = 39.5”, 99’ tall, 81’ wide / has good color / approximately 8%
deadwood / no signs of bugs
9. Location: Morro & South Street
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
DSH = 107”, 186’ tall, 171’ wide there are 9 leaders between the ground
and 18’ / approximately 12% deadwood / good color / no bugs / no signs
of reduction pruning but too much inner-branch removal
10. Location: Shasta & Dunes
Avocado
DSH {has three leaders measuring 15.5”, 11” and 10”} = 36.5”, 45’ tall,
53’ wide / has good color / is producing pollen / some tips at top of tree
are burnt / no signs of bug infestation.
11. Location: Monterey & Morro Bay Blvd
Canary Island Palms (3)
A. Tree #1 at corner - DSH = 23”, 45’ tall, 30’ wide / good color / bottleneck
on lower section probably from too much pruning or not enough water
[purely cosmetic] / needs to have weeds removed , cut with hand pruners
and roundup brushed on fresh cut to kill roots and not disturb tree
B. Tree #2 next in line toward laundromat - DSH = 24”, 33’ tall, 26’ wide /
color is yellow, needs magnesium [holes need to be drilled and filled with
a magnesium sulfate solution; depending on accessibility, if 4 holes are
drilled use 1 cup solution per hole / if 8 holes are drilled use ½ cup
solution per hole]
C. Tree #3 nearest to laundromat - DSH = 25.5, 48’ tall, 32’ wide / needs to
have weeds removed, cut with hand pruners and roundup brushed on fresh
cut to kill roots and not disturb tree / needs magnesium sulfate [holes need
to be drilled and filled with a magnesium sulfate solution; depending on
accessibility, if 4 holes are drilled use 1 cup solution per hole / if 8 holes
are drilled use ½ cup solution per hole] / need seed bundles removed for
pedestrian traffic safety
ATTACHMENT 2
4
12. Location: Tidelands Park on the Embarcadero
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
DSH (has three leaders 40 ½, 11 & 18) = 69.5 “, 99’ tall, 74’ wide / good
color / no bugs / approximately 20% of foliage is missing / approximately
8% deadwood
13. Location: On Piney between entrance to St. Timothy’s and fire station
Blue Gum Eucalyptus (2)
A. Tree #1 - DSH = 42”, 165’ tall, unable to measure width / 8 degree lean
under larger tree / some small removals of branches by the roadway /
splits tree into two co-dominant leaders at 12’ / good color / no signs of
beetles
B. Tree #2 - DSH – 109” with indentions, 174’ tall, 115’ wide / has 8 leaders
at 12’ above ground / lots of included bark / good color / no signs of
beetles
14. Location: Market & Dunes
Red Bud Eucalyptus
DSH = 53”, 68’ tall, 79’ wide, good color, no bugs, needs 5 branches
reduced for end weight and wind exposure / has three major leaders with
co-dominating crotch / one branch facing the house needs a strap [has two
cracks – one is callusing over] / two branches pointing east need a strap /
one branch pointing west over the wire has moved 5” and is on the wire at
this time – needs reduction pruning for weight
15. Location: Marina & Estero
Monterey Pine
DSH = 54.5”, 87’ tall, 79’ wide / good color except small amount pitch
canker / no bleeding / no beetles / too many inner branches removed /
approximately 25% of foliage is missing / three major branches removed
from 10’ to the ground [1 – 13”, 2 – 8”] / good candidate for strapping or
removal
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
A.4
A list of fifteen nominated for “LANDMARK TREE” (Heritage
Tree) Status in Morro Bay, CA
By City of Morro Bay Tree Committee members, October 1, 2011
1. Location: Corner of Sandalwood & Terra Street
Monterey Cypress
2. Location: Pacific & Morro Streets
Canary Island Palms (4)
3. Location: In front of library on Harbor Street
Island Oak
ATTACHMENT 2
4. Location: End of Dunes on the bluff
Monterey Cypress
5. Location: Marina & Napa
Monterey Cypress (3)
6. Location: 708 Morro Bay Blvd.
Red Bud Eucalyptus
Silver Dollar Eucalyptus (2)
ATTACHMENT 2
7. Location: Morro & Anchor
Monterey Cypress (3)
8. Location: In front of Estero Bay Graphics on Morro Bay Blvd.
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
9. Location: Morro & South Street
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
ATTACHMENT 2
10. Location: Shasta & Dunes
Avocado
11. Location: Monterey & Morro Bay Blvd
Canary Island Palms (3)
12. Location: Tidelands Park on the Embarcadero
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
ATTACHMENT 2
13. Location: On Piney between entrance to St. Timothy’s and fire station
Blue Gum Eucalyptus (2)
14. Location: Market & Dunes
Red Bud Eucalyptus
15. Location: Marina & Estero
Monterey Pine
ATTACHMENT 2
Rob Livick - Landmark Tree Documents
Hello all,
Attached is the Landmark Tree Nominees with corresponding Ordinance Criteria that apply. It is the same
list as the Arborist Report w/out analysis.
Also, #6 is not a Silver Dollar Eucalyptus, it is a Silver Leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus melanophloia).
Also, is this our final draft? Shouldn't we have a photo & correct scientific name for each nominee?
Cheers,
-Taylor Newton, MB Tree Committee
From: Mr Noah Smukler <nsmukler@yahoo.com>
To: Wally McCray <mccraywa@aol.com>
Cc: Taylor NewtonCultivation <taylor_newton@yahoo.com>; Robert Schreiber <arborfirst@sbcglobal.net>; Noah
Smukler <nsmukler@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 8:03 PM
Subject: Landmark Tree Documents
1st Attachement: Agenda w/ MB Municipal Code on pg 2
2nd Attachment: Robert's Arborist Report
Remaining Attachments are photos in best order of Arborist Report Listing
Note:
#5) Three Cypress @ Marina & Napa
Are labeled as Marina & Piney on pictures
Please be sure to add photo in review:
+ Blue Euc @ St. Timothy's (w/ property owner letter)
+ Red Flowering Ficafolia near Surf Staircase
+ optional: any other Ficafolia's in the Street Tree setting that exhibit prime growing habits as
noted by Dr. Ritter (good color, minimal bulbing @ ground level, health, etc)?
Also GPS coordinate for each would be nice.
From:taylor newton <taylor_newton@yahoo.com>
To:Mr Noah Smukler <nsmukler@yahoo.com>, Wally McCray <mccraywa@aol.com>, D...
Date:4/10/2012 12:52 PM
Subject:Landmark Tree Documents
CC:Robert Schreiber <arborfirst@sbcglobal.net>, taylor newton <taylor_newto...
Attachments:Landmark_Nominees_Ordinance_Criteria.doc
Page 1of 1
5/16/2012file:///C:/Users/RLivick/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/4F842D09CMBMBPS1001386...
ATTACHMENT 2
1
A.3~ordinance criteria…
1. Location: Corner of Sandalwood & Terra Street
Monterey Cypress
A, B, D(farm land marker), E, G
2. Location: Pacific & Morro Streets
Canary Island Palms (4)
A, E, G
3. Location: In front of library on Harbor Street
Island Oak
A, B, F
4. Location: End of Dunes on the bluff
Monterey Cypress
A, B, E, G
5. Location: Marina & Napa
Monterey Cypress (3)
A, B, E, G
6. Location: 708 Morro Bay Blvd.
Red Bud Eucalyptus
Silver Dollar Eucalyptus (2)
A. Red Bud Eucalyptus – A, B, F
B. Eucalyptus melanophloia (Silver leaved Ironbark) – A, B, F
7. Location: Morro & Anchor
Monterey Cypress (3)
A, B, E, G
ATTACHMENT 2
2
8. Location: In front of Estero Bay Graphics on Morro Bay Blvd.
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
A, B, F, G
9. Location: Morro & South Street
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
A, B, E, F, G
10. Location: Shasta & Dunes
Avocado
A, D, F
11. Location: Monterey & Morro Bay Blvd
Canary Island Palms (3)
A, E, F, G
12. Location: Tidelands Park on the Embarcadero
Blue Gum Eucalyptus
A, B, F, G
13. Location: On Piney between entrance to St. Timothy’s and fire station
Blue Gum Eucalyptus (2)
A, B, E, F, G
14. Location: Market & Dunes
Red Bud Eucalyptus
A, B, F
15. Location: Marina & Estero
Monterey Pine
A, F, G
ATTACHMENT 2
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 22, 2013
FROM: Eric Endersby, Harbor Director
SUBJECT: Discussion and Direction on Future Expiring Leases and Consideration of
Proposals Received for Lease Sites 30W-33W (Coakley – Bay Front Marina),
34W (Crizer), 35W-36W (Vacant), and 37W (Meyer – Morro Bay Marina Inc.)
RECOMMENDATION
Consider alternatives and provide direction to staff.
ALTERNATIVES
A. Direct staff to begin negotiations with any or all of the existing leaseholders on each lease
site for new leases. Proposals have been submitted from each existing leaseholder, as well as
one proposal from the adjacent landowner to vacant lease site 35W-36W.
B. Consider combining lease sites in any combination under master lease holders or soliciting
Request for Proposals for all or any of the sites.
C. Consider whether City should take over one or all sites and operate under direct City
management.
FISCAL IMPACT
Unknown positive fiscal impact expected as older leases are retired and brought up to modern terms
and rents, in addition to potential new revenue from one currently vacant lease site.
SUMMARY
All of the currently leased water-only sites south of the public launch ramp are at or very nearly
within their five-year windows of expiration. Proposals have been received for each lease site, and
staff has included them with this report for consideration by Council and direction on how to
proceed with the future of these pristine sites.
BACKGROUND
Lease Site 30W-33W is an old County lease originally entered into in 1964 that expires December,
2013. It currently has approximately 25 vessel slips and a small L-shaped pier that was formerly a
fuel dock.
AGENDA NO: D-4
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
Prepared By: ________ Dept Review:_____
City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
2
Lease Site 34W is a City lease originally entered into in 1997 that expires in December, 2018. It
currently has approximately 4 vessel slips only.
Lease Site 35W-36W is currently vacant. Under the previous landowner’s tenancy of the lease, this
site was historically a fish buying station and tie-up location for commercial fishing vessels.
However, under the current upland landowner’s ownership those operations ceased and the wharf
was removed from the lease site.
Lease Site 37W is a City lease originally entered into in 1994 that expires in June, 2016. It currently
has approximately 15 vessel slips and the water area is used for hauling and launching vessels for the
adjacent small-scale boatyard.
In February 2013, Council directed staff to first bring these sites to an overall waterfront lease Study
Session, then to schedule them for an open Public session to consider the alternatives. The Study
Session was held on March 25th, and while no Council action was taken at that meeting, public
testimony was taken and information about the lease sites and administration of them discussed.
To date, staff has received proposals from the current tenants and adjacent landowner to the four
sites, which are included with this staff report. The current Harbor Department Lease Management
Policy (LMP) is also included for reference.
DISCUSSION
Alternative A: The LMP for this area states the following when considering lease renewals:
Tidelands Park south water area only leases. In this area the City leases only the water areas as the
upland property and access to the water areas is owned and controlled by private parties. The City
will encourage continuation/enhancement of marine dependent uses such as boat slips and boat
repair facilities where feasible. However, this area is not suitable for large redevelopment projects
and in most cases the City will negotiate a new 10 to 30 year lease extension with existing tenants
when they meet the above criteria.
Those criteria are outlined on Page 4, numbered 1-9, of the LMP. For Council’s consideration is to
discuss and decide whether or not the tenants, and previous tenant in one case, meet the criteria and
have desirable proposals that the City wishes to pursue on an individual basis. Should Council wish
to pursue one or all proposals, staff will take general direction regarding the proposals from Council
in open Public session, however, once negotiation of terms and conditions of said leases begins,
those discussions with Council will occur in Closed session.
The proposals received to date are highlighted as follows:
30W-33W. One proposal received from Jay and Mereline Coakley, current upland property owners
and leaseholders of 30W-33W, proposing continued operation of the site with its current uses,
3
replacement of at least five pilings on the pier, replacement of a portion of the pier decking,
installation of floats under the slips where needed, installation of a stand-pipe and fire hose cabinet
on the slips, and installation of a second small hoist on the pier. The upland property is reportedly
for sale.
34W. Two proposals received: one proposal from Robert Crizer, current leaseholder (but not upland
property owner) of 34W, proposing continued operation of the site with its current uses, replacement
of at least three pilings to the docks, replacement of the existing wooden gangway with a new
aluminum one, and replacement of the dock bumpers; one proposal from Bill Martony and
Bernadette Pekarek, current adjacent upland property owners to the site, proposing taking over
operation of the site with its current uses, replacement of an unspecified number of pilings, and
extension of parking and access, utilities, and restroom services to the site from their adjacent upland
property.
35W-36W. Two proposals received: one proposal from Bill Martony and Bernadette Pekarek,
current upland property owners, proposing a small dock to be used primarily for Nori seaweed
mariculture operations, and one proposal from Ty Meyers, current adjacent upland property owner to
the north of the site, proposing development of slips.
37W. One proposal received from Ty Meyer, current upland property owner and current leaseholder,
proposing continued operation of the site with its current uses including continuing to operate the
adjacent boatyard and upgrading its crane, although the boatyard is not on the lease site but only
uses it for access to the water.
Alternative B: This alternative is similar to Alternative A; however it differs in that the discussion
and decision is whether or not to combine lease sites in any way under single leaseholder
management or by solicitation through a Request for Proposal. Two proposals received (highlighted
above) offer this alternative.
Alternative C: This alternative combines some or all sites under direct management of the City and
would require an alternative access either from the north at the public launch ramp, from the south
via Bayshore Bluffs Park, or by purchasing one of the upland properties from the lease sites, one of
which is reportedly for sale.
Since all of these leases are at or very nearly within their five-year windows of expiration, now will
likely be one of the few historical opportunities for the City to consider combining two or more sites
in any combination, including combining any or all of them under direct City management in order
to eliminate some or all of the challenges and issues that have arisen because the City does not
control the land adjacent to these leases. Conversely, Council could desire to negotiate with the
current leaseholders and/or adjacent landowner for new leases as proposed. Naturally, any proposal
project would require the full public Planning Commission and Coastal Commission permit
processes.
4
CONCLUSION
If required, staff is prepared to discuss in more detail the alternatives, however, greater detail was
not provided in this staff report simply because there are many issues and possible alternatives at
play, and it is not feasible to include all of them in their possible combinations in this report.
Staff Report
AGENDA NO: D-5
MEETING DATE: 5/28/13
Prepared By: __JB____ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 22, 2013
FROM: Andrea Lueker, City Manager
SUBJECT: Review of the 2008 Management Partner Study (Assessment of City
Organization and Financial Options), Including Progress on the 21 Expenditure
Control Strategies, 13 Revenue Creation Strategies and 4 Long Range Strategies
and Provide Further Direction to Staff
SUMMARY
This item was agendized for the May 14, 2013 City Council meeting as Item D-8. It became
apparent that there was not enough time to hear all the New Business items that evening; as such, it
was decided to open up for public comment from those in attendance and then continue this item to a
future meeting.
Attached is the staff report from the May 14, 2013 meeting in its entirety.
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: 5/7/13
AGENDA NO: __ D-8___
Meeting Date: 5/14/13
Prepared By: _______________ Dept Review:_____
City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________ Page 1 of 3
FROM: Andrea K. Lueker, City Manager
SUBJECT: Review of the 2008 Management Partner Study (Assessment of City
Organization and Financial Options), Including Progress on the 21 Expenditure
Control Strategies, 13 Revenue Creation Strategies and 4 Long Range Strategies
and Provide Further Direction to Staff
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council review the attached report on the progress made on the 21
Expenditure Control Strategies, 13 Revenue Creation Strategies and 4 Long Range Strategies from
the 2008 Management Partners Assessment of City Organization and Financial Options document
and provide staff direction.
ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1 –receive and review the 2008 Report, January and August 2009 and May 2013
updates and provide no further direction.
Alternative 2 – receive and review the 2008 Report, January and August 2009 and May 2013
updates and direct staff to pursue one or more recommendations.
Alternative 3 –receive and review the 2008 Report, January and August 2009 and May 2013
updates and ask that staff bring back this issue for discussion at the May 22, 2013 budget hearing for
consideration of funding for an update of the entire document.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact related to the review of the 2008 Management Partner Study (Assessment
of City Organization and Financial Options). The fiscal impact of the listed alternatives is as
follows:
Alternative 1 – no fiscal impact.
Alternative 2 – to be determined based on recommendation from City Council
Alterative 3 –the cost provided by Management Partners to update the document is $39,500– this
would include approximately 229 hours of work.
2
BACKGROUND
In 2006/2007, the City of Morro Bay experienced significant financial hardships with expenses to
provide public services increasing faster than city revenues could keep up. To make matters worse,
the City was lagging in important general revenue sources such as sales tax. In the Fall of 2007, the
City Council requested a study be performed that would identify opportunities for improvement at
various levels of the City’s organization. The scope of the study included an examination of
processes and procedures, effectiveness and efficiency of service delivery, organizational design and
staffing levels as well as other services currently being provided. At their November 13, 2007
meeting, the City Council reviewed the four proposals received and narrowed their selection to two
proposals. At the December 10, 2007 City Council meeting, the decision was made to contract with
Management Partners.
Management Partners began research and fact finding for the study in early 2008. They used a
number of analytical and management techniques for the project which enabled the Management
Partners staff to obtain high quality stakeholder input and suggestions on potential strategies, gain
full understanding of the extent of the City’s financial situation, and compare and contrast Morro
Bay against other peer jurisdictions. The research and fact-finding techniques included a thorough
review of documents, personal interviews with the key managers in the City, selection of 10
communities (in consultation with the City) for benchmarking purposes, implementation of two
electronic surveys (one to City employees and the second to elected officials and Advisory Board
and Commission members), organization of city employee focus groups (6 in total with 63 people
participating) and financial modeling.
The report produced by Management Partners, entitled “City Organization and Financial Options”
which can still be found on the City’s website, contains 38 recommendations, including 21
Expenditure Control Strategies, 13 Revenue Creation Strategies and 4 Long Range Strategies the
City could consider for overall improved financial health. After receiving the document in May
2008, the City Council scheduled a public workshop in August (the delay between receipt of the
document and the 1st public workshop was due to the City being in the midst of the fiscal year
budget adoption process as well as the hiring of a permanent City Manger). That August 13, 2008
workshop was held with staff first providing an update on the progress made on recommendations
that had occurred since receipt of the document, approximately 10 strategies/recommendations had
been addressed at that time. Just prior to the workshop, the City Council was asked to rank the
Management Partner recommendations on a scale of 1 to 5 (in conjunction with the priorities
determined in the Goal Setting Workshop held in June 2008). The City Council was then able to
focus their discussion on those top scoring recommendations. Following the August 2008
workshop, staff provided an update on the Management Partner recommendations in January 2009
and then again, at a second workshop that was held in August 2009.
The City also included the Management Partners recommendations in their discussions during the
goal setting processes in June 2008, February 2009 and March 2010 which were conducted by Amy
Paul of Management Partners.
At the December 11, 2012 City Council meeting during the Declaration of Future Agenda Items,
Mayor Irons asked and received support for City staff to bring back a proposal to update the
Management Partners study. Following the meeting, staff contacted Andy Belknap of Management
3
Partners and asked that he provide a proposal to update the study that was originally completed in
2008. Mr. Belknap has provided a proposal, and staff brought back the proposal and corresponding
staff report to the City Council at their February 26, 2013 meeting. The proposal provided by
Management Partners indicated that an update effort would cost approximately $39,500 and require
229 hours of work. The City Council discussed this issue and directed staff to provide an in-house
update of the progress on the recommendations to the City Council in April/May 2013.
DISCUSSION
Staff has attached the original document that the City Council reviewed in August 2008 and
subsequently updated in January and August, 2009. That document has been further updated with
any progress on the goals since 2009, being added.
CONCLUSION
Based on the direction from City Council at their February 26, 2013 meeting, staff has provided an
in-house update to the 21 Expenditure Control Strategies, 13 Revenue Creation Strategies and 4
Long Range Strategies originally provided in the report.
Prepared By: __KW_ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 22, 2013
FROM: Kathleen Wold, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Status report on Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance (Title 17) as it relates to
Section 17.48.32 (Secondary Units), Section 17.44.020.1 (North Main Street
Commercial Area Parking) and Section 17.27 (Antennas and Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council review the materials presented in the packet by staff and
direct staff to submit to Coastal Commission a Local Coastal Plan amendment to include all
three Zoning Ordinance Amendments.
ALTERNATIVES
An alternative would be to consider the three Zoning Ordinances separately and direct staff to
submit to Coastal Commission one, two, or three of the amendments or any combination thereof.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to this report as it only presents a status update on Zoning Ordinance
Amendments.
BACKGROUND
Staff has provided for you a packet of information for each Ordinance change. In reviewing the
minutes from each project, staff determined that there were no members of the public who spoke
regarding the Wireless or the Main Street parking amendment during the public hearing process
either pro or con. In addition, the motions that were made on these two amendments were passed
unanimously by City Council. Since these two Ordinance Amendments were approved by Council
without concerns, staff will focus on the Secondary Unit Ordinance Amendment. In order to provide
the issues that were brought up during the Public Hearing in a concise manner, staff has excerpted
from the February 14, 2012 minutes item B-2, which are as follows:
Councilmember Smukler asked for a review of history as to how we came to the
AGENDA NO: D-6
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
2
existing regulations of the 900 square feet to both Public Services Director Livick
and City Attorney Schultz. He followed up with a question of whether we did a
review of other coastal communities in our county of what their regulations are
for secondary units.
Mayor Yates opened the hearing for public comment.
Jamie Irons brought up the fact that there is no data from Planning staff or the
public that the current Ordinance even had a problem. He also questioned why it
wasn’t certified back in 2005. There was a 3 day public workshop when this
Ordinance was originally crafted and now Council majority is asking to revise
that process; he asked that Council reconsider these actions and send it back to a
public workshop to do it the right way.
Betty Winholtz concurred with Mr. Irons. She is concerned with the potential of
being able to build 2 homes on a lot, each 1200 square feet and then subdivide
them and sell both off. She feels there are 3 things being repeated in the staff
report that she wants to correct. She feels it is in error that: we are fixing our
Ordinance in regards to compliance with State law; that we are increasing small
affordable housing units; and, that we are ensuring compatibility with existing
neighborhoods. We should listen to public input and shouldn’t undermine the
public process.
John Barta commented that the granny unit issue is not about land being
subdivided and sold separately, never was and never will be. Granny units are
there because they allow us to have a healthy community. No one is going to be
required to build a 1200 sq foot granny unit. From 2005 to the present we have
had a more restrictive process and as a result, very few granny units have been
built. In order to have a viable community where people can afford to live, we
will need a robust granny unit program.
Mayor Yates closed the hearing for public comment.
Councilmember Smukler felt that there wasn’t enough data to move forward with
this tonight. He also feels we would be abandoning the public process by moving
forward. If we plan on changing, we should have another public workshop. He
feels that 900 square feet is a fair and more affordable number and wants to stick
with the existing Ordinance that was developed through the public process and
move forward with the certification of that.
Councilmember Leage thinks the owner of the property should have the choice of
up to 1200 square feet and agrees that just because you can, doesn’t mean you
3
will. He doesn’t feel 1200 square feet is too big as long as the property owner
feels they can rent it out.
Mayor Yates doesn’t see a problem with this and feels it’s irrelevant to compare
us with what other communities are doing. He also doesn’t feel that 1200 square
feet is too big nor does she feel that everybody building a secondary unit to 1200
square feet will occur.
Councilmember Johnson is good with this as well. She feels that 1200 square feet
is still a reasonably sized smaller home and that this subject has been “work
shopped” enough as we’ve had 2 public hearings already.
Councilmember Borchard agreed, public process has been on-going on this issue
and in fact we are having a public process on it right now. A 1200 square foot
limit would help the applicants expedite a project as well as save costs without
having to go to a CUP. This should also help with our housing inventory.
MOTION: Councilmember Borchard moved the City Council approve Item B2 as
presented in the staff report. The motion was seconded by Councilmember
Leage and carried 4-1 with Councilmember Smukler voting no
The minutes indicate that there was discussion by the public and the Council over the issue of the
appropriate size of a secondary unit and whether or not the existing Ordinance is flawed.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Council review the materials presented in the packet and provide
direction on how to proceed. If the Council determines that the three Ordinance amendments are
ready to submit to the Coastal Commission as presented in this staff report, staff will immediately
prepare an application and submit to the Commission by June 14, 2013. If the Council does not feel
that all three are ready, staff will prepare any amendment deemed ready for submittal to the Coastal
Commission.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Section 17.48.32 (Secondary Units) materials
2. Section 17.44.020.1 (North Main Street Commercial Area Parking)
3. Section 17.27 (Antennas and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities.