HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 97-77 - Opposition to Expansion of Orange County MN
WATER R IRI
IT
IRI I IE RANCH WATER NSTRIC 1 15600 Sand Canyon Ave..P.O.Box 57000.Irvine,CA 92619-7000.(714)453-5300
FAX NO. 714-374-1557
October 20, 1997
Ms. Connie Brockway
City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92548
RE: ITEM F2 ENTITLED CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OPPOSING EXPANSION OF THE ORANGE
COUNTY WATER DISTRICTS' SERVICE BOUNDARIES &PROPOSED
ANNEXATION OF THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT& THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
Dear City Council Members:
I just became aware of the Huntington Beach City Council Agenda, item F2 addressing
annexation of a portion of Irvine Ranch Water District and Yorba Linda Water District into the
Orange County Water District(OCWD). Staff recommends opposition to this annexation until a
study of water supply is conducted.
Please do not take action on this item tonight, except to delay further consideration until the facts
from both sides are heard.
The City of Huntington Beach is currently participating on a committee with all groundwater
pumpers located within OCWD to evaluate annexation issues. This committee has only been
meeting for 6 weeks with a scheduled process of 3-4 months to evaluate annexation.
I believe it is very premature for the City of Huntington Beach to take a position before the
annexation committee has completed their evaluation and determined the facts considering water
supply and water demand.
Please delay discussion on this item this evening until all the facts are presented so the City of
Huntington Beach can make an informed decision.
Sincerely,
0
i a
President
CIS Y OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
MEETING DATE: November 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-4
Only)(Below Space For City Clerk's Use
RCA Author: Jeff Renna x5527
Council/Agency Meeting Held: i/�sf97 �000.tCo
Deferred/Continued to:
L2 roved ❑ Conditional) 'pp�rov d ❑ Denied ,dJr�« City Clerk's Signature
Council Meeting Date: November 3, 1997 Department ID Number: PWW97/98-4
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
REQUEST FOR ACTION o
co
SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL z..�-
N -enm
SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, Acting City Administrator
PREPARED BY: ES M. JONES II, Director of Public Works n �,
`ino• R?-'7-7
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution Opposing Expansion o the Orange
County Water District's Service Boundaries.
=te.etsue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s)
Statement of Issue: The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) and the Yorba Linda Water District
(YLWD) recently petitioned the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to expand its boundaries and annex
IRWD and YLWD outlying areas into OCWD. Presently only a portion of the each petitioning agency's
service area is within OCWD boundaries. That proposal (to include all of IRWD and YLWD in the OCWD)
is presently under consideration by OCWD's Board of Directors.
In order to meet three-quarters of their respective water needs, OCWD members (of which the City is one)
presently pump a total of 350,000 AF/year of well water from the basin. By the year 2020, the 75% cap for
each agency's demand level will require that 428,000 AF of water per year be pumped from the basin.
Water managers of agencies located within the basin question whether or not the basin can meet the 2020
demand level, and suggest that it would be most precarious to expand service levels beyond that demand.
It is illogical to expand the OCWD boundaries at this time or until thorough studies demonstrate that
increased pumping (sufficient to serve proposed annexation areas) will have no adverse affect on current
users. /
SVBI.DOC -2- 10/28/97 12:53 PM
9EQUEST FOR ACTION
MEETING DATE: November 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-4
At the October 20, 1997, meeting of the City Council, staff was directed to prepare a resolution opposing
expansion of the OCWD service boundaries until studies clearly demonstrate that additional water
demand on the basin from proposed annexations will not adversely impact present member agencies.
Funding Source: Not applicable.
Recommended Action: Adopt the proposed Resolution No. -7 opposing expansion of the
Orange County Water District's service boundaries until studies demonstrate that additional water
demand from the basin will not adversely impact present member agencies.
Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt the resolution. Selecting this alternative may: (1) show
indifference toward annexing district service area and protecting the underground basin; and (2) cause
the District Board to approve the expansion.
Analysis: The Orange County Water District was formed in 1933 by a special act of the California
Legislature. At that time, and for the 60+ ensuing years, the District's primary purposes have been to: (1)
manage the Orange County groundwater basin to the benefit of its users; and (2) protect the
groundwater basins users' water rights.
The Orange County Water District's present service area is nearly 350 square miles, including the north
Orange County area indicated on the attached map. Member agencies are: the Cities of Anaheim,
Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, La Palma, Newport Beach,
Orange, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Tustin and Westminster as well as the East Orange County Water
District, the Irvine Company, the Irvine Ranch Water District, the Mesa Consolidated Water District, the
Santiago County Water District, the Serrano Irrigation District, the Southern California Water Company,
and the Yorba Linda Water District. However, only portions of Anaheim, the Irvine Ranch Water District,
Santiago County Water District and the Yorba Linda Water District are within the OCWD's present
boundaries.
The Irvine Ranch Water District and the Yorba Linda Water District recently petitioned the Orange
County Water District to expand it's boundaries and annex IRWD and YLWD outlying service areas into
OCWD. That proposal (to include all of IRWD and YLWD areas in the OCWD) is presently under
consideration by OCWD's Board of Directors.
The historical precedent is that member agencies pump up to a maximum of 75% of their agency needs
per year. Even with that 75% cap, members presently pump a total of 350,000 Acre Feet (AF) per year
of water from the basin. By the year 2020, however, the 75% cap for each agency's demand level will
require that 428,000 AF of water per year be pumped from the basin just to meet the growing
population's needs within the present District boundary.
Over the past five years, an average of 300,000 acre feet of water has been percolated into the basin
from the water flows in the Santa Ana River. This required that 50,000 acre feet per year be purchased
from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWDSC) and percolated into the basin.
Some OCWD staff members suggest that the increased basin demand (resulting from boundary
expansion and population increases) could be met by: (1) percolating 60,000 AF of additional Santa
Ana River water flows into the underground basin; and (2) developing the Orange County Regional
SVB1.DOC -3- 10/28/97 12:53 PM
'REQUEST FOR ACTION
MEETING DATE: November 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-4
Reclamation Project (additional 100,000 AF per year in which treated OC Sanitation District water would
be pumped to the percolation ponds in the Santa Ana River, which would then be percolated back into
the underground basin).
Many managers of member water agencies, however, question whether or not the District would be able
to percolate as much as 100,000 AF of water into the basin over and above what it is already
percolating. Further, the Orange County Regional Reclamation Project would cost $340 million dollars
which must be borne by local rate payers. Even if these alternate water sources would work, and
construction began immediately, the very earliest that users could enjoy the alternative-source water
would be in the year 2002.
For the immediate future, however, it is questionable whether or not there is sufficient basin capacity to
meet the: (1) existing demand of present member agencies; and (2) accelerated demands resulting from
boundary expansion. Preventing near-term district expansion is the best way in which current members
may help protect the basin's water supply.
A task force of various water managers of OCWD member agencies has been attempting to reach
consensus on the issue of annexation over the last thirteen (13) months. Wishing to bring the issue to
closure soon, the OCWD Board of Directors set the date of December 1, 1997, as a deadline for the task
force to reach consensus. Based on the progress to date, it appears that consensus may be elusive.
While many water officials are not completely opposed to District expansion, they do oppose it at this
time. City staff opposes any expansion of the Orange County Water District's service area until thorough
studies have been conducted demonstrating that increased water draws (sufficient to serve proposed
annexation areas) will have no adverse affect on present users. In accordance with this, staff proposes
that the City Council adopt the resolution opposing the expansion of the Orange County Water District's
service boundaries until studies demonstrate that additional water demand from the basin will not
adversely impact present member agencies. Adoption of this resolution would help build support for
protecting the underground basin and keep water costs at status quo.
Conversely, the Council could deny the resolution. Selecting this alternative may: (1) show indifference
toward annexing District service areas and protecting the underground basin; and (2) cause the District
Board to approve the expansion. If this alternative was selected, OCWD could be required to decrease
the amount each agency pumps from the basin (from 75% to 70%). Such a decrease would require the
City to buy an additional 1,900 acre feet of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's higher
priced water per year at an annual additional cost of $878,000.
Environmental Status: Not applicable.
Attachment(s): List attachment(s) below.
City Clerk's
Page Number No. Description
Start Numbering 1. Map depicting boundaries of Orange County Water District
2. Proposed Resolution No. '-77
RCA Author: Jeff Renna x5527.
SVB1.DOC -4- 10/28/97 12:53 PM
ATTACHMENT 1
uwowA _�
�A raie.toAw
.rc.S
tea A.uo1
�K
41Y1(Y Ri�AR
YWOI AM�d
NLYpI�
YYIW
IOC
roona,.a,rcu ,...Kou.,a
o�
• TOOW
.,MTKM
AAVA
ORANGE COUNTY HATER DISTRICT AND
RETAIL%ATER PROVIDERS
If ronN MLANNMTWNAlUS
N acwDoommar
VATINDMISaMOUNMEY
N oftwocoomsouraur -
NONAMIEltEARM ionUtION -
4 BOUNDARY Of THE UNDS OUDADE OCWD DMNM NTO •�
SHE CaU=OOLWff GBOW41WFB MMN -
yAN 2WP20POSID MMATE BOUNDAd
FROFOMMAZOWMANhWAnON
y/% CFVELAND NOMONAL FORM N OW4M COUNW
e '
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 97-77
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH OPPOSING EXPANSION OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT'S SERVICE BOUNDARIES
•WHEREAS, the Orange County Water District("OCWD')was formed by a special act of the
California Legislature in 1933 to: (1) manage the Orange County groundwater basin for users' benefit; and
(2) protect the groundwater basin users'water rights; and
The OCWD member agencies are presently the Cities of Anaheim, Buena Park, Fountain Valley,
Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, La Palma, Newport Beach, Orange, Santa Ana, Seal Beach,
Tustin and Irvine Ranch Water District, the Mesa Consolidated Water District, the Santiago Water District,
the Serrano Irrigation District, the Southern California Water Company, and the Yorba Linda Water District;
and
Only portions of Anaheim, Irvine Ranch Water District, Santiago County Water District and the
Yorba Linda Water District are within the OCWD present boundaries; and
The Irvine Ranch Water District and the Yorba Linda Water District petitioned for annexation of their
outlying service areas into the Orange County Water District; and
The basin's present member-pumped water demand is 354,000 acre feet/year but that in the year
2020, their basin water demand will be 428,000 acre feet; and
The OCWD Board of Directors is considering expanding its District boundaries, in accordance with
its existing adopted policy, to include all of the area that lies within the basin's drainage area;
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach
opposes any expansion of the Orange County Water District boundaries until studies demonstrate that
pumping more than 428,000 acre feet of water from the basin will not have any negative impact on present
member agencies.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting
thereof held on the 3rd day of November , 1997.
ATTEST:
yo
City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED:
City Attorney
Administrator INITLADND A
Director of Public Works C�Li
Jmp/k/resolution/omd/10/28/97
Res. No. 97-77
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss:
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I, CONNIE BROCKWAY,the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of
the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City,
do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City
of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted
by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council
at an regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of November, 1997 by the
following vote:
AYES: Julien, Harman, Dettloff, Bauer, Sullivan, Garofalo
NOES: None
ABSENT: None (Green- out of room)
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the
City Council of the City of Huntington
Beach, California
G/resol uti/resbkpg/97-39
s s
RCA ROUTING SHEET
INITIATING DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution of the City Council Opposing
Expansion of the Orange County Water District's
Boundaries
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 3, 1997
RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS'
Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached
Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached
Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable)
Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc.
(Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable
Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable
Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable
Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable
Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable
Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable
EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS
REVIEWED RETURNED IFORWARDED?'
Administrative Staff )
Assistant City Administrator (Initial) ( -2P4
City Administrator Initial
City Clerk
.EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM:
r
L4)
CI Y OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
MEETING DATE: October 20, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-1
Space • Only)
RCA Author: Jeff Renna x5527
Council/Agency Meeting Held: )b,/-20)97
Deferred/Continued to:
9'Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied '�"� City Clerk Signature
Council Meeting Date: October 20, 1997 Department ID Number: PWW97/98-1
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH o C
REQUEST FOR ACTION -
co .-,. r rM
SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL r-_Z
SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator �— r=-" y
71
PREPARED BY: YES M. JONES II, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution to the City C it Opposing
Expansion of the Orange County Water District's Service
Boundaries.
Eat
ent:.f
Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s)
Statement of Issue: The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) and the Yorba Linda Water District
(YLWD) recently petitioned the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to expand its boundaries and annex
IRWD and YLWD outlying areas into OCWD. Presently only a portion of the each petitioning agency's
service area is within OCWD boundaries. That proposal (to include all of IRWD and YLWD in the OCWD) is
presently under consideration by OCWD's Board of Directors.
In order to meet three-quarters of their respective water needs, OCWD members (of which the City is one)
presently pump a total of 350,000 AF/year of well water from the basin. By the year 2020, the 75% cap for
each agency's demand level will require that 428,000 AF of water per year be pumped from the basin.
Water managers of agencies located within the basin question whether or not the basin can meet the 2020
demand level, and suggest that it would be most precarious to expand service levels beyond that demand.
It is illogical to expand the OCWD boundaries at this time or until thorough studies demonstrate that
increased pumping (sufficient to serve proposed annexation areas) will have no adverse affect on current
users.
RCA-SVB.DOC -2- 10/08/97 3:45 PM .
REQUEST FOR ACTION
MEETING DATE: October 20, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-1
Funding Source: Not applicable.
Recommended Action: Motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution opposing expansion of the
Orange County Water District's service boundaries until studies clearly demonstrate that additional water
demand on the basin from proposed annexations will not adversely impact present member agencies.
Alternative Action(s):
1. Motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution supporting the expansion of the Orange County Water
District's service boundaries. Selecting this alternative may: (1) show indifference toward annexing
District service area and protecting the underground basin; and (2) cause the District Board to
approve the expansion.
2. Take no action at this time.
Analysis: The Orange County Water District was formed in 1933 by a special act of the California
Legislature. At that time, and for the 60+ ensuing years, the District's primary purposes have been to: (1)
manage the Orange County groundwater basin to the benefit of its users; and (2) protect the groundwater
basins users' water rights.
The Orange County Water District's present service area is nearly 350 square miles, including the north
Orange County area indicated on the attached map. Member agencies are: the Cities of Anaheim,
Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, La Palma, Newport Beach,
Orange, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Tustin and Westminster as well as the East Orange County Water
District, the Irvine Company, the Irvine Ranch Water District, the Mesa Consolidated Water District, the
Santiago County Water District, the Serrano Irrigation District, the Southern California Water Company,
and the Yorba Linda Water District. However, only portions of Anaheim, the Irvine Ranch Water District,
Santiago County Water District and the Yorba Linda Water District are within the OCWD's present
boundaries.
The Irvine Ranch Water District and the Yorba Linda Water District recently petitioned the Orange County
Water District to expand it's boundaries and annex IRWD and YLWD outlying service areas into OCWD.
That proposal (to include all of IRWD and YLWD areas in the OCWD) is presently under consideration by
OCWD's Board of Directors.
The historical precedent is that member agencies pump up to a maximum of 75% of their agency needs
per year. Even with that 75% cap, members presently pump a total of 350,000 Acre Feet (AF) per year of
water from the basin. By the year 2020, however, the 75% cap for each agency's demand level will
require that 428,000 AF of water per year be pumped from the basin -- just to meet the growing
population's needs within the present District boundary.
Over the past five years, an average of 300,000 acre feet of water has been percolated into the basin
from the water flows in the Santa Ana River. This required the purchase of 50,000 acre feet per year to
be purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWDSC) and percolated into
the basin.
Some OCWD staff members suggest that the increased basin demand (resulting from boundary
expansion and population increases) could be met by: (1) percolating 60,000 AF of additional Santa Ana
RCA-SVB.DOC -3- 10/08/97 3:45 PM
REQUEST FOR ACTION
MEETING DATE: October 20, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-1
River water flows into the underground basin; and (2) developing the Orange County Regional
Reclamation Project (additional 100,000 AF per year in which treated OC Sanitation District water would
be pumped to the percolation ponds in the Santa Ana River, which would then be percolated back into the
underground basin).
Many managers of member water agencies, however, question whether or not the District would be able
to percolate as much as 100,000 AF of water into the basin -- over and above what it is already
percolating. Further, the Orange County Regional Reclamation Project would cost $340 million dollars
which must be borne by local rate payers. Even if these alternate water sources would work, and
construction began immediately, the very earliest that users could enjoy the alternative-source water
would be in the year 2002.
For the immediate future, however, it is questionable whether or not there is sufficient basin capacity to
meet the: (1) existing demand of present member agencies; and (2) accelerated demands resulting from
boundary expansion. Preventing near-term district expansion is the best way in which current members
may help protect the basin's water supply.
A task force of various water managers of OCWD member agencies has been attempting to reach
consensus on the issue of annexation over the last thirteen (13) months. Wishing to bring the issue to
closure soon, the OCWD Board of Directors set the date of December 1, 1997, as a deadline for the task
force to reach consensus. Based on the progress to date, it appears that consensus may be elusive.
While many water officials are not completely opposed to District expansion, they do oppose it at this
time. City staff opposes any expansion of the Orange County Water District's service area until thorough
studies have been conducted demonstrating that increased water draws (sufficient to serve proposed
annexation areas) will have no adverse affect of users. In accordance with this, staff proposes that the
City Council direct it to prepare a resolution opposing the expansion of the Orange County Water District's
service boundaries until studies demonstrate that additional water demand from the basin will not
adversely impact present member agencies. Selecting this alternative would help build support for
protecting the underground basin and keep water costs at status quo.
Conversely, the Council could direct staff to prepare a resolution which supports expansion of the Orange
County Water District's service boundaries. Selecting this alternative may: (1) show indifference toward
annexing District service areas and protecting the underground basin; and (2) cause the District Board to
approve the expansion. If this alternative was selected, OCWD could be required to decrease the amount
each agency pumps from the basin (from 75% to 70%). Such a decrease would require the City to buy
an additional 1,900 acre feet of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's higher priced water
per year at an annual additional cost of$878,000.
RCA-SVB.DOC -4- 10/08/97 3:45 PM
REQUEST FOR ACTION
MEETING DATE: October 20, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PWW97/98-1
Environmental Status: Not applicable.
Attachment():
NumberCity Clerk's
Page
1. Map depicting boundaries of Orange County Water District
RCA Author: Jeff Renna x5527.
RCA-SVB.DOC -5- 10/08/97 3:45 PM
i
4wVM _�
��Y YOM\llO�
ANDYIIW
.MJ
WUHRv. �4Y w�Tr
�G�n ANNFN
NOOAT01
. Mw.IIY �ny.1�11[
�1M1V1 NWCY
1p191[(Y
f_/ M11lll�[
4� �lu1iY
j/
{GrII MK
Y 4T
Ylmp AIM
YLLYtlI ���
TrfY
TWlM
(41i IMF �q�/p
1V[1N
IWIYf� Mbl MMd�TM
Mw1ON AfKA
ARU
OOIO1LOm y�pYT01
Y14
YQ�R s NIOT161+41T6A IIYSICO4MTd
AIIOO�l10M Y.YY bQYCf
NEA
M_ la
� C0Ym8CID
DPP
. PRtoef
YMO4YM
6Tv0
IIA'.011f VCX
N11f�W�WIIrtA
K .r4�1MCNT
NMdiT Dy.OT
� YINOWTb1
ME11
ORANGE COUNTY HATER DISTRICT AND
RETAILHATERPROVIDERS
/1/ EOTEINTMIANNESATONAK.c
N ocwo souNwn
N MSUTERDwiticTROuNmotr
.ovrw ea.n ..oa oo..w�
N MANGE COUNTY BOUNDARY ..aT.asr.rcT
NON41gT38EARIN:TORAIATON
I� ROUNOAWOf THE LANDS OMSIDEOCWD DRAINING INTO
THE ORANGE COUNTY GROUNDWATER BASIN
W
a� All TOf RROPOf®UITMATY rouNw a Yw wr�rt
LROTOSED AADO LANDS ANN UATION �
.�—Ij' svn un.un
�/ CLEVELUND NATIONAL FORM IN ORANGE COUNTY � %\
RCA ROUTING S
INITIATING DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution of the City Council Opposing
Expansion of the Orange County Water District's
Boundaries
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 20, 1997
__...... ........ ......... .... ..... ........ ...... ......... ...... .. ...... ..... ..._ STATUSAATTACHMENS
Rr"
Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached
Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable)
(Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc.
(Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable
Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable
Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable
Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable
Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable
Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable
..
EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS
REVIEWED RETURNED,; FORWARDED
Administrative Staff ( ) ( )
Assistant City Administrator (Initial)
City Administrator (Initial) ( ) Gc)
City Clerk ( )
EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM
Orange County Water District
Ultimate
Boundary Issue
City of Huntington Beach
vzma av
City Council Z'me,
Zormo
mnm>,31
a,m-jD�
yOZ�o�
October 20 1997 NRO��
.� oi d
m
�n O
OM
r
mW
v
� t
r
> m
ISSUE:
What should OCWD . 's
ultimate boundary be .?
OCWD manage s the
groundwater basin and controls
the amount of extractions
Percent of Demand 75% 700%
ECM
t
OCWD Board sets percentage each year
Groundwater extraction costs
are about 1/3 of imported
water costs
Imported water $ 430 per acre-foot
Groundwater $ 140 per acre-foot
Savings $ 290 per acre-foot
Original 1933 OCWD Boundary
Orange County
Boundary
OCWD area has increased through
annexation by 40% since 1933
Orange County
Boundary
Areas annexed
since 1933
r
Area de-annexed
since 1933
OCWD ,4ct does not define ultimate
boundary, but in 1986 Boardpolicy limited
district ed boundary
Boundary that drains
into OCWD
Orange County
Boundary
AB 2109 (Pringle) in 1995 attempted to
define OCWD boundary as service area of
curren embers
Boundary that drains
into OCWD
Boundary agencies
already p ly
within CWD
Orange County
Boundary
Annexations beyond the
current OCWD
boundary have both
water resources and
financial implications
Water Resources Implications:
Projections toyear 2020 indicate
significant new demands on basin by
existing OCWD members
400,000 330,000
L
300,000
L
C.
4-0
200,000
a� 130,000
a�
L
Q 100,000
0
Current Projected New
Groundwater Groundwater
Production Production
Water Resources Implications:
Projections of Year 2020 water demands on the
basin for potential annexable areas is about 1/3 of
that projected for internal growth
150,000 130,000
y 1U0,000
m
409000 37,000
0
Q
50,000
0
No Change Red Line Blue Line
- Water Resources Implications:
OCWD to meet demands on the basin
currently supplements local resources
with imported water purchases
Imported
15%
Water Resources Implications:
xk.
. ..................I Projected new water demands would
require additional imported water or
water recycling projects
2009000
150,000 � El
Imports for
Annexation
e
1002000 ■ Imports for
Internal Growth
50,000
■ Current Imports
0
1995-96 Year
2020
Financial implications:
OCWD currently purchases
supplemental water and
fi nances recycling, projects
through a uniform charge
called the Replenishment
Assessment (RA) . This charge
0s currently set at $911af.
Financial Implications:
Growth in water demand by cities in OCWD,
although unequal since 1954, has beenfinanced
by a Uniform Replenishment Assessment
60
U.
N
a 50
Increase in Groundwater Production from 1954 to present
N
N
40
7
O
L
H
0 30
w
3
a 2000
L
d
cc
3
Io-
n
O
fL^
V
O
Ana SA GG HB IRWD Org Full SCWC Mesa Tus BP YL West FV SB LP
Financial Implications:
Assuming no water pricing changes into
the future, annexations could add
approximately $ 7 to the RA in the year 2 02 0
$150
El Additional RA for
Annexations
$100
■ Additional RA for
Internal Growth
$50
■ Current RA
1995-96 Year
2020
Issues which have come to
light regarding annexations:
♦ Should an ultimate boundary for OCWD be
set on watershed basis or service area?
♦ Should uniform Replenishment Assessment
continue?
♦ What are the physical impacts on the Basin
from increasing demand?
OCWD response to issue:
♦ Established an Annexation Working Group
of represenatives of Groundwater Producers
♦ Held series of OCWD Board workshops
♦ Re-formatted Annexation Working Group
and brought in professional facilitator
(Huntington Beach is represented)
♦ Will schedule OCWD Board meeting to
consider recommendations from AWG
F 0 1
OCWD ANNEXATION - summary of issue
— Internal growth within current OCWD
boundary
— Annexations to OCWD
1 0
ZE3
INTERNAL GROWTH
- Will increase water demands over
00 , 000 acre-feet by 2020
Huntington Beach portion = 4,500 acre-feet
- Represents increase of 20% in water
demand compared to 1996 demands
o
ANNEXATIONS
- Could increase water demands by an
additional 50 , 000 acre-feet by 2020
- Represents increase in demand of
10% compared to 1996 demands
A 13
POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO
HUNTINGTON BEACH
- Lower water levels in wells
- Increase in water rates
o
LOWER WATER LEVELS
- Reduction in water quality
- Increase in pumping costs
- Reduction in well water production
- Wells may need to be replaced
- New wells may need to be added
o
� e
INCREASE IN WATER RATES
- OCWD will need to purchase
additional costly imported water for
groundwater replenishment (± 10% in
average monthly bill)
- Energy costs of City will rise sharply
due to lower well levels (± 10% in
rage monthly
o
INCREASE IN WATER RATES
- Basin pumping percentage could be
lowered to less than 75% ( 1 % decrease
= 1 % increase in average monthly bill)
- Additional wells will need to be
constructed
- Existing wells may need to be
laced
o S�Se
RECOMMENDED ACTION
- Direct staff to prepare a resolution
opposing expansion of OCWD
boundaries until studies clearly
demonstrate no adverse impact to
present member agencies from
proposed annexations
Irvine Ach Water District —�-
16800 SAND CANYON AVENUE FAX
11M+ -O OX STOOD
M P �B /
IRViN6,CA�6�619-7000 �� �.,
OM
� � N�O TH bi RD AT THE
ITY CLERK
WAY,CITY OLE
Date October 20, 1997 — HE RECORD AT THE
Number of pages including cover sheet 2 tN CITY CLER---K�`
�6D4FIiVAY,CITY CLERK
To: Ms. Connie Brockway From: Darryl Miller
City Clerk President
Phone
Fax Phone 714-374-1557 Phone 714-M-6310
CC: Fax Phone 714-463.1228
REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please comment
Please present this letter to the City Council this evening for Consideration. Hard copy to follow
in mail. Thank you.
RECEIVED FROM
LL AND MADE A PART OF THE RECO AT TtIE
COUNCIL MEETING OF-
OFFICE
i
CONNIE BROC WAY'CITY CLERK
w n
C'
T_ w
W L0
v>
W
C" O
2 V
a
s .O
�a
10-20-9^ 06 : 54PM Pol .
z>-a,rm,i 1KWL1
j�
n
IRV1IERAIN WEE NST10 15600 Sand Canyon Ave..P.O.Box57000,Irving,CA M19.7000.(714)4534=
FAX NO. 714-374-1557
October 20, 1997
Ms. Connie Brockway
City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Maui Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92549
RE: ITEM F2 ENTITLED CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OPPOSING EXPANSION OV THE ORANGE
COUNTY WATER DISTRICTS' SERVICE BOUNDARIES &PROPOSED
ANNEXATION OF THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT& THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
Dear City Council Members;
I just became aware of the Huntington Beach City Council Agenda,item F2 addressing
annexation of a portion of Irvine Ranch Water District and Yorba Linda Water District into the
Orange County Water District(OCWD), Staff recommends opposition to this annexation until a
study of water supply is conducted.
Please do not take action on this item tonight except to delay further consideration until the facts
from both sides are heard.
The City of Huntington Beach is currently participating on a committee with all groundwater
pumpers located within OCWD to evaluate annexation issues. This committee has only been
meeting for 6 weeks with a scheduled process of 3.4 months to evaluate annexation.
I believe it is very premature for the City of Huntington Beach to take a position before the
annexation committee has completed their evaluation and determined the facts considering water
supply and water demand.
Please delay discussion on this item this evening until all the facts are presented so the City of
Huntington Beach can make an informed decision.
Sincerely, ►
Darryl
President
In_71A_Q7 hR• Fn oae L n I
OCT-20-97 MON 04 : 17 Prl 253926D7 714 960 2230 P. 01
CITY CL nK
�.y CITY
A x1_ OV.M TING TC'7 or, 'CH, CALIF.
OCT Z0 4 p '9�
,�rarr '
n
ALEX ANDER & ASSOCIATES
8072 Driftwood Drive ,
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
Tel.: 714/536-6010
FAX : 714/960-2230 ,: .
Date: our :
tt
TO: PHONE: '
�W
FAX! .r
PROM: --. NO. PAGES, INCL. COVER
r
SUBJECT: G�
MESSAGE: 0e. •
r
I� w --
ACTION DESIRED?
f
r
Please report any transmission problems to 7 4/536-6010