The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2021-06-15 Agenda Packet AGENDA City Council/Public Financing Authority Regular Meeting Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 6:00 PM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL KIM CARR, Mayor BARBARA DELGLEIZE, Mayor Pro Tem DAN KALMICK, Councilmember NATALIE MOSER, Councilmember ERIK PETERSON, Councilmember MIKE POSEY, Councilmember Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 --or-- Virtual via Zoom Webinar STAFF OLIVER CHI, City Manager MICHAEL E. GATES, City Attorney ROBIN ESTANISLAU, City Clerk ALISA BACKSTROM, City Treasurer On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which allows a local legislative body to hold public meetings via teleconferencing, and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body. IN-PERSON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/ZOOM ACCESS: Members wishing to attend the meeting in person should be prepared to wear a face covering, or provide evidence of COVID-19 vaccination or a negative COVID-19 PCR test to gain entrance into the Council Chambers. In addition, in-person Chamber seating capacity may be limited to 50 percent. These requirements may change depending on guidance provided by the State. Alternate ways to view City Council meetings live or on-demand remain: livestreamed on HBTV Channel 3 (replayed on Wednesday’s at 10:00 a.m., and Thursday’s at 6:00 p.m.); live and archived meetings for on- demand viewing accessed from https://huntingtonbeach.legistar.com/calendar; or, from any Roku or Apple device by downloading the Cablecast Screenweave App and searching for the City of Huntington Beach channel. PUBLIC COMMENTS: At 6:00 PM, individuals wishing to provide a comment on agendized or non-agendized items may do so in person by completing a Request to Speak delivered to the City Clerk, or from a virtual location by entering Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528 via computer device, or by phone at (669) 900-6833. The Zoom Webinar can be accessed here: https://huntingtonbeach.zoom.us/j/97154130528. Those utilizing computer devices to request to speak may select the “Raise Hand” feature in the Webinar Controls section. Attendees entering the Webinar and requesting to speak by phone can enter *9 to enable the “Raise Hand” feature, followed by the *6 prompt that unmutes their handheld device microphone. Once the Mayor opens Public Comments, in-person attendees will be called to speak first. Speakers attending via Zoom will be provided a 15- minute window to raise their hands, and will be prompted to speak when the City Clerk announces their name or the last three digits of their phone number. All speakers are encouraged, but not required to identify themselves by name. Each individual may have up to 3 minutes to speak, but the Mayor, at her discretion, may reduce the time allowance if warranted by the volume of speakers. The Public Comment process will only be active during designated portions of the agenda (Public Comments and/or Public Hearing). After a virtual speaker concludes their comment, their microphone will be muted but they may remain in Webinar attendance for the duration of the meeting. 1 Members of the public unable to personally participate in the meeting but interested in communicating with the City Council on agenda-related items are encouraged to submit a written (supplemental) communication via email at SupplementalComm@Surfcity-hb.org, or City.Council@surfcity-hb.org. Supplemental Communications are public record, and if received by 2:00 PM on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, will be distributed to the City Council prior to consideration of agenda-related items, posted to the City website, and announced, but not read, at the meeting. Supplemental Communications received following the 2:00 PM deadline will be incorporated into the administrative record the following day. MEETING ASSISTANCE NOTICE: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, services are available to members of our community who require special assistance to participate in public meetings. If you require special assistance, 48-hour prior notification will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for an assisted listening device (ALD) for the hearing impaired, American Sign Language interpreters, a reader during the meeting and/or large print agendas. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at (714) 536-5227 for more information. 2 AGENDA June 15, 2021City Council/Public Financing Authority 4:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Peterson, Kalmick, Delgleize, Carr, Posey, Moser ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO STUDY SESSION / CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (3-Minute Time Limit) - At approximately 4:00 PM, individuals wishing to provide a comment on item(s) scheduled for Study Session or Closed Session may do so either in person by filling out a Request to Speak form, via computer through Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528, or Zoom Webinar by phone by calling (669) 900-6833 (see agenda cover sheet for request to speak instructions). Zoom Webinar participants wishing to speak will be provided a 15-minute window to “raise their hands,” and prompted to speak when the Clerk announces their name or the last three digits of their phone number. All speakers are encouraged, but not required to identify themselves by name. Speakers providing comments in person will be called to speak first, and each speaker may have up to 3 minutes unless the volume of speakers warrants reducing the time allowance. STUDY SESSION 21-4631.Parking & Outdoor Dining in a Post Pandemic World RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION 21-4622.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Gov. Code section 54956.9(d)(1).) Name of case: Rodriguez (Christian A.) v. City of Huntington Beach; Pamela Joyce Garrett; OCSC Case No.: 30-2020-01131129. 21-4663.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OR PUBLIC FACILITIES: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, Consultation with Julian Harvey, Acting Police Chief for the City of Huntington Beach Police Department. 21-4734.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Gov. Code section 54956.9(d)(1).) Name of case: Lathus (Shayna) v. City Page 1 of 5 3 AGENDA June 15, 2021City Council/Public Financing Authority of Huntington Beach; USDC Case No.: 8:21-cv-00808-SB (DFMx). 6:00 PM – COUNCIL CHAMBERS RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING ROLL CALL Peterson, Kalmick, Delgleize, Carr, Posey, Moser PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION In permitting a nonsectarian invocation, the City does not intend to proselytize or advance any faith or belief. Neither the City nor the City Council endorses any particular religious belief or form of invocation. 21-4505.Zarathushti Maneck Bhujwala of the Zoroastrian Community and member of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council CLOSED SESSION REPORT BY CITY ATTORNEY AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 21-4696.Mayor Carr to Receive a Certificate of Recognition from Rick Rowe of Huntington Beach Hospital for City’s Partnership on Mobile COVID-19 Vaccination Pods ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) PUBLIC COMMENTS (3-Minute Time Limit) – At approximately 6:00 PM, individuals wishing to provide a comment on agendized or non-agendized items may do so either in person by filling out a Request to Speak form, via computer through Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528, or Zoom Webinar by phone by calling (669) 900-6833 (see agenda cover sheet for request to speak instructions). Zoom Webinar participants wishing to speak will be provided a 15-minute window to “raise their hands,” and prompted to speak when the Clerk announces their name or the last three digits of their phone number. All speakers are encouraged, but not required to identify themselves by name. Speakers providing comments in person will be called to speak first, and each speaker may have up to 3 minutes unless the volume of speakers warrants reducing the time allowance. COUNCIL COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENTS - LIAISON REPORTS, AB 1234 REPORTING, AND OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS DISCLOSURES Page 2 of 5 4 AGENDA June 15, 2021City Council/Public Financing Authority 21-4747.City Council Liaison Appointment to the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committees Receive and file recommendation to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Delgleize as Council Liaison to the Economic Development Committee and Intergovernmental Relations Committee, effective June 15, 2021. Recommended Action: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 21-4758.Downtown Shuttle Service Launch 21-4769.Civic Center Project Update CITY CLERK'S REPORT 21-46110.Presentation of Historic July 4 video clips archived through the California Revealed State Library Initiative CONSENT CALENDAR 21-45711.Approve and Adopt Minutes A) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes dated June 1, 2021 , as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk; and, B) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes dated June 2, 2021, as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk . Recommended Action: 21-47112.Approve reappointments of Kathie Schey, Duane Wentworth, Amory Hanson, and Mark Zambrano to the Historic Resources Board (HRB) of Trustees, as recommended by Council Liaisons, Councilmembers Erik Peterson and Mike Posey Approve the reappointments of Kathie Schey, Duane Wentworth, Amory Hanson , and Mark Zambrano for an additional term of the Historic Resources Board of Trustees, effective July 1, 2021 , through June 30, 2025 . Recommended Action: 21-45513.Approve reappointments of George Rivera and Cindy Vellucci and Page 3 of 5 5 AGENDA June 15, 2021City Council/Public Financing Authority appointment of Dianne Thompson to the Personnel Commission, as recommended by Council Liaisons, Mayor Kim Carr and Councilmember Mike Posey Approve the reappointments of George Rivera and Cindy Vellucci , and the appointment of Dianne Thompson to the Personnel Commission for the term of July 1, 2021 , through June 30, 2023, as recommended by the Council Liaisons to the Personnel Commission. Recommended Action: 21-42014.Adopt Resolution No. 2021-32 regarding the status and update of the Circulation Element and Mitigation Fee Program for the Measure M (M2) Program, and Adopt a 7-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2021/22 through 2027/28 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements A) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-32, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach concerning the Status and Update of the Circulation Element, and Mitigation Fee Program for Measure M (M2) Program;” and, B) Adopt the 7-Year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2021/22 through 2027/28 to comply with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements (Attachment #5). Recommended Action: 21-43315.Reject Bids for the Peck and Springdale Facility Improvements Project CC-1590 Reject all bids for the Peck and Springdale Facility Improvements Project CC -1590. Recommended Action: 21-44816.Adopt Ordinance No. 4232 amending Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 Relating to On-Street Parking Meter Zones Approved for introduction June 1, 2021 - Vote: 6-0-1 (Ortiz absent) Adopt Ordinance No. 4232, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code On-Street Parking Meter Zones.” Recommended Action: 21-44717.Adopt Ordinance No. 4233 amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program Approved for introduction June 1, 2021 - Vote: 6-0-1 (Ortiz absent) Page 4 of 5 6 AGENDA June 15, 2021City Council/Public Financing Authority Adopt Ordinance No. 4233, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program .” Recommended Action: ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 21-47718.Consideration of Proposed Pilot Concert Program in conjunction with the Pacific Airshow A) Authorize a one-time pilot concert program at the City Beach, to be embedded into the Air Show event on the evenings of October 1 and October 2, 2021; and , B) Cap attendance for the concert at no more than 12,000 people per evening; and , C) Direct that the event would be authorized at the City Beach located adjacent to Beach Boulevard / Pacific Coast Highway; and D) Through the Special Event permitting process, direct that staff require the following: ·Event organizer would have to provide a full event security plan vetted and approved by the Police Department; and , ·Full general liability and ABC liability insurance coverage would be required; and , ·Require direct payment for all City-provided services, including public safety costs, and institute a $5 per person charge to be paid by Code Four (the event promoter) to offset various indirect administrative costs. Recommended Action: COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized) ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority is Tuesday, July 6, 2021, at 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA AND STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov Page 5 of 5 7 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-463 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Parking & Outdoor Dining in a Post Pandemic World City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™8 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-462 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Gov. Code section 54956.9(d) (1).) Name of case: Rodriguez (Christian A.) v. City of Huntington Beach; Pamela Joyce Garrett; OCSC Case No.: 30-2020-01131129. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™9 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-466 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OR PUBLIC FACILITIES: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, Consultation with Julian Harvey, Acting Police Chief for the City of Huntington Beach Police Department. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™10 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-473 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Gov. Code section 54956.9(d) (1).) Name of case: Lathus (Shayna) v. City of Huntington Beach; USDC Case No.: 8:21-cv- 00808-SB (DFMx). City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™11 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-450 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Zarathushti Maneck Bhujwala of the Zoroastrian Community and member of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™12 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-469 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Mayor Carr to Receive a Certificate of Recognition from Rick Rowe of Huntington Beach Hospital for City’s Partnership on Mobile COVID-19 Vaccination Pods City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™13 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-474 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 City Council Liaison Appointment to the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committees Receive and file recommendation to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Delgleize as Council Liaison to the Economic Development Committee and Intergovernmental Relations Committee, effective June 15, 2021. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™14 HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable City Councilmembers FROM: Kim Carr, Mayor DATE: June 15, 2021 SUBJECT: City Council Liaison Appointment to the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committees I would like to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Delgleize as Council Liaison to the Economic Development Committee (EDC), and Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC), effective immediately to fill vacancies created by the recent resignation of former Mayor Pro Tem Tito Ortiz. Recommended Action: Receive and file recommendation to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Delgleize as Council Liaison to the Economic Development Committee and Intergovernmental Relations Committee, effective June 15, 2021. c: Oliver Chi, City Manager Robin Estanislau, City Clerk 15 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-475 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Downtown Shuttle Service Launch City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™16 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-476 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Civic Center Project Update City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™17 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-461 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Presentation of Historic July 4 video clips archived through the California Revealed State Library Initiative City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™18 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-457 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk PREPARED BY:Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk Subject: Approve and Adopt Minutes Statement of Issue: The City Council special meeting minutes of June 1, 2021, and the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes of June 2, 2021, require review and approval. Financial Impact: None. Recommended Action: A) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes dated June 1, 2021, as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk; and, B) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes dated June 2, 2021, as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk. Alternative Action(s): Do not approve and/or request revision(s). Analysis: None. Environmental Status: Non-Applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Non-Applicable - Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. June 1, 2021 CC/PFA special meeting minutes City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™19 File #:21-457 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 2. June 2, 2021 CC/PFA special meeting minutes City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™20 Special Meeting Minutes City Council/Public Financing Authority City of Huntington Beach Tuesday, June 1, 2021 5:00 PM - Council Chambers 6:00 PM - Council Chambers Virtual via Zoom W ebinar Civic Center, 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 A video recording of the 5:00 PM and 6:00 PM portions of this meeting is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and archived at www.surfcity-hb.org/government/agendas/ 5:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALLED TO ORDER — 5:02 PM ROLL CALL Present: Peterson, Kalmick, Ortiz, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize Absent: None ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) — None PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (3-Minute Time Limit) — None RECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION — 5:04 PM A motion by Posey, second Kalmick, to recess to Closed Session for Items 2, 3 and *New (21-443). With no objections, the motion passed. CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT(S) 1. 21-431 Mayor Carr Announced: Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council takes this opportunity to publicly introduce and identify designated labor negotiator, City Manager Oliver Chi; also in attendance: Assistant City Manager, Travis Hopkins who will be participating in today’s Closed Session discussion of the public employment of the Police Chief CLOSED SESSION 2. 21-423 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Gov. Code section 54956.9(d)(1).) Name of case: Brewster (Terri Lynn) v. City of Huntington Beach; OCSC Case No. 30-2020-01160094. 3. 21-430 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code section 54957.6.) The City Council shall recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiator, Oliver Chi, City Manager; also in attendance: Travis Hopkins, Assistant City Manager to discuss the public employment of the Police Chief. 21 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 2 of 16 *New 21-443 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION. Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2) of Subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: Number of cases, one (1). 6:00 PM — COUNCIL CHAMBERS RECONVENED CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING — 6:04 PM ROLL CALL Present: Peterson, Kalmick, Ortiz, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Mayor Pro Tem Ortiz INVOCATION In permitting a nonsectarian invocation, the City does not intend to proselytize or advance any faith or belief. Neither the City nor the City Council endorses any particular religious belief or form of invocation. Deacon Joe Sullivan, St. Bonaventure Catholic Church, Huntington Beach and member of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council CLOSED SESSION REPORT BY CITY ATTORNEY — None AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 4. 21-434 Mayor Carr called on Victoria Alberty to present the "Adoptable Pet of the Month" Ms. Alberty and Karen of Top Dog Barkery joined the meeting via Zoom to introduce Guinness, a Black Lab/Shephard mix, born on March 17, and his Mamacita, a small Shephard mix. Both of these energetic dogs need a home with a yard, and anyone interested can complete an application at Top Dog Barkery, Pacific City. 5. 21-421 Mayor Carr presented a commendation to Kiwanis of Huntington Beach President Shawn Wood to celebrate the organization’s 60th anniversary of service in Surf City Mayor Carr introduced Shawn Wood, provided a brief historical overview of Kiwanis Club, and described some of their events to improve the lives of children by providing food, clothing, educational and recreational activities. Mr. Wood expressed appreciation for the recognition and thanked all of the volunteers who make it possible to carry out their devotion to improving the world, one child and one community at a time, by focusing on human and spiritual, rather than material values. 6. 21-422 Mayor Carr presented the "Making a Difference Award" to David Gins for his diligence in having the new Mobi-Mat installed off the 6th Street parking lot to allow those with disabilities easy access to enjoy the ocean Mayor Carr stated this award recognizes selflessness, volunteerism, exceptional community service, and applauds unsung heroes. Councilmember Moser, who nominated Mr. Gins for this recognition, 22 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 3 of 16 described how he invited her, as an elected official, to join his team working to provide easy access to the ocean for those with disabilities. Councilmember Moser noted Mr. Gins' extensive volunteer services with many local, state and national organizations to help those with life challenges, and thanked him for modeling advocacy and solutions-oriented thinking. Mr. Gins expressed his appreciation for the recognition and shared his inspiration for the many people, including his friend Kamaka Jensen, who are now more able to access the ocean in Huntington Beach with the installation of the Mobi-Mat. ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) City Manager’s Report #7 (21-427) Email communication received regarding the Public Safety Update on Unlawful Assembly. Consent Calendar #10 (21-424) Four (4) email communications regarding Mobile Home Advisory Board appointments. #16 (21-418) Email communication regarding elimination of Environmental Assessment and Subdivision committees. Councilmember Items #21 (21-441) Ten (10) email communications received regarding review of the Settlement Agreement reached in the Moore/Field v. Huntington Beach & Michael Gates. (Item #21 was withdrawn from the Agenda on 5/28/21). PUBLIC COMMENTS (3-Minute Time Limit) — 11 In-Person Speakers; 4 Phone-In Speakers The number [hh:mm:ss] following the speakers' comments indicates their approximate starting time in the archived video located at http://www.surfcity-hb.org/government/agendas. Amory Hanson, a candidate for City Council in 2022 and member of the Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board, was called to speak and shared his pleasure at being allowed to speak in person at this meeting, and requested that all Huntington Beach deliberative assemblies also be allowed to meet in person. (00:28:09) Michael Gates, City Attorney and candidate for reelection in 2022, was called to speak and responded to a recent article in the Orange County Register about Councilmember Item No. 21 submitted by Councilmembers Kalmick and Posey, thereafter, pulled from the agenda on Friday, May 28. He shared factual details on the Settlement Agreement reached in the case of Moore / Field v. Huntington Beach & Michael Gates. (00:29:43) Cari Swan was called to speak and expressed her appreciation for City Attorney Michael Gates, and summarized her opinion that sensitive legal issues should not be discussed in any open session, but if the Council decides differently, they should start with the 2008 case which is described in the book Friendly Fire: The Illusion of Justice by Adam Bereki, a former Huntington Beach Police Officer. (00:33:01) Ida Margaret Wolff was called to speak and shared her personal opinions regarding COVID-19. (00:36:47) 23 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 4 of 16 Mary Jo Baretich, Zone C Vice President, Golden State Manufactured-Home Owners League (GSMOL), and Member, Huntington Beach Mobile Home Advisory Board (MHAB), was called to speak and requested that Consent Calendar Item No. 10 regarding appointments to the MHAB be postponed to allow affected homeowners proper time for discussions on these appointments, and suggested all MHAB members should be either local Huntington Beach mobile home owners or managers. (00:39:02) Devin Dwyer, self -described as a recovering politician, was called to speak and shared his perspectives of the City Attorney's office during his tenure as a Huntington Beach Councilmember from 2008 – 2012. Mr. Dwyer added his opinion that City Attorney Gates has cleaned up the City Attorney's office, and asked that the current City Council not allow the past practice of settling lawsuits to return. (00:41:14) Eric Silkenson, At-Large Member, Mobile Home Advisory Board, was called to speak and thanked Council for returning to Council Chambers, and thanked Stoney's Pizza and residents for stepping up to help replace items recently lost by Pier Plaza vendors during the May 21-23 incidents. He shared concerns expressed to him by some mobile home owners regarding the Mobile Home Advisory Board appointments in Consent Calendar Item No. 10, suggesting additional time needed for further discussions. (00:44:26) Avery Counts, Constituent Services Manager for Orange County 2nd District Supervisor Katrina Foley, and resident of Huntington Beach, was called to speak and thanked Huntington Beach for the wonderful Memorial Day event with the American Legion; provided an update on the work that Supervisor Foley is doing for Huntington Beach, including State funding for channel improvements; and described upcoming community events to support employers and job seekers including the Veterans Workforce Development Program. OC Supervisor Foley may be reached through avery.counts@ocgov.com or by calling 714- 559-8364. (00:46:39) Jeff Herold, a resident and business owner in Huntington Beach since 1990, was called to speak and shared his concerns regarding the homeless population which appears to be day camping on the sand in Sunset Beach. He shared pictures to document his concerns and suggested laws need to be changed to prevent this type of activity from continuing. (00:48:22) Gina Clayton-Tarvin, Trustee, Ocean View School District, was called to speak and shared School District actions related to COVID-19, and announced the District's upcoming in-person promotions for 5th and 8th graders. (00:51:25) Maureen was called to speak and shared her opinions on why Harvey Milk should not have been honored on May 22, and suggested that Mayor Carr and City Councilmembers support Mayor Pro Tem Ortiz rather than continue to disparage him. (00:54:28) Galen Pickett, (phone-in caller) was called to speak and stated his support for the Council's recent efforts to acknowledge the LGBQT community, and for working together to reach consensus. (00:56:24) Allison Plum and Jerry Blyweiss, (phone-in caller) a long-time resident of Huntington Beach and member of American Legion Post 133, were called to speak and stated their opposition to Consent Calendar Item No. 10 regarding the appointment of Vickie Talley to the Mobile Home Advisory Board (MHAB). They recommended that only residents, owners or managers of a Huntington Beach mobile home community be allowed to be MHAB members. (00:59:32) Mary Kate (Katie) Morrow, (phone-in caller) was called to speak and stated her support for the Council and business community's recent efforts to acknowledge the LGBQT community, and thanked City Attorney Michael Gates for stepping forward and addressing recent publicity through the proper channel 24 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 5 of 16 as a Public Speaker, rather than sticking to social media platforms like Mayor Pro Tem Ortiz has done. (01:01:54) John (phone-in caller) was called to speak and stated his opposition to Public Hearing Item No. 19 regarding the adoption of the City Budget for Fiscal Year 2021/22, specifically Resolution No. 2021-40 levying retirement property tax for pre-1978 employee retirement benefits; and stated opposition to Consent Calendar Item Nos. 12, 13 and 14 approving Professional Service contracts totaling $7.65M. (01:04:59) At approximately 7:05 PM, Mayor Pro Tem Tito Ortiz read a prepared statement to announce that he was resigning from his elected position as Mayor Pro Tem for the City Council, effective immediately. CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY RECESS - At 7:08 PM, Mayor Carr called for a 10- minute recess. RECOVENED CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING — 7:21 PM City Clerk Robin Estanislau announced for the benefit of the listening public that all Councilmembers returned to Chambers after the brief recess, with the exception of Mr. Ortiz. COUNCIL COMMITTEE — APPOINTMENTS — LIAISON REPORTS, AB 1234 REPORTING, AND OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS DISCLOSURES Councilmember Kalmick reported attending meetings of the Smart City's Ad Hoc Committee, and Ad Hoc Committee to Review Commissions and Boards. Councilmember Moser reported attending a special meeting of the Homeless Task Force with Police Officers; meetings with Faith Leaders and City Manager Chi regarding Project Zero; and HB Central Park Collaboratives including Central Park Landscape Designer Erik Katzmaier. Councilmember Delgleize reported attending a meeting of the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA), and announced an upcoming OCTA "The Future of Transit in Orange County" workshop. Councilmember Posey announced Orange County Vector Control workshops on June 8 and 9, 11:30 am – 1 pm, and presentation of information on genetically modifying male mosquitoes to prevent them from fertilizing eggs in an effort to reduce mosquito populations. Mayor Carr reported attending meetings of Orange County Sanitation District, Intergovernmental Relations Committee, Ad Hoc Committee to Review Commissions and Boards, Communications Committee, and the Southeast Huntington Beach Community. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT 7. 21-427 Public Safety Update on Unlawful Assembly Police Chief Julian Harvey presented a PowerPoint communication entitled Viral Three-Day TikTok Event Background with slides entitled: Preparation Efforts; Saturday, May 21, 2021; Saturday, May 21, 2021 — Mutual Aid; Saturday, May 21, 2021 — Unlawful Assembly; Saturday, May 21, 2021 — Over 150 Arrested; Saturday, May 21, 2021 — Property Damage; Sunday, May 22, 2021; and Next Steps 25 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 6 of 16 Mayor Carr thanked Police Chief Harvey, City staff, and Officers from neighboring communities for handling the situation so admirably. Mayor Carr and Chief Harvey discussed the importance of notifying parents and schools when evidence of similar activities in the future, becomes known. Councilmember Delgleize and Chief Harvey discussed how law-abiding citizens get a permit for a planned event, but unfortunately, some have no interest in abiding by the law. Chief Harvey stated that City Council is very supportive of the Police Department including staffing, training, equipment, and noted that in the last year ten Police Officers were hired. Councilmember Kalmick and Chief Harvey discussed ways to determine impact by geographic area, and how to share that information with those potentially affected. Councilmember Posey underscored how well the staff and mutual aid controlled the crowds and thanked everyone for that effort. Councilmember Moser and Chief Harvey discussed the importance of balance when with any pre- warning communication to potentially affected businesses and public, while being careful as to not create undue panic or fear. Chief Harvey also explained that select parking structures were strategically closed. 8. 21-429 Smart Meter Technology Update Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works, presented a PowerPoint communication entitled AMI Customer Portal - Automatic Meter Infrastructure, with slides titled About, Background, Customer Portal, Bills & Payments, Billed Usage, Compare - Year to Year, Service Requests, Outages, Schedule, and End of Presentation. Mayor Carr and Director Crumby discussed some of the new features available with the system change which will require computer access, and added that further details and client education will be addressed after Labor Day with the beta testing. Councilmember Kalmick asked, and Director Crumby confirmed that this system would not allow for remotely turning water on or off. Director Crumby also added that water agencies throughout the world are currently using it. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Moser pulled Item No. 10 for further discussion, and Councilmember Peterson requested to “Abstain” on Item No. 9 A) – May 3, 2021 Minutes, and be recorded as “No” on Item No. 16. 9. 21-373 Approved and Adopted Minutes A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated May 3, 2021, as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk; and, approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated May 17, 2021, as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk. The motion carried by the following votes: For regular meeting minutes dated May 3, 2021: AYES: Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None 26 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 7 of 16 ABSTAIN: Peterson ABSENT: Ortiz For regular meeting minutes dated May 17, 2021: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 10. 21-424 Approved as amended appointments to the Mobile Home Advisory Board (MHAB) as recommended by City Council Liaisons Carr and Posey Councilmember Moser requested more time to delve into this item in light of public comments and communications. Mayor Carr asked that a motion be amended to approve the appointment of Terrance Pham, and postpone appointments of Vickie Talley and Chris Houser. A motion was made by Moser, second Delgleize to approve the appointment of Terrance Pham as an At- Large Member to the MHAB effective immediately through August 5, 2025, and postpone until further notice the appointment of Vickie Talley as an Owner Member, and Chris Houser as an Owner Member. The motion as amended carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 11. 21-425 Adopted Resolution No. 2021-39 Amending Section 3 of the City Council Manual Regarding the Day of Regular Council Meetings A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to adopt Resolution No. 2021-39, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Section 3 of the City Council Manual Regarding the Day of Regular Council Meetings." The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 12. 21-308 Approved and authorized execution of Professional Services Contracts for On-Call Development Review Engineering and Professional Consulting Services with Ardurra Group, Cannon Corporation, Derek J. McGregor, and HR Green Pacific A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $500,000 “Professional Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Ardurra Group, Inc., for On-Call Development Review Engineering and Professional Consulting Services;” and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $500,000 “Professional Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Cannon Corporation for On-Call Development Review Engineering and Professional Consulting Services;” and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $500,000 “Professional Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Derek J. McGregor, Inc., for On-Call Development Review Engineering and Professional Consulting Services;” and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $500,000 “Professional 27 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 8 of 16 Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and HR Green Pacific, Inc. for On-Call Development Review Engineering and Professional Consulting Services.” The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 13. 21-392 Approved and authorized execution of Professional Services Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Consulting Services with Ardurra Group, BKF Engineers, RAK Development dba Kreuzer Consulting Group, Psomas, and Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $1,000,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Ardurra Group for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Professional Consulting Services;" and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $1,000,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and BKF Engineers for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Professional Consulting Services;" and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $1,000,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Kreuzer Consulting Group for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Professional Consulting Services;" and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $1,000,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Psomas for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Professional Consulting Services;" and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $1,000,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Professional Consulting Services." The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 14. 21-395 Approved and authorized execution of Professional Services Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying and Professional Consulting Services with Moffatt & Nichol, Anchor QEA, LLC and COWI North America A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $650,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Moffatt and Nichol for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying and Professional Consulting Services;" and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $250,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Anchor QEA, LLC for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying and Professional Consulting Services;" and, approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute $250,000 "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and COWI for On-Call Civil Engineering, Surveying and Professional Consulting Services. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize 28 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 9 of 16 NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 15. 21-428 Took positions on legislation pending before the State and Federal Legislature, as recommended by the Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC) A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to approve City positions on the following State legislation: Watch Assembly Bill 1177 (Santiago) — California Public Banking Option Act; and, Support Assembly Bill 1158 (Petrie-Norris) — Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 16. 21-418 Adopted Ordinance No. 4230 amending the Municipal Code and Zoning and Subdivision Code to eliminate the Environmental Assessment Committee and Subdivision Committee (Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 21-002) Approved for introduction May 17, 2021 – Vote: 6-1 (Peterson – No) A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to adopt Ordinance No. 4230, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapters 2.33, and 2.56 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code; Chapters 240, 248, 250 and 251 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Code Removing All References to the Subdivision and Environmental Assessment Subcommittees (Zoning Text Amendment No. 21-002)." The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: Peterson ABSENT: Ortiz 17. 21-419 Adopted Ordinance No. 4231 adding Section 17.48.050 to the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter to amend Subsection A of Section 690.13 of the California Electrical Code Approved for introduction May 17, 2021 – Vote: 7 – 0 A motion was made by Posey, second Kalmick to adopt Ordinance No. 4231, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adding Section 17.48.050 to the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter to Amend Subsection A of Section 690.13 of the California Electrical Code." The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz PUBLIC HEARING 29 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 10 of 16 18. 21-396 Adopted Resolution No. 2021-34 adopting the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP); Adopted Resolution No. 2021-35 adopting the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP); Approved for introduction Ordinance No. 4233 amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program; and, Adopted Resolution No. 2021-33 adopting the Amendment to the Adopted 2015 UWMP City Manager Chi introduced Deputy Director, Public Works Utility Division, Alvin Papa who shared a PowerPoint communication entitled Public Hearing - June 1, 2021 with slides entitled: Public Hearing Items, 2020 UWMP — Background, 2020 UWMP — Assessment Overview, 2020 UWMP — New Items, 2020 UWMP — Key Findings, 2020 WSCP — Overview, 2020 WSCP — Annual Assessment Framework, Six Shortage Levels & Response Actions, Ordinance No. 4233, Appendix L — Addendum to the 2015 UWMP (2), Recommendation Actions, and End of Public Hearing — June 1, 2021 Councilmember Peterson asked, and City Manager Chi agreed, that language in 14.18.041 be added to state any proposed changes would be brought to City Council to allow for public input, versus just being implemented by the City Manager. Councilmember Delgleize and Deputy Director Papa briefly discussed annual water shortage assessment details, and Mr. Papa stated his opinion that overall, the outlook is very good for the next 25 years. Councilmember Moser stated her appreciation for the depth of topics covered in the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), and expressed her expectation that the previously discussed water system will be a tool to inform, educate and encourage water conservation. Mayor Carr opened the Public Meeting. Pursuant to the Brown "Open Meetings" Act, City Clerk Robin Estanislau announced supplemental communication received by her office following distribution of the Council Agenda packet: Public Hearing #18 (21-396) Inter-Departmental Memo regarding Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) identifying a revision to Ordinance No. 4233 submitted by Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works. PowerPoint communication entitled Public Hearing — 2020 Urban Water Management Plan submitted by Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works. There being no public speakers, Mayor Carr closed the Public Hearing. A motion was made by Peterson, second Posey to adopt Resolution No. 2021-34, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011"; and, adopt Resolution No. 2021-35, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011"; and, after the City Clerk reads by title, approve for introduction Ordinance No. 4233, "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program"; and, adopt Resolution No. 2021-33, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the Amendment to the Adopted 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011," as amended by Supplemental Communication (replacement page for Ordinance 4233); and, add provision to HBMC Section 14.18.060 to improve public notification. 30 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 11 of 16 The motion as amended carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz 19. 21-426 Adopted Resolution No. 2021-38 to Adopt a Budget for the City for Fiscal Year 2021/2022; Resolution No. 2021-41 establishing the Gann Appropriation Limit for Fiscal Year 2021/2022; Resolution No. 2021-40 Levying a Retirement Property Tax for Fiscal Year 2021/2022 to Pay for Pre-1978 Employee Retirement Benefits; Resolution No. 2021-37 Setting Advanced Life Support, Basic Life Support, and Emergency Ambulance Transportation Fees to be Charged by the Fire Department; Resolution No. 2021-36 Amending the Community & Library Services Department Charges for Entrance To or Use of City Property (Supplemental Fee Resolution 14); approved for introduction Ordinance No. 4232 Amending Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 Relating to On-Street Parking Meter Zones; approved the purchase of certain capital equipment and authorized the City Manager to enter into all documents necessary to acquire and lease finance the purchase of the capital equipment at an interest rate not to exceed 2.25%; approve the refinancing of the City's four outstanding capital leases at an interest rate not to exceed 1.50%, and authorized the City Manager or designee to take all administrative and budgetary actions necessary to complete the refinancing; and, authorized the Mayor to establish a three-person City Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to review expenditure opportunities and make recommendations to the City Council on how to best utilize funds received through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) City Manager Chi and Chief Financial Officer Dahle Bulosan jointly presented a PowerPoint communication titled Proposed FY 2021/22 Budget Adoption with slides entitled: Presentation Overview, City's Financial Status Heading Into FY 2021/22, Huntington Beach Is In A Terrific Financial Position!, The City Addressed Unprecedented Fiscal Challenges This Past Year, Difficult Decisions Previously Made Are Providing Benefits Today, Review of Budget Study Session Items, Budget Study Session Held May 17, 2021, Legal Cost Expenditures, Historical Legal Costs July 1,2018 to May 19,2021 (3), City Prosecutor Program MOU w/OCDA Identified, Homeless Response Position, Downtown Parking Structure - Updated Parking Rates, Seasonal Parking Rates - Parking Meters, Seasonal Parking Rates - Attended Parking Lots, RV Camping Note, EMS Cost Recovery Fee Adjustment, Finance Purchase of Major Capital Replacement Equipment, Establish City Council Ad-Hoc ARPA Funding Committee, FY 2021/22 Budget Study Session Follow-Up, Proposed FY 2021-22 General Fund Budget Review, Economic Overview & Local Budgetary Impacts, FY 2021/22 General Fund Proposed Budget Review, FY 2021/22 General Fund Proposed Revenues, FY 2021/22 General Fund Proposed Revenues - $228M (2), FY 2021/22 General Fund Proposed Expenditures, Recommended FY 2021/22 Authorized Positions, FY 2021/22 Full Time Equivalent - All Funds, FY 2021-22 Capital Improvement Budget Review, CIP Budget Overview, CIP Funding Sources, Key Facility Upgrades (3), Key Park Upgrades, Key Street Upgrades, Key Utility System Upgrades, Approval of FY 2021/22 Budget Requested, City Council Approval Requested, and Questions? Councilmember Moser, in response to a public comment, confirmed with City Manager Chi that California property taxes cannot be increased without voter approval; however, levying the retirement property tax to pay for pre-1978 employee retirement benefits which was approved years ago, must be voted on by Council annually. 31 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 12 of 16 Councilmember Moser stated her strong support for adding the position of Deputy Director of Homelessness Services to the budget, and outlined some of her expectations as a result. Councilmember Kalmick confirmed with City Manager Chi that as currently set up, the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services would report to the Police Chief. Discussion continued to clarify that Beach Boulevard parking meters are not being moved. Councilmember Posey confirmed with City Manager Chi that no changes are being proposed for Seasonal Beach Parking Passes. Councilmember Posey confirmed with CFO Bulosan that any EMS cost recovery study must be completed by a specialized consultant. Councilmember Posey and City Manager Chi briefly discussed the process that determined that purchasing helicopters is more advantageous than leasing them. Councilmember Posey and City Attorney Michael Gates discussed the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the District Attorney's Office, and City Attorney Gates confirmed it has the full support of new District Attorney Todd Spitzer. Councilmember Posey and City Attorney Gates discussed, for the purpose of transparency, whether legal costs retained by various departments within the City could or should be moved to the City Attorney's Office budget from Administrative Services. City Manager Chi clarified that Administrative Services incorporates Risk Management, Human Resources, and Police Department, among others for outside legal costs. Councilmember Posey suggested that the line-item listing be more comprehensive by including the department retaining the service. Councilmember Moser stated her preference to eventually have the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services report to the City Manager, and Councilmember Delgleize concurred. City Manager Chi explained that the Police Department currently directs homelessness responses, so it makes sense at this time to include the position in the Police Department, with a willingness to review the best structure as the services and processes evolve to end homelessness in Huntington Beach. City Manager Chi suggested that if Council approves the position, staff could provide 6-month updates for Council review. Mayor Carr confirmed with Police Chief Harvey that the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services would be at the epicenter of calls for service in the Police Department with their 24/7 staff and communication center. Chief Harvey stated support for providing regular Council updates and review to determine if this plan continues to be optimal, or not. Mayor Carr and Chief Harvey discussed the process selected to replace the three helicopters. Mayor Carr opened the Public Hearing. Pursuant to the Brown "Open Meetings" Act, City Clerk Robin Estanislau announced supplemental communication received by her office following distribution of the Council Agenda packet: Public Hearing #19 (21-426) PowerPoint communication entitled Proposed FY 2021/22 Budget Adoption submitted by Dahle Bulosan, Chief Financial Officer. 32 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 13 of 16 Two (2) email communications regarding Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Budget. There being no public speakers, Mayor Carr closed the Public Hearing. Councilmember Peterson confirmed with City Manager Chi the "at will" designation for the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services position, and stated he cannot support the quarter million dollars for the position. Councilmember Peterson also stated his opposition to #19E regarding levying a retirement property tax for Fiscal Year 2021/2022 to pay for pre-1978 employee retirement benefits. Councilmember Moser reiterated her support for the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services position, especially knowing there would be regular update reports. Councilmember Posey stated his support for the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services position under the umbrella of the Police Chief. Councilmember Posey confirmed with CFO Bulosan that approximately $363M or 85% of the pension obligation was refinanced through a bond over 21 and 22 years, and the remaining 15% was refinanced with CalPERS. Councilmember Delgleize stated her support for the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services position within the Police Department with regular reviews to evaluate whether goals are being met. Mayor Carr expressed her support for the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services position, and also requested that the "Sunset Vista Camping, October 1 through May 31" language shown as stricken in the Parking Fee Schedule remain, and return for discussion at a later date. Mayor Carr described the concerns she had during the 2019 budget process when the City Attorney's Office acquired three managers, and stated her opinion that it would be appropriate to remove one of the Chief Assistant City Attorney positions and apply the cost savings to the Deputy Director of Homelessness Services position. City Attorney Gates voiced objections, noting that this year's personnel budget is much lower than last year's budget, and that his office is currently recruiting for a Senior Trial Counsel, not a Chief Assistant. Councilmember Kalmick clarified with City Attorney Gates the current number of employees, including new hires and open positions, and discussed staff turnover. City Manager Chi stated the top step for a Chief Assistant is $92.46/hour, and Senior Trial Counsel $85.83/hour, for an annual difference of about $14,000. Attorney Gates observed that prior to this meeting, no member of the Council approached him to share concerns about his budget, and wondered why there was suddenly an effort to re-arrange his staff. Councilmember Posey and City Attorney Gates discussed that as a result of COVID-19, courts were closed and court cases deferred to the end of 2021 and into 2022/23, which meant there was no pressing need to fill department vacancies. City Attorney Gates explained he purposely used that opportunity as a cost-saving measure. Councilmember Posey closed discussion by pointing out that the Debt per Capita line item on page 412 in the $500 range in 2017 – 2020, jumped to $1,348 after booking the debt obligation bond. 33 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 14 of 16 A motion was made by Carr, second Delgleize to adopt Resolution No. 2021-38, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Budget for the City for Fiscal Year 2021/22" as amended to downgrade one Chief Assistant City Attorney position as identified on Exhibit D to Senior Trial Counsel; provide greater budget detail on services retained for outside legal counsel; and, authorize the Professional Services included in the FY 2021/2022 budget to be representative of the services projected to be utilized by departments in FY 2021/2022; and, approve budget adjustments to the FY 2021/2022 Proposed Budget in the Funds and by the amounts contained in Attachment 2, Exhibit A-1; and, adopt Resolution No. 2021-41, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Establishing the Gann Appropriation Limit for Fiscal Year 2021/2022" of $1,049,513,696;" and, adopt Resolution No. 2021-40, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Levying a Retirement Property Tax for Fiscal Year 2021/2022 to Pay for Pre-1978 Employee Retirement Benefits;" and, approve the purchase and 10-year lease financing for the replacement of the City's three helicopters, fire engine, and rescue boat at an amount not to exceed $8.75 million, with an annual interest rate not to exceed 2.25%, and authorize the City Manager or designee to enter into any and all documents to finance the purchase of the capital equipment and take all administrative and budgetary actions necessary to complete the purchase and financing; and, approve the refinancing of the City's four outstanding capital leases (Schedules 1000141779,1000142350,1000143109, and 1000146094) at an annual interest rate not to exceed 1.50%, and authorize the City Manager or designee to enter into any and all documents and take all administrative and budgetary actions necessary to complete the refinancing; and, adopt Resolution No. 2021-37, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Setting Advanced Life Support, Basic Life Support, and Emergency Ambulance Transportation Fees to be Charged by the Fire Department of the City of Huntington Beach;" and, after City Clerk reads by title, approve for Introduction Ordinance No. 4232, "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code On- Street Parking Meter Zones;" and, adopt Resolution No. 2021-36, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Community Services & Library Department Charges for Entrance To or Use of City Property by Amending Resolution 2016-59, as Amended by Resolution Nos. 2017-28, 2017-44, 2017-46, 2018-01, 2018-29, 2018-48, 2018-55, 2019-07, 2019-19, 2019-87, 2020-37, 2021-17, and 2021-18, which Established a Consolidated Comprehensive Citywide Master Fee and Charges Schedule (Supplemental Fee Resolution 14) as amended to retain language “Winter Camping (October 1 – May 31)” stricken under Exhibit A - Sunset Vista Camping Facility (Daily Rates); and, authorize the Mayor to establish a three-person City Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to review expenditure opportunities and make recommendations to the City Council on how to best utilize funds received through the American Rescue Plan Act; and, provide periodic update to Council on Deputy Director of Homelessness and Homelessness Program within the Police Department. The motion as amended carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson (No-Exhibit A-1 to Resolution No. 2021-38, Proposed Budget FY 2021/22 Revisions; No-Resolution 2021-40, Levying a Retirement Property Tax for FY 2021/22 to pay for Pre-1978 Employee Retirement Benefits), Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Ortiz COUNCILMEMBER ITEMS 20. 21-439 Item Submitted by Mayor Carr Approved - Establish a Recovery Fund to Support Businesses Impacted by the May 21-23 Incidents 34 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 15 of 16 Mayor Carr introduced this item by describing incident damage experienced by some vendors and Downtown businesses during what has been referred to as “Adrian’s Kickback” on May 21-23, and suggested that a $20,000 Recovery Fund Program be established to utilize remaining American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, as well as offering assistance in completing the application process. Councilmember Peterson stated his support for personally assisting those affected, and shared his opinion that this proposal is setting a bad precedent by using taxpayer funds, especially when some type of graffiti or paint damage happens during any group event in that area. Councilmember Peterson referred to Police Chief Harvey’s indication that this incident may be an indicator of things to come this summer, and expressed his belief that there are better solutions, including encouraging individuals to continue supporting and assisting those affected. Mayor Carr stated she understands Councilmember Peterson's concerns, but she is interested in an opportunity to utilize funds that will be lost if not spent. Councilmember Posey stated his support for Councilmember Peterson's sentiment on the matter of fiscal conservancy. Councilmember Posey and City Manager Chi discussed whether there is a creative mechanism for utilizing some of the approximately $200,000 remaining American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, which need to be used by the end of June, to assist affected businesses. Councilmember Posey said he would second Mayor Carr's motion, but would like to include an amendment to the agreement with Pier Plaza Art-A-Faire, prohibiting overnight storage of merchandise, equipment or supplies. A motion was made by Carr, second Posey to recommend that the City Council direct the City Manager to develop a $20,000 Recovery Fund Program to support local downtown businesses that were impacted by the events from the May 21-23 weekend, as amended to modify agreement with Pier Plaza Art-A- Faire prohibiting overnight storage of merchandise, equipment or supplies. The motion as amended carried by the following vote: AYES: Delgleize, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Kalmick NOES: Peterson ABSENT: Ortiz 21. 21-441 Item Submitted by Councilmembers Kalmick and Posey Withdrawn May 28, 2021 Consider agendizing a review of the Settlement Agreement reached in the Moore / Field v. Huntington Beach & Michael Gates COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized) Councilmember Peterson thanked American Legion Post 133 for their participation and involvement in the City Hall Memorial Day ceremony. Councilmember Kalmick also expressed his appreciation to American Legion Post 133, reported attending the Huntington Beach Fire Recruit Graduation, and thanked everyone who participated in or attended Harvey Milk Day and the Pride flag raising. 35 Council/PFA Special Meeting Minutes June 1, 2021 Page 16 of 16 Councilmember Posey congratulated Kiwanis of Huntington Beach President Shawn Wood on the organization's 60th anniversary of service in Surf City, thanked him for his service to the community, and thanked Mayor Carr for acknowledging not only Harvey Milk but also George Muscone at the recent Pride flag-raising event. Councilmember Delgleize agreed that American Legion Post 133 provided a pitch perfect ceremony; reported attending the outstanding Huntington Beach Fire Recruit Graduation ceremony; a ribbon-cutting at newly renovated Huntington Terrace Senior and Assisted Living facility; an OC Tax presentation on Southern California Edison's nuclear fuel rods relocation project; acknowledged ExperTec Automotive for inscribing a VIN or license number on catalytic converters to make it easier to notify owners if they are recovered by police; and thanked Kiwanis of Huntington Beach President Shawn Wood for recognizing important community members in their 60th Anniversary celebration. Councilmember Moser reminded everyone of the Saturday, June 5th Clean-up Day from 8 - 10 am in the Oak View Community, and a Housing Element community meeting in Spanish; stated her appreciation to American Legion Post 133 for the moving Memorial Day Ceremony; acknowledged and thanked Stoney’s Pizza for stepping up to support the people and businesses impacted by the unfortunate incidents downtown May 21-23; thanked Mayor Carr and Councilmember Kalmick for bringing to fruition the flying of the Pride flag at City Hall; expressed gratitude for being invited to speak at the Community United Methodist Church “Peace With Justice” Sunday service; wished Former Mayor Pro Tem Ortiz and his family well; and reminded people to be active participants in creating the kind of city we all want to live in. Mayor Carr thanked American Legion Post 133 for an outstanding Memorial Day ceremony; acknowledged Battalion Chief Justin Fleming for the best Fire Recruit Graduation ceremony ever; thanked Downtown businesses for embracing Pride Month; congratulated Kiwanis of Huntington Beach President Shawn Wood on their 60th Anniversary celebration; wished Former Mayor Pro Tem Ortiz and his family well; and thanked staff for preparing Chambers for a safe in-person meeting. ADJOURNMENT — 10:38 PM to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA AND STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov ________________________________________ City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach and Secretary of the Public Financing Authority of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTEST: ______________________________________ City Clerk-Secretary ______________________________________ Mayor-Chair 36 Special Meeting Minutes City Council/Public Financing Authority City of Huntington Beach Wednesday, June 2, 2021 8:00 PM - Council Chambers Virtual via Zoom Webinar Civic Center, 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 A video recording of this meeting is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and archived at www.surfcity-hb.org/government/agendas/ 8:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALLED TO ORDER — 8:00 PM ROLL CALL Present: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Councilmember Posey ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) Pursuant to the Brown "Open Meetings" Act, City Clerk Robin Estanislau announced supplemental communication received by her office following distribution of the Council Agenda packet: Administrative Items 21-446 One hundred five (105) email communications received regarding the appointment of Mayor Pro Tem after the resignation of Tito Ortiz from Huntington Beach City Council on June 1, 2021. PUBLIC COMMENTS (3-Minute Time Limit per person) - 8 In-Person Speakers; 2 Phone-In Speakers The number [hh:mm:ss] following the speakers' comments indicates their approximate starting time in the archived video located at http://www.surfcity-hb.org/government/agendas. Valentina Bankhead was called to speak, expressed her sorrow after learning of former Mayor Pro Tem Tito Ortiz resignation, and suggested that Council appoint Councilmember Peterson as the next Mayor Pro Tem. Ms. Bankhead also recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:03:21) Kathy Carrick was called to speak and recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:04:56) 37 Council/PFA Special Meeting June 2, 2021 Page 2 of 3 DD Dominguez was called to speak and recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:06:29) Ceason Baker was called to speak and recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:07:36) John Faheem was called to speak and recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:08:48) Casey McKeon was called to speak and recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:11:09) Gracey Van Der Mark, Huntington Beach Planning Commissioner and former Finance Commissioner, was called to speak, confirmed she would be honored to serve on the City Council, and outlined her experience and skills that garnered the support of over 23,000 voters in the November 2020 election. (00:12:46) John Aird, a resident of Huntington Beach, was called to speak and recommended that Gracey Van Der Mark, as the candidate with the fourth highest votes in the November 2020 election, be the only option for seating a new Councilmember. (00:14:26) Katie, phone-in caller, was invited to speak and shared her opinions related to the process of selecting a new Councilmember, and stated her opposition to seating Gracey Van Der Mark. (00:17:36) Caller #7998, Spencer Kelly, was invited to speak and recommended that Oscar Rodriguez be seated as a new Councilmember due to his community service, and stated his opposition to seating Gracey Van Der Mark. (00:20:59) ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 1. 21-446 Appointed Councilmember Barbara Delgleize as Mayor Pro Tem to address the resignation of Tito Ortiz from the Huntington Beach City Council City Manager Chi explained that this special meeting was called to select a member of the Council to serve as Mayor Pro Tem after the resignation of Former Mayor Pro Tem Tito Ortiz at last evening's Council meeting. He stated that Resolution 6320, approved 30 years ago, states the individual with the longest consecutive tenure and who has not been a Mayor in the last four years, be selected as the Mayor Pro Tem. City Manager Chi also explained that the Council could vote to set aside Resolution 6320 based on the unique circumstances and use other criteria for selecting a Mayor Pro Tem. Mayor Carr invited a Councilmember motion. Councilmember Peterson nominated Councilmember Delgleize as Mayor Pro Tem based on her previous experience and her ability to provide an example of leadership as Mayor next year for the benefit of newly elected Councilmembers. 38 Council/PFA Special Meeting June 2, 2021 Page 3 of 3 A motion was made by Peterson, second Kalmick to set aside Resolution No. 6320 and appoint Councilmember Delgleize as Mayor Pro Tem to address the resignation of Tito Ortiz from the Huntington Beach City Council. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, and Delgleize NOES: None City Clerk Robin Estanislau administered the Oath of Office to newly elected Mayor Pro Tem Delgleize. Newly Elected Mayor Pro Tem Delgleize thanked those who supported her for the position, and expressed her gratefulness for the opportunity to officially stand beside Mayor Carr and represent the City of Huntington Beach as Mayor Pro Tem. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized) — None ADJOURNMENT — 8:30 PM to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA AND STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov __________________________________________ City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach and Secretary of the Public Financing Authority of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTEST: ______________________________________ City Clerk-Secretary ______________________________________ Mayor-Chair 39 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-471 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:Chris Slama, Director of Community Services Subject: Approve reappointments of Kathie Schey, Duane Wentworth, Amory Hanson, and Mark Zambrano to the Historic Resources Board (HRB) of Trustees, as recommended by Council Liaisons, Councilmembers Erik Peterson and Mike Posey Statement of Issue: Appointments to the Historic Resources Board of Trustees must be approved by the City Council. Currently, five terms on the Historic Resources Board will expire on June 3 0, 2021. Four outgoing Board members have expressed interest in continuing to serve. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Recommended Action: Approve the reappointments of Kathie Schey, Duane Wentworth, Amory Hanson, and Mark Zambrano for an additional term of the Historic Resources Board of Trustees, effective July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2025. Alternative Action(s): Do not make reappointments to the Historic Resources Board of Trustees at this time. Analysis: The terms of Kathie Schey, Duane Wentworth, Amory Hanson, and Mark Zambrano expire on June 30, 2021. All four Trustees have requested reappointment to the Historic Resources Board. Attached is the communication for each Trustee requesting reappointment for an additional term. Councilmembers Peterson and Posey have viewed and approved the recommendation for reappointment. Environmental Status: Not applicable. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™40 File #:21-471 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Strategic Plan Goal: Community Engagement Attachment(s): 1. Letter from Kathie Schey 2. Letter from Duane Wentworth 3. Letter from Amory Hanson 4. Letter from Mark Zambrano 5. HRB Roster City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™41 RE: Historic Resources Reappointment DATE: May,27, 2021 Please consider my request for reappointment to the Historic Resources Board. I am proud of the work we have done and I look forward to helping serve our community, our city’s staff and our elected officials in the future. In addition, I am looking forward to continuing cross-training other members of the HRB to share skill- sets we each use in completing our work. We had begun this before Covid and will continue as soon as we are free to do so. Thank you for your consideration. Again, it is my pleasure to serve the City of Huntington Beach. Kathie A. Schey 42 5/25/21 City Council Members, This letter is to inform the City Council of my desire to continue to serve on the Historic Resources Board after my current term expires on June 30 2021. Thank You, Duane Wentworth 43 Dear City Council, I am willing to be reappointed to the Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board for a second term. Sincerely Yours, Mr. Amory Hanson 44 City Council Members, This letter is to inform the City Council of my desire to continue to serve on the Historic Resources Board after my current term expires on June 30 2021. Thank You, Mark Zambrano 45 HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD JANUARY 2021 KATHIE SCHEY, CHAIR Term: 7/1/17 – 7/1/21 (3rd Term) RONALD KNOWLES Term: 7/1/17 – 7/1/21 (2nd Term) SUSAN NGUYEN Term: 7/1/15 – 6/30/19 (1st Term) JOE SANTIAGO Term: 7/1/15 – 6/30/19 (4th Term) DUANE WENTWORTH Term: 7/1/17 – 7/1/21 (2nd Term) DAVID WENTWORTH, SR. Term: 7/1/15 – 6/30/19 (2nd Term) AMORY HANSON Term: 1/20/19 – 7/1/21 (1st Term) MARK ZAMBRANO Term: 1/20/19 – 7/1/21 (1st Term) COUNCIL LIAISONS: Erik Peterson, Mike Posey INTERIM STAFF LIAISON: Michelle Roesner, Community and Library Services – 714-960-8836 46 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-455 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:John Clark, Interim Director of Administrative Services Subject: Approve reappointments of George Rivera and Cindy Vellucci and appointment of Dianne Thompson to the Personnel Commission, as recommended by Council Liaisons, Mayor Kim Carr and Councilmember Mike Posey Statement of Issue: Mayor Kim Carr and Councilmember Mike Posey, Council Liaisons to the Personnel Commission, recommend the re-appointment of George Rivera and Cindy Vellucci, and the appointment of Dianne Thompson, for the term of July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2023. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Recommended Action: Approve the reappointments of George Rivera and Cindy Vellucci, and the appointment of Dianne Thompson to the Personnel Commission for the term of July 1, 2021 , through June 30, 2023, as recommended by the Council Liaisons to the Personnel Commission. Alternative Action(s): Refer the matter to the Council Liaisons for selection of other candidates to fill the vacancies. Analysis: The Personnel Commission currently has a total of three (3) vacancies. Appropriate posting of the vacancies and advertisement in the local newspaper and on the Public Access Channel was conducted requesting applications. Mayor Kim Carr and Councilmember Mike Posey reviewed and considered applications to fill the vacant positions. All three applicants have prior experience serving on the Personnel Commission. George Rivera and Cindy Vellucci are being recommended to serve a second term, and Dianne Thompson is recommended to begin her first term. Environmental Status: Not applicable. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™47 File #:21-455 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Strategic Plan Goal: Non Applicable - Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. Updated Personnel Commission Terms Roster 2. George Rivera Personnel Commission Application 3. Cindy Vellucci Personnel Commission Application 4. Dianne Thompson Personnel Commission Application City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™48 DRAFT CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PERSONNEL COMMISSION TERMS GEORGE RIVERA CINDY VELLUCCI Term One: 07/01/19 – 06/30/21 (Appointed 08/05/19 Semeta/Peterson) (Vice-Chair 02/17/21-6/30/21) Term One: 07/01/19 – 06/30/21 (Appointed 01/19/21 Carr/Posey) Term Two: 07/01/21 – 06/30/23 (Appointed 06/15/21 Carr/Posey) Term Two: 07/01/21 – 06/30/23 (Appointed 06/15/21 Carr/Posey) DIANNE THOMPSON KATHERINE ELFORD Term One: 07/01/21 – 06/30/23 (Appointed 06/15/21 Carr/Posey) Term One 07/01/20 – 06/30/22 (Appointed 01/19/21 Carr/Posey) PATRICIA QUINTANA Term One: 07/01/20 – 06/30/22 (Appointed 01/19/21 Carr/ Posey) Revised 07/01/2021 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-420 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works Subject: Adopt Resolution No. 2021-32 regarding the status and update of the Circulation Element and Mitigation Fee Program for the Measure M (M2) Program, and Adopt a 7-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2021/22 through 2027/28 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements Statement of Issue: To be eligible to receive Measure M2 funding, the City is required to adopt a resolution informing the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) that the City’s Circulation Element is in conformance with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), and reaffirm concurrence with the City’s existing Mitigation Fee Program; and submit to OCTA an adopted 7-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) in compliance with renewed Measure M (M2) eligibility requirements. Financial Impact: No financial impact. The annual Measure M2 local fair share allocation in Fiscal Year 2021/22 is approximately $3.3 million for the City. Recommended Action: A) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-32, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach concerning the Status and Update of the Circulation Element, and Mitigation Fee Program for Measure M (M2) Program;” and, B) Adopt the 7-Year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2021/22 through 2027/28 to comply with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements (Attachment #5). Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt the resolution and forego the City’s eligibility for Measure M2 funding. Analysis: On November 6, 1990, the Orange County voters approved the original Measure M, the revised City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™56 File #:21-420 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Traffic Impact and Growth Management Ordinance, for twenty years (1991-2011). On November 7, 2006, the Orange County voters approved renewed Measure M (M2), which is a thirty-year (2011- 2041), multi-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M. M2 net revenues are generated from the transactions and use tax, plus any interest or other earnings after allowable deductions. Net revenues may be allocated to jurisdictions for a variety of programs identified in Ordinance Number 3 (Attachment #1). Compliance with eligibility requirements established in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to receive Measure M revenues. The City is required to adopt a resolution biennially, informing OCTA that the City’s Circulation Element is in conformance with the MPAH, and whether any changes to any arterial highways of the Circulation Element have been adopted by the City. The City Council must also reaffirm every two years that the City concurs with the existing mitigation fee program. Additionally, the 7-Year CIP must be adopted annually in compliance with M2 eligibility requirements. These items are described in greater detail below. Circulation Element/MPAH Consistency A Circulation Element is one component of the City’s General Plan that depicts a planned multimodal network and related policies (Attachment #2). The City’s Circulation Element defines the minimum planned lane configurations for major roads and shall be consistent with the OCTA MPAH, which defines the minimum planned lane configurations for major regionally significant roads in Orange County. Mitigation Fee Program The mitigation fee program is a locally-established fee program, which assess fees used to mitigate effects of new development on transportation infrastructure. Appropriate mitigation measures, including payment of fees, construction of improvements, or any combination thereof, will be determined through an established and documented process by the City. The City previously adopted Resolution No. 2012-23, establishing new and revised mitigation fees (Attachment #3). Additionally, Resolution No. 2021-32 allows the City to meet annual eligibility requirements to receive M2 Net Revenues (Attachment #4). 7-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) For Measure M compliance, the City must adopt a 7-Year CIP for Fiscal Years 2021/22 through 2027/28. The 7-Year CIP identifies all twenty-six (26) projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA M2 funds, outlined in Attachment #5 and listed below: 1. Arterial Rehabilitation FY 2021 2. Bridge Preventive Maintenance 3. Bridge Rehabilitation Projects 4. Brookhurst Street Synchronization 5. Concrete Replacements 6. Downtown Street Lighting 7. Edinger Avenue Synchronization 8. Garfield Avenue Fiber Optic 9. General Street Maintenance for Public Works City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™57 File #:21-420 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 10. Gothard Street Fiber Optic 11. Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project 12. Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project 13. Magnolia Street Synchronization 14. McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin Retrofit Project 15. Residential Curb Ramp Project 16. Residential Overlay 17. TS Modification Warner and Graham 18. TS Modification Warner and Nichols 19. TS Modifications - Left Turn Arrows 20. TS Synchronization - Bolsa 21. Talbert Avenue Synchronization 22. Traffic Signal Modification at Brookhurst and Indianapolis 23. Traffic Signal Modification Main and Delaware 24. Traffic Signal Modification Warner and Ash 25. Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main Street to Beach 26. Warner Avenue Synchronization Public Works Commission Action: Not applicable. Environmental Status: Not applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Infrastructure & Parks Attachments: 1. OCTA Ordinance No. 3 2. Huntington Beach Circulation Element 3. Resolution No. 2012-23 4. Resolution No. 2021-32 5. Measure M 7-Year CIP (FY 2021/22 through FY 2027/28) City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™58 213669.10 ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. 3 JULY 24, 2006 AMENDED: November 9, 2012 November 25, 2013 December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016) Orange County Local Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Tel: (714) 560-6282 59 213669.10 Measure M2 Amendments Transportation Investment Plan Amendments 1. November 9, 2012 • Reallocation of Funds within Freeway Program Between SR-91 and I-405 2. December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016) • Closeout of Project T and Reallocation of Remaining Funds within Transit Program between Metrolink Service Expansion (Project R) and Fare Stabilization Program (Project U). Corrected amendment language was presented to the Board on March 14, 2016. Ordinance Amendment 1. November 25, 2013 • Strengthens the eligibility and selection process for TOC members to prevent any person with a financial conflict of interest from serving as a member. Also requires currently elected or appointed officers who are applying to serve on the TOC to complete an “Intent to Resign” form. 2. December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016) • Accounts for additional funding from Project T allocated to the Fare Stabilization Program by changing Attachment B language to reflect a 1.47% delegation (rather than 1%) of Project U funding towards Fare Stabilization. Corrected amendment language was presented to the Board on March 14, 2016. 60 213669.10 TABLE OF CONTENTS Ordinance No. 3 Page Preamble ............................................................................................... 1 Section 1. Title ......................................................................................... 1 Section 2. Summary ................................................................................ 2 Section 3. Imposition of Retail Transactions and Use Tax ...................... 2 Section 4. Purposes ................................................................................ 2 Section 5. Bonding Authority ................................................................... 3 Section 6. Maintenance of Effort Requirements ...................................... 3 Section 7. Administration ......................................................................... 4 Section 8. Annual Appropriations Limit .................................................... 4 Section 9. Effective and Operative Dates ................................................ 5 Section 10. Safeguards of Use of Revenues ............................................. 5 Section 11. Ten-Year Comprehensive Program Review ........................... 6 Section 12. Amendments .......................................................................... 6 Section 13. Request for Election ............................................................... 7 Section 14. Effect on Ordinance No. 2 ...................................................... 8 Section 15. Severability ............................................................................. 8 ATTACHMENT A – Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan ................................... A-1 ATTACHMENT B - Allocation of Net Revenues Section I. Definitions ............................................................................... B-1 61 213669.10 Section II. Requirements ......................................................................... B-4 Section III. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions ................................... B-7 Section IV. Allocation of Net Revenues; General Provisions .................... B-10 Section V. Allocation of Net Revenues; Streets and Roads Programs/Projects ....................................................... B-12 Section VI. Allocation of Net Revenues; Transit Programs/ Projects .................................................................................. B-14 Section VII. Allocation of Net Revenues; Environmental Cleanup Projects .................................................................................. B-17 ATTACHMENT C - Taxpayer Oversight Committee Section I. Purpose and Organization ...................................................... C-1 Section II. Committee Membership ......................................................... C-1 Section III. Appointment of Members ....................................................... C-2 Section IV. Duties and Responsibilities .................................................... C-4 62 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ordinance No. 3 Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan PREAMBLE A. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180050, the Orange County Transportation Authority (“Authority”) has been designated as the Orange County Local Transportation Authority by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. B. There has been adopted a countywide transportation expenditure plan, referred to as the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, dated July 24, 2006, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180206 (“Plan”), which will be administered by the Authority. C. The Plan provides for needed countywide transportation facility and service improvements which will be funded, in part, by a transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%). D. Local Transportation Ordinance Number 2 (“Ordinance No. 2”) funds transportation facility and service improvements through a transactions and use tax of one- half of one percent (1/2%) that will be imposed through March 31, 2011. E. Ordinance No. 3 (“Ordinance”) provides for the continuation of the existing Ordinance No. 2 transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for an additional period of thirty (30) years to fund transportation facility and service improvements. SECTION 1. TITLE The Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan. The word “Ordinance,” as used in the Ordinance, shall mean and include Attachment A entitled “Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan,” Attachment B entitled “Allocation of Net Revenues,” and Attachment C entitled “Taxpayer Oversight Committee,” which Attachments A, B and C are attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. 63 2 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 2. SUMMARY The Ordinance provides for the implementation of the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, which will result in countywide transportation improvements for freeways, highways, local streets and roads, bus and rail transit, transportation-related water quality (“Environmental Cleanup”), and transit services for seniors and disabled persons. These needed improvements will be funded by the continuation of the one-half of one percent (1/2%) transaction and use tax for a period of thirty years. The revenues shall be deposited in a special fund and used solely for the identified improvements authorized by the Ordinance. SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX Subject to approval by the electors, the Authority hereby imposes, in the incorporated and unincorporated territories of Orange County (“County”), in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000) of the California Public Utilities Code, continuance of the existing retail transactions and use tax at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) commencing April 1, 2011, for a period of thirty years. This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax. The imposition, administration and collection of the tax shall be in accordance with all applicable statutes, laws, rules and regulations prescribed and adopted by the State Board of Equalization. SECTION 4. PURPOSES All of the gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax plus any interest or other earnings thereon (collectively, “Revenues”), after the deduction for: (i) amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the administration of the Ordinance as provided herein, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of 64 3 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 separate allocations, shall be defined as “Net Revenues” and shall be allocated solely for the transportation purposes described in the Ordinance. SECTION 5. BONDING AUTHORITY “Pay as you go” financing is the preferred method of financing transportation improvements and operations under the Ordinance. However, the Authority may use bond financing as an alternative method if the scope of planned expenditures makes “pay as you go” financing unfeasible. Following approval by the electors of the ballot proposition authorizing imposition of the transactions and use tax and authorizing issuance of bonds payable from the proceeds of the tax, bonds may be issued by the Authority pursuant to Division 19 of the Public Utilities Code, at any time before, on, or after the imposition of taxes, and from time to time, payable from the proceeds of the tax and secured by a pledge of revenues from the proceeds of the tax, in order to finance and refinance improvements authorized by the Ordinance. SECTION 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTS It is the intent of the Legislature and the Authority that the Net Revenues allocated to a jurisdiction pursuant to the Ordinance for street and road projects shall be used to supplement existing local discretionary funds being used for transportation improvements. Each jurisdiction is hereby required to annually maintain as a minimum no less than the maintenance of effort amount of local discretionary funds required to be expended by the jurisdiction for local street and road purposes pursuant to the current Ordinance No. 2 for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The maintenance of effort level for each jurisdiction as determined through this process shall be adjusted effective July 1, 2014 and every three fiscal years thereafter in an amount equal to the percentage change for the Construction Cost Index compiled by Caltrans for the immediately preceding three calendar years, providing that any percentage increase in the maintenance of effort level based on this adjustment shall not exceed the percentage increase in the growth rate in the jurisdiction’s general fund revenues over the same time period. The Authority shall not allocate any Net Revenues to any jurisdiction for any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it 65 4 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 has included in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of local discretionary funds for streets and roads purposes at least equal to the level of its maintenance of effort requirement. An annual independent audit may be conducted by the Authority to verify that the maintenance of effort requirements are being met by the jurisdiction. Any Net Revenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall be allocated to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according to the formula described in the Ordinance. SECTION 7. ADMINISTRATION The Authority shall allocate Revenues to fund facilities, services and projects as specified in the Ordinance, and shall administer the Ordinance consistent with the authority cited. Revenues may be expended by the Authority for salaries, wages, benefits, and overhead and for those services, including contractual services, necessary to carry out its responsibilities pursuant to Division 19; however, in no case shall the Revenues expended for salaries and benefits of Authority administrative staff exceed more than one percent (1%) of the Revenues in any year. The Authority shall use, to the extent possible, existing state, regional and local transportation planning and programming data and expertise, and may, as the law permits, contract with any public agency or private firm for services necessary to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance. Expenses incurred by the Authority for administrative staff and for project implementation, including contracting with public agencies and private firms, shall be identified in the annual report prepared pursuant to Section 10, subpart 8, of the Ordinance. SECTION 8. ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT The annual appropriations limit established pursuant to Article XIII. B. of the California Constitution and Section 180202 of the Public Utilities Code shall be established as $1,123 million for the 2006-07 fiscal year. The appropriations limit shall be subject to adjustment as provided by law. All expenditures of the Revenues are subject to the appropriations limit of the Authority. /// 66 5 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES The Ordinance shall be effective on November 8, 2006, if two thirds of the electors vote on November 7, 2006, to approve the ballot measure authorizing the extension of the imposition of the existing tax. The continuance of the imposition of the existing tax authorized by Section 3 of the Ordinance shall be operative on April 1, 2011. SECTION 10. SAFEGUARDS OF USE OF REVENUES The following safeguards are hereby established to ensure strict adherence to the limitations on the use of the Revenues: 1. A transportation special revenue fund (the “Local Transportation Authority Special Revenue Fund”) shall be established to maintain all Revenues. 2. The County of Orange Auditor-Controller (“Auditor-Controller”), in the capacity as Chair of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee, shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Ordinance. 3. Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable in each jurisdiction’s accounting records from other funding sources, and expenditures of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable by program or project. Interest earned on Net Revenues allocated pursuant to the Ordinance shall be expended only for those purposes for which the Net Revenues were allocated. 4. No Net Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other than transportation purposes authorized by the Ordinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the Net Revenues misspent and shall be deemed ineligible to receive Net Revenues for a period of five (5) years. 5. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee (“Committee”) shall be established to provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under the Ordinance. The Committee will help to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as required. The roles and responsibilities of the Committee, the selection process for Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as described in Attachment C. 67 6 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. A performance assessment shall be conducted at least once every three years to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and program results of the Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary of the Plan, the Plan and the Ordinance. A copy of the performance assessment shall be provided to the Committee. 7. Quarterly status reports regarding the major projects detailed in the Plan shall be brought before the Authority in public meetings. 8. Annually the Authority shall publish a report on how all Revenues have been spent and on progress in implementing projects in the Plan, and shall publicly report on the findings. SECTION 11. TEN-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW At least every ten years the Authority shall conduct a comprehensive review of all projects and programs implemented under the Plan to evaluate the performance of the overall program and may revise the Plan to improve its performance. The review shall include consideration of changes to local, state and federal transportation plans and policies; changes in land use, travel and growth projections; changes in project cost estimates and revenue projections; right-of-way constraints and other project constraints; level of public support for the Plan; and the progress of the Authority and jurisdictions in implementing the Plan. The Authority may amend the Plan based on its comprehensive review, subject to the requirements of Section 12. SECTION 12. AMENDMENTS The Authority may amend the Ordinance, including the Plan, to provide for the use of additional federal, state and local funds, to account for unexpected revenues, or to take into consideration unforeseen circumstances. The Authority shall notify the board of supervisors and the city council of each city in the county and provide them with a copy of the proposed amendments, and shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments prior to adoption, which shall require approval by a vote of not less than two thirds of the Authority Board of Directors. Amendments shall become effective forty five days after 68 7 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 adoption. No amendment to the Plan which eliminates a program or project specified on Page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the Authority Board of Directors adopts a finding that the transportation purpose of the program or project to be eliminated will be satisfied by a different program or project. No amendment to the Plan which changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the amendment to the Plan is first approved by a vote of not less than two thirds of the Committee. In addition, any proposed change in allocations among the four major funding categories of freeway projects, street and road projects, transit projects and Environmental Cleanup projects identified on page 31 of the Plan, or any proposed change of the Net Revenues allocated pursuant to Section IV C 3 of Attachment B for the Local Fair Share Program portion of the Streets and Roads Projects funding category, shall be approved by a simple majority vote of the electors before going into effect. SECTION 13. REQUEST FOR ELECTION Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180201, the Authority hereby requests that the County of Orange Board of Supervisors call a special election to be conducted by the County of Orange on November 7, 2006, to place the Ordinance before the electors. To avoid any misunderstanding or confusion by Orange County electors, the Authority requests that the Ordinance be identified as “Measure M” on the ballot. The ballot language for the measure shall contain a summary of the projects and programs in the Plan and shall read substantially as follows: “Measure “M,” Orange County Transportation Improvement Plan Shall the ordinance continuing Measure M, Orange County’s half-cent sales tax for transportation improvements, for an additional 30 years with limited bonding authority to fund the following projects: * relieve congestion on the I-5, I-405, 22, 55, 57 and 91 freeways; * fix potholes and resurface streets; * expand Metrolink rail and connect it to local communities; * provide transit services, at reduced rates, for seniors and disabled persons; 69 8 213671.11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 * synchronize traffic lights in every community; * reduce air and water pollution, and protect local beaches by cleaning up oil runoff from roadways; and establish the following taxpayer protections to ensure the funds are spent as directed by the voters: * require an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to review yearly audits to ensure that voter mandates are met; * publish an annual report to the taxpayers on how all funds are spent; and * update the transportation improvement plan every 10 years, with voter approval required for major changes; be adopted for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion in Orange County?” SECTION 14. EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 2 The Ordinance is not intended to modify, repeal or alter the provisions of Ordinance No. 2, and shall not be read to supersede Ordinance No. 2. The provisions of the Ordinance shall apply solely to the transactions and use tax adopted herein. If the Ordinance is not approved by the electors of the County, the provisions of Ordinance No. 2 and all powers, duties, and actions taken thereunder shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 15. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, part, clause or phrase of the Ordinance is for any reason held invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that holding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining funds or provisions of the Ordinance, and the Authority declares that it would have passed each part of the /// /// /// /// /// /// 70 71 RENEWED MEASURE MRENEWED MEASURE M Transportation Investment PlanTransportation Investment Plan ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 (714) 560-5066 www.octa.net As amended on December 14, 2015 Approved by voters on November 7, 2006 Updated March 14, 2016 ATTACHMENT A 72 73 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................2 Overview ................................................................................................3 Freeway Projects Overview ..................................................................................................................5 Orange County Freeway Projects Map ...............................................................6 I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements ...........................7 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements .............................8 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements .............................9 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements ...............................................9 SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements .....................................................10 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements ..................................................11 I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements .................................................13 I-605 Freeway Access Improvements ........................................................15 All Freeway Service Patrol .....................................................................15 Streets & Roads Projects Overview ................................................................................................................16 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Map ...........................................17 Regional Capacity Program ...............................................................................18 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program ..........................................19 Local Fair Share Program ...................................................................................20 Transit Projects Overview ................................................................................................................21 Orange County Transit Projects Map ................................................................22 High Frequency Metrolink Service ....................................................................23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink ...........................................................................23 Metrolink Gateways ..............................................................................................24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities............24 Community Based Transit/Circulators ...............................................................25 Safe Transit Stops .................................................................................................25 Environmental Cleanup Overview ................................................................................................................26 Project Description ...............................................................................................27 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview ................................................................................................................28 Description ..............................................................................................................29 Measure M Investment Summary ........................................................31 1 74 RENEW E D Measure M Promises Fulfilled On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M, a half-cent local transportation sales tax for twenty years. All of the major projects promised to and approved by the voters are underway or complete. Funds that go to cities and the County of Orange to maintain and improve local street and roads, along with transit fare reductions for seniors and persons with disabilities, will continue until Measure M ends in 2011. The promises made in Measure M have been fulfilled. Continued Investment Needed Orange County continues to grow. By the year 2030, Orange County’s population will increase by 24 percent from 2.9 million in 2000 to 3.6 million in 2030; jobs will increase by 27 percent; and travel on our roads and highways by 39 percent. Without continued investment average morning rush hour speeds on Orange County freeways will fall by 31 percent and on major streets by 32 percent. Responding to this continued growth and broad support for investment in Orange County’s transportation system, the Orange County Transportation Authority considered the transportation projects and programs that would be possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority, together with the 34 cities of Orange County, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands of Orange County citizens, participated during the last eighteen months in developing a Transportation Investment Plan for consideration by the voters. A Plan for New Transportation Investments The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent in the diverse communities of Orange County. It includes continued investment to expand and improve Orange County’s freeway system; commitment to maintaining and improving the network of streets and roads in every community; an expansion of Metrolink rail service through the core of Orange County with future extensions to connect with nearby communities and regional rail systems; more transit service for seniors and disabled persons; and funds to clean up runoff from roads that leads to beach closures. Strong Safeguards These commitments are underscored by a set of strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that promises made in the Plan are kept. They include an annual independent audit and report to the taxpayers; ongoing monitoring and review of spending by an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee; requirement for full public review and update of the Plan every ten years; voter approval for any major changes to the Plan; strong penalties for any misuse of funds and a strict limit of no more than one percent for administrative expenses. No Increase in Taxes The traffic improvements detailed in this plan do not require an increase in taxes. Renewal of the existing Measure M one-half cent transportation sales tax will enable all of the projects and programs to be implemented. And by using good planning and sensible financing, projects that are ready to go could begin as early as 2007. Renewing Measure M The projects and programs that follow constitute the Transportation Investment Plan for the renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax approved by Orange County voters in November of 1990. These improvements are necessary to address current and future transportation needs in Orange County and reflect the best efforts to achieve consensus among varied interests and communities throughout the County. Introduction 2 RENEW E D 75 RENEW E D The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is a 30-year, $11.8 billion program designed to reduce traffic congestion, strengthen our economy and improve our quality of life by upgrading key freeways, fixing major freeway interchanges, maintaining streets and roads, synchronizing traffic signals countywide, building a visionary rail transit system, and protecting our environment from the oily street runoff that pollutes Orange County beaches. The Transportation Investment Plan is focused solely on improving the transportation system and includes tough taxpayer safeguards, including a Taxpayer Oversight Committee, required annual audits, and regular, public reports on project progress. The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan must be reviewed annually, in public session, and every ten years a detailed review of the Plan must take place. If changing circumstances require the voter-approved plan to be changed, those changes must be taken to the voters for approval. Freeways Relieving congestion on the Riverside/Artesia Freeway (SR-91) is the centerpiece of the freeway program, and will include new lanes, new interchanges, and new bridges. Other major projects will make substantial improvements on Interstate 5 (I-5) in southern Orange County and the San Diego Freeway (I-405) in western Orange County. The notorious Orange Crush — the intersection of the I-5, the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and the Orange Freeway (SR-57) near Angel Stadium — will be improved and upgraded. Under the Plan, major traffic chokepoints on almost every Orange County freeway will be remedied. Improving Orange County freeways will be the greatest investment in the Renewed Measure M program: Forty- three percent of net revenues, or $4.871 billion, will be invested in new freeway construction. Streets and Roads More than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads will need repair, rejuvenation and improvement. City streets and county roads need to be maintained regularly and potholes have to be filled quickly. Thirty-two percent of net revenue from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or $3.625 billion, will be devoted to fixing potholes, improving intersections, synchronizing traffic signals countywide, and making the existing countywide network of streets and roads safer and more efficient. Overview RENEW E D 2 3 76 RENEW E D Public Transit As Orange County continues to grow, building a visionary rail transportation system that is safe, clean and convenient, uses and preserves existing rights-of-way, and, over time, provides high-speed connections both inside and outside of Orange County, is a long term goal. Twenty-five percent of the net revenue from Renewed Measure M, or $2.83 billion, will be dedicated to transit programs countywide. About twenty percent, or $2.24 billion, will be dedicated to creating a new countywide high capacity transit system anchored on the existing, successful Metrolink and Amtrak rail line, and about five percent, or $591 million, will be used to enhance senior transportation programs and provide targeted, safe localized bus service. Environmental Cleanup Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily pollution, litter, and dirty contaminants wash off streets, roads, and freeways and pour onto Orange County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the transportation-generated beach and ocean pollution increases tenfold. Under the plan, two percent of the gross Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or $237 million, will be dedicated to protecting Orange County beaches from this transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called “urban runoff”) while improving ocean water quality. Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits When new transportation dollars are approved, they should go for transportation and transportation purposes alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation dollars for other purposes. The original Measure M went solely for transportation purposes. The Renewed Measure M must be just as airtight. One percent of the gross Measure M program, or $118.6 million over 30 years, will pay for annual, independent audits, taxpayer safeguards, an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee assigned to watchdog government spending, and a full, public disclosure of all Renewed Measure M expenditures. A detailed review of the program must be conducted every ten years and, if needed, major changes in the investment plan must be brought before Orange County voters for approval. Taxpayers will receive an annual report detailing the Renewed Measure M expenditures. Additionally, as required by law, an estimated one and a half percent of the sales taxes generated, or $178 million over 30 years, must be paid to the California State Board of Equalization for collecting the one-half cent sales tax that funds the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan. In this pamphlet, every specific project, program, and safeguard included in the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is explained. Similar details will be provided to every Orange County voter if the measure is placed on the ballot.RENEW E D 4 77 RENEW E D Every day, traffic backs up somewhere on the Orange County freeway system. And, every day, freeway traffic seems to get a little worse. In the past decade, Orange County has made major strides in re-building our aging freeway system. But there is still an enormous amount of work that needs to be done to make the freeway system work well. You see the need for improvement every time you drive on an Orange County freeway. Forty-three percent of net revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is dedicated to improving Orange County freeways, the largest portion of the 30-year transportation plan. SR-91 is the Centerpiece Making the troubled Riverside/Artesia Freeway (SR-91) work again is the centerpiece of the Renewed Measure M Freeway program. The fix on the SR-91 will require new lanes, new bridges, new overpasses, and, in the Santa Ana Canyon portion of the freeway, a diversion of drivers to the Foothill Corridor (SR-241) so the rest of the Orange County freeway system can work more effectively. And there’s more to the freeway program than the fix of SR-91 — much more. More than $1 billion is earmarked for Interstate 5 in South County. More than $800 million is slated to upgrade the San Diego Freeway (I-405) between Irvine and the Los Angeles County line. Another significant investment is planned on the congested Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55). And needed projects designed to relieve traffic chokepoints are planned for almost every Orange County freeway. To make any freeway system work, bottlenecks at interchanges also have to be fixed. The notorious Orange Crush Interchange — where the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) meets the Orange Freeway (SR-57) and the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) in a traffic tangle near Angel Stadium — is in need of a major face lift. And the intersection of Interstate 5 and the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) is also slated for major repair. Pays Big Dividends Local investment in freeways also pays big dividends in the search for other needed freeway dollars. Because of state and federal matching rules, Orange County’s local investment in freeway projects acts as a magnet for state and federal transportation dollars — pulling more freeway construction dollars into the county and allowing more traffic- reducing freeway projects to be built sooner. Innovative Environmental Mitigation A minimum of $243.5 million will be available, subject to a Master Agreement, to provide for comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, mitigation of the environmental impacts of freeway improvements. Using a proactive, innovative approach, the Master Agreement negotiated between the Orange County Local Transportation Authority and state and federal resource agencies will provide higher-value environmental benefits such as habitat protection, wildlife corridors and resource preservation in exchange for streamlined project approvals for the freeway program as a whole. Freeway projects will also be planned, designed and constructed with consideration for their aesthetic, historic and environmental impacts on nearby properties and communities using such elements as parkway style designs, locally native landscaping, sound reduction and aesthetic treatments that complement the surroundings. Freeway Projects Overview RENEW E D 4 5 78 A B C F G H I J K L Orange County Freeway Projects Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) page 7 Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) page 8 Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) page 8 Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) page 9 Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) page 9 Orange Freeway (SR-57) page 10 Riverside Freeway (SR-91) page 11 Riverside Freeway (SR-91) page 12 San Diego Freeway (I-405) page 13-14 Freeway Access Improvements (I-605) page 15 (not mapped) Freeway Service Patrol (not mapped) page 15 A B D C E F NG M K L J H I C 6 E M D 79 Freeway Projects Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Interchange Improvements A B RENEW E D 6 7 Project Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) and “Orange Crush” Area (SR-57) Description: Reduce freeway congestion through improvements at the SR-55/I-5 interchange area between the Fourth Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on I-5, and between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on SR-55. Also, add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 to relieve congestion at the “Orange Crush”. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this segment of the I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about 389,000. The demand is expected to grow by more than 19 percent by 2030, bringing the daily usage to 464,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include additional improvements on I-5 from the “Orange Crush” to SR-91 using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve this section of the I-5 is $470.0 million. Project Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements from the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to El Toro “Y” Area Description: Build new lanes and improve the interchanges in the area between SR-55 and the SR-133 (near the El Toro “Y”). This segment of I-5 is the major route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine, Tustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County. The project will also make improvements at local interchanges, such as Jamboree Road. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The current traffic volume on this segment of I-5 is about 356,000 vehicles per day and is expected to increase by nearly 24 percent, bringing it up to 440,000 vehicles per day. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans include additional improvements to this freeway at local interchanges, such as Culver Drive, using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve this section of I-5 is $300.2 million. 80 Project San Diego Freeway (I-5) Improvements South of the El Toro “Y” Description: Add new lanes to I-5 from the vicinity of the El Toro Interchange in Lake Forest to the vicinity of SR-73 in Mission Viejo. Also add new lanes on I-5 between Coast Highway and Avenida Pico interchanges to reduce freeway congestion in San Clemente. The project will also make major improvements at local interchanges as listed in Project D. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. Current traffic volume on I-5 near the El Toro “Y” is about 342,000 vehicles per day. This volume will increase in the future by 35 percent, bringing it up to 460,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include construction of a new freeway access point between Crown Valley Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve these segments of I-5 is $627.0 million. Project Santa Ana Freeway / San Diego Freeway (I-5) Local Interchange Upgrades Description: Update and improve key I-5 interchanges such as Avenida Pico, Ortega Highway, Avery Parkway, La Paz Road, El Toro Road, and others to relieve street congestion around older interchanges and on ramps. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. In addition to the project described above, regional plans also include improvements to the local interchanges at Camino Capistrano, Oso Parkway, Alicia Parkway and Barranca Parkway using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for the I-5 local interchange upgrades is $258.0 million. Mission Viejo Laguna Niguel San Juan Capistrano Dana Point San Clemente Mission Viejo Laguna Niguel San Juan Capistrano Dana Point San Clemente Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) C Freeway Projects D RENEW E D 8 81 Project Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) Access Improvements Description: Construct interchange improvements at Euclid Street, Brookhurst Street and Harbor Boulevard to reduce freeway and street congestion near these interchanges. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Regional plans also include the construction of new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the SR-22/I-405 interchange, and improvements to the local interchange at Magnolia Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve the SR-22 interchanges is $120.0 million. Project Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Improvements Description: Add new lanes to SR-55 between Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and the San Diego Freeway (I-405), generally within existing right-of-way, including merging lanes between interchanges to smooth traffic flow. This project also provides for freeway operational improvements for the portion of SR-55 between SR-91 and SR-22. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. This freeway carries about 295,000 vehicles on a daily basis. This volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 332,000 vehicles per day in the future. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans also include a new street overcrossing and carpool ramps at Alton Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these SR-55 improvements is $366.0 million. Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Garden Grove Stanton Westminster Santa Ana Tustin Orange Anaheim Buena Park Fullerton Costa Mesa Irvine Westminster Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Garden Grove Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Stanton Freeway Projects E F 8 9 82 Project Orange Freeway (SR-57) Improvements Description: Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include improvements to the Lambert interchange and the addition of a northbound truck climbing lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon Road. The improvements will be designed and coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at SR-57/SR-91 interchange. These improvements will be made generally within existing right-of- way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030, this volume will increase by 15 percent, bringing it up to 363,000 vehicles per day. In addition to the project described above, regional plans include new carpool ramps at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to implement SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million. Orange Freeway (SR-57) Freeway Projects G RENEW E D 10 83 Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) to the Orange Freeway (SR-57) Description: Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide operational improvements at on and off ramps to the SR-91 between I-5 and the Orange Freeway (SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way, to smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91 interchange. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The current daily freeway volume along this segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030, this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per day. Cost: The estimated cost for improvements in this segment of SR-91 is $140.0 million. Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from Orange Freeway (SR-57) to the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Interchange Area Description: Improve the SR-91/SR-55 to SR-91/SR-57 interchange complex, including nearby local interchanges such as Tustin Avenue and Lakeview, as well as adding freeway capacity between SR-55 and SR-57. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of- way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Current freeway volume on this segment of the SR-91 is about 245,000 vehicles per day. This vehicular demand is expected to increase by 22 percent, bringing it up to 300,000 vehicles per day in the future. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the SR-91 is $416.5 million. Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Santa Ana Tustin Orange Anaheim Buena Park Fullerton Costa Mesa Westminster Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Garden Grove Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Stanton Placentia Villa Park Anaheim Freeway Projects H I RENEW E D 10 11 84 Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to the Orange/ Riverside County Line Description: This project adds capacity on SR-91 beginning at SR-55 and extending to I-15 in Riverside County. The first priority will be to improve the segment of SR-91 east of SR-241. The goal is to provide up to four new lanes of capacity between SR-241 and Riverside County Line by making best use of available freeway property, adding reversible lanes, building elevated sections and improving connections to SR-241. These projects would be constructed in conjunction with similar coordinated improvements in Riverside County extending to I-15 and provide a continuous set of improvements between SR-241 and I-15. The portion of improvements in Riverside County will be paid for from other sources. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. This project also includes improvements to the segment of SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-55. The concept is to generally add one new lane in each direction and improve the interchanges. Today, this freeway carries about 314,000 vehicles every day. This volume is expected to increase by 36 percent, bringing it up to 426,000 vehicles by 2030. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the SR-91 is $352.0 million. Placentia Yorba Linda Villa Park Anaheim Riverside Freeway (SR-91) J Freeway Projects RENEW E D 12 Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012.85 Project San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements between the I-605 Freeway in Los Alamitos area and Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Description: Add new lanes to the San Diego Freeway between I-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right- of-way. The project will make best use of available freeway property, update interchanges and widen all local overcrossings according to city and regional master plans. The improvements will be coordinated with other planned I-405 improvements in the I-405/SR-22/I-605 interchange area to the north and I-405/SR-73 improvements to the south. The improvements will adhere to recommendations of the Interstate 405 Major Investment Study (as adopted by the Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors on October 14, 2005) and will be developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Today, I-405 carries about 430,000 vehicles daily. The volume is expected to increase by nearly 23 percent, bringing it up to 528,000 vehicles daily by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73 interchange as well as a new carpool interchange at Bear Street using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the I-405 is $1,072.8 million. San Diego Freeway (I-405) Santa Ana Tustin Orange Anaheim Buena Park Fullerton Costa Mesa Westminster Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Garden Grove Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Stanton Freeway Projects K RENEW E D 12 13 Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012.86 Project San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) and Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Description: Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the I-5. The project will also improve chokepoints at interchanges and add merging lanes near on/ off ramps such as Lake Forest Drive, Irvine Center Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway operations in the I-405/I-5 El Toro “Y” area. The projects will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. This segment of the freeway carries 354,000 vehicles a day. This number will increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 401,000 vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans include a new carpool interchange at Von Karman Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the I-405 is $319.7 million. San Diego Freeway (I-405) Freeway Projects L RENEW E D 14 87 Project I-605 Freeway Access Improvements Description: Improve freeway access and arterial connection to I-605 serving the communities of Los Alamitos and Cypress. The project will be coordinated with other planned improvements along SR-22 and I-405. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Regional plans also include the addition of new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the I-405/ I-605 interchange using federal and state funds. This improvement will connect to interchange improvements at I-405 and SR-22 as well as new freeway lanes between I-405 and I-605. Cost: The estimated cost to make these I-605 interchange improvements is $20.0 million. Project Freeway Service Patrol Description: The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) provides competitively bid, privately contracted tow truck service for motorists with disabled vehicles on the freeway system. This service helps stranded motorists and quickly clears disabled vehicles out of the freeway lanes to minimize congestion caused by vehicles blocking traffic and passing motorists rubbernecking. Currently Freeway Service Patrol is available on Orange County freeways Monday through Friday during peak commuting hours. This project would assure that this basic level of service could be continued through 2041. As demand and congestion levels increase, this project would also permit service hours to be extended throughout the day and into the weekend. Cost: The estimated cost to support the Freeway Service Patrol Program for thirty years beyond 2011 is $150.0 million. I-605 Freeway Access Improvements Freeway Service Patrol Freeways Projects M N RENEW E D 14 15 88 RENEW E D Orange County has more than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads, many of which are in need of repair, rejuvenation and improvement. Intersections need to be widened, traffic lights need to be synchronized, and potholes need to be filled. And, in many cases, to make Orange County’s transportation system work smoothly, we need to add additional lanes to existing streets. Thirty-two percent of net revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is dedicated to maintaining streets, fixing potholes, improving intersections and widening city streets and county roads. Making the System Work Making the existing system of streets and roads work better — by identifying spot intersection improvements, filling potholes, repaving worn- out streets — is the basis of making a countywide transportation system work. That basis has to be the first priority. But to operate a successful, countywide system of streets and roads, we need more: street widenings and traffic signals synchronized countywide. And there’s more. Pedestrian safety near local schools needs to be improved. Traffic flow must be smoothed. Street repairs must be made sooner. And, perhaps most importantly, cities and the county must work together — collaboratively — to find simple, low-cost traffic solutions. Renewed Measure M provides financial incentives for traffic improvements that cross city and county lines, providing a seamless, county- wide transportation system that’s friendly to regional commuters and fair to local residents. Better Cooperation To place a higher priority on cooperative, collaborative regional decision-making, Renewed Measure M creates incentives that encourage traffic lights to be coordinated across jurisdictional lines, major street improvements to be better coordinated on a regional basis, and street repair programs to be a high priority countywide. To receive Measure M funding, cities and the county have to cooperate. The Streets and Roads program in Renewed Measure M involves shared responsibilities — local cities and the county set their local priorities within a competitive, regional framework that rewards cooperation, honors best practices, and encourages government agencies to work together. Streets and Roads Projects Overview RENEW E D 16 89 Signal Synchronization Network Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Regional Capacity Program page 18 (not mapped) Nearly 1,000 miles of new lanes Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program page 19 (see grid above) Over 750 miles of roadway Over 2,000 coordinated signals Local Fair Share Program page 20 (not mapped) Street maintenance and improvements O P Q 16 17 90 Streets and Roads Projects OProject Regional Capacity Program Description: This program, in combination with local matching funds, provides a funding source to complete the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). The program also provides for intersection improvements and other projects to help improve street operations and reduce congestion. The program allocates funds through a competitive process and targets projects that help traffic the most by considering factors such as degree of congestion relief, cost effectiveness, project readiness, etc. Local jurisdictions must provide a dollar-for-dollar match to qualify for funding, but can be rewarded with lower match requirements if they give priority to other key objectives, such as better road maintenance and regional signal synchronization. Roughly 1,000 miles of new street lanes remain to be completed, mostly in the form of widening existing streets to their ultimate planned width. Completion of the system will result in a more even traffic flow and efficient system. Another element of this program is funding for construction of railroad over or underpass grade separations where high volume streets are impacted by freight trains along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad in northern Orange County. Cost: The estimated cost for these street improvement projects is $1,132.8 million. Regional Capacity Program RENEW E D 18 91 RENEW E D Project Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Description: This program targets over 2,000 signalized intersections across the County for coordinated operation. The goal is to improve the flow of traffic by developing and implementing regional signal coordination programs that cross jurisdictional boundaries. Most traffic signal synchronization programs today are limited to segments of roads or individual cities and agencies. For example, signals at intersections of freeways with arterial streets are controlled by Caltrans, while nearby signals at local street intersections are under the control of cities. This results in the street system operating at less than maximum efficiency. When completed, this project can increase the capacity of the street grid and reduce the delay by over six million hours annually. To ensure that this program is successful, cities, the County of Orange and Caltrans will be required to work together and prepare a common traffic signal synchronization plan and the necessary governance and legal arrangements before receiving funds. In addition, cities will be required to provide 20 percent of the costs. Once in place, the program will provide funding for ongoing maintenance and operation of the synchronization plan. Local jurisdictions will be required to publicly report on the performance of their signal synchronization efforts at least every three years. Signal equipment to give emergency vehicles priority at intersections will be an eligible expense for projects implemented as part of this program. Cost: The estimated cost of developing and maintaining a regional traffic signal synchronization program for Orange County is $453.1 million. Streets and Roads Projects P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 18 19 92 Streets and Roads Projects QProject Local Fair Share Program Description: This element of the program will provide flexible funding to help cities and the County of Orange keep up with the rising cost of repairing the aging street system. In addition, cities can use these funds for other local transportation needs such as residential street projects, traffic and pedestrian safety near schools, signal priority for emergency vehicles, etc. This program is intended to augment, rather than replace, existing transportation expenditures and therefore cities must meet the following requirements to receive the funds. 1. Continue to invest General Fund monies (or other local discretionary monies) for transportation and annually increase this commitment to keep pace with inflation. 2. Agree to use Measure M funds for transportation purposes only, subject to full repayment and a loss of funding eligibility for five years for any misuse. 3. Agree to separate accounting for Measure M funds and annual reporting on actual Measure M expenditures. 4. Develop and maintain a Pavement Management Program to ensure timely street maintenance and submit regular public reports on the condition of streets. 5. Annually submit a six-year Capital Improvement Program and commit to spend Measure M funds within three years of receipt. 6. Agree to assess traffic impacts of new development and require that new development pay a fair share of any necessary transportation improvements. 7. Agree to plan, build and operate major streets consistent with the countywide Master Plan of Arterial Highways to ensure efficient traffic flow across city boundaries. 8. Participate in Traffic Forums with neighboring jurisdictions to facilitate the implementation and maintenance of traffic signal synchronization programs and projects. This requires cities to balance local traffic policies with neighboring cities — for selected streets — to promote more efficient traffic circulation overall. 9. Agree to consider land use planning strategies that are transit-friendly, support alternative transportation modes including bike and pedestrian access and reduce reliance on the automobile. The funds under this program are distributed to cities and the County of Orange by formula once the cities have fulfilled the above requirements. The formula will account for population, street mileage and amount of sales tax collected in each jurisdiction. Cost: The estimated cost for this program for thirty years is $2,039.1 million. Local Fair Share Program RENEW E D 20 93 RENEW E D RENEW E DTransit Overview Building streets, roads and freeways helps fix today’s traffic problems. Building a visionary transit system that is safe, clean and convenient focuses on Orange County’s transportation future. Twenty-five percent of net revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is allocated towards building and improving rail and bus transportation in Orange County. Approximately twenty percent of the Renewed Measure M funds is allocated to developing a creative countywide transit program and five percent of the revenues will be used to enhance programs for senior citizens and for targeted, localized bus service. All transit expenditures must be consistent with the safeguards and audit provisions of the Plan. A New Transit Vision The key element of the Renewed Measure M transit program is improving the 100-year old Santa Fe rail line, known today as the Los Angeles/San Diego (LOSSAN) rail corridor, through the heart of the county. Then, by using this well-established, operational commuter rail system as a platform for future growth, existing rail stations will be developed into regional transportation hubs that can serve as regional transportation gateways or the centerpiece of local transportation services. A series of new, well- coordinated, flexible transportation systems, each one customized to the unique transportation vision the station serves, will be developed. Creativity and good financial sense will be encouraged. Partnerships will be promoted. Transportation solutions for each transportation hub can range from monorails to local mini-bus systems to new technologies. Fresh thinking will be rewarded. The new, localized transit programs will bring competition to local transportation planning, creating a marketplace of transportation ideas where the best ideas emerge and compete for funding. The plan is to encourage civic entrepreneurship and stimulate private involvement and investment. Transit Investment Criteria The guiding principles for all transit investments are value, safety, convenience and reliability. Each local transit vision will be evaluated against clear criteria, such as congestion relief, cost-effectiveness, readiness, connectivity, and a sound operating plan. In terms of bus services, more specialized transit services, including improved van services and reduced fares for senior citizens and people with disabilities, will be provided. Safety at key bus stops will be improved. And a network of community- based, mini-bus services will be developed in areas outside of the central county rail corridor. 20 21 94 Pacific Electric right-of-way Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo Station San Juan Capistrano Station San Clemente Station Irvine Transportation Center Tustin Station Santa Ana Depot Orange Station Anaheim Canyon Station Anaheim Station Buena Park Station Fullerton Station Orange County Transit Projects High Frequency Metrolink Service ( = existing rail line/stations) page 23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink page 23 Metrolink Gateways (not mapped) page 24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities (countywide; not mapped) page 24 Community Based Transit/Circulators (countywide; not mapped) page 25 Safe Transit Stops (countywide; not mapped) page 25W V U T S R 22 95 Transit Projects Project High Frequency Metrolink Service Description: This project will increase rail services within the county and provide frequent Metrolink service north of Fullerton to Los Angeles. The project will provide for track improvements, more trains, and other related needs to accommodate the expanded service. This project is designed to build on the successes of Metrolink and complement service expansion made possible by the current Measure M. The service will include upgraded stations and added parking capacity; safety improvements and quiet zones along the tracks; and frequent shuttle service and other means, to move arriving passengers to nearby destinations. The project also includes funding for improving grade crossings and constructing over or underpasses at high volume arterial streets that cross the Metrolink tracks. Cost: The estimated cost of capital and operations is $1,129.8 million. Project Transit Extensions to Metrolink Description: Frequent service in the Metrolink corridor provides a high capacity transit system linking communities within the central core of Orange County. This project will establish a competitive program for local jurisdictions to broaden the reach of the rail system to other activity centers and communities. Proposals for extensions must be developed and supported by local jurisdictions and will be evaluated against well-defined and well-known criteria as follows: • Traffic congestion relief • Project readiness, with priority given to projects that can be implemented within the first five years of the Plan • Local funding commitments and the availability of right-of-way • Proven ability to attract other financial partners, both public and private • Cost-effectiveness • Proximity to jobs and population centers • Regional as well as local benefits • Ease and simplicity of connections • Compatible, approved land uses • Safe and modern technology • A sound, long-term operating plan This project shall not be used to fund transit routes that are not directly connected to or that would be redundant to the core rail service on the Metrolink corridor. The emphasis shall be on expanding access to the core rail system and on establishing connections to communities and major activity centers that are not immediately adjacent to the Metrolink corridor. It is intended that multiple transit projects be funded through High Frequency Metrolink Service Transit Extensions to Metrolink R S RENEW E D 22 23 Project R cost estimate amended on December 14, 2015.96 a competitive process and no single project may be awarded all of the funds under this program. These connections may include a variety of transit technologies such as conventional bus, bus rapid transit or high capacity rail transit systems as long as they can be fully integrated and provide seamless transition for the users. Cost: The estimated cost to implement this program over thirty years is $1,000.0 million. Project Convert Metrolink Station(s) to Regional Gateways that Connect Orange County with High-Speed Rail Systems Description: This program will provide the local improvements that are necessary to connect planned future high-speed rail systems to stations on the Orange County Metrolink route. The State of California is currently planning a high-speed rail system linking northern and southern California. One line is planned to terminate in Orange County. In addition, several magnetic levitation (MAGLEV) systems that would connect Orange County to Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, including a link from Anaheim to Ontario airport, are also being planned or proposed by other agencies. Cost: The estimated Measure M share of the cost for these regional centers and connections is $57.9 million. Project Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities Description: This project will provide services and programs to meet the growing transportation needs of seniors and persons with disabilities as follows: • One and forty-seven hundredths percent (1.47%) of net revenues will stabilize fares and provide fare discounts for bus services, specialized ACCESS services and future rail services • One percent of net revenues will be available to continue and expand local community van service for seniors through the existing Senior Mobility Program • One percent will supplement existing countywide senior non-emergency medical transportation services Over the next 30 years, the population age 65 and over is projected to increase by 93 percent. Demand for transit and specialized transportation services for seniors and persons with disabilities is expected to increase proportionately. Cost: The estimated cost to provide these programs over 30 years is $392.8 million. Transit Projects T Metrolink Gateways Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities U RENEW E D 24 Project T and U cost estimates amended on December 14, 2015.97 RENEW E D Transit Projects V Community Based Transit/Circulators Safe Transit Stops WProject Community Based Transit/Circulators Description: This project will establish a competitive program for local jurisdictions to develop local bus transit services such as community based circulators, shuttles and bus trolleys that complement regional bus and rail services, and meet needs in areas not adequately served by regional transit. Projects will need to meet performance criteria for ridership, connection to bus and rail services, and financial viability to be considered for funding. All projects must be competitively bid, and they cannot duplicate or compete with existing transit services. Cost: The estimated cost of this project is $226.5 million. Project Safe Transit Stops Description: This project provides for passenger amenities at 100 busiest transit stops across the County. The stops will be designed to ease transfer between bus lines and provide passenger amenities such as improved shelters, lighting, current information on bus and train timetables and arrival times, and transit ticket vending machines. Cost: The estimated cost of this project is $25.0 million. 24 25 98 Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily pollution, litter, and dirty contamination washes off streets, roads and freeways and pours onto Orange County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the transportation-generated pollution increases tenfold, contributing to the increasing number of beach closures and environmental hazards along the Orange County coast. Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and transit projects, two percent of gross revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is set aside to protect Orange County beaches from transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called “urban runoff”) and improving ocean water quality. Countywide Competitive Program Measure M Environmental Cleanup funds will be used on a countywide, competitive basis to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for controlling transportation-generated pollution by funding nationally recognized Best Management Practices, such as catch basins with state-of- the-art biofiltration systems; or special roadside landscaping systems called bioswales that filter oil runoff from streets, roads and freeways. The environmental cleanup program is designed to supplement, not supplant, existing transportation- related water quality programs. This clean-up program must improve, and not replace, existing pollution reduction efforts by cities, the county, and special districts. Funds will be awarded to the highest priority programs that improve water quality, keep our beaches and streets clean, and reduce transportation-generated pollution along Orange County’s scenic coastline. Environmental Cleanup Overview RENEW E D 26 99 XProject Environmental Cleanup Description: Implement street and highway related water quality improvement programs and projects that will assist Orange County cities, the County of Orange and special districts to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for urban runoff. The Environmental Cleanup monies may be used for water quality improvements related to both existing and new transportation infrastructure, including capital and operations improvements such as: • Catch basin screens, filters and inserts • Roadside bioswales and biofiltration channels • Wetlands protection and restoration • Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) units • Maintenance of catch basins and bioswales • Other street-related “Best Management Practices” for capturing and treating urban runoff This program is intended to augment, not replace existing transportation related water quality expenditures and to emphasize high-impact capital improvements over local operations and maintenance costs. In addition, all new freeway, street and transit capital projects will include water quality mitigation as part of project scope and cost. The Environmental Cleanup program is subject to the following requirements: • Development of a comprehensive countywide capital improvement program for transportation related water quality improvements • A competitive grant process to award funds to the highest priority, most cost-effective projects • A matching requirement to leverage other federal, state and local funds for water quality improvements • A maintenance of effort requirement to ensure that funds augment, not replace existing water quality programs • Annual reporting on actual expenditures and an assessment of the water quality benefits provided • A strict limit on administrative costs and a requirement to spend funds within three years of receipt • Penalties for misuse of any of the Environmental Cleanup funds Cost: The estimated cost for the Environmental Cleanup program is $237.2 million. In addition it is estimated that new freeway, road and transit projects funded by the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan will include more than $165 million for mitigating water quality impacts.RENEW E D 26 27 Environmental Cleanup 100 RENEW E D When new transportation dollars are approved, they should go for transportation and transportation alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation dollars for other purposes. The original Measure M went solely for transportation. The Renewed Measure M will be just as airtight. And there will be no hidden costs in the program. Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and transit projects, one percent of gross revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plans is set aside for audits, safeguards, and taxpayer protection. By state law, one and one half percent of the gross sales taxes generated by Measure M must be paid to the California State Board of Equalization for collecting the countywide one-half percent sales tax that funds the Transportation Investment Program. Special Trust Fund To guarantee transportation dollars are used for transportation purposes, all funds must be kept in a special trust fund. An independent, outside audit of this fund will protect against cheaters who try to use the transportation funds for purposes other than specified transportation uses. A severe punishment will disqualify any agency that cheats from receiving Measure M funds for a five-year period. The annual audits, and annual reports detailing project progress, will be sent to Orange County taxpayers every year and will be reviewed in public session by a special Taxpayer Oversight Committee that can raise fiscal issues, ask tough questions, and must independently certify, on an annual basis, that transportation dollars have been spent strictly according to the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan. Back to the Voters Of course, over the next 30 years, things will change. Minor adjustments can be made by a 2/3 vote of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee and a 2/3 vote of the Orange County Local Transportation Authority Board of Directors. Major changes must be taken back to voters for authorization. And, every ten years, and more frequently if necessary, the Orange County Local Transportation Authority must conduct a thorough examination of the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan and determine if major changes should be submitted to the voters. There are other important taxpayer safeguards, all designed to insure the integrity of the voter- authorized plans. But each is focused on one goal: guaranteeing that new transportation dollars are devoted to solving Orange County’s traffic problems and that no transportation dollars are diverted to anything else. Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview RENEW E D 28 101 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Description: Implement and maintain strict taxpayer safeguards to ensure that the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is delivered as promised. Restrict administrative costs to one percent (1%) of total tax revenues and state collection of the tax as prescribed in state law [currently one-and-one-half (1.5%) percent]. Administration of the Transportation Investment Plan and all spending is subject to the following specific safeguards and requirements: Oversight • All spending is subject to an annual independent audit • Spending decisions must be annually reviewed and certified by an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee • An annual report on spending and progress in implementing the Plan must be submitted to taxpayers Integrity of the Plan • No changes to the Plan can be made without review and approval by 2/3 vote of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee • Major changes to the Plan such as deleting a project or shifting projects among major spending categories (Freeways, Streets & Roads, Transit, Environmental Cleanup) must be ratified by a majority of voters • The Plan must be subject at least every ten years to public review and assessment of progress in delivery, public support and changed circumstances. Any significant proposed changes to the Plan must be approved by the Taxpayer Oversight Committee and ratified by a majority of voters. Fund Accounting • All tax revenues and interest earned must be deposited and maintained in a separate trust fund. Local jurisdictions that receive allocations must also maintain them in a separate fund. • All entities receiving tax funds must report annually on expenditures and progress in implementing projects • At any time, at its discretion, the Taxpayer Oversight Committee may conduct independent reviews or audits of the spending of tax funds • The elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County must annually certify that spending is in accordance with the Plan Spending Requirements • Local jurisdictions receiving funds must abide by specific eligibility and spending requirements detailed in the Streets & Roads and Environmental Cleanup components of the Plan • Funds must be used only for transportation purposes described in the Plan. The penalty for misspending is full repayment and loss of funding eligibility for a period of five years. • No funds may be used to replace private developer funding committed to any project or improvement • Funds shall augment, not replace existing funds • Every effort shall be made to maximize matching state and federal transportation dollars RENEW E D 28 29 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits 102 RENEW E D Taxpayer Oversight Committee • The committee shall consist of eleven members — two members from each of the five Board of Supervisor’s districts, who shall not be elected or appointed officials — along with the elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County • Members shall be recruited and screened for expertise and experience by the Orange County Grand Jurors Association. Members shall be selected from the qualified pool by lottery. • The committee shall be provided with sufficient resources to conduct independent reviews and audits of spending and implementation of the Plan Collecting the Tax • The State Board of Equalization shall be paid one-and-one-half (1.5) percent of gross revenues each fiscal year for its services in collecting sales tax revenue as prescribed in Section 7273 of the State’s Revenue and Taxation Code Cost: The estimated cost for Safeguards and Audits over thirty years is $296.6 million. 30 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits 103 RENEW E D I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements $470.0 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements 1,185.2 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements 120.0 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements 366.0 SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements 258.7 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements 908.7* I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements 1,392.5* I-605 Freeway Access Improvements 20.0 All Freeway Service Patrol 150.0 Regional Capacity Program $1,132.8 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 453.1 Local Fair Share Program 2,039.1 High Frequency Metrolink Service $1,129.8* Transit Extensions to Metrolink 1,000.0 Metrolink Gateways 57.9* Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 392.8* Community Based Transit/Circulators 226.5 Safe Transit Stops 25.0 Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches $237.2 Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law) $178.0 Oversight and Annual Audits 118.6 Measure M Investment Summary Streets & Roads Projects (in millions) $3,625.0 Environmental Cleanup (in millions) $237.2 Transit Projects (in millions) $2,832.0 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits (in millions) $296.6 A E F G H I J K L M N O P Q X S T U V W Total (2005 dollars in millions) $11,861.9 2005 estimatesin millions Freeway Projects (in millions) $4,871.1 COSTSPROJECTSLOCATION R B C D 30 31 *Asterisk notes project estimates that have been amended since 2006.104 105 214007.11 B-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATT ACHMENT B ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES I. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of the Ordinance the following words shall mean as stated. A. “Capital Improvement Program”: a multi-year-year funding plan to implement capital transportation projects and/or programs, including but not limited to capacity, safety, operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects. B. “Circulation Element”: an element of an Eligible Jurisdiction’s General Plan depicting planned roadways and related policies, including consistency with the MPAH. C. “Congestion Management Program”: a program established in 1990 (California Government Code 65089), for effective use of transportation funds to alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts through a balanced transportation and land use planning process. D. “Eligible Jurisdiction”: a city in Orange County or the County of Orange, which satisfies the requirements of Section III A. E. “Encumbrance”: the execution of a contract or other action to be funded by Net Revenues. F. “Environmental Cleanup”: street, highway, freeway and transit related water quality improvement programs and projects as described in the Plan. G. “Environmental Cleanup Revenues”: Two percent (2%) of the Revenues allocated annually plus interest and other earnings on the allocated revenues, which shall be maintained in a separate account. H. “Expenditure Report”: a detailed financial report to account for receipt, interest earned and use of Measure M and other funds consistent with requirements of the Ordinance. I. “Freeway Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement, 106 214007.11 B-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a state or interstate freeway. J “Local Fair Share Program”: a formula-based allocation to Eligible Jurisdictions for Street and Road Projects as described in the Plan. K. “Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan”: identification of traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within a jurisdiction. L. “Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH)”: a countywide transportation plan administered by the Authority defining the ultimate number of through lanes for arterial streets, and designating the traffic signal synchronization street routes in Orange County. M. “Net Revenues”: The remaining Revenues after the deduction for: (i) amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the administration of the Ordinance, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup, and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations. N. “Pavement Management Plan”: a plan to manage the preservation, rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing pavement life cycles, assessing overall system performance and costs, and determining alternative strategies and costs necessary to improve paved roads. O. “Permit Streamlining”: commitments by state and federal agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting of freeway projects through development of a comprehensive conservation strategy early in the planning process and the permitting of multiple projects with a single comprehensive conservation strategy. P. “Programmatic Mitigation”: permanent protection of areas of high ecological value, and associated restoration, management and monitoring, to comprehensively compensate for numerous, smaller impacts associated with individual transportation projects. Continued function of existing mitigation features, such as wildlife 107 214007.11 B-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 passages, is not included. Q. “Project Final Report”: certification of completion of a project funded with Net Revenues, description of work performed, and accounting of Net Revenues expended and interest earned on Net Revenues allocated for the project. R. “Regional Capacity Program”: capital improvement projects to increase roadway capacity and improve roadway operation as described in the Plan. S. “Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program”: competitive capital and operations funding for the coordination of traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries as included in the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan and as described in the Plan. T. “Revenues”: All gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) plus any interest or other earnings thereon. U. “State Board of Equalization”: agency of the State of California responsible for the administration of sales and use taxes. V. “Street and Road Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement, operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a street or road, or for any transportation purpose, including, but not limited to, purposes authorized by Article XIX of the California Constitution. W. “Traffic Forums”: a group of Eligible Jurisdictions working together to facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization among the respective jurisdictions. X. “Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan”: an element of the MPAH to promote smooth traffic flow through synchronization of traffic signals along designated street routes in the County. Y. “Transit”: the transportation of passengers by bus, rail, fixed guideway or other vehicle. Z. “Transit Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement, equipment, operation or maintenance necessary for, or incidental to, or convenient for transit facilities or transit services. AA. “Watershed Management Areas”: areas to be established by the 108 214007.11 B-4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 County of Orange, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, or by another public entity with appropriate legal authority, for the management of water run-off related to existing or new transportation projects. II. REQUIREMENTS. The Authority may allocate Net Revenues to the State of California, an Eligible Jurisdiction, or the Authority for any project, program or purpose as authorized by the Ordinance, and the allocation of Net Revenues by the Authority shall be subject to the following requirements: A. Freeway Projects 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and federal funding for Freeway Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year to any Freeway Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the Authority as the result of the addition of any Net Revenues. 2. All Freeway Projects funded with Net Revenues, including project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of Caltrans, the Authority, and the affected jurisdiction(s). All major approval actions, including the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project scope shall be jointly agreed upon by Caltrans, the Authority, and the project sponsors, and where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Administration and/or the California Transportation Commission. 3. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Freeway Project, the Authority shall obtain written assurances from the appropriate state agency that after the Freeway Project is constructed to at least minimum acceptable state standards, the state shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of such Freeway Project. 4. Freeway Projects will be built largely within existing rights of way using the latest highway design and safety requirements. However, to the greatest extent possible within the available budget, Freeway Projects shall be implemented using 109 214007.11 B-5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Context Sensitive Design, as described in the nationally recognized Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Principles of Context Sensitive Design Standards. Freeway Projects will be planned, designed and constructed using a flexible community-responsive and collaborative approach to balance aesthetic, historic and environmental values with transportation safety, mobility, maintenance and performance goals. Context Sensitive Design features include: parkway-style designs; environmentally friendly, locally native landscaping; sound reduction; improved wildlife passage and aesthetic treatments, designs and themes that are in harmony with the surrounding communities. 5. At least five percent (5%) of the Net Revenues allocated for Freeway Projects shall fund Programmatic Mitigation for Freeway Projects. These funds shall be derived by pooling funds from the mitigation budgets of individual Freeway Projects, and shall only be allocated subject to the following: a. Development of a Master Environmental Mitigation and Resource Protection Plan and Agreement (Master Agreement) between the Authority and state and federal resource agencies that includes: (i) commitments by the Authority to provide for programmatic environmental mitigation of the Freeway Projects, (ii) commitments by state and federal resource agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting and streamline the permit process for Freeway Projects, (iii) an accounting process for mitigation obligations and credits that will document net environmental benefit from regional, programmatic mitigation in exchange for net benefit in the delivery of transportation improvements through streamlined and timely approvals and permitting, and (iv) a description of the specific mitigation actions and expenditures to be undertaken and a phasing, implementation and maintenance plan. (v) appointment by the Authority of a Mitigation and Resource Protection Program Oversight Committee (“Environmental Oversight 110 214007.11 B-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Committee”) to make recommendations to the Authority on the allocation of the Net Revenues for programmatic mitigation, and to monitor implementation of the Master Agreement. The Environmental Oversight Committee shall consist of no more than twelve members and be comprised of representatives of the Authority, Caltrans, state and federal resource agencies, non-governmental environmental organizations, the public and the Taxpayers Oversight Committee. b. A Master Agreement shall be developed as soon as practicable following the approval of the ballot proposition by the electors. It is the intent of the Authority and state and federal resource agencies to develop a Master Agreement prior to the implementation of Freeway Projects. c. Expenditures of Net Revenues made subject to a Master Agreement shall be considered a Freeway Project and may be funded from the proceeds of bonds issued subject to Section 5 of the Ordinance. B. Transit Projects 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and federal funding for Transit Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year for any Transit Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the Authority as the result of the addition of any Revenues. 2. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Transit Project, the Authority shall obtain a written agreement from the appropriate jurisdiction that the Transit Project will be constructed, operated and maintained to minimum standards acceptable to the Authority. C. Street and Road Projects Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for any Street and Road Project, the Authority, in cooperation with affected agencies, shall determine the entity(ies) to be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof. /// 111 214007.11 B-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 III. REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS. A. In order to be eligible to receive Net Revenues, a jurisdiction shall satisfy and continue to satisfy the following requirements. 1. Congestion Management Program. Comply with the conditions and requirements of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65089. 2. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts of new development and require new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development. 3. Circulation Element. Adopt and maintain a Circulation Element of the jurisdiction’s General Plan consistent with the MPAH. 4. Capital Improvement Program. Adopt and update biennially a six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP shall include all capital transportation projects, including projects funded by Net Revenues, and shall include transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with signal synchronization and pavement management requirements. 5. Traffic Forums. Participate in Traffic Forums to facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization programs and projects. Eligible Jurisdictions and Caltrans, in participation with the County of Orange and the Orange County Division of League of Cities, will establish the boundaries for Traffic Forums. The following will be considered when establishing boundaries: a. Regional traffic routes and traffic patterns; b. Inter-jurisdictional coordination efforts; and c. Total number of Traffic Forums. 6. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan. Adopt and maintain a Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan which shall identify traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals; include a three-year plan showing costs, available funding 112 214007.11 B-8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and phasing of capital, operations and maintenance of the street routes and traffic signals; and include information on how the street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. The Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan shall be consistent with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 7. Pavement Management Plan. Adopt and update biennially a Pavement Management Plan, and issue, using a common format approved by the Authority, a report every two years regarding the status of road pavement conditions and implementation of the Pavement Management Plan. a. Authority, in consultation with the Eligible Jurisdictions, shall define a countywide management method to inventory, analyze and evaluate road pavement conditions, and a common method to measure improvement of road pavement conditions. b. The Pavement Management Plan shall be based on: either the Authority’s countywide pavement management method or a comparable management method approved by the Authority, and the Authority’s method to measure improvement of road pavement conditions. c. The Pavement Management Plan shall include: (i) Current status of pavement on roads; (ii) A six-year plan for road maintenance and rehabilitation, including projects and funding; (iii) The projected road pavement conditions resulting from the maintenance and rehabilitation plan; and (iv) Alternative strategies and costs necessary to improve road pavement conditions. 8. Expenditure Report. Adopt an annual Expenditure Report to account for Net Revenues, developer/traffic impact fees, and funds expended by the Eligible Jurisdiction which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements. The Expenditure 113 214007.11 B-9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Report shall be submitted by the end of six (6) months following the end of the jurisdiction’s fiscal year and include the following: a. All Net Revenue fund balances and interest earned. b. Expenditures identified by type (i.e., capital, operations, administration, etc.), and program or project . 9. Project Final Report. Provide Authority with a Project Final Report within six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues. 10. Time Limits for Use of Net Revenues. a. Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Capacity Program projects and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects shall be expended or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are programmed. A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than twenty-four months may be submitted to the Authority no less than ninety days prior to the deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the encumbrance deadline. b. Agree that Net Revenues allocated for any program or project, other than a Regional Capacity Program project or a Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program project, shall be expended or encumbered within three years of receipt. The Authority may grant an extension to the three-year limit, but extensions shall not be granted beyond a total of five years from the date of the initial funding allocation. c. In the event the time limits for use of Net Revenues are not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction and interest earned thereon shall be returned to the Authority and these Net Revenues and interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same source program. 11. Maintenance of Effort. Annual certification that the Maintenance of Effort requirements of Section 6 of the Ordinance have been satisfied. 12. No Supplanting of Funds. Agree that Net Revenues shall not be 114 214007.11 B-10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 used to supplant developer funding which has been or will be committed for any transportation project. 13. Consider, as part of the Eligible Jurisdiction’s General Plan, land use planning strategies that accommodate transit and non-motorized transportation. B. Determination of Non-Eligibility A determination of non-eligibility of a jurisdiction shall be made only after a hearing has been conducted and a determination has been made by the Authority’s Board of Directors that the jurisdiction is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided hereinabove. IV. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Subject to the provisions of the Ordinance, including Section II above, use of the Revenues shall be as follows: 1. First, the Authority shall pay the State Board of Equalization for the services and functions; 2. Second, the Authority shall pay the administration expenses of the Authority; 3. Third, the Authority shall satisfy the annual allocation requirement of two percent (2%) of Revenues for Environmental Cleanup; and 4. Fourth, the Authority shall satisfy the debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations. B. After providing for the use of Revenues described in Section A above, and subject to the averaging provisions of Section D below, the Authority shall allocate the Net Revenues as follows: 1. Forty-three percent (43%) for Freeway Projects; 2. Thirty-two percent (32%) for Street and Road Projects; and 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) for Transit Projects. C. The allocation of thirty-two percent (32%) of the Net Revenues for 115 214007.11 B-11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Street and Road Projects pursuant to Section B 2 above shall be made as follows: 1. Ten percent (10%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for Regional Capacity Program projects; 2. Four percent (4%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects; and 3. Eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for Local Fair Share Program projects. D. In any given year, except for the allocations for Local Fair Share Program projects, the Authority may allocate Net Revenues on a different percentage basis than required by Sections B and C above in order to meet short-term needs and to maximize efforts to capture state, federal, or private transportation dollars, provided the percentage allocations set forth in Sections B and C above shall be achieved during the duration of the Ordinance. E. The Authority shall allocate Net Revenues for programs and projects as necessary to meet contractual, program or project obligations, and the Authority may withhold allocations until needed to meet contractual, program or project obligations, except that Net Revenues allocated for the Local Fair Share Program pursuant to Section C above shall be paid to Eligible Jurisdictions within sixty days of receipt by the Authority. F. The Authority may exchange Net Revenues from a Plan funding category for federal, state or other local funds allocated to any public agency within or outside the area of jurisdiction to maximize the effectiveness of the Plan. The Authority and the exchanging public agency must use the exchanged funds for the same program or project authorized for the use of the funds prior to the exchange. Such federal, state or local funds received by the Authority shall be allocated by the Authority to the same Plan funding category that was the source of the exchanged Net Revenues, provided, however, in no event shall an exchange reduce the Net Revenues allocated for Programmatic Mitigation of Freeway Projects. G. If additional funds become available for a specific project or program 116 214007.11 B-12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 described in the Plan, the Authority may allocate the Net Revenues replaced by the receipt of those additional funds, in the following order of priority: first, to Plan projects and programs which provide congestion relief in the geographic region which received the additional funds; second, to other projects and programs within the affected geographic region which may be placed in the Plan through an amendment to the Ordinance; and third, to all other Plan projects and programs. H. Upon review and acceptance of the Project Final Report, the Authority shall allocate the balance of Net Revenues for the project, less the interest earned on the Net Revenues allocated for the project. V. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAMS/ PROJECTS A. Regional Capacity Program. 1. Matching Funds. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute local matching funds equal to fifty percent (50%) of the project or program cost. This local match requirement may be reduced as follows: a. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction implements, maintains and operates in conformance with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. b. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction either: (i) has measurable improvement of paved road conditions during the previous reporting period as determined pursuant to the Authority’s method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions, or (ii) has road pavement conditions during the previous reporting period which are within the highest twenty percent of the scale for road pavement conditions as determined pursuant to the Authority’s method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions. c. A local match reduction of five percent (5%) of the 117 214007.11 B-13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction does not use any Net Revenues as part of the funds for the local match. 2. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations. B. Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 1. Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. The Authority shall adopt and maintain a Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan, which shall be a part of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan shall include traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries, and the means of implementing, operating and maintaining the programs and projects, including necessary governance and legal arrangements. 2. Allocations. a. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations. b. The Authority shall give priority to programs and projects which include two or more jurisdictions. c. The Authority shall encourage the State to participate in the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program and Authority shall give priority to use of transportation funds as match for the State’s discretionary funds used for implementing the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 3. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute matching local funds equal to twenty percent (20%) of the project or program cost. The requirement for matching local funds may be satisfied all or in part with in-kind services provided by the Eligible Jurisdiction for the program or project, including salaries and benefits for employees of the Eligible Jurisdiction who perform work on the project or programs. 118 214007.11 B-14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall issue a report once every three years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities. 5. Not less than once every three years an Eligible Jurisdiction shall review and revise, as may be necessary, the timing of traffic signals included as part of the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 6. An Eligible Jurisdiction withdrawing from a signal synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project. C. Local Fair Share Program. The allocation of eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues for Local Fair Share Program projects shall be made to Eligible Jurisdictions in amounts determined as follows: 1. Fifty percent (50%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s population for the immediately preceding calendar year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas) for the immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State Department of Finance; 2. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways (“MPAH”) centerline miles to the total existing MPAH centerline miles within the County as determined annually by the Authority; and 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s total taxable sales to the total taxable sales of the County for the immediately preceding calendar year as determined by the State Board of Equalization. VI. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. A. Transit Extensions to Metrolink. 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit 119 214007.11 B-15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Extensions to Metrolink projects to provide effective and user-friendly connections to Metrolink services and bus transit systems. 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Transit Extension to Metrolink projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the Transit Extension to Metrolink project. 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Transit Extension to Metrolink projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology. B. Metrolink Gateways. 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Regional Transit Gateway facilities to provide for effective and user-friendly connections to the Metrolink system and other transit services. 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Regional Gateway projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the Regional Gateway facility. 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Regional Gateway projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology. C. Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities. 1. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to perform all or part of a Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities project. 120 214007.11 B-16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. A senior is a person age sixty years or older. 3. Allocations. a. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated to the County to augment existing senior non-emergency medical transportation services funded with Tobacco Settlement funds as of the effective date of the Ordinance. The County shall continue to fund these services in an annual amount equal to the same percentage of the total annual Tobacco Settlement funds received by the County. The Net Revenues shall be annually allocated to the County in an amount no less than the Tobacco Settlement funds annually expended by the County for these services and no greater than one percent of net revenues plus any accrued interest. b. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated to continue and expand the existing Senior Mobility Program provided by the Authority. The allocations shall be determined pursuant to criteria and requirements for the Senior Mobility Program adopted by the Authority. c. One and forty-seven hundredths percent (1.47%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated to partially fund bus and ACCESS fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in an amount equal to the percentage of partial funding of fares for seniors and persons with disabilities as of the effective date of the Ordinance, and to partially fund train and other transit service fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in amounts as determined by the Authority. d. In the event any Net Revenues to be allocated for seniors and persons with disabilities pursuant to the requirements of subsections a, b and c above remain after the requirements are satisfied then the remaining Net Revenues shall be allocated for other transit programs or projects for seniors and persons with disabilities as determined by the Authority. D. Community Based Transit/Circulators. 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation planning, procurement and operations resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in 121 214007.11 B-17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 designing Community Based Transit/Circulators projects to provide effective and user- friendly transit connections to countywide bus transit and Metrolink services. 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Community Based Transit/Circulators projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the Community Based Transit/Circulators project. 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Community Based Transit/Circulator projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology. 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to perform all or part of a Community Based Transit/Circulators project. VII. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. A. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with any other public entity to perform all or any part of an Environmental Cleanup project. B. Allocation Committee. 1. The Allocation Committee shall not include any elected public officer and shall include the following twelve (12) voting members: (i) one (1) representative of the County of Orange; (ii) five (5) representatives of cities, subject to the requirement for one (1) representative for the cities in each supervisorial district; (iii) one (1) representative of the California Department of Transportation; (iv) two (2) representatives of water or wastewater public entities; (v) one (1) representative of the development industry; 122 214007.11 B-18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (vi) one (1) representative of the scientific or academic community; (vii) one (1) representative of private or non-profit organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters; In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be non-voting members of the Allocation Committee. 2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for adoption by the Authority the following: a. A competitive grant process for the allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement projects included in a Watershed Management Area. The process shall give priority to cost-effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for maximum benefit. b. A process requiring that Environmental Cleanup Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs. c. Allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues for proposed projects and programs. d. An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs. 123 C-1 507779.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE ATTACHMENT C TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE I. PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee (“Committee”) is hereby established for the purpose of overseeing compliance with the Ordinance as specified in Section IV hereof. The Committee shall be organized and convened before any Revenues are collected or spent pursuant to the Ordinance. II. COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP. The Committee shall be governed by eleven members (“Member”). The composition of the Committee membership shall be subject to the following provisions. A. Geographic Balance. The membership of the Committee shall be geographically balanced at all times as follows: 1. There shall be two Members appointed from each of the County’s supervisorial districts (individually, “District”); and 2. The Auditor-Controller shall be a Member and chairman (“Chair”) of the Committee. B. Member Term. Each Member, except the Auditor-Controller and as provided in Section III B 2 below, shall be appointed for a term of three years; provided, however, that any Member appointed to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed shall serve only the balance of such Member’s unexpired term, and no person shall serve as a Member for a period in excess of six consecutive years. C. Resignation. Any Member may, at any time, resign from the Committee upon written notice delivered to the Auditor-Controller. Acceptance of any public office, the filing of an intent to seek public office, including a filing under California Government Code Section 85200, or change of residence to outside the District shall constitute a Member’s automatic resignation. D. Removal. Any Member who has three consecutive unexcused absences from meetings of the Committee shall be removed as a Member. An absence 124 C-2 507779.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE from a Committee meeting shall be considered unexcused unless, prior to or after such absence (i) the Member submits to each of the other Members a written request to excuse such absence, which request shall state the reason for such absence and any special circumstances existing with respect to such absence; and (ii) a majority of the other Members agree to excuse such absence. E. Reappointment. Any former Member may be reappointed . III. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS. A. Membership Recommendation Panel. 1. The Authority shall contract with the Orange County Grand Jurors’ Association for the formation of a committee membership recommendation panel (“Panel”) to perform the duties set forth in this subsection III A. If the Orange County Grand Jurors’ Association refuses or fails to act in such capacity, the Authority shall contract with another independent organization selected by the Authority for the formation of the Panel. 2. The Panel shall have five members who shall screen and recommend potential candidates for Committee membership. 3. The Panel shall solicit, collect and review applications from potential candidates for membership on the Committee. No currently elected or appointed officer of any public entity (“Public Officer”) will be eligible to serve as a Member, except the Auditor-Controller, and a Public Officer shall complete an Intent to Resign form, which shall be provided as part of the application and submitted as part of the initial application process. Failure to submit an Intent to Resign form will deem such Public Officer ineligible for consideration to serve as a Member. In addition, a person who has a financial conflict of interest with regard to the allocation of Revenues will be deemed ineligible for consideration to serve as a Member. A Member shall reside within the District the Member is appointed to represent. Subject to the foregoing restrictions, the Panel shall evaluate each potential candidate on the basis of the following criteria: a. Commitment and ability to participate in Committee meetings; 125 C-3 507779.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE b. Demonstrated interest and history of participation in community activities, with special emphasis on transportation-related activities; and c. Lack of conflicts of interest with respect to the allocation of Revenues. 4. For initial membership on the Committee, the Panel shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates from each of the two Districts that are represented by one member on the Ordinance No. 2, Citizens Oversight Committee (“COC”) as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members. Thereafter, the Panel shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates for filing each vacancy on the Committee. B. Initial Members. 1. The COC members, as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members of the Committee, shall be appointed as initial Members of the Committee. These Members shall each serve until each of their respective terms as a member of the COC expires. 2. Two additional initial Members shall be appointed. The Authority shall place the names of the candidates recommended by the Panel on equally- sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In public session, the Chairman of the Authority will draw a sufficient number of names from said container to allocate Committee membership in accordance with the membership requirements and restrictions set forth in Section II hereof. The first person whose name is drawn shall be appointed to serve a term of three years. Thereafter, the person whose name is drawn who is not from the same District as the first person whose name is drawn shall be appointed to serve a term of two years. C. Member Vacancy. A member vacancy, however caused, shall be filled by the Authority. A Member shall be appointed on or about July 1 to replace a Member whose term has expired. A Member may be appointed at any time as necessary to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed. The Authority shall place the 126 C-4 507779.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE names of the candidates recommended by the Panel for the appointment on equally-sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In a public session, the Chairman of the Authority will draw one name from said container for each vacancy on the Committee. The person whose name is so drawn shall be appointed by the Authority to fill the vacancy. IV. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Committee is hereby charged with the following duties and responsibilities: A. The initial Members shall convene to adopt such procedural rules and regulations as are necessary to govern the conduct of Committee meetings, including, but not limited to, those governing the calling, noticing and location of Committee meetings, as well as Committee quorum requirements and voting procedures. The Committee may select its own officers, including, but not limited to, a Committee co-chair who will be the primary spokesperson for the Committee. B. The Committee shall approve, by a vote of not less than two thirds of all Committee members, any amendment to the Plan proposed by the Authority which changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan. C. The Committee shall receive and review the following documents submitted by each Eligible Jurisdiction: 1. Congestion Management Program; 2. Mitigation Fee Program; 3. Expenditure Report; 4. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan; and 5. Pavement Management Plan. D. The Committee shall review yearly audits and hold an annual public hearing to determine whether the Authority is proceeding in accordance with the Plan. The Chair shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Plan. In addition, the Committee may issue reports, from time to time, on the progress of the transportation projects described in the Plan. 127 C-5 507779.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE E. The Committee shall receive and review the performance assessment conducted by the Authority at least once every three years to review the performance of the Authority in carrying out the purposes of the Ordinance. F. Except as otherwise provided by the Ordinance, the Committee may contract, through the Authority, for independent analysis or examination of issues within the Committee’s purview or for other assistance as it determines to be necessary. G. The Committee may submit a written request to the Authority to explain any perceived deviations from the Plan. The Authority’s Chair must respond to such request, in writing, within sixty days after receipt of the same. 128 Measure M2 Amendments & Staff Reports September 24, 2012 Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan Amendment November 9, 2012 Public Hearing on Amendment of the Measure M2 Freeway Category: State Route 91 (Project J), Interstate 405 (Project K) October 11, 2013 Proposal to Amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 to Modify Taxpayer Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility November 25, 2013 Public Hearing to Amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 to Modify Taxpayer Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility October 26, 2015 Proposed Amendment to the Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan December 14, 2015 Public Hearing to Amend the Renewed Measure M Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and Transportation Investment Plan for the Transit Program March 14, 2016 Renewed Measure M Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and Transportation Investment Plan Amendment Update 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-433 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works Subject: Reject Bids for the Peck and Springdale Facility Improvements Project CC-1590 Statement of Issue: On April 20, 2021, bids were opened for the Peck and Springdale Facilities Improvements Project CC 1590. Staff recommends that all bids be rejected, since there was an error in the project specifications, which was not identified until after bids were opened. Financial Impact: Funds totaling $400,000 were budgeted in the current fiscal year in the Water Master Plan Account No. 50791005.82100. The recommended action will preserve funds in the Account. Recommended Action: Reject all bids for the Peck and Springdale Facility Improvements Project CC -1590. Alternative Action(s): Do not reject bids at this time and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: The Peck and Springdale Facility contains two potable water reservoirs, Peck Reservoir and Springdale Reservoir, which provide 47% of the City’s water storage capacity. Additionally, the Facility contains three potable water wells, Well No. 4, Well No. 7, and Well No. 13, which provide 31% of the City’s well field capacity. The Peck and Springdale Facilities Improvements Project CC 1590 is the first phase of a two phase improvement to the Facility’s site security. The project’s goals include augmenting security fence systems and installing conduit throughout the site. The conduit will be used for the installation of electronic site security in the second phase of the project. The Engineer’s Estimate for this project was $320,000. Bids for the Peck and Springdale Facility project CC1590 were opened on April 20, 2021, and are listed in ascending order. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™188 File #:21-433 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Bidder Submitted Bid Corrected Bid 1 A2Z Construct, Inc.$305,000.00 $305,000.00 2 Ace Construction, Inc.$609,078.53 $609,078.53 The low bidder, A2Z Construct, Inc., withdrew their bid, due to a clerical error. One bidder submitted their bid late and was prohibited from bidding. In a post-bid analysis of the project, bidders identified the specification of aluminum conduit as an additional and unnecessary expense within the bid. Aluminum conduit is more expensive than galvanized steel conduit. The project Engineer has since revised the project specifications to accept galvanized steel conduit. The use of the less expensive , galvanized steel conduit, will not compromise the integrity of the project, and will likely produce a more favorable bid outcome. Public Works Staff recommends rejecting all bids, with the intention of re-bidding the project. This strategy provides an opportunity for more companies to submit bids on this project, and to receive bids that incorporate the use of galvanized steel conduit. Environmental Status: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303.c. Strategic Plan Goal: Infrastructure & Parks Attachment(s): 1. Project Location Map City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™189 PECK AND SPRINGDALE RESERVOIRS SECURITY PROJECT, FENCES AND CONDUIT CC-1590 190 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-448 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:Dahle Bulosan, Chief Financial Officer Subject: Adopt Ordinance No. 4232 amending Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 Relating to On-Street Parking Meter Zones Approved for introduction June 1, 2021 - Vote: 6-0-1 (Ortiz absent) Statement of Issue: On June 1, 2021, City Council approved Ordinance No. 4232 for introduction. If adopted, this Ordinance would change the metered parking rate from a year-round $2.00 hourly rate to a seasonal rate ranging from $2.25-3.00 per hour. The proposed peak season rates would be in effect from Memorial Day weekend though Labor Day, and are comparable to the rates at surrounding beach cities. Financial Impact: Changing the parking meter rates to incorporate seasonal rate changes and align with neighboring cities would generate an additional ~$1.32 million in General Fund revenue annually. Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 4232, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code On-Street Parking Meter Zones .” Alternative Action(s): Do not approve the recommended action and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: Staff conducted a review of surrounding beach cities, including Laguna Beach and Newport Beach, and is proposing changing the metered parking rate from a year-round $2.00 hourly rate to a seasonal rate ranging from $2.25-3.00 per hour, as shown below: Current Rate Meter Zone Year Round Off-Peak Peak Season Downtown/Residential $2.00 $2.25 $3.00 Bluff Top, Dog Beach, PCH, Warner Lot, 1st & Atlanta2.00 2.25 2.50 Pier Plaza (lots north/south of pier)2.00 2.25 3.00 Beach Blvd 2.00 2.25 2.25 Proposed Rate City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™191 File #:21-448 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Current Rate Meter Zone Year Round Off-Peak Peak Season Downtown/Residential $2.00 $2.25 $3.00 Bluff Top, Dog Beach, PCH, Warner Lot, 1st & Atlanta2.00 2.25 2.50 Pier Plaza (lots north/south of pier)2.00 2.25 3.00 Beach Blvd 2.00 2.25 2.25 Proposed Rate The proposed peak season rates would be in effect from Memorial Day weekend though Labor Day, and are comparable to the rates at surrounding beach cities. Other administrative changes pertaining to the proposed Ordinance include the movement of the Southside Atlanta meters from residential to recreational zoning. The proposed parking rate adjustments is anticipated to increase General Fund revenues by ~$1.32M annually. If approved, the hourly parking meter adjustments would take effect July 15 th. Environmental Status: Not applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Organizational Fiscal Stability Attachment(s): 1. Ordinance No. 4232, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapters 10.04 and 10.60 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code On-Street Parking Meter Zones” 2. Legislative Draft of Ordinance No. 4232 City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-447 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works Subject: Adopt Ordinance No. 4233 amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program Approved for introduction June 1, 2021 - Vote: 6-0-1 (Ortiz absent) Statement of Issue: Ordinance No. 4233 approved for introduction on June 1, 2021 requires adoption. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 4233, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program.” Alternative Action(s): Do not approve the plan(s) and/or ordinance in part, or as a whole, and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: The Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983 requires water suppliers with more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet (AF) of water annually to prepare and adopt an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every five (5) years. UWMPs are comprehensive documents that present an evaluation of a water supplier’s reliability over a long-term horizon, typically 20-25 years. The City supplies water to approximately 200,000 residents, over 53,000-metered connections, and around 26,000 AF of water annually. The City last updated the UWMP on June 20, 2016, and must adopt and submit an updated UWMP to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) by July 1, 2021. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™200 File #:21-447 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 For this 2020 UWMP cycle, DWR placed emphasis on achieving improvements for long-term reliability and resilience to drought and climate change in California. The 2020 UWMP updates various 2015 UWMP items related to water resource needs, water use efficiency, assessment of water reliability, and strategies to mitigate water shortage conditions. The 2020 UWMP includes a 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP), which is a strategic planning document designed to prepare the City to effectively respond to water shortages, and is required for compliance with Water Code Section 10632. The WSCP requires the City to amend Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program to match the new requirement to plan for six (6) levels of water shortage , and to take appropriate demand-reduction measures at each shortage level, as outlined in the WSCP. The 2020 UWMP and 2020 WSCP were prepared in coordination with MWDOC, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The 2020 UWMP includes a Drought Risk Assessment (DRA), which evaluates the City’s near-term ability to supply water during drought conditions. Water demand is projected to increase 1.7% over the next five years; however, in the longer term, water demand is projected to decrease 1.3% from 2025 through 2045. The projected potable water use for 2045 is 26,054 AF. Even under the assumption of a drought over the next five (5) years, MET’s 2020 UWMP concludes a surplus of water supplies would be available to all of its Member Agencies, including MWDOC and in effect, the City, should the need for additional supplies arise to close any local water supply gap. As part of the 2020 UWMP Public Hearing and Adoption action, an addendum to the 2015 UWMP adding Appendix L to the 2015 plan to ensure compliance with the Delta Plan Policy WR P1 is included for consideration. Appendix L was not included in DWR guidance for the 2015 UWMPs at the time and was, therefore, not included in MET’s, MWDOC’s, or the City of Huntington Beach’s UWMP. Appendix L is not a requirement of the California Water Code related to Urban Water Management Planning; however, it is important for the City to include the appendix in both its 2020 UWMP and its 2015 UWMP for MET to certify that the Delta Conveyance Project is consistent with the Delta Stewardship Council policies. The proposed project allows for the modernization of the State Water Project system, through which the City receives imported water supplies from MWDOC. Environmental Status: Not applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Non Applicable - Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. Resolution No. 2021-34, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011,” including Exhibit A - City of Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan 2. Resolution No. 2021-35, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011,” including Exhibit A - City of Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™201 File #:21-447 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 3. Ordinance No. 4233, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program 4. Resolution No. 2021-33, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the Amendment to the Adopted 2015 Urban Water Management Plan,” including Exhibit A - Appendix L: City of Huntington Beach Reduced Delta Reliance Reporting 5. Public Hearing Notice City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™202 203 204 EXHIBIT “A” 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 205 2020 Urban Water Management Plan Final Draft June 2021 206 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Prepared for: City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Prepared by: Arcadis U.S., Inc. 320 Commerce Suite 200 Irvine California 92602 Tel 714 730 9052 Fax 714 730 9345 Our Ref: 30055240 Date: June 2021 Sarina Sriboonlue, P.E. Project Manager 207 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com i CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... viii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ ES-1 1 Introduction and UWMP Overview ..................................................................................................... 1-1 Overview of Urban Water Management Plan Requirements ...................................................... 1-1 UWMP Organization .................................................................................................................... 1-2 2 UWMP Preparation ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 Individual Planning and Compliance ........................................................................................... 2-1 Coordination and Outreach ......................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1 Integration with Other Planning Efforts .................................................................................. 2-2 2.2.2 Wholesale and Retail Coordination ........................................................................................ 2-4 2.2.3 Public Participation ................................................................................................................. 2-4 3 System Description ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 Agency Overview ......................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Formation ............................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 City Council ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.3 Relationship to MWDOC ........................................................................................................ 3-2 Water Service Area and Facilities ............................................................................................... 3-4 3.2.1 Water Service Area ................................................................................................................ 3-4 3.2.2 Water Facilities ....................................................................................................................... 3-5 Climate ......................................................................................................................................... 3-5 Population, Demographics, and Socioeconomics ....................................................................... 3-6 3.4.1 Population .............................................................................................................................. 3-6 3.4.2 Demographics and Socioeconomics ...................................................................................... 3-6 3.4.3 CDR Projection Methodology ................................................................................................. 3-7 Land Uses .................................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.5.1 Current Land Uses ................................................................................................................. 3-7 3.5.2 Projected Land Uses .............................................................................................................. 3-9 4 Water Use Characterization ............................................................................................................... 4-1 Water Use Overview .................................................................................................................... 4-1 208 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com ii Past and Current Water Use ....................................................................................................... 4-1 Water Use Projections ................................................................................................................. 4-2 4.3.1 Water Use Projection Methodology........................................................................................ 4-2 4.3.1.1 Weather Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Impacts ....................................... 4-5 4.3.2 25-Year Water Use Projection ............................................................................................... 4-5 4.3.2.1 Water Use Projections for 2021-2025 ............................................................................ 4-5 4.3.2.2 Water Use Projections for 2025-2045 ............................................................................ 4-6 4.3.2.3 Water Use Projections for Lower Income Households .................................................. 4-7 Water Loss ................................................................................................................................... 4-8 5 Conservation Target Compliance....................................................................................................... 5-1 Baseline Water Use ..................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Ten to 15-Year Baseline Period (Baseline GPCD) ................................................................ 5-2 5.1.2 Five-Year Baseline Period (Target Confirmation) .................................................................. 5-2 5.1.3 Service Area Population ......................................................................................................... 5-2 SBx7-7 Water Use Targets .......................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2.1 SBx7-7 Target Methods ......................................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.2 2020 Targets and Compliance ............................................................................................... 5-3 Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance ................................................................................ 5-4 6 Water Supply Characterization .......................................................................................................... 6-1 Water Supply Overview ............................................................................................................... 6-1 Imported Water ............................................................................................................................ 6-3 6.2.1 Colorado River Supplies ........................................................................................................ 6-3 6.2.2 State Water Project Supplies ................................................................................................. 6 - 5 6.2.3 Storage ................................................................................................................................... 6-9 6.2.4 Planned Future Sources ...................................................................................................... 6-10 Groundwater .............................................................................................................................. 6-11 6.3.1 Historical Groundwater Production ...................................................................................... 6-11 6.3.2 Basin Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 6-12 6.3.3 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act ........................................................................ 6-15 6.3.4 Basin Production Percentage ............................................................................................... 6-15 6.3.4.1 2020 OCWD Groundwater Reliability Plan .................................................................. 6-17 209 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com iii 6.3.4.2 OCWD Engineer’s Report ............................................................................................ 6-17 6.3.5 Recharge Management ........................................................................................................ 6-18 6.3.6 MET Groundwater Replenishment Program ........................................................................ 6-18 6.3.7 MET Conjunctive Use Program / Cyclic Storage Program with OCWD .............................. 6-19 6.3.8 Overdraft Conditions ............................................................................................................ 6-19 6.3.9 Planned Future Sources ...................................................................................................... 6-20 Surface Water ............................................................................................................................ 6-20 6.4.1 Existing Sources................................................................................................................... 6-20 6.4.2 Planned Future Sources ...................................................................................................... 6-20 Stormwater ................................................................................................................................ 6-21 6.5.1 Existing Sources................................................................................................................... 6-21 6.5.2 Planned Future Sources ...................................................................................................... 6-21 Wastewater and Recycled Water .............................................................................................. 6-21 6.6.1 Agency Coordination ............................................................................................................ 6-21 6.6.1.1 OCWD Green Acres Project ........................................................................................ 6-21 6.6.1.2 OCWD Groundwater Replenishment System .............................................................. 6-22 6.6.2 Wastewater Description and Disposal ................................................................................. 6-22 6.6.3 Current Recycled Water Uses .............................................................................................. 6-26 6.6.4 Projected Recycled Water Uses .......................................................................................... 6-26 6.6.5 Potential Recycled Water Uses ............................................................................................ 6-26 6.6.6 Optimization Plan ................................................................................................................. 6-26 Desalination Opportunities ........................................................................................................ 6-27 6.7.1 Ocean Water Desalination ................................................................................................... 6-28 6.7.2 Groundwater Desalination .................................................................................................... 6-30 Water Exchanges and Transfers ............................................................................................... 6-30 6.8.1 Existing Exchanges and Transfers ....................................................................................... 6-30 6.8.2 Planned and Potential Exchanges and Transfers ................................................................ 6-30 Summary of Future Water Supply Projects ............................................................................... 6-31 6.9.1 City Initiatives ....................................................................................................................... 6-31 6.9.2 Regional Initiatives ............................................................................................................... 6-32 Energy Intensity.................................................................................................................... 6-34 210 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com iv 6.10.1 Water Supply Energy Intensity ......................................................................................... 6-34 6.10.1.1 Operational Control and Reporting Board ................................................................ 6-36 6.10.1.2 Volume of Water Entering Processes ...................................................................... 6-36 6.10.1.3 Energy Consumption and Generation ...................................................................... 6-36 6.10.2 Wastewater and Recycled Water Energy Intensity .......................................................... 6-36 6.10.2.1 Operational Control and Reporting Board ................................................................ 6-38 6.10.2.2 Volume of Wastewater Entering Processes ............................................................. 6-38 6.10.2.3 Energy Consumption and Generation ...................................................................... 6-38 6.10.3 Key Findings and Next Steps ........................................................................................... 6-38 7 Water Service Reliability and Drought Risk Assessment .................................................................. 7-1 Water Service Reliability Overview .............................................................................................. 7-1 Factors Affecting Reliability ......................................................................................................... 7-3 7.2.1 Climate Change and the Environment ................................................................................... 7-3 7.2.2 Regulatory and Legal ............................................................................................................. 7-4 7.2.3 Water Quality .......................................................................................................................... 7-4 7.2.3.1 Imported Water ............................................................................................................... 7-5 7.2.3.2 Groundwater ................................................................................................................... 7-5 7.2.4 Locally Applicable Criteria ...................................................................................................... 7-8 Water Service Reliability Assessment ......................................................................................... 7-8 7.3.1 Normal Year Reliability ........................................................................................................... 7-8 7.3.2 Single Dry Year Reliability ...................................................................................................... 7-9 7.3.3 Multiple Dry Year Reliability ................................................................................................. 7-10 Management Tools and Options ............................................................................................... 7-12 Drought Risk Assessment ......................................................................................................... 7-13 7.5.1 DRA Methodology ................................................................................................................ 7-13 7.5.2 Total Water Supply and Use Comparison ............................................................................ 7-15 7.5.3 Water Source Reliability ....................................................................................................... 7-16 8 Water Shortage Contingency Planning .............................................................................................. 8-1 Layperson Description ................................................................................................................. 8-1 Overview of the WSCP ................................................................................................................ 8-1 Summary of Water Shortage Response Strategy and Required DWR Tables ........................... 8-2 211 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com v 9 Demand Management Measures ....................................................................................................... 9-1 Demand Management Measures for Retail Suppliers ................................................................. 9-1 9.1.1 Water Waste Prevention Ordinances ..................................................................................... 9-1 9.1.2 Metering ................................................................................................................................. 9-2 9.1.3 Conservation Pricing .............................................................................................................. 9-3 9.1.4 Public Education and Outreach .............................................................................................. 9-3 9.1.5 Programs to Assess and Manage Distribution System Real Loss ......................................... 9-5 9.1.6 Water Conservation Program Coordination and Staffing Support ......................................... 9-6 9.1.7 Other Demand Management Measures ................................................................................. 9-6 9.1.7.1 Residential Program ....................................................................................................... 9-6 9.1.7.2 CII Programs .................................................................................................................. 9-7 9.1.7.3 Landscape Programs ..................................................................................................... 9-8 Implementation over the Past Five Years.................................................................................. 9-10 Water Use Objectives (Future Requirements) .......................................................................... 9-12 10 Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Implementation ................................................................................ 10-1 Overview .............................................................................................................................. 10-1 Agency Coordination ............................................................................................................ 10-2 Public Participation ............................................................................................................... 10-4 UWMP Submittal .................................................................................................................. 10-4 Amending the Adopted UWMP or WSCP ............................................................................ 10-4 11 References ....................................................................................................................................... 11-1 TABLES Table 2-1: Plan Identification...................................................................................................................... 2-1 Table 2-2: Supplier Identification ............................................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-3: Retail: Water Supplier Information Exchange ........................................................................... 2-4 Table 3-1: Retail Only: Public Water Systems ........................................................................................... 3-5 Table 3-2: Retail: Population - Current and Projected ............................................................................... 3-6 Table 3-3: City of Huntington Beach Service Area Dwelling Units by Type .............................................. 3-6 Table 4-1: Retail: Demands for Potable and Non-Potable Water – Actual ................................................ 4-2 212 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com vi Table 4-2: Water Use Projections for 2021 to 2025 ................................................................................... 4-6 Table 4-3: Retail: Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water - Projected .................................................... 4-6 Table 5-1: Baselines and Targets Summary .............................................................................................. 5-3 Table 5-2: 2020 Compliance ...................................................................................................................... 5-4 Table 6-1: Retail: Water Supplies – Actual ................................................................................................ 6-1 Table 6-2: Retail: Water Supplies – Projected ........................................................................................... 6-2 Table 6-3: MET SWP Program Capabilities ............................................................................................... 6-7 Table 6-4: Retail: Groundwater Volume Pumped .................................................................................... 6-12 Table 6-5: Management Actions Based on Changes in Groundwater Storage ....................................... 6-16 Table 6-6: Retail: Wastewater Collected Within Service Area in 2020 ................................................... 6-24 Table 6-7: Retail: Wastewater Treatment and Discharge Within Service Area in 2020 .......................... 6-25 Table 6-8: Retail: 2015 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projection Compared to 2020 Actual ................... 6-26 Table 6-9: Recommended Energy Intensity – Water Supply Process Approach .................................... 6-35 Table 6-10: Recommended Energy Intensity – Wastewater & Recycled Water ..................................... 6-37 Table 7-1: Retail: Basis of Water Year Data (Reliability Assessment) ...................................................... 7-2 Table 7-2: Retail: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison ............................................................ 7-9 Table 7-3: Retail: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison ..................................................... 7-10 Table 7-4: Retail: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison ................................................. 7-11 Table 7-5: Five-Year Drought Risk Assessment Tables to Address Water Code Section 10635(b) ....... 7-15 Table 8-1: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels ................................................................................ 8-4 Table 9-1: Water Rates Effective July 1 2019............................................................................................ 9-3 Table 9-2: City of Huntington Beach Conservation Efficiency Program Participation ............................. 9-11 Table 9-3: MWDOC Programs to Assist in Meeting WUO ....................................................................... 9-13 Table 9-4: CII BMP Implementation Programs Offered ........................................................................... 9 - 1 6 Table 10-1: External Coordination and Outreach .................................................................................... 10-2 Table 10-2: Retail: Notification to Cities and Counties ............................................................................ 10-3 213 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com vii FIGURES Figure 3-1: Regional Location of City of Huntington Beach and Other MWDOC Member Agencies ........ 3-3 Figure 3-2: City of Huntington Beach Water Service Area ........................................................................ 3-4 Figure 3-3: City of Huntington Beach Land Use Designations Map .......................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-4: Character of Change Map based on General Plan (City of Huntington Beach, 2017) .......... 3-10 Figure 4-1: Water Use Projection Methodology Diagram .......................................................................... 4-4 Figure 4-2: Water Loss Audit for FY 2014/15 and CY2018-2019 ............................................................ 4-10 Figure 4-3: Water Loss Performance Indicator for FY 2014/15 and CY2018-2019................................. 4-10 Figure 6-1: City’s Projected Water Supply Sources (AF) ........................................................................... 6-2 Figure 6-2: Map of the OC Basin ............................................................................................................. 6-14 Figure 8-1: UWMP Overview ..................................................................................................................... 8-2 APPENDICES Appendix A. UWMP Water Code Checklist Appendix B. DWR Standardized Tables Appendix C. Reduced Delta Reliance Appendix D. SBx7-7 Verification and Compliance Forms Appendix E. 2021 OC Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD Technical Memorandum Appendix F. AWWA Water Loss Audits Appendix G. 2017 Basin 8-1 Alternative Appendix H. Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix I. Water Use Efficiency Implementation Report Appendix J. Demand Management Measures Appendix K. Notice of Public Hearing Appendix L. Adopted UWMP Resolution 214 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com viii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS % Percent 20x2020 20% water use reduction in GPCD by year 2020 ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit Act Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983 AF Acre-Feet AFY Acre-Feet per Year AMI Advanced Metering Infrastructure AWWA American Water Works Association BEA Basin Equity Assessment Biops Biological Opinions BMP Best Management Practice BPP Basin Production Percentage CCC California Coastal Commission CDR Center for Demographic Research at California State University Fullerton CEC Constituents of Emerging Concern CEE Consortium for Energy Efficiency cfs Cubic Feet per Second CII Commercial/Industrial/Institutional City City of Huntington Beach CPTP Coastal Pumping Transfer Program CRA Colorado River Aqueduct CUP Conjunctive Use Program CVP Central Valley Project CY Calendar Year DAC Disadvantaged Communities DCP Delta Conveyance Project DDW California State Division of Drinking Water Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta DRA Drought Risk Assessment DMM Demand Management Measure DOF Department of Finance DVL Diamond Valley Lake DWR Department of Water Resources FIRO Forecast Informed Reservoir Operations FY Fiscal Year GAP Green Acres Project GHG Greenhouse Gas GPCD Gallons per Capita per Day 215 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com ix gpf Gallons per Flush GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan GWRS Groundwater Replenishment System GWRSFE Groundwater Replenishment System Final Expansion H2O2 Hydrogen Peroxide HECW High Efficiency Clothes Washer HEN High Efficiency Nozzle HET High Efficiency Toilet IPR Indirect Potable Reuse IRP Integrated Water Resources Plan kWh Kilowatt-Hour LRP Local Resources Program LTFP Long-Term Facilities Plan MAF Million Acre-Feet MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MET Metropolitan Water District of Southern California MF Microfiltration MG Million Gallon MGD Million Gallons per Day MHI Median Household Income MNWD Moulton Niguel Water District MTBE Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County MWELO Model Water Use Efficiency Landscape Ordinance NDMA N-nitrosodimethylamine NRW Non-Revenue Water OC Orange County OC Basin Orange County Groundwater Basin OC San Orange County Sanitation District OCWD Orange County Water District ORP On-Site Retrofit Program PFAS Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances PFOA perfluorooctanoic acid PFOS perfluorooctane sulfanate Poseidon Poseidon Resources LLC PPCP Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Product PPT Parts Per Trillion PSA Public Service Announcement QWEL Qualified Water Efficient Landscaper 216 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com x RA Replenishment Assessment RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment RO Reverse Osmosis RUWMP Regional Urban Water Management Plan SBx7-7 Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCWD South Coast Water District SDP Seawater Desalination Program sf Square Feet SMWD Santa Margarita Water District SOC South Orange County STEAM Science Technology Engineering Arts and Mathematics SWP State Water Project SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board TAF Thousand Acre-Feet TDS Total Dissolved Solids USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation UV Ultraviolet UWMP Urban Water Management Plan UWMP Act Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983 VOC Volatile Organic Compound Water Code California Water Code WBIC Weather-Based Irrigation Controller WF-21 Water Factory 21 WSAP Water Supply Allocation Plan WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan WSIP Water Savings Inventory Program WUO Water Use Objective 217 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION AND UWMP OVERVIEW The City of Huntington Beach prepared this 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to satisfy the UWMP Act of 1983 (UWMP Act or Act) and subsequent California Water Code (Water Code) requirements. The City is a retail water supplier that provides water to its residents and customers using a combination of local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin (OC Basin) and supplemental imported potable water supply obtained from its regional wholesaler, Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). UWMPs are comprehensive documents that present an evaluation of a water supplier’s reliability over a long-term horizon, typically 20-25 years. This 2020 UWMP provides an assessment of the present and future water supply sources and demands within the City’s service area. It updates various 2015 UWMP items related to: water resource needs, water use efficiency, assessment of water reliability, and strategies to mitigate water shortage conditions. The 2020 UWMP adds a 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) to help the City effectively respond to potential water shortages. This 2020 UWMP contains all elements needed to comply with new requirements of the Act as amended since 2015. UWMP PREPARATION The City coordinated the preparation of this 2020 UWMP with other key entities including MWDOC (regional wholesale supplier for Orange County), MET (regional wholesaler for Southern California and the direct supplier of imported water to MWDOC), and OCWD (OC Basin manager). The City also coordinated with other entities, which provided valuable data for the analyses prepared in this UWMP, such as the Center for Demographic Research (CDR) at California State University Fullerton for population projections, through MWDOC’s assistance. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The City was incorporated in 1909 and is governed by a seven-member elected City Council. In 1964, the City's Water Division was established as a Division of the Public Works Department. In 2003, the Public Works Wastewater Section was incorporated into the Water Division to form the Utilities Division. The City’s water service area covers 27.3 square miles, along the Southern California Coast of Orange County, located 35 miles southeast of Los Angeles and 90 miles northwest of San Diego. The City’s Public Works Department operates four storage and distribution reservoirs with a combined capacity of 55 million gallons (MG), four booster stations, eight active groundwater wells and manages 607.2-mile water main system with 55,028 service connections. Lying in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), its climate is characterized by southern California’s “Mediterranean” climate with mild winters, warm summers and moderate rainfall. In terms of land use, the City is mostly developed and is a predominantly single and multi-family residential community. Moving forward, new development will occur as a result of market response to changing conditions such as population growth, demographics, and the economy as well as the need to replace aging buildings and improve homes. The City will continue planning for its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) 218 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com ES-2 allocation and future planned developments may potentially include accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The current population of 201,327 is projected to increase by 2.3% over the next 25 years. WATER USE CHARACTERIZATION Water use within the City’s service area has been relatively stable in the past decade with an annual average of 27,753 AF for potable use. In FY 2019-20, the City’s water use was 25,966 AF of potable water (groundwater and imported). In FY 2019-20, 18,206 AF (or 70%) of the City’s potable water demand was residential, with commercial, industrial, institutional/governmental, dedicated landscape, and losses accounting for the remaining 30% of the total potable water demand. More specifically, commercial water use accounted for 3,240 AF (or 12.5%) of total water demand and dedicated landscape for 2,141 AF (or 8.2%) of total water demand. Industrial and institutional/governmental uses make up about 741 AF (2.9%) of total demand. Non- revenue water comprised 6.3% of total water demand. WATER USE PROJECTIONS: 5-YEAR AND 25-YEAR Water use within the City’s service area has been relatively stable in the past decade and is expected to remain stable as the city is essentially built-out and the rate of population growth is expected to average less than 0.1% per year for the next 25 years. Water demand is projected to increase 1.7% over the next five years. In the longer term, water demand is projected to decrease 1.3% from 2025 through 2045. The projected potable water use for 2045 is 26,054 AF. This demand projection considers such factors as current and future demographics, future water use efficiency measures, and long-term weather variability. CONSERVATION TARGET COMPLIANCE Retail water suppliers are required to comply with the requirements of Water Conservation Act of 2009, also known as SBx7-7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), which was signed into law in 2010 and requires the State of California to reduce urban water use by 20% by 2020 from a 2013 baseline. The retail water suppliers can comply individually or as a region in collaboration with other retail water suppliers, in order to be eligible for water related state grants and loans. The City is part of the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance created in collaboration with MWDOC, its retail member agencies as well as the Cities of Anaheim, Fullerton and Santa Ana. The Alliance was created to assist OC retail agencies in complying with SBx7-7. The City met its 2020 water use target and is in compliance with SBx7-7; the actual 2020 consumption was 88 gallons per capita per day (GPCD), which is below its 2020 target of 142 GPCD. WATER SUPPLY CHARACTERIZATION The City meets its demands through a combination of local groundwater and supplemental imported water. The City works together with two primary agencies, MWDOC and OCWD, to ensure a safe and reliable water supply that will continue to serve the community in periods of drought and shortage. The 219 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com ES-3 sources of imported water supplies include water from the Colorado River and the State Water Project (SWP) provided by MET and delivered through MWDOC. In FY 2019-20, the City’s water supplies consisted of 70% groundwater and 30% imported water. It is projected that by 2045, the water supply mix will shift to 85% groundwater and 15% imported water. Note that these representations of supply match the projected demand. The City can purchase more MET water through MWDOC, should the need arise. The City does not own or operate wastewater treatment facilities but owns and operates the wastewater collection system in its service area that sends all wastewater to Orange County Sanitation District (OC San) for treatment and disposal. OCWD’s Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) produces recycled water for indirect potable reuse (IPR) through the replenishment of the OC Basin. The City benefits from this indirect use of recycled water. WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY AND DROUGHT RISK ASSESSMENT Every urban water supplier is required to assess the reliability of their water service to its customers under a normal year, a single dry year, and a drought period lasting five consecutive years. The water service reliability assessment compares projected supply to projected demand for the three hydrological conditions between 2025 and 2045. Factors affecting reliability, such as climate change and regulatory impacts, are accounted for as part of the assessment. The City depends on a combination of imported and local supplies to meet its water demands and has taken numerous steps to ensure it has adequate supplies. MET’s and MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP conclude that they can meet full-service demands of their member agencies through 2045 during normal years, single-dry years, and multiple-dry years. Consequently, the City is projected to meet full-service demands through 2045 for the same scenarios, due to diversified supply and conservation measures. The Drought Risk Assessment (DRA) evaluates the City’s near-term ability to supply water assuming the City is experiencing a drought over the next five years. Even under the assumption of a drought over the next five years, MET’s 2020 UWMP concludes a surplus of water supplies would be available to all of its Member Agencies, including MWDOC and in effect, the City, should the need for additional supplies arise to close any local supply gap. Additionally, the City partakes in various efforts to reduce its reliance on imported water supplies such as increasing the use of local groundwater and indirect recycled water. WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING Water shortage contingency planning (WSCP) is a strategic planning process that the City engages in to prepare for and respond to water shortages. A water shortage, when water supply available is insufficient to meet the normally expected customer water use at a given point in time, may occur due to a number of reasons, such as water supply quality changes, drought, and catastrophic events (e.g., earthquake). The City’s WSCP provides real-time water supply availability assessment and structured steps designed to respond to actual conditions. This level of detailed planning and preparation will help maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions. The WSCP serves as the operating manual that the City will use to prevent catastrophic service disruptions through proactive, rather than reactive, mitigation of water shortages. The WSCP contains the processes and procedures that will be deployed when shortage conditions arise so that the City’s 220 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com ES-4 governing body, its staff, and its retail agencies can easily identify and efficiently implement pre-determined steps to mitigate a water shortage to the level appropriate to the degree of water shortfall anticipated. DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES The City, along with other retail water agencies in Orange County, recognizes the need to use existing water supplies efficiently. This ethic of efficient use of water has evolved as a result of the development and implementation of water use efficiency programs that make good economic sense and reflect responsible stewardship of the region’s water resources. The City participates in regional water savings programs and works closely with MET and MWDOC to promote regional efficiency. PLAN ADOPTION, SUBMITTAL, AND IMPLEMENTATION The Water Code requires the UWMP to be adopted by the Supplier’s governing body. Before the adoption of the UWMP, the City notified the public and the cities and counties within its service area per the Water Code and held a public hearing to receive input from the public on the UWMP. Post adoption, the City submitted the UWMP to DWR and other key agencies and made the document available for public review no later than 30 days after filing with DWR. 221 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 1-1 1 INTRODUCTION AND UWMP OVERVIEW The City of Huntington Beach (City) prepared this 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP or Plan) to satisfy the UWMP Act of 1983 (Act or UWMP Act) and subsequent California Water Code (Water Code) requirements. The City is a retail water supplier that provides water to its residents and customers using a combination of imported potable water supply obtained from its regional wholesaler, Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) and local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin (OC Basin). The City is a member agency of both MWDOC (28 members) and Orange County Water District ((OCWD) (19 members)). The City prepared this 2020 UWMP in collaboration with MWDOC, OCWD, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET), and other key agencies. UWMPs are comprehensive documents that present an evaluation of a water supplier’s reliability over a long-term horizon, typically 20-25 years. In response to changing climate conditions and regulatory updates since the 2015 UWMP, the City has been proactively managing its water supply and demand. The water loss audit program, water conservation measures and efforts for increased self-reliance in order to reduce dependency on imported water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (the Delta) are some of the water management efforts that the City is a part of to maintain the reliability of water supply for its service area. This 2020 UWMP provides an assessment of the present and future water supply sources and demands within the City’s service area. It updates various 2015 UWMP items related to: water resource needs, water use efficiency, assessment of water reliability, and strategies to mitigate water shortage conditions. The 2020 UWMP adds a 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) to help the City effectively respond to potential water shortages. This 2020 UWMP contains all elements needed to comply with new requirements of the Act as amended since 2015. Overview of Urban Water Management Plan Requirements The UWMP Act requires every urban water supplier (Supplier) providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet (AF) of water annually, to prepare, adopt, and file an UWMP with the DWR every five (5) years for each year ending in “0” and “5”. For this 2020 UWMP cycle, DWR placed emphasis on achieving improvements for long-term reliability and resilience to drought and climate change in California. Legislation related to water supply planning in California has evolved to address these issues, namely Making Conservation a Way of Life [Assembly Bill (AB) 1668 and Senate Bill (SB) 606] and Water Loss Performance Standard SB555. New UWMP requirements in 2020 are a direct result of these new water regulations. The 2020 UWMP added two (2) components complimenting the legislation mentioned above. First is the WSCP, which assesses the Supplier’s near-term, five-year drought risk assessment (DRA) and provides a structured guide to deal with water shortages. Second is the Annual Water Supply Demand Assessment (WSDA), which assesses the current year plus one dry year i.e., short-term demand/supply outlook. Analyses over near- and long-term horizons together provide a more complete picture of a Supplier’s reliability and serve to inform appropriate actions needed to build up capacity over the long term. 222 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 1-2 Key additions to the 2020 UWMP in accordance with recent water regulations are: x Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) – WSCP helps a Supplier to better prepare for drought conditions and provides the steps and water use efficiency measures to be taken in times of water shortage conditions. WSCP now has more prescriptive elements, including an analysis of water supply reliability; the water use efficiency measures for each of the six standard water shortage levels, that correspond to water shortage percentages ranging from 0-10% to greater than 50%; an estimate of potential to close supply gap for each measure; protocols and procedures to communicate identified actions for any current or predicted water shortage conditions; procedures for an annual water supply and demand assessment; monitoring and reporting requirements to determine customer compliance; reevaluation and improvement procedures for evaluating the WSCP. x Drought Risk Assessment – Suppliers are now required to compare their total water use and supply projections, and conduct a reliability assessment of all their water sources for a consecutive five-year drought period beginning 2021. x Five Consecutive Dry-Year Water Reliability Assessment - The three-year multiple dry year reliability assessment in previous UWMPs was changed from three (3) to five (5) consecutive dry years to include a more comprehensive assessment of water source reliability to improve Supplier preparedness for extended drought conditions. x Seismic Risk – The UWMP now includes a seismic risk assessment of water supply infrastructure along with a plan to mitigate any potential seismic risks to water supply assets. x Groundwater Supplies Coordination – The UWMP should be in accordance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 and consistent with the Groundwater Sustainability Plans, wherever applicable. x Lay Description – To provide a better understanding of the UWMP to the general public, a lay description of the UWMP is included, especially summarizing the Supplier’s detailed water service reliability assessment and the planned management steps and actions to mitigate any possible shortage scenarios. UWMP Organization This UWMP is organized into 10 main sections aligned with the DWR Guidebook recommendations. The subsections are customized to tell the City’s story of water supply reliability and ways to overcome any water shortages over a 25-year planning horizon. Section 1 Introduction and UWMP Overview gives an overview of the UWMP fundamentals and briefly describes the new additional requirements passed by the Legislature for 2020 UWMP. Section 2 UWMP Preparation identifies this UWMP as an individual planning effort of the City, lists the type of year and units of measure used and introduces the coordination and outreach activities conducted by the City to develop this UWMP. 223 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 1-3 Section 3 System Description gives a background on the City’s water system and its climate characteristics, population projection, demographics, socioeconomics and predominant current and projected land uses of its service area. Section 4 Water Use Characterization provides historical, current, and projected water use by customer category for the next 25 years within the City’s service area and the projection methodology used by MWDOC to develop the 25-year projections. Section 5 Conservation Target Compliance reports the SB X7-7 water use conservation target compliance of the City (individually and as a member of the OC 20x2020 Regional Alliance). Section 6 Water Supply Characterization describes the current water supply portfolio of the City as well as the planned and potential water supply projects and water exchange and transfer opportunities. Section 7 Water Service Reliability and Drought Risk Assessment assesses the reliability of the City’s water supply service to its customers for a normal year, single dry year, and five consecutive dry years scenarios. This section also includes a DRA of all the supply sources for a consecutive five-year drought period beginning 2021. Section 8 Water Shortage Contingency Planning is a brief summary of the standalone WSCP document (Appendix H) which provides a structured guide for the City to deal with water shortages, incorporating prescriptive information and standardized action levels, lists the appropriate actions and water use efficiency measures to be taken to ensure water supply reliability in times of water shortage conditions, along with implementation actions in the event of a catastrophic supply interruption. Section 9 Demand Management Measures provides a comprehensive description of the water conservation programs that the City has implemented, is currently implementing, and plans to implement in order to meet its urban water use reduction targets. Section 10 Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Implementation provides a record of the process the City followed to adopt and implement its UWMP. 224 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 2-1 2 UWMP PREPARATION The City’s 2020 UWMP is an individual UWMP for the City to meet the Water Code compliance as a retail water supplier. While the City opted to prepare its own UWMP and meet Water Code compliance individually, the development of this UWMP involved close coordination with its whole supplier, MWDOC along with other key entities within the region. Individual Planning and Compliance All water suppliers in Orange County opted to prepare their own UWMP and comply with the Water Code individually, including the City (Table 2-1). The City closely coordinated with MWDOC and various key entities as discussed in Section 2.2 to ensure regional integration. The UWMP Checklist was completed to confirm the compliance of this UWMP with the Water Code (Appendix A). One consistency with MWDOC and the majority of its other retail member agencies is that the City selected to report demands and supplies using fiscal year (FY) basis (Table 2-2). Table 2-1: Plan Identification DWR Submittal Table 2-2: Plan Identification Select Only One Type of Plan Name of RUWMP or Regional Alliance if applicable Individual UWMP Water Supplier is also a member of a RUWMP Water Supplier is also a member of a Regional Alliance Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) NOTES: 225 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 2-2 Table 2-2: Supplier Identification DWR Submittal Table 2-3: Supplier Identification Type of Supplier Supplier is a wholesaler Supplier is a retailer Fiscal or Calendar Year UWMP Tables are in calendar years UWMP Tables are in fiscal years If using fiscal years provide month and date that the fiscal year begins (mm/dd) 7/1 Units of measure used in UWMP (select from drop down) Unit AF NOTES: Coordination and Outreach 2.2.1 Integration with Other Planning Efforts The City, as a retail water supplier, coordinated this UWMP preparation effort with other key entities, including MWDOC (regional wholesale supplier for Orange County), MET (regional wholesaler for Southern California and the direct supplier of imported water to MWDOC), and OCWD (OC Basin manager). The City also developed this Plan in conjunction with other MWDOC-led efforts such as population projection from the Center for Demographic Research at California State University Fullerton (CDR). Some of the key planning and reporting documents that were used to develop this UWMP are: x MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP provides the basis for the projections of the imported supply availability over the next 25 years for the City’s service area. x MWDOC’s 2020 WSCP provides a water supply availability assessment and structured steps designed to respond to actual conditions that will help maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions. 226 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 2-3 x 2021 OC Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD Technical Memorandum (Demand Forecast TM) provides the basis for water demand projections for MWDOC’s member agencies as well as Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana. x MET’s 2020 Draft Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) is a long-term planning document to ensure water supply availability in Southern California and provides a basis for water supply reliability in Orange County. x MET’s 2020 UWMP was developed as a part of the 2020 IRP planning process and was used by MWDOC as another basis for the projections of supply capability of the imported water received from MET. x MET’s 2020 WSCP provides a water supply assessment and guide for MET’s intended actions during water shortage conditions. x OCWD’s Groundwater Reliability Plan (to be finalized after July 2021) provides the latest information on groundwater management and supply projection for the OC Basin, the primary source of groundwater for 19 retail water suppliers in OC. x OCWD’s 2019-20 Engineer’s Report provides information on the groundwater conditions and basin utilization of the OC Basin. x OCWD’s 2017 Basin 8-1 Alternative is an alternative to the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the OC Basin and provides significant information related to sustainable management of the basin in the past and hydrogeology of the basin, including groundwater quality and basin characteristics. x Local Hazard Mitigation Plan provides the basis for the seismic risk analysis of the water system facilities. x Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission’s 2020 Municipal Service Review for MWDOC Report provides comprehensive review of the municipal services provided by MWDOC. x Water Master Plan of the City provides information on water infrastructure planning projects and plans to address any required water system improvements. Statewide Water Planning In addition to regional coordination with various agencies described above, the City as a MWDOC member agency is currently a part of MET’s statewide planning effort to reduce reliance on the water imported from the Delta. It is the policy of the State of California to reduce reliance on the Delta in meeting California’s future water supply needs through a statewide strategy of investing in improved regional supplies, conservation, and water use efficiency. This policy is codified through the Delta Stewardship Council’s Delta Plan Policy WR P1 and is measured through Supplier reporting in each Urban Water Management Planning cycle. WR P1 is relevant to water suppliers that plan to participate in multi-year water transfers, conveyance facilities, or new diversions in the Delta. 227 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 2-4 Through significant local and regional investment in water use efficiency, water recycling, advanced water technologies, local and regional water supply projects, and improved regional coordination of local and regional water supply efforts, the City has demonstrated a reduction in Delta reliance and a subsequent improvement in regional self-reliance. For a detailed description and documentation of the City’s consistency with Delta Plan Policy WR P1 see Section 7.4 and Appendix C. 2.2.2 Wholesale and Retail Coordination The City developed its UWMP in conjunction with MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP. The City provided its historical water use and initial water use projections data to MWDOC (Table 2-3). MWDOC facilitated in refining the projections of the City’s water demand and the imported supply from MWDOC over the next 25 years. The City also has taken part in many regional programs administered by MWDOC to assist retail agencies meet various State compliance, such as the OC Regional Alliance for SB x7-7 compliance, regional water loss program for SB555 compliance, and regional water use efficiency programs. Sections 5 and 9 provide detailed information on these programs. Table 2-3: Retail: Water Supplier Information Exchange DWR Submittal Table 2-4 Retail: Water Supplier Information Exchange The retail Supplier has informed the following wholesale supplier(s) of projected water use in accordance with Water Code Section 10631. Wholesale Water Supplier Name MWDOC NOTES: 2.2.3 Public Participation For further coordination with other key agencies and to encourage public participation in the review and update of this Plan, the City held a public hearing and notified key entities and the public per the Water Code requirements. Sections 10.2 and 10.3 describe these efforts in detail. 228 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-1 3 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The City was incorporated in 1909 and is governed by a seven-member elected City Council. In 1964, the City's Water Division was established as a Division of the Public Works Department. In 2003, the Public Works Wastewater Section was incorporated into the Water Division to form the Utilities Division. The City’s water service area covers 27.3 square miles, along the Southern California Coast of Orange County, located 35 miles southeast of Los Angeles and 90 miles northwest of San Diego. The City’s Public Works Department operates four storage and distribution reservoirs with a combined capacity of 55 million gallons (MG), four booster stations, eight active groundwater wells and manages 607.2-mile water mains system with 55,028 service connections. Lying in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), its climate is characterized by southern California’s “Mediterranean” climate with mild winters, warm summers and moderate rainfall. In terms of land use, the City is mostly developed and is a predominantly single and multi-family residential community. Moving forward, new development will occur as a result of market response to changing conditions such as population growth, demographics, and the economy as well as the need to replace aging buildings and improve homes. The City will continue planning for its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation and future planned developments may potentially include accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The current population of 201,327 is projected to increase by only 2.3% over the next 25 years. Agency Overview This section provides information on the formation and history of the City, its organizational structure, and relationship to MWDOC. 3.1.1 Formation The City is a predominantly residential community located along the California coastline in Orange County. It was incorporated in 1909 and is a charter city. From 1936 to 1964, the water system serving the City was owned and operated by the Southern California Water Company. In 1964, the City purchased the private system and the City's Water Division was established as a Division of the Public Works Department. In 2003, the Public Works Wastewater Section was incorporated into the Water Division to form the Utilities Division. 3.1.2 City Council The City is administered under a council/administrator form of government and is governed by a seven -member elected City council, with part time council members. Current City Council members are: x Kim Carr, Mayor x Tito Ortiz, Mayor Pro Tempore x Barbara Delgleize, Council Member x Dan Kalmick, Council Member 229 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-2 x Natalie Moser, Council Member x Erik Peterson, Council Member x Mike Posey, Council Member 3.1.3 Relationship to MWDOC The City is one of MWDOC’s 28 member agencies purchasing imported water from MWDOC, Orange County’s wholesale water supplier and a member agency of MET. The City’s location within MWDOC’s service is shown on Figure 3-1. 230 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-3 Figure 3-1: Regional Location of City of Huntington Beach and Other MWDOC Member Agencies 231 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-4 Water Service Area and Facilities 3.2.1 Water Service Area The City is located 35 miles southeast of Los Angeles and 90 miles northwest of San Diego along the Southern California Coast of Orange County. The City's water service area is 27.3 square miles. The City is generally flat, with elevations ranging from a low of about five feet below sea level to 120 feet above sea level. The City also has 71 parks and public facilities and 8.5 miles of beaches. The City formerly supplied water to Sunset Beach, which is approximately 68 acres of land located off of the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) near Huntington Harbor. A map of the City's water service area is shown as Figure 3-2. Figure 3-2: City of Huntington Beach Water Service Area 232 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-5 3.2.2 Water Facilities The Public Works Department maintains the City's water facilities. Groundwater is currently pumped from eight (8) active wells located throughout the City, with a combined design capacity of 26,300 gallons per minute (gpm). There is a total of approximately 607.2 miles of water mains. The City's water distribution system is connected to MET transmission mains at OC-9, OC-35, and OC-44 located along the northeast, northwest, and southeast sides of the City, respectively. The Public Works Department also operates four storage and distribution reservoirs, all located in the lower pressure zone (Zone 1) with a combined capacity of 55 MG. The storage system is supported with four booster stations located at each the reservoir sites. The booster pumps have a total capacity of 60,190 gpm, which is adequate to keep the system pressurized under peak flow conditions. The system connections and water volume supplied are summarized in Table 3-1. Table 3-1: Retail Only: Public Water Systems DWR Submittal Table 2-1 Retail Only: Public Water Systems Public Water System Number Public Water System Name Number of Municipal Connections 2020 Volume of Water Supplied 2020 CA3010053 City of Huntington Beach 55,028 25,966 TOTAL 55,028 25,966 NOTES: Climate The City is located within the SCAB that encompasses all of Orange County, and the urban areas of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside counties. The SCAB climate is characterized by southern California’s “Mediterranean” climate: a semi-arid environment with mild winters, warm summers, and moderate rainfall. Local rainfall has limited impacts on reducing water demand in the City, except for landscape irrigation demand. Water that infiltrates into the soil may enter groundwater supplies depending on the local geography. However, due to the large extent of impervious cover in southern California, rainfall runoff quickly flows to a system of concrete storm drains and channels that lead directly to the ocean. OCWD is one agency that has successfully captured stormwater along the Santa Ana River and in recharge basins for years and used it as an additional source of supply for groundwater recharge. Based on the 2017 Basin 8-1 Alternative Plan, OCWD captured an average annual stormwater volume of approximately 44,000 AF over the period of ten years, from Water Year 2006-07 to 2015-16; however, this period’s rainfall was 17% below the long term average using San Bernardino precipitation data. Based on a longer period (1989-2015) of rainfall and captured stormwater records, the average year water budget of OCWD assumes a stormwater capture volume of 52,000 AF. 233 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-6 Population, Demographics, and Socioeconomics 3.4.1 Population According to CDR, the City’s service area has a 2020 population of 201,327, an increase from the 2015 population of 197,787. The City is almost completely built-out and overall, the population is projected to increase with a moderate growth of 2.3% over the 25-year period from 2020 to 2045 due to densification of existing communities. The growth is slightly higher in the first 15 years until 2035 and tapered off from there. Table 3-2 shows the population projections in five-year increments out to 2045 within the City’s service area. Table 3-2: Retail: Population - Current and Projected DWR Submittal Table 3-1 Retail: Population - Current and Projected Population Served 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 201,327 203,713 206,499 207,479 207,402 205,907 NOTES: Source - Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton, 2020 3.4.2 Demographics and Socioeconomics As shown in Table 3-3 below, the total number of dwelling units in the City is expected to increase by 1.4% in the next 25 years from 82,524 in 2020 to 83,693 in 2045. Table 3-3 also shows a breakdown of the total dwelling units by type for the 25-year period from 2020 to 2045. Table 3-3: City of Huntington Beach Service Area Dwelling Units by Type City of Huntington Beach Service Area Dwelling Units by Type Dwelling Units 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total 82,524 83,071 83,236 83,615 83,636 83,693 Single Family 39,469 39,613 39,712 39,821 39,824 39,833 All Other* 43,055 43,458 43,524 43,794 43,812 43,860 Source: Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton, 2020 *Includes duplex, triplex, apartment, condo, townhouse, mobile home, etc. Yachts, houseboats, recreational vehicles, vans, etc. are included if is primary place of residence. Does not include group quartered units, cars, railroad box cars, etc. 234 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-7 In addition to the types and proportions of dwelling units, various socio-economic factors such as age distribution, education levels, general health status, income and poverty levels affect City’s water management and planning. Based on the U.S. Census Bureau's QuickFacts, the City has about 17.6% of population of 65 years and over, 19.2% under the age of 18 years and 5.3% under the age of 5 years. 92.7% of the City’s population with an age of more than 25 years has a minimum of high school graduate and 42.6% of this age group has at least a bachelor’s degree. 3.4.3 CDR Projection Methodology The City obtains its services area population and dwelling unit data from MWDOC via CDR. MWDOC contracts with CDR to update the historic population estimates for 2010 to the current year and provide an annual estimate of population served by each of its retail water suppliers within its service area. CDR uses GIS and data from the 2000 and 2010 U.S. Decennial Censuses, State Department of Finance (DOF) population estimates, and the CDR annual population estimates. These annual estimates incorporate annual revisions to the DOF annual population estimates, often for every year back to the most recent Decennial Census. As a result, all previous estimates were set aside and replaced with the most current set of annual estimates. Annexations and boundary changes for water suppliers are incorporated into these annual estimates. In the summer of 2020, projections by water supplier for population and dwelling units by type were estimated using the 2018 Orange County Projections dataset. Growth for each of the five-year increments was allocated using GIS and a review of the traffic analysis zones (TAZ) with a 2019 aerial photo. The growth was added to the 2020 estimates by the water supplier. Land Uses 3.5.1 Current Land Uses The City’s service area can best be described as a predominantly single and multi-family residential community located along the coast in northern Orange County. There is a large number of visitors to the City throughout the year to take advantage of the miles of coastline and beachfront activities. Existing land uses in the City include a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, mixed use, parks, open space (e.g., wetlands, beaches), oil-related, and public uses. According to the General Plan Land Use Element, residential development is the predominant use in the City; housing uses constitute about 43% of all land uses in the planning area. Public uses, primarily comprising public rights-of-way, occupy an additional 28% of the planning area. Open space, commercial, and industrial development occupies most of the remainder of the planning area. There is very little vacant land available within the City, therefore, most growth is occurring through redevelopment of existing developed land. Figure 3-3 shows the land use designations in the City based on the 2040 General Plan, which was adopted in 2017. As most of the planning area is already developed and maintained in good condition, the designations generally correspond to the pattern of existing uses. 235 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-8 Figure 3-3: City of Huntington Beach Land Use Designations Map Pursuant to the General Plan, land use in the City is being developed in accordance with the General Plan land use designation of each property. The General Plan land use designation specifies the uses, density, and intensity of development allowed on each property. In addition, there are 17 adopted specific plans in the City. These plans have predominantly been used to focus on the characteristics unique to a particular area and customize the planning process and land use regulations and requirements that apply 236 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-9 within that specific plan area. Two of the largest specific plans are the Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan. 3.5.2 Projected Land Uses The City is mostly built-out and moving forward, new development will occur as a result of market response to changing conditions such as population growth, demographics, and the economy as well as the need to replace aging buildings and improve homes. The 2017 General Plan anticipated a modest amount of growth through 2040, with most residential growth occurring in specific plan areas and non- residential growth occurring through implementation of a new Research and Technology land use designation as further described below. Figure 3-4 indicates where change is encouraged to occur to accommodate future growth and development under the City’s General Plan and to what degree it can be expected. As shown in the diagram, most areas in the City are proposed to remain much as they are today or would transform through guidelines provided by documents other than the General Plan. The terms used to describe the planned levels of change range from very little (“Preserve” and “Conserve”) to substantial (“Transform”). 237 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-10 Figure 3-4: Character of Change Map based on General Plan (City of Huntington Beach, 2017) 238 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 3-11 “Preserve” areas are developed portions of Huntington Beach, where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision. Preserve areas include all established residential neighborhoods; most commercial, retail, and employment centers; many visitor -serving commercial uses; and all of the Downtown area. “Conserve” areas include open space and recreational areas that provide valuable natural habitat or parkland and support the community recreational and aesthetic needs. This category includes the beach, the Bolsa Chica Wetlands, parks, golf courses, and other similar uses. “Transform” areas consist of underdeveloped or underutilized portions of the planning area, where current developments might not adequately support future City goals. These areas are located within the Northwest Industrial Area and along the Gothard Corridor, where a majority of the city’s industrial uses are located. The General Plan established a new land use designation, Research and Technology, to enable a broader mix of lower-intensity industrial and commercial uses that better meet current and future market demands, and capture employment growth in emerging fields. Additional areas in the City could transform via means other than those established within the General Plan (e.g., specific plan areas). In addition to land use and growth anticipated by the 2017 General Plan, the City must plan for future regional housing growth. State law requires jurisdictions to plan for their share of the RHNA. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) determines the housing growth needs by income for local jurisdictions through the RHNA process. The City’s RHNA allocation for the 2021 - 2029 planning period is 13,368 units. This includes 3,661 units for very low-income households, 2,184 units for low-income households, 2,308 units for moderate-income households, and 5,215 units for above moderate-income households. It should be noted that the City’s RHNA targets for 2021-2029 reflect greater residential growth than is anticipated in the 2017 General Plan, which has a horizon year of 2040. The City is currently updating the General Plan Housing Element to identify where in the City 13,368 units can be accommodated. As such, it is likely that areas of the City with existing residential land use designations will change to higher density residential designations and areas with nonresidential land use designations will convert to residential or mixed use. To that end, amendments to the land use map shown in Figure 3-3 will probably occur in the next one to three years. Finally, as part of the state’s response to an ongoing housing crisis, many new laws with the goal of increasing housing supply have been passed by the legislature in the last several years. Some of these laws have addressed regulations for ADUs, which are attached or detached independent living units on the same property as the primary dwelling unit or units, by requiring jurisdictions to make them easier to permit. As such, in accordance with state law, all residential properties, including single-family residential properties, are permitted to have ADUs by right. Since the laws to ease regulations on ADUs have passed, there has been an increase in the construction of ADUs in the City and statewide. Of note, approximately 92% of the ADUs in California are being built in the single family zoned parcels (University of California Berkeley, 2020). The increase in ADUs implies an increase in number of people per dwelling unit which potentially translates to higher water demand. 239 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-1 4 WATER USE CHARACTERIZATION Water Use Overview Water use within the City’s service area has been relatively stable in the past decade with an annual average of 27,753 AF for potable use. In FY 2019-20, the City’s water use was 25,966 AF of potable water (groundwater and imported). There is currently no recycled water use within the City’s service area. As described in Section 3, the City mostly developed and is a predominantly single and multi-family residential community, with a small projected population increase of 2.3% over the next 25 years. Water demand is likely to increase 1.7% over the next five years. In the longer term, water demand is projected to decrease 1.3% from 2025 through 2045. The projected potable water use for 2045 is 26,054 AF. The passive savings are anticipated to continue for the next 25 years and are considered in the water use projections. Permanent water conservation requirements and water conservation strategies are discussed in Section 8 and 9 of this document. Past and Current Water Use Water use within the City’s service area has been relatively stable in the past decade with an annual average of 27,753 AF. A stable trend is expected because the city is essentially built-out and the rate of population growth is expected to average less than 0.1% per year for the next 25 years. Water conservation efforts also kept per capita water use down. As a result of Governor Jerry Brown’s mandatory water conservation order in 2014, retail water use within the City’s service area has been decreased from the average of 29,356 AF (FY2010/11 and FY2014/15) to the last five-year average of 26,150 (FY2015/16 and FY2019/20). Between FY2015/16 and FY2019/20, water use within the City’s service area ranged from 24,717 to 27,720 AFY. All the water use within the City is for potable use and there is currently no recycled water use within the City’s service area because the City currently does not have infrastructure in place for recycled water. As of FY2019/20, there are 55,028 current customer active and inactive service connections in the City’s water distribution system with all existing connections metered. Table 4-1 summarizes the City’s total water use for FY2019/20. For FY 2019-20, 18,206 AF (or 70.1%) of the City’s potable water demand was residential, with commercial, industrial, institutional/governmental, dedicated landscape, and losses accounting for the remaining 29.8% of the total potable water demand. The City has a mix of commercial uses (markets, restaurants, etc.), public entities (schools, fire stations and government offices), office complexes, light industrial and warehouses. Commercial water use accounts for 3,240 AF (or 12.5%) of total water demands and dedicated landscape for 2,141 AF (or 8.2%) of total water demand. Industrial and institutional/governmental uses make up about 741 AF (2.9%) of total demand. Non-revenue water comprises 6.3% of total water demand. Non-revenue water includes real losses (e.g., leakage in mains and service lines, and storage tank overflows), apparent losses (unauthorized consumption, customer metering inaccuracies and systematic data handling errors), and unbilled water (e.g., hydrant flushing, firefighting, and blow-off water from well start-ups). 240 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-2 Table 4-1: Retail: Demands for Potable and Non-Potable Water – Actual DWR Submittal Table 4-1 Retail: Demands for Potable and Non-Potable Water - Actual Use Type 2020 Actual Additional Description (as needed) Level of Treatment When Delivered Volume (AF) Single Family Drinking Water 12,197 Multi-Family Drinking Water 6,009 Institutional/Governmental Facilities only, parks/medians/etc. under landscape Drinking Water 130 Commercial Drinking Water 3,240 Industrial Drinking Water 612 Landscape Represents large landscape (with irrigation meters) served by potable water and not recycled water Drinking Water 2,141 Losses Non-revenue water Drinking Water 1,638 TOTAL 25,966 NOTES: Water Use Projections A key component of this 2020 UWMP is to provide an insight into the City’s future water demand outlook. This section discusses the considerations and methodology used to estimate the 25-year water use projection. Overall, total water demand is projected to decrease 11.1% between 2020 and 2045. Single and multifamily residential use is projected to decrease in the same timeframe. Commercial, institutional, and industrial (CII) use is projected to decrease slightly. Demands for large landscape applications are projected to increase, while projections for non-revenue water loss decrease. 4.3.1 Water Use Projection Methodology In 2021, MWDOC and OCWD, in collaboration with their member agencies, led the effort to update water demand projections originally done as part of the 2021 OC Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD (Appendix E). The updated demand projections, prepared by CDM Smith, were for the Orange County region as a whole, and provided retail agency specific demands. The projections span the years of 2025-2050 and are based upon information surveyed from each Orange County water agency. 241 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-3 The forecast methodology began with a retail water agency survey that asked for FY 2017-18, FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20 water use by major sector, including number of accounts. If a member agency provided recycled water to customers that information was also requested. Given that FY 2017-18 was a slightly above-normal demand year (warmer/drier than average) and FY 2018-19 was a slightly below-normal demand year (cooler/wetter than average), water use from these two years were averaged to represent an average-year base water demand. For the residential sectors (single-family and multifamily) the base year water demand was divided by households in order to get a total per unit water use (gallons per home per day). In order to split household water use into indoor and outdoor uses, three sources of information were used, along with CDM Smith’s expertise. The sources of information included: (1) the Residential End Uses of Water (Water Research Foundation, 2016); (2) California’s plumbing codes and landscape ordinances; and (3) CA DWR’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) calculator. Three different periods of residential end uses of water were analyzed as follows: x Pre-2010 efficiency levels – Has an average indoor water use that is considered to be moderately efficient, also does not include the most recent requirements for MWELO. x High-efficiency levels – Includes the most recent plumbing codes that are considered to be highly efficient, and also includes the most recent requirements for MWELO. x Current average efficiency levels – Represents the weighted average between pre-2010 efficiency and high efficiency levels, based on average age of homes for each retail water agency. For outdoor residential water use, the indoor per capita total was multiplied by each member agency- specific persons per household in order to get an indoor residential household water use (gallons per day per home), and then was subtracted from the base year total household water use for single-family and multifamily for each agency based on actual water use as reported by the agency surveys. For existing residential homes, the current average indoor and outdoor water use for each member agency were used for the year 2020. It was assumed that indoor water uses would reach the high efficiency level by 2040. Based on current age of homes, replacement/remodeling rates, and water utility rebate programs it is believed this assumption is very achievable. It was also assumed that current outdoor water use would be reduced by 5% by 2050. For new homes, the indoor high efficiency level was assumed for the years 2025 through 2050. Outdoor uses for new homes were assumed to be 25% and 30% lower than current household water use for single-family and multifamily homes, respectively. This methodology is illustrated in Figure 4-1 below. 242 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-4 Figure 4-1: Water Use Projection Methodology Diagram Existing and projected population, single-family and multifamily households for each retail water agency were provided by CDR under contract by MWDOC and OCWD. CDR provides historical and future demographics by census tracts for all of Orange County (Section 3.4). Census tract data is then clipped to retail water agency service boundaries in order to produce historical and projected demographic data by agency. For the CII water demands, which have been fairly stable from a unit use perspective (gallons/account/day), it was assumed that the unit demand in FY 2019-20 would remain the same from 2020-2025 to represent COVID-19 impacts. Reviewing agency water use data from FY 2017-18 through FY2019-20 revealed that residential water use increased slightly in FY 2019-20 while CII demands decreased slightly as a result of COVID-19. From 2030 to 2050, the average CII unit use from FY 2017-18 and 2018-19 was used. These unit use factors were then multiplied by an assumed growth of CII accounts under three broad scenarios: x Low Scenario – assuming no growth in CII accounts x Mid Scenario – assuming 0.5% annual growth in CII accounts x High Scenario – assuming 1.5% annual growth in CII accounts For most retail agencies, the Mid Scenario of CII account growth was used, but for those retail agencies that have had faster historical growth the High Scenario was used. For those retail agencies that have had relatively stable CII water demand, the Low Scenario was used. For Huntington Beach, the mid- scenario was used. For those agencies that supply recycled water for non-potable demands, MWDOC used agency-specified growth assumptions. Most agencies have already maximized their recycled water and thus are not expecting for this category of demand to grow. However, a few agencies in South Orange County do expect moderate growth in recycled water customers. For large landscape customers served currently by potable water use, MWDOC assumed these demands to be constant through 2050, except for agencies that have growing recycled water demands. For the agencies that have growing recycled water demands, large landscape demands served by potable water 243 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-5 reduced accordingly. For non-revenue water, which represents the difference in total water production less all water billed to customers, this percentage was held constant through 2050. Note that 2050 data was not presented in the UWMP. A member agency’s water use demand projection is the summation of their residential water demand, CII demands, large landscape and recycled water demands, and water losses all projected over the 25-year time horizon. These demands were provided to each of the Orange County water agencies for their review, feedback, and revision before being finalized. The MWDOC regional water demand projection was collaboratively developed between MWDOC and its member agencies. MWDOC’s projections were built upon the same model developed by CDM Smith, and took into consideration specific assumptions and projections provided to MWDOC by its member agencies. 4.3.1.1 Weather Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Impacts In any given year water demands can vary substantially due to weather. In addition, long-term climate change can have an impact on water demands into the future. For the 2014 OC Water Reliability Study, CDM Smith developed a statistical model of total water monthly production from 1990 to 2014 from a sample of retail water agencies. This model removed impacts from population growth, the economy and drought restrictions in order to estimate the impact on water use from temperature and precipitation. The results of this statistical analysis are: x Hot/dry weather demands will be 5.5% greater than current average weather demands x Cooler/wet weather demands will be 6% lower than current average weather demands x Climate change impacts will increase current average weather demands by: o 2% in 2030 o 4% in 2040 o 6% in 2050 4.3.2 25-Year Water Use Projection The projected demand values were provided by MWDOC and reviewed by the City as part of the UWMP effort. As the regional wholesale supplier for much of Orange County, MWDOC works in collaboration with each of its retail agencies as well as MET, its wholesaler, to develop demand projections for imported water. The City has been proactively decreasing its reliance on imported water by pursuing a variety of water conservation strategies within the service area. Future water savings and low -income water use are included in these projected values. 4.3.2.1 Water Use Projections for 2021-2025 The water use projection for normal year conditions without drought conditions for 2021-2025 is presented in Table 4-2. A linear decrease in total water demand is expected between 2021 and 2025. Total water demand is expected to be 26,399 AF in 2025 (a decrease of 9.9% from 2020 actual usage). This table will be adjusted to estimate the five-years’ cumulative drought effects as described in the five-year DRA in Section 7. 244 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-6 Table 4-2: Water Use Projections for 2021 to 2025 Retail: Total Water Demand FY Ending 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total Water Demand (AF) 26,052 26,138 26,225 26,311 26,399 NOTES: 4.3.2.2 Water Use Projections for 2025-2045 Table 4-3 is a projection of the City’s water demand for 2025-2045. Single family and multi-family usage are both projected to decrease in this timeframe, while CII usage is expected to increase. CII projections for 2025 through 2045 were broken down into commercial, industrial, and institutional/governmental using proportions reported for each billing sector in FY 2019-20. Demands for large landscape applications are projected to stay relatively consistent, while projections for NRW loss gradually decrease. These projected demand values were provided by MWDOC and reviewed by the City as part of the UWMP effort. As the regional wholesale supplier for much of Orange County, MWDOC works in collaboration with each of its retail agencies as well as MET, its wholesaler, to develop demand projections for imported water. The City has been proactively decreasing its reliance on imported water by pursuing a variety of water conservation strategies. Future water savings and low-income water use are included in these projected values (Table 4-5). The demand data presented in this section accounts for passive savings in the future. Passive savings are water savings as a result of codes, standards, ordinances and public outreach on water conservation and higher efficiency fixtures. Passive savings are anticipated to continue through 2045 and will result in continued water saving and reduced consumption levels. Permanent water conservation requirements and water conservation strategies are discussed in Section 8 and 9 of this document. Table 4-3: Retail: Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water - Projected DWR Submittal Table 4-2 Retail: Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water - Projected Use Type Additional Description (as needed) Projected Water Use 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Single Family 11,714 11,525 11,339 11,127 11,090 Multi-Family 5,950 5,826 5,731 5,603 5,603 Commercial 3,115 3,465 3,551 3,640 3,640 Industrial 588 654 670 687 687 Institutional/Governmental 125 139 142 146 146 Landscape 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 Losses Non-revenue water 1,496 1,503 1,492 1,478 1,476 TOTAL 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 26,054 NOTES: 245 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-7 Based on the information provided above, the total demand for potable water is listed below in Table 4-4. Table 4-4: Retail: Total Water Use (Potable and Non-Potable) DWR Submittal Table 4-3 Retail: Total Gross Water Use (Potable and Non-Potable) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Potable Water, Raw, Other Non-potable 25,966 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 26,054 Recycled Water Demand 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL WATER USE 25,966 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 26,054 NOTES: Table 4-5: Retail Only: Inclusion in Water Use Projections DWR Submittal Table 4-5 Retail Only: Inclusion in Water Use Projections Are Future Water Savings Included in Projections? (Refer to Appendix K of UWMP Guidebook) Yes If "Yes" to above, state the section or page number, in the cell to the right, where citations of the codes, ordinances, etc. utilized in demand projections are found. Section 8 and 9 Are Lower Income Residential Demands Included in Projections? Yes NOTES: 4.3.2.3 Water Use Projections for Lower Income Households Since 2010, the UWMP Act has required retail water suppliers to include water use projections for single- family and multi-family residential housing for lower income and affordable households. This will assist the City in complying with the requirement under Government Code Section 65589.7 granting priority for providing water service to lower income households. A lower income household is defined as a household earning below 80% of the median household income (MHI). DWR recommends retail suppliers rely on the housing elements of city or county general plans to quantify planned lower income housing with the City's service area (DWR, 2020). RHNA assists jurisdictions in updating general plan's housing elements section. The RHNA identifies additional housing needs and assesses households by income level for the City through 2010 decennial Census and 2005-2009 American Community Survey data. The sixth cycle of the RHNA covers the planning period of October 2021 to October 2029. The SCAG adopted the RHNA Allocation Plan for this cycle on March 4, 2021. The California Department of Housing and Community Development reviewed the housing elements data submitted by jurisdictions in the SCAG region and concluded the data meets statutory requirements for the assessment of current housing needs. 246 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-8 Under the assumption that the RHNA household allocations adequately represent ratios of the City’s overall future income categories (not the exact ratio of all household by income but a conservative one for low-income household estimates), the RHNA low-income percentage can be used to estimate future low income demands. One objective of RHNA is to increase affordable housing, therefore RHNA has been allocating additional low-income households to various regions. Because relying on the RHNA distribution of households by income category is likely to produce an overestimate of low-income water demands, this approach represents a conservative projection of future low-income water use. Table 4-6 presents the City’s RHNA housing allocation. RHNA classifies low income housing into two categories: very low income (<30% - 50% MHI), and low income (51% - 80% MHI). Altogether 43.7% of the City’s allocated housing need for the planning period of October 2021 to October 2029 are considered low-income housing (SCAG, 2021). Table 4-6: SCAG 6th Cycle Household Allocation Based on Median Household Income Household Category by Income Number of Households % of Total Allocated Households Very Low Income 3,661 27.4% Low Income 2,184 16.3% Moderate Income 2,308 17.3% Above Moderate Income 5,215 39.0% Total Future Allocated Households 13,368 100.0% By applying the percentage of low-income housing from the SCAG report to the total projected SF/MF residential demand calculated in Table 4-3 above, low-income demand can be conservatively estimated for both SF and MF through 2045. For example, the total low-income single family residential demand is projected to be 5,122 AF in 2025 and 4,849 AF in 2045 (Table 4-7). Table 4-7: Projected Water Use for Low Income Households (AF) Water Use Sector FY Ending 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Residential Demand (AF) 17,664 17,352 17,071 16,730 16,693 Single-Family Residential Demand - Low Income Households (AF) 5,122 5,039 4,958 4,865 4,849 Multi-Family Residential Demand - Low Income Households (AF) 2602 2547 2506 2450 2450 Total Low Income Households Demand (AF) 7,723 7,587 7,464 7,315 7,299 Water Loss The City has conducted annual water loss audit since 2015 per the American Water Works Association (AWWA) methodology per SB 555 to understand the relationship between water loss, operating costs, 247 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-9 and revenue losses. Non-revenue water for FY2014/15 – CY 2019 (excluding CY 2016 and 2017 due to negative reported real loss values associated with billing system errors) (Figure 4-2) consists of three components: real losses (e.g., leakage in mains and service lines, and storage tank overflows), apparent losses (unauthorized consumption, customer metering inaccuracies and systematic data handling errors), and unbilled water (e.g., hydrant flushing, firefighting, and blow-off water from well start-ups). The City’s real losses ranged from 902 AFY to 1389 AFY and apparent losses ranged from 185 AFY to 247AFY from FY2014/15 – CY 2019 (once again excluding CY 2016 and 2017). The water audit data from CY2016 and CY2017 are not included in the discussion because the real loss was -85 and -2531 AFY, respectively. The unbilled water ranged from 64 AFY to 68 AFY in the same time frame. In the CY2019 water audit, the City’s total water loss was 1,574 AFY (Table 4-8) compared to the total water use of 25,912 AF in the same timeframe. The total water loss consists of real loss of 1389 AFY and apparent loss of 185 AFY in CY2019. The non-revenue water was 1638 AFY. The active and inactive service connections were relatively consistent from CY2015-2019 with 55,088 connections in CY2019. The real loss performance indicator was 23 gals/connection/day in CY2019. Figure 4-3 presents the performance indicators of gallons of real and apparent loss per connection per day. Understanding and controlling water loss from a distribution system is an effective way for the City to achieve regulatory standards and manage their existing resources. The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is still developing water loss performance standards; these standards have not yet been adopted. Table 4-8: Retail: 12 Month Water Loss Audit Reporting DWR Submittal Table 4-4 Retail: Last Five Years of Water Loss Audit Reporting Reporting Period Start Date (mm/yyyy) Volume of Water Loss 1,2 (AF) 07/2014 1,167 01/2018 1,101 01/2019 1,574 1 Taken from the field "Water Losses" (a combination of apparent losses and real losses) from the AWWA worksheet. 2 Units of measure (AF, CCF, MG) must remain consistent throughout the UWMP as reported in Table 2-3. NOTES: Water loss in AFY. Real loss was negative for CY 2016 and 2017, hence not included. Total water loss was negative for 2017. This is due to errors in the City's billing system. The City changed the billing system in the 2016 timeframe to a third-party system which caused double counting of meter reads; the City’s billing department has been making manual corrections of these errors. 248 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 4-10 Figure 4-2: Water Loss Audit for FY 2014/15 and CY2018-2019 Figure 4-3: Water Loss Performance Indicator for FY 2014/15 and CY2018-2019 249 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 5-1 5 CONSERVATION TARGET COMPLIANCE The Water Conservation Act of 2009, also known as SBx7-7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), signed into law on February 3, 2010, requires the State of California to reduce urban water use by 20% by the year 2020 (20x2020). To achieve this each retail urban water supplier must determine baseline water use during their baseline period and target water use for the years 2015 and 2020 to meet the state’s water reduction goal. Retail water suppliers are required to comply with SBx7-7 individually or as a region in collaboration with other retail water suppliers, or demonstrate they have a plan or have secured funding to be in compliance, in order to be eligible for water related state grants and loans on or after July 16, 2016. The City’s actual 2020 water use is lower than its 2020 water use target, therefore, demonstrating compliance with SBx7-7. In its 2015 UWMP, the City revised its baseline per capita water use calculations using 2010 U.S. Census data. Changes in the baseline calculations resulted in updated per capita water use targets. The following sections describe the efforts by the City to comply with the requirements of SBx7-7 and efforts by MWDOC to assist retail agencies, including the formation of a Regional Alliance to provide additional flexibility to all water suppliers in Orange County. A discussion of programs implemented to support retail agencies in achieving their per capita water reduction goals is covered in Section 9 – Demand Management Measures of this UWMP. Complimentary to information presented in this section are SBx7-7 Verification and Compliance Forms, a set of standardized tables required by DWR to demonstrate compliance with the Water Conservation Act in this 2020 UWMP (Appendix D) including calculations of recycled water used for groundwater recharge (indirect reuse) to offset a portion of the agency’s potable demand when meeting the regional as well as individual water use targets. Baseline Water Use The baseline water use is the City’s gross water use divided by its service area population, reported in GPCD. Gross water use is a measure of water that enters the distribution system of the supplier over a 12-month period with certain allowable exclusions. These exclusions are: x Recycled water delivered within the service area x Indirect recycled water x Water placed in long term storage x Water conveyed to another urban supplier x Water delivered for agricultural use x Process water Water suppliers within the OCWD Groundwater Basin, including the City, have the option of choosing to deduct recycled water used for indirect potable reuse (IPR) from their gross water use to account for the 250 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 5-2 recharge of recycled water into the OC Basin by OCWD, historically through Water Factory 21 (WF-21), and now by the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS). Water suppliers must report baseline water use for two baseline periods, the 10- to 15-year baseline (baseline GPCD) and the five-year baseline (target confirmation) as described below. 5.1.1 Ten to 15-Year Baseline Period (Baseline GPCD) The first step to calculating the City’s water use targets is to determine its base daily per capita water use (baseline water use). The baseline water use is calculated as a continuous (rolling) 10-year average during a period, which ends no earlier than December 31, 2004 and no later than December 31, 2010. Water suppliers whose recycled water made up 10% or more of their 2008 retail water delivery can use up to a 15-year average for the calculation. Recycled water use was less than 10% of the City’s retail delivery in 2008; therefore, a 10-year baseline period is used. The City’s baseline water use is 161 GPCD, obtained from the 10-year period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2005. Calculations are provided in Appendix D. 5.1.2 Five-Year Baseline Period (Target Confirmation) Water suppliers are required to calculate water use, in GPCD, for a five-year baseline period. This number is used to confirm that the selected 2020 target meets the minimum water use reduction requirements. Regardless of the compliance option adopted by the City, it will need to meet a minimum water use target of 5% reduction from the five-year baseline water use. This five-year baseline water use is calculated as a continuous five-year average during a period, which ends no earlier than December 31, 2007 and no later than December 31, 2010. The City’s five-year baseline water use is 151 GPCD, obtained from the five-year period July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2008. Calculations are provided in Appendix D. 5.1.3 Service Area Population The City’s service area boundaries correspond with the boundaries for a city or census designated place. This allows the City to use service area population estimates prepared by the DOF. CDR is the entity which compiles population data for Orange County based on DOF data. The calculation of the City’s baseline water use and water use targets in the 2010 UWMP was based on the 2000 U.S. Census population numbers obtained from CDR. The baseline water use and water use targets in the 2015 UWMP were revised based on the 2010 U.S. Census population obtained from CDR in 2012. That baseline remained in use in the 2020 calculations. SBx7-7 Water Use Targets In the 2020 UWMP, the City may update its 2020 water use target by selecting a different target method than what was used previously. The target methods and determination of the 2015 and 2020 targets are described below. The City selected Option 3 consistent with 2015 and maintained the same 2015 and 2020 target water uses as reported in its 2015 UWMP. 251 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 5-3 5.2.1 SBx7-7 Target Methods DWR has established four target calculation methods for urban retail water suppliers to choose from. The City is required to adopt one of the four options to comply with SBx7-7 requirements. The four options include: x Option 1 requires a simple 20% reduction from the baseline by 2020 and 10% by 2015. x Option 2 employs a budget-based approach by requiring an agency to achieve a performance standard based on three metrics o Residential indoor water use of 55 GPCD o Landscape water use commensurate with the Model Landscape Ordinance o 10% reduction in baseline CII water use x Option 3 is to achieve 95% of the applicable state hydrologic region target as set forth in the State’s 202020 Water Conservation Plan. x Option 4 requires the subtraction of Total Savings from the baseline GPCD: o Total savings includes indoor residential savings, meter savings, CII savings, and landscape and water loss savings. With MWDOC’s assistance in the calculation of the City’s base daily per capita use and water use targets, the City selected to comply with Option 3 consistent with the option selected in 2010 and 2015. 5.2.2 2020 Targets and Compliance Under Compliance Option 3, to achieve 95% of the South Coast Hydrologic Region target as set forth in the State’s 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan, the City’s 2015 target is 157 GPCD and the 2020 target is 142 GPCD as summarized in Table 5-1. In addition, the confirmed 2020 target needs to meet a minimum of 5% reduction from the five-year baseline water use. Table 5-1: Baselines and Targets Summary DWR Submittal Table 5-1 Baselines and Targets Summary From SB X7-7 Verification Form Retail Supplier or Regional Alliance Only Baseline Period Start Year * End Year * Average Baseline GPCD* Confirmed 2020 Target* 10-15 year 1996 2005 161 142 5 Year 2004 2008 151 *All cells in this table should be populated manually from the supplier's SBX7-7 Verification Form and reported in Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD) NOTES: 252 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 5-4 The City’s actual 2020 consumption is 88 GPCD which is below its 2020 target of 142 GPCD (Table 5-2). As shown in Table 5-2, the City did not make any adjustments in its actual 2020 consumption using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events. The City met its 2020 water use target and is in compliance with SBx7-7. Table 5-2: 2020 Compliance DWR Submittal Table 5-2: 2020 Compliance From SB X7-7 2020 Compliance Form Retail Supplier or Regional Alliance Only 2020 GPCD 2020 Confirmed Target GPCD* Did Supplier Achieve Targeted Reduction for 2020? Y/N Actual 2020 GPCD* 2020 TOTAL Adjustments* Adjusted 2020 GPCD* (Adjusted if applicable) 88 0 88 142 Y *All cells in this table should be populated manually from the supplier's SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form and reported in Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD) NOTES: Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance A retail supplier may choose to meet the SBx7-7 targets on its own or it may form a regional alliance with other retail suppliers to meet the water use target as a region. Within a Regional Alliance, each retail water supplier will have an additional opportunity to achieve compliance under both an individual target and a regional target. x If the Regional Alliance meets its water use target on a regional basis, all agencies in the alliance are deemed compliant. x If the Regional Alliance fails to meet its water use target, each individual supplier will have an opportunity to meet their water use targets individually. The City is a member of the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance formed by MWDOC, its wholesaler. This regional alliance consists of 29 retail agencies in Orange County as described in MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP. MWDOC provides assistance in the calculation of each retail agency’s baseline water use and water use targets. In 2020, the regional baseline and targets were revised from 2015 to account for any revisions made by the retail agencies to their individual 2020 targets. The regional water use target is the weighted average of the individual retail agencies’ targets (by population). The Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance weighted 2020 target is 159 GPCD. The actual 2020 water use in the region is 109 GPCD, i.e., the region met its 2020 GPCD goal. 253 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-1 6 WATER SUPPLY CHARACTERIZATION As a counterpart to Section 4’s Water Use Characterization, this section characterizes the City’s water supply. This section includes identification and quantification of water supply sources through 2045, descriptions of each water supply source and their management, opportunities for exchanges and transfers, and discussion regarding any planned future water supply projects. This section also includes the energy intensity of the water service, a new UWMP requirement. Water Supply Overview The City meets all of its demands with a combination of imported water and local groundwater. The City works together with two primary agencies, MWDOC and OCWD, to ensure a safe and reliable water supply that will continue to serve the community in periods of drought and shortage. The sources of imported water supplies include water from the Colorado River and the State Water Project (SWP) provided by MET and delivered through MWDOC. The City’s main source of water supply is groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin. Imported water makes up the rest of the City’s water supply portfolio. In FY 2019-20, the City relied on approximately 70% groundwater and 30% imported water (Table 6-1). It is projected that by 2045, the water supply mix will change to approximately 85% groundwater and 15% imported water (Table 6-2 and Figure 6-1). Note that these representations of supply match the projected demand. However, the City can purchase more MET water through MWDOC, should the need arise. Additionally, GWRS supplies are included as part of groundwater pumping numbers. The following subsections provide a detailed discussion of the City’s water sources as well as the future water supply portfolio for the next 25 years. Table 6-1: Retail: Water Supplies – Actual DWR Submittal Table 6-8 Retail: Water Supplies — Actual Water Supply Additional Detail on Water Supply 2020 Actual Volume (AF) Water Quality Groundwater (not desalinated) Orange County Groundwater Basin 18,296 Drinking Water Purchased or Imported Water MWDOC 7,670 Drinking Water Total 25,966 NOTES: Source - City of Huntington Beach, 2021 254 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-2 Table 6-2: Retail: Water Supplies – Projected DWR Submittal Table 6-9 Retail: Water Supplies — Projected Water Supply Additional Detail on Water Supply Projected Water Supply (AF) 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Reasonably Available Volume Reasonably Available Volume Reasonably Available Volume Reasonably Available Volume Reasonably Available Volume Groundwater (not desalinated) Orange County Groundwater Basin 22,439 22,545 22,388 22,179 22,146 Purchased or Imported Water MWDOC 3,960 3,979 3,951 3,914 3,908 Total 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 26,054 NOTES: Source - CDM Smith, 2021 Groundwater volumes assume OCWD’s basin production percentage (BPP) to be 85% for all years. Volumes of groundwater and imported water may vary depending on OCWD's actual BPP projections, which are established annually. Figure 6-1: City’s Projected Water Supply Sources (AF) 255 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-3 Imported Water The City supplements its local groundwater with imported water purchased from MET through MWDOC. Based on the most recent 10-year average, the annual imported water volume supplied in the City is 8,882 AFY. In FY 2019-20, the City relied on approximately 7,670 AFY – approximately 30% of the City’s water supply portfolio for FY 2019-20 – of imported water to meet its demands. MET’s principal sources of water are the Colorado River via the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) and the Lake Oroville watershed in Northern California through the SWP. For Orange County, the water obtained from these sources is treated at the Robert B. Diemer Filtration Plant located in Yorba Linda. Typically, the Diemer Filtration Plant receives a blend of Colorado River water from Lake Mathews through the MET Lower Feeder and SWP water through the Yorba Linda Feeder. The City maintains three imported water connections to the MET system, OC-9 with a capacity of 14 cubic feet per second (cfs), OC-35 with a capacity of 20 cfs, and OC-44 with a capacity of 15 cfs. OC-9 is located at the intersection of Dale and Katella Streets in the City of Stanton and enters the City at the intersection of Newland and Edinger Streets. OC-35 is also located at the intersection of Dale and Katella Streets, and enters the City at the intersection of Springdale and Glenwood Streets. OC- 9 and OC-35 are under the jurisdiction of the West Orange County Water Board. OC-44 is located at the East Orange County Feeder #2, and flow is delivered to the City’s service area through a 24- to 42-inch transmission main jointly owned by the City and Mesa Water District. A secondary metering station, also jointly owned, is located on Adams Avenue at the Santa Ana River. 6.2.1 Colorado River Supplies Background The Colorado River was MET’s original source of water after MET’s establishment in 1928. The CRA, which is owned and operated by MET, transports water from the Colorado River to its terminus Lake Mathews, in Riverside County. The actual amount of water per year that may be conveyed through the CRA to MET’s member agencies is subject to the availability of Colorado River water. Approximately 40 million people rely on the Colorado River and its tributaries for water with 5.5 million acres of land using Colorado River water for irrigation. The CRA includes supplies from the implementation of the Quantification Settlement Agreement and its related agreements to transfer water from agricultural agencies to urban uses. The 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement enabled California to implement major Colorado River water conservation and transfer programs, in order to stabilize water supplies and reduce the state’s demand on the river to its 4.4 million acre-feet (MAF) entitlement. Colorado River transactions are potentially available to supply additional water up to the CRA capacity of 1.25 MAF on an as-needed basis. Water from the Colorado River or its tributaries is available to users in California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, and Mexico. California is apportioned the use of 4.4 MAF of water from the Colorado River each year plus one-half of any surplus that may be available for use collectively in Arizona, California, and Nevada. In addition, California has historically been allowed to use Colorado River water apportioned to, but not used by, Arizona or Nevada. MET has a basic entitlement of 550,000 AFY of Colorado River water, plus surplus water up to an additional 662,000 AFY when the following conditions exist (MET, 2021): x Colorado River water is unused by the California holders of priorities 1 through 3 256 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-4 x Water is saved by the Palo Verde land management, crop rotation, and water supply program x When the U.S. Secretary of the Interior makes available either one or both of the following: o Surplus water o Colorado River water that is apportioned to but unused by Arizona and/or Nevada. Current Conditions and Supply MET has not received surplus water for a number of years. The Colorado River supply faces current and future imbalances between water supply and demand in the Colorado River Basin due to long-term drought conditions. Analysis of historical records suggests a potential change in the relationship between precipitation and runoff in the Colorado River Basin. The past 21 years (1999-2020) have seen an overall drying trend, even though the period included several wet or average years. The river basin has substantial storage capacity, but the significant reduction in system reservoir storage in the last two decades is great enough to consider the period a drought (DWR, 2020a). At the close of 2020, system storage was at or near its lowest since 2000, so there is very little buffer to avoid a shortage from any future period of reduced precipitation and runoff (MET, 2021). Looking ahead, the long-term imbalance in the Colorado River Basin’s future supply and demand is projected to be approximately 3.2 MAF by the year 2060 (USBR, 2012). Over the years, MET has helped fund and implement various programs to improve Colorado River supply reliability and help resolve the imbalance between supply and demand. Implementation of such programs have contributed to achievements like achieving a record low diversion of the Colorado River in 2019, a level not seen since the 1950s. Colorado River water management programs include: x Imperial Irrigation District / MET Conservation Program – Under agreements executed in 1988 and 1989, this program allows MET to fund water efficiency improvements within Imperial Irrigation District’s service area in return for the right to divert the water conserved by those investments. An average of 105,000 AFY of water has been conserved since the program’s implementation. x Palo Verde Land Management, Crop Rotation, and Water Supply Program – Authorized in 2004, this 35-year program allows MET to pay participating farmers to reduce their water use, and for MET to receive the saved water. Over the life of the program, an average of 84,500 AFY has been saved and made available to MET. x Bard Seasonal Fallowing Program – Authorized in 2019, this program allows MET to pay participating farmers in Bard to reduce their water use between the late spring and summer months of selected years, which provides up to 6,000 AF of water to be available to MET in certain years. x Management of MET-Owned Land in Palo Verde – Since 2001, MET has acquired approximately 21,000 acres of irrigable farmland that are leased to growers, with incentives to grow low water-using crops and experiment with low water-consumption practices. If long-term water savings are realized, MET may explore ways to formally account them for Colorado River supplies. x Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) and MET Storage and Interstate Release Agreement – Entered in 2004, this agreement allows SNWA to store its unused, conserved 257 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-5 water with MET, in exchange for MET to receive additional Colorado River water supply. MET has relied on the additional water during dry years, especially during the 2011-2016 California drought, and SNWA is not expected to call upon MET to return water until after 2026. x Lower Colorado Water Supply Projects – Authorized in 1980s, this project provides up to 10,000 AFY of water to certain entities that do not have or have insufficient rights to use Colorado River water. A contract executed in 2007 allowed MET to receive project water left unused by the project contractors along the River – nearly 10,000 AF was received by MET in 2019 and is estimated for 2020. x Exchange Programs – MET is involved in separate exchange programs with the United States Bureau of Reclamation, which takes place at the Colorado River Intake and with San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), which exchanges conserved Colorado River water. x Lake Mead Storage Program – Executed in 2006, this program allows MET to leave excessively conserved water in Lake Mead, for exclusive use by MET in later years. x Quagga Mussel Control Program – Developed in 2007, this program introduced surveillance activities and control measures to combat quagga mussels, an invasive species that impact the Colorado River’s water quality. x Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan – Signed in 2019, this agreement incentivizes storage in Lake Mead through 2026 and overall, it increases MET’s flexibility to fill the CRA as needed (MET, 2021). Future Programs / Plans The Colorado River faces long-term challenges of water demands exceeding available supply with additional uncertainties due to climate change. Climate change impacts expected in the Colorado River Basin include the following: x More frequent, more intense, and longer lasting droughts, which will result in water deficits x Continued dryness in the Colorado River Basin, which will increase the likelihood of triggering a first-ever shortage in the Lower Basin x Increased temperatures, which will affect the percentage of precipitation that falls as rain or snow, as well as the amount and timing of mountain snowpack (DWR, 2020b) Acknowledging the various uncertainties regarding reliability, MET plans to continue ongoing programs, such as those listed earlier in this section. Additionally, MET supports increasing water recycling in the Colorado River Basin and is in the process of developing additional transfer programs for the future (MET, 2021). 6.2.2 State Water Project Supplies Background The SWP consists of a series of pump stations, reservoirs, aqueducts, tunnels, and power plants operated by DWR and is an integral part of the effort to ensure that business and industry, urban and suburban residents, and farmers throughout much of California have sufficient water. Water from the SWP originates at Lake Oroville, which is located on the Feather River in Northern California. Much of 258 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-6 the SWP water supply passes through the Delta. The SWP is the largest state-built, multipurpose, user -financed water project in the United States. Nearly two-thirds of residents in California receive at least part of their water from the SWP, with approximately 70% of SWP’s contracted water supply going to urban users and 30% to agricultural users. The primary purpose of the SWP is to divert and store water during wet periods in Northern and Central California and distribute it to areas of need in Northern California, the San Francisco Bay area, the San Joaquin Valley, the Central Coast, and Southern California (MET, 2021). The Delta is key to the SWP’s ability to deliver water to its agricultural and urban contractors. All but five of the 29 SWP contractors receive water deliveries below the Delta (pumped via the Harvey O. Banks or Barker Slough pumping plants). However, the Delta faces many challenges concerning its long-term sustainability such as climate change posing a threat of increased variability in floods and droughts. Sea level rise complicates efforts in managing salinity levels and preserving water quality in the Delta to ensure a suitable water supply for urban and agricultural use. Furthermore, other challenges include continued subsidence of Delta islands, many of which are below sea level, and the related threat of a catastrophic levee failure as the water pressure increases, or as a result of a major seismic event. Current Conditions and Supply “Table A” water is the maximum entitlement of SWP water for each water contracting agency. Currently, the combined maximum Table A amount is 4.17 million AFY. Of this amount, 4.13 million AFY is the maximum Table A water available for delivery from the Delta. On average, deliveries are approximately 60% of the maximum Table A amount (DWR, 2020b). SWP contractors may receive Article 21 water on a short-term basis in addition to Table A water if requested. Article 21 of SWP contracts allows contractors to receive additional water deliveries only under specific conditions, generally during wet months of the year (December through March). Because a SWP contractor must have an immediate use for Article 21 supply or a place to store it outside of the SWP, there are few contractors like MET that can access such supplies. Carryover water is SWP water allocated to an SWP contractor and approved for delivery to the contractor in a given year, but not used by the end of the year. The unused water is stored in the SWP’s share of San Luis Reservoir, when space is available, for the contractor to use in the following year. Turnback pool water is Table A water that has been allocated to SWP contractors that has exceeded their demands. This water can then be purchased by another contractor depending on its availability. SWP Delta exports are the water supplies that are transferred directly to SWP contractors or to San Luis Reservoir storage south of the Delta via the Harvey O. Banks pumping plant. Estimated average annual Delta exports and SWP Table A water deliveries have generally decreased since 2005, when Delta export regulations affecting SWP pumping operations became more restrictive due to federal biological opinions (Biops). The Biops protect species listed as threatened or endangered under the federal and state Endangered Species Acts (ESAs) and affect the SWP’s water delivery capability because they restrict SWP exports in the Delta and include Delta outflow requirements during certain times of the year, thus reducing the available supply for export or storage. Before being updated by the 2019 Long-Term Operations Plan, the prior 2008 and 2009 Biops resulted in an estimated reduction in SWP deliveries of 0.3 MAF during critically dry years to 1.3 MAF in above 259 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-7 normal water years as compared to the previous baseline. However, the 2019 Long-Term Operations Plan and Biops are expected to increase SWP deliveries by an annual average of 20,000 AF as compared to the previous Biops (MET, 2021). Average Table A deliveries decreased in the 2019 SWP Final Delivery Capability Report compared to 2017, mainly due to the 2018 Coordinated Operation Agreement (COA) Addendum and the increase in the end of September storage target for Lake Oroville. Other factors that also affected deliveries included changes in regulations associated with the Incidental Take Permit (ITP) and the Reinitiation of Consultation for Long-Term Operations (RoC on LTO), a shift in Table A to Article 21 deliveries which occurred due to higher storage in SWP San Luis, and other operational updates to the SWP and federal Central Valley Project (CVP) (DWR, 2020b). Since 2005, there are similar decreasing trends for both the average annual Delta exports and the average annual Table A deliveries (Table 6-3). Table 6-3: MET SWP Program Capabilities Year Average Annual Delta Exports (MAF) Average Annual Table A Deliveries (MAF) 2005 2.96 2.82 2013 2.61 2.55 2019 2.52 2.41 Percent Change* -14.8% -14.3% *Percent change is between the years 2019 and 2005. Ongoing regulatory restrictions, such as those imposed by the Biops on the effects of SWP and the CVP operations on certain marine life, also contribute to the challenge of determining the SWP’s water delivery reliability. In dry, below-normal conditions, MET has increased the supplies delivered through the California Aqueduct by developing flexible CVP/SWP storage and transfer programs. The goal of the storage/transfer programs is to develop additional dry-year supplies that can be conveyed through the available Harvey O. Banks pumping plant capacity to maximize deliveries through the California Aqueduct during dry hydrologic conditions and regulatory restrictions. In addition, the SWRCB has set water quality objectives that must be met by the SWP including minimum Delta outflows, limits on SWP and CVP Delta exports, and maximum allowable salinity level. The following factors affect the ability to estimate existing and future water delivery reliability: x Water availability at the source: Availability can be highly variable and depends on the amount and timing of rain and snow that fall in any given year. Generally, during a single-dry year or two, surface and groundwater storage can supply most water deliveries, but multiple-dry years can result in critically low water reserves. Fisheries issues can also restrict the operations of the export pumps even when water supplies are available. x Water rights with priority over the SWP: Water users with prior water rights are assigned higher priority in DWR’s modeling of the SWP’s water delivery reliability, even ahead of SWP Table A water. x Climate change: Mean temperatures are predicted to vary more significantly than previously expected. This change in climate is anticipated to bring warmer winter storms that result in less 260 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-8 snowfall at lower elevations, reducing total snowpack. From historical data, DWR projects that by 2050, the Sierra snowpack will be reduced from its historical average by 25 to 40 percent. Increased precipitation as rain could result in a larger number of “rain-on-snow” events, causing snow to melt earlier in the year and over fewer days than historically, affecting the availability of water for pumping by the SWP during summer. Furthermore, water quality may be adversely affected due to the anticipated increase in wildfires. Rising sea levels may result in potential pumping cutbacks on the SWP and CVP. x Regulatory restrictions on SWP Delta exports: The Biops protect special-status species such as delta smelt and spring- and winter-run Chinook salmon and imposed substantial constraints on Delta water supply operations through requirements for Delta inflow and outflow and export pumping restrictions. Restrictions on SWP operations imposed by state and federal agencies contribute substantially to the challenge of accurately determining the SWP’s water delivery reliability in any given year (DWR, 2020b). x Ongoing environmental and policy planning efforts: Governor Gavin Newsom ended California WaterFix in May 2019 and announced a new approach to modernize Delta Conveyance through a single tunnel alternative. The EcoRestore Program aims to restore at least 30,000 acres of Delta habitat, with the near-term goal of making significant strides toward that objective by 2020 (DWR, 2020b). x Delta levee failure: The levees are vulnerable to failure because most original levees were simply built with soils dredged from nearby channels and were not engineered. A breach of one or more levees and island flooding could affect Delta water quality and SWP operations for several months. When islands are flooded, DWR may need to drastically decrease or even cease SWP Delta exports to evaluate damage caused by salinity in the Delta. Operational constraints will likely continue until a long-term solution to the problems in the Bay-Delta is identified and implemented. New Biops for listed species under the Federal ESA or by the California Department of Fish and Game’s issuance of incidental take authorizations under the Federal ESA and California ESA might further adversely affect SWP and CVP operations. Additionally, new litigation, listings of additional species or new regulatory requirements could further adversely affect SWP operations in the future by requiring additional export reductions, releases of additional water from storage or other operational changes impacting water supply operations. Future Programs / Plans MET’s Board approved a Delta Action Plan in June 2007 that provides a framework for staff to pursue actions with other agencies and stakeholders to build a sustainable Delta and reduce conflicts between water supply conveyance and the environment. The Delta Action Plan aims to prioritize immediate short-term actions to stabilize the Delta while an ultimate solution is selected, and mid-term steps to maintain the Delta while a long-term solution is implemented. Currently, MET is working towards addressing four elements: Delta ecosystem restoration, water supply conveyance, flood control protection, and storage development. In May 2019, Governor Newsom ended California WaterFix, announced a new approach to modernize Delta Conveyance through a single tunnel alternative, and released Executive Order 10-19 that directed state agencies to inventory and assess new planning for the project. DWR then withdrew all project 261 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-9 approvals and permit applications for California WaterFix, effectively ending the project. The purpose of the Delta Conveyance Project (DCP) gives rise to several project objectives (MET, 2021). In proposing to make physical improvements to the SWP Delta conveyance system, the project objectives are: x To address anticipated rising sea levels and other reasonably foreseeable consequences of climate change and extreme weather events. x To minimize the potential for public health and safety impacts from reduced quantity and quality of SWP water deliveries, and potentially CVP water deliveries, south of the Delta resulting from a major earthquake that causes breaching of Delta levees and the inundation of brackish water into the areas in which existing pumping plants operate. x To protect the ability of the SWP, and potentially the CVP, to deliver water when hydrologic conditions result in the availability of sufficient amounts, consistent with the requirements of state and federal law. x To provide operational flexibility to improve aquatic conditions in the Delta and better manage risks of further regulatory constraints on project operations. 6.2.3 Storage Storage is a major component of MET’s dry year resource management strategy. MET’s likelihood of having adequate supply capability to meet projected demands, without implementing its Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP), is dependent on its storage resources. Due to the pattern of generally drier hydrology, the groundwater basins and local reservoirs have dropped to low operating levels and remain below healthy storage levels. For example, the Colorado River Basin’s system storage at the close of 2020, was at or near its lowest since 2000, so there is very little buffer to avoid a shortage from any future period of reduced precipitation and runoff (MET, 2021). MET stores water in both DWR and MET surface water reservoirs. MET’s surface water reservoirs are Lake Mathews, Lake Skinner, and Diamond Valley Lake (DVL), which have a combined storage capacity of over 1 MAF. Approximately 650,000 AF are stored for seasonal, regulatory, and drought use, while approximately 370,000 AF are stored for emergency use. MET also has contractual rights to DWR surface Reservoirs, such as 65 thousand acre-feet (TAF) of flexible storage at Lake Perris (East Branch terminal reservoir) and 154 TAF of flexible storage at Castaic Lake (West Branch terminal reservoir) that provides MET with additional options for managing SWP deliveries to maximize the yield from the project. This storage can provide MET with up to 44 TAF of additional supply over multiple dry years, or up to 219 TAF to Southern California in a single dry year (MET, 2021). MET endeavors to increase the reliability of water supplies through the development of flexible storage and transfer programs including groundwater storage (MET, 2021). These include: x Lake Mead Storage Program: Executed in 2006, this program allows MET to leave excessively conserved water in Lake Mead, for exclusive use by MET in later years. MET created “Intentionally Created Surplus” (ICS) water in 2006-2007, 2009-2012, and 2016-2019, and withdrew ICS water in 2008 and 2013-2015. As of January 1, 2021, MET had a total of 1.3 MAF of Extraordinary Conservation ICS water. 262 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-10 x Semitropic Storage Program: The maximum storage capacity of the program is 350 TAF, and the minimum and maximum annual yields available to MET are 34.7 TAF and 236.2 TAF, respectively. The specific amount of water MET can expect to store in and subsequently receive from the program depends on hydrologic conditions, any regulatory requirements restricting MET’s ability to export water for storage and demands placed by other program participants. During wet years, MET has the discretion to use the program to store portions of its SWP supplies which are in excess, and during dry years, the Semitropic Water Storage District returns MET’s previously stored water to MET by direct groundwater pump-in or by exchange of surface water supplies. x Arvin-Edison Storage Program: The storage program is estimated to deliver 75 TAF, and the specific amount of water MET can expect to store in and subsequently receive from the program depends on hydrologic conditions and any regulatory requirements restricting MET’s ability to export water for storage. During wet years, MET has the discretion to use to program to store portions of its SWP supplies which are in excess, and during dry years, the Arvin-Edison Water Storage District returns MET’s previously stored water to MET by direct groundwater pump-in or by exchange of surface water supplies. x Antelope Valley-East Kern (AVEK) Water Agency Exchange and Storage Program: Under the exchange program, for every two AF MET receives, MET returns 1 AF back to AVEK, and MET will also be able to store up to 30 TAF in the AVEK’s groundwater basin, with a dry-year return capability of 10 TAF. x High Desert Water Bank Program: Under this program, MET will have the ability to store up to 280 TAF of its SWP Table A or other supplies in the Antelope Valley groundwater basin, and in exchange will provide funding for the construction of monitoring and production wells, turnouts from the California Aqueduct, pipelines, recharge basins, water storage, and booster pump facilities. The project is anticipated to be in operation by 2025. x Kern-Delta Water District Storage Program: This groundwater storage program has 250 TAF of storage capacity, and water for storage can either be directly recharged into the groundwater basin or delivered to Kern-Delta Water District farmers in lieu of pumping groundwater. During dry years, the Kern-Delta Water District returns MET’s previously stored water to MET by direct groundwater pump-in return or by exchange of surface water supplies. x Mojave Storage Program: MET entered into a groundwater banking and exchange transfer agreement with Mojave Water Agency that allows for the cumulative storage of up to 390 TAF. The agreement allows for MET to store water in an exchange account for later return. 6.2.4 Planned Future Sources Beyond the programs highlighted in Sections 6.2.1 through 6.2.3, MET continues to invest in efforts to meet its goal of long-term regional water supply reliability, focusing on the following: x Continuing water conservation x Developing water supply management programs outside of the region x Developing storage programs related to the Colorado River and the SWP x Developing storage and groundwater management programs within the Southern California region x Increasing water recycling, groundwater recovery, stormwater and seawater desalination 263 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-11 x Pursuing long-term solutions for the ecosystem, regulatory and water supply issues in the California Bay-Delta (MET, 2021). Groundwater Historically, local groundwater has been the cheapest and most reliable source of supply for the City. The City draws water from the Basin. Based on the most recent 10-year average, the annual groundwater volume supplied by the City is 18,871 AFY. In FY 2019-20, the City relied on approximately 18,296 AFY – approximately 70% of the City’s water supply portfolio for FY 2019-20 – from the OC Basin to meet its demands. This section describes the non-adjudicated OC Basin and the management measures taken by OCWD, the basin manager to optimize local supply and minimize overdraft. This section also provides information on historical groundwater production as well as a 25-year projection of the City's groundwater supply. The OCWD was formed in 1933 by a special legislative act of the California State Legislature to protect and manage the County's vast, natural, groundwater supply using the best available technology and defend its water rights to the OC Basin. This legislation is found in the State of California Statutes, Water – Uncodified Acts, Act 5683, as amended. The OC Basin is managed by OCWD under the Act, which functions as a statutorily-imposed physical solution. The OCWD Management Area includes approximately 89% of the land area of the OC Basin, and 98% of all groundwater production occurs within the area. OCWD monitors the basin by collecting groundwater elevation and quality data from wells and manages an electronic database that stores water elevation, water quality, production, recharge and other data on over 2,000 wells and facilities within and outside OCWD boundaries (City of La Habra et al., 2017). Groundwater levels are managed within a safe basin operating range to protect the long-term sustainability of the OC Basin and to protect against land subsidence. OCWD regulates groundwater levels in the OC Basin by regulating the annual amount of pumping and setting the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) for the water year. As defined in the District Act, the BPP is the ratio of water produced from groundwater supplies within the City to all water produced within the City from both supplemental sources and groundwater within the City (OCWD, 2020). 6.3.1 Historical Groundwater Production The City draws water from the OC Basin through its eight active groundwater wells. The total potable water well design capacity is estimated at 25,300 gpm. However, the City does not operate most of its wells at maximum capacity due to various factors such as lower demand, supporting Basin sustainability, and also to prolong the life of the wells and their associated supply equipment. Each well is operated only about six to seven months per year (Psomas, 2016). The City has experienced a relatively steady level of groundwater production, aside from a decrease in groundwater production in FY 2017-18, when the City used approximately 9,000 AF of in-lieu water (Table 6-4). 264 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-12 Table 6-4: Retail: Groundwater Volume Pumped DWR Submittal Table 6-1 Retail: Groundwater Volume Pumped (AF) Supplier does not pump groundwater. The supplier will not complete the table below. All or part of the groundwater described below is desalinated. Groundwater Type Location or Basin Name 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Alluvial Basin Orange County Groundwater Basin 18,657 19,730 11,682 20,975 18,296 TOTAL 18,657 19,730 11,682 20,975 18,577 NOTES: Source - MWDOC, 2020 and City of Huntington Beach Groundwater Production Reports, 2021 6.3.2 Basin Characteristics The OC Basin underlies the northerly half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. The OC Basin, managed by OCWD, covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest. The OC Basin boundary extends to the Orange County-Los Angeles Line to the northwest, where groundwater flows across the county line into the Central Groundwater Basin of Los Angeles County. A map of the OC Basin is shown in Figure 6-2. The total thickness of sedimentary rocks in the OC Basin is over 20,000 feet, with only the upper 2,000 to 4,000 feet containing fresh water. The OC Basin’s full volume is approximately 66 MAF. There are three major aquifer systems that have been subdivided by OCWD, the Shallow Aquifer System, the Principal Aquifer System, and the Deep Aquifer System. These three aquifer systems are hydraulically connected as groundwater is able to flow between each other through intervening aquitards or discontinuities in the aquitards. The Shallow Aquifer system occurs from the surface to approximately 250 feet below ground surface. Most of the groundwater from this aquifer system is pumped by small water systems for industrial and agricultural use. The Principal Aquifer system occurs at depths between 200 and 1,300 feet below ground surface. Over 90% of groundwater production is from wells that are screened within the Principal Aquifer system. Only a minor amount of groundwater is pumped from the Deep Aquifer system, which underlies the Principal Aquifer system and is up to 2,000 feet deep in the center of the OC Basin. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of thousands of manmade chemicals that includes perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). PFAS compounds were once commonly used in many products including, among many others, stain- and water-repellent fabrics, 265 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-13 nonstick products (e.g., Teflon), polishes, waxes, paints, cleaning products, and fire-fighting foams. Beginning in the summer of 2019, the California State Division of Drinking Water (DDW) began requiring testing for PFAS compounds in some groundwater production wells in the OCWD area. Groundwater production in FY 2019-20 was expected to be approximately 325,000 AF but declined to 286,550 AF primarily due to PFAS impacted wells being turned off around February 2020. OCWD expects groundwater production to be in the area of 245,000 AF in FY 2020-21 due to the currently idled wells and additional wells being impacted by PF AS and turned off. As PFAS treatment systems are constructed, OCWD expects total annual groundwater production to slowly increase back to normal levels (310,000 to 330,000 AF) (OCWD, 2020). PFAS has not impacted any City wells to date. However, the City routinely monitors and tests for PFAS, among other contaminants, to ensure a safe and reliable water supply. 266 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-14 Figure 6-2: Map of the OC Basin 267 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-15 6.3.3 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act In 2014, the State of California adopted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to help manage its groundwater sustainably, and limit adverse effects such as significant groundwater-level declines, land subsidence, and water quality degradation. SGMA requires all high- and medium-priority basins, as designated by DWR, be sustainably managed. DWR designated the non-adjudicated Coastal Plain of the OC Basin (“Basin 8-1” or “Basin”) as a medium-priority basin, primarily due to heavy reliance on the Basin’s groundwater as a source of water supply. Compliance with SGMA can be achieved in one of two ways: 1) A Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) is formed and a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) is adopted, or 2) Special Act Districts created by statute, such as OCWD, and other agencies may prepare and submit an Alternative to a GSP (City of La Habra et al., 2017). The agencies within Basin 8-1, led by OCWD collaborated to submit an Alternative to a GSP in 2017, titled the “Basin 8-1 Alternative” to meet SGMA compliance. This document will be updated every five years. The current (2017) version is included in Appendix G. 6.3.4 Basin Production Percentage Background The OC Basin is not adjudicated and as such, pumping from the OC Basin is managed through a process that uses financial incentives to encourage groundwater producers to pump a sustainable amount of water. The framework for the financial incentives is based on establishing the BPP, the percentage of each Producer’s total water supply that comes from groundwater pumped from the OC Basin. Groundwater production at or below the BPP is assessed the Replenishment Assessment (RA). While there is no legal limit as to how much an agency pumps from the OC Basin, there is a financial disincentive to pump above the BPP. The BPP is set uniformly for all Producers by OCWD on an annual basis. Agencies that pump above the BPP are charged the RA plus the Basin Equity Assessment (BEA). The BEA is presently calculated so that the cost of groundwater production is equivalent to the cost of importing potable water supplies. This approach serves to discourage, but not eliminate, production above the BPP, and the BEA can be increased to discourage production above the BPP if necessary. The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, and Basin management objectives. The supplies available for recharge must be estimated for a given year. The supplies of recharge water that are estimated are: 1) Santa Ana River stormflow, 2) Natural incidental recharge, 3) Santa Ana River baseflow, 4) GWRS supplies, and 5) other supplies such as imported water and recycled water purchased for the Alamitos Barrier. The BPP is a major factor in determining the cost of groundwater production from the OC Basin for that year. The BPP set for Water Year 2021-22 is 77%. BPP Adjustments for Basin Management OCWD has established management guidelines that are used to establish future BPPs, as seen in Table 6-5. Raising or lowering the BPP allows OCWD to manage the amount of pumping from the basin. OCWD has a policy to manage the groundwater basin within a sustainable range to avoid adverse impacts to the basin. OCWD seeks to maintain some available storage space in the basin to maximize surface water 268 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-16 recharge when such supplies are available, especially in relatively wet years. By keeping the basin relatively full during wet years, and for as long as possible in years with near-normal recharge, the maximum amount of groundwater could be maintained in storage to support pumping in future drought conditions. During dry hydrologic years when less water would be available for recharge, the BPP could be lowered to maintain groundwater storage levels. A component of OCWD’s BPP policy is to manage the groundwater basin so that the BPP will not fluctuate more that 5% from year to year. Based on most recent modeling of water supplies available for groundwater recharge and water demand forecasts, OCWD anticipates being able to sustain the BPP at 85% starting in 2025. The primary reasons for the higher BPP are the expected completion of the GWRS Final Expansion (GWRSFE) in 2023 and the relatively low water demands of approximately 400,000 AFY. Modeling and forecasts generate estimates based on historical averages. Consequently, forecasts use average hydrologic conditions which smooth the dynamic and unpredictable local hydrology. Variations in local hydrology are the most significant impact to supplies of water available to recharge the groundwater basin. The BPP projection of 85% is provided based upon average annual rainfall weather patterns. If the City were to experience a relatively dry period, the BPP could be reduced to maintain water storage levels, by as much as five percent. Table 6-5: Management Actions Based on Changes in Groundwater Storage Available Storage Space (amount below full basin condition, AF) Considered Basin Management Action Less than 100,000 Raise BPP 100,000 to 300,000 Maintain and / or raise BPP towards 75% goal 300,000 to 350,000 Seek additional supplies to refill basin and / or lower the BPP Greater than 350,000 Seek additional supplies to refill basin and lower the BPP BPP Exemptions In some cases, OCWD encourages pumping and treating groundwater that does not meet drinking water standards in order to protect water quality. This is achieved by using a financial incentive called the BEA Exemption. A BEA Exemption is used to promote beneficial uses of poor-quality groundwater and reduce or prevent the spread of poor-quality groundwater into non-degraded aquifer zones. OCWD uses a partial or total exemption of the BEA to compensate a qualified participating agency or Producer for the costs of treating poor quality groundwater, which typically include capital, interest and operations and maintenance costs for treatment facilities. When OCWD authorizes a BEA exemption for a project, it is obligated to provide the replenishment water for the production above the BPP and forgo the BEA revenue that OCWD would otherwise receive from the producer (City of La Habra et al., 2017). Similarly, for proactive water quality management, OCWD exempts a portion of the BEA for their Coastal Pumping Transfer Program (CPTP). The CPTP encourages inland groundwater producers to increase pumping and coastal producers like the City to decrease pumping in order to reduce the groundwater 269 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-17 basin drawdown at the coast and protect against seawater intrusion. Inland pumpers can pump above the BPP without having to pay the full BEA for the amount pumped above the BPP (OCWD, 2015). Coastal pumpers receive BEA revenue from OCWD to assist in offsetting their additional water supply cost from taking less groundwater. 6.3.4.1 2020 OCWD Groundwater Reliability Plan In order to adapt to the substantial growth in water demands in OCWD’s management area, it is paramount to anticipate and understand future water demands and develop projects to increase future water supplies proactively to match demands. The GRP is a continuation of these planning efforts that estimates the OC Basin’s sustainable average annual production and extrapolates water needs of the OC Basin by combining recently completed water demand projections and modeling of Santa Ana River flows available for recharge. These data will be used to evaluate future water supply projects and guide management of the OC Basin. OCWD is currently developing the GRP, and the first public draft is expected to be available May 2021. Current water demand projections show a relatively slow increase over the 25-year planning horizon, which is generally of similar magnitude as the additional production from the GWRSFE in early 2023. Once complete, the GWRSFE will increase capacity from 100,000 to 134,000 AFY of high-quality recycled water. This locally controlled, drought proof supply of water reduces the region’s dependance on imported water. Historically, the Santa Ana River has served as the primary source of water to recharge the OC Basin. To determine the availability of future Santa Ana River flows, OCWD utilized surface water flow modeling of the upper watershed. Modeling was developed to predict the impacts future stormwater capture and wastewater recycling projects in the upper watershed would have on future Santa Ana River flow rates at Prado Dam. Santa Ana River base flows are expected to decrease as more water recycling projects are built in the upper watershed. OCWD continues to work closely with the US Army Corps of Engineers to temporarily impound and slowly release up to approximately 20,000 AF of stormwater in the Prado Dam Conservation Pool. To some extent, the losses in baseflow are partially offset through the capture of additional stormwater held in the Prado Dam Conservation Pool. When available, OCWD will continue to augment groundwater recharge through the purchase of imported water through MET. OCWD will diligently monitor and evaluate future water supply projects to sustainably manage and protect the OC Basin for future generations. 6.3.4.2 OCWD Engineer’s Report The OCWD Engineer’s Report reports on the groundwater conditions and investigates information related to water supply and groundwater basin usage within OCWD’s service area. The overall BPP achieved in the 2019 to 2020 water year within OCWD for non-irrigation use was 75.9%. The achieved pumping was less than the BPP established for the 2019 to 2020 water year primarily due to the water quality impacts of PFAS. As indicated in Section 6.3.4, a BPP of 77% was established for water year 2021-22. Analysis of the groundwater basin’s projected accumulated overdraft, the available supplies to the OC Basin (assuming average hydrology) and the projected pumping demands indicate that this level of pumping can be sustained for 2021-22 without detriment to the OC Basin (OCWD, 2021). 270 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-18 In FY 2021-22 additional production of approximately 22,000 AF above the BPP will be undertaken by the City of Tustin, City of Garden Grove, City of Huntington Beach, Mesa Water District, and IRWD. These agencies use the additional pumping allowance in order to accommodate groundwater quality improvement projects. As in prior years, production above the BPP from these projects would be partially or fully exempt from the BEA as a result of the benefit provided to the OC Basin by removing poor-quality groundwater and treating it for beneficial use (OCWD, 2021). 6.3.5 Recharge Management Recharging water into the OC Basin through natural and artificial means is essential to support pumping from the OC Basin. Active recharge of groundwater began in 1949, in response to increasing drawdown of the OC Basin and, consequently, the threat of seawater intrusion. The OC Basin’s primary source of recharge is flow from the Santa Ana River, which is diverted into recharge basins and its main Orange County tributary, Santiago Creek. Other sources of recharge water include natural infiltration, recycled water, and imported water. Natural recharge consists of subsurface inflow from local hills and mountains, infiltration of precipitation and irrigation water, recharge in small flood control channels, and groundwater underflow to and from Los Angeles County and the ocean. Recycled water for the OC Basin recharge is from two sources. The main source of recycled water is from the GWRS, which is injected into the Talbert Seawater Barrier and recharged in the Kraemer, Miller and Miraloma Basins (City of La Habra et al., 2017). The second source of recycled water is water purified at the Water Replenishment District’s Leo J. Vander Lans Treatment Facility, which supplies water to the Alamitos Seawater Barrier (owned and operated by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works). OCWD’s share of the Alamitos Barrier injection total for water year 2018-19 was less than half of the total injection, based on barrier wells located within Orange County. The Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD) also works closely with OCWD to ensure that the water demands at the Alamitos Barrier are fulfilled through the use of recycled water as opposed to imported water, however the recycled portion was less than 33% for the last six years due to operational issues and wastewater supply interruptions (OCWD, 2020a). Injection of recycled water into these barriers is an effort by OCWD to control seawater intrusion into the OC Basin. Operation of the injection wells forms a hydraulic barrier to seawater intrusion. OCWD purchases imported water for recharge from MWDOC. Untreated imported water can be used to recharge the OC Basin through the surface water recharge system in multiple locations, such as Anaheim Lake, Santa Ana River, Irvine Lake, and San Antonio Creek. Treated imported water can be used for in -lieu recharge, as was performed extensively from 1977 to 2007 (City of La Habra et al., 2017). For detailed recharge management efforts from OCWD, refer to OCWD’s 2017 “Basin 8-1 Alternative” (Appendix G). 6.3.6 MET Groundwater Replenishment Program In the past, OCWD, MWDOC, and MET have coordinated water management to increase storage in the OC Basin when imported supplies are available for this purpose. MET’s groundwater replenishment program was discontinued on January 1, 2013, and currently MET via MWDOC sells replenishment water to OCWD at the full service untreated MET rate. 271 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-19 MWDOC’s imported water sales to OCWD since FY 1990-91 averages approximately 31,200 AF per year. Recently, due to low Santa Ana River flows as a result of low precipitation and increased use along the river, OCWD has needed to purchase more imported replenishment water per year than the average of 31,200 AFY over the last 25 years (this does not include water amounts from MET’s Conjunctive Use Program (CUP) or its Cyclic Storage Account). However, with the emergence of PFAS affecting groundwater production, the need to purchase imported water has been temporary suspended. Until PFAS treatment is in place for most groundwater producers in the region, imported replenishment water will be significantly reduced. 6.3.7 MET Conjunctive Use Program / Cyclic Storage Program with OCWD Since 2004, OCWD, MWDOC, and certain groundwater producers have participated in MET’s CUP. This program allows for the storage of MET water in the OC Basin. The existing MET program provides storage up to 66,000 AF of water in the OC Basin to be pumped by participating producers in place of receiving imported supplies during water shortage events in exchange for MET’s contribution to improvements in basin management facilities and an annual administrative fee. These improvements include eight new groundwater production wells, improvements to the seawater intrusion barrier, and construction of the Diemer Bypass Pipeline. The water is accounted for via the CUP program administered by the wholesale agencies and is controlled by MET such that it can be withdrawn over a three-year time period (OCWD, 2020). As of 2021, the CUP has not been in use since 2014. The CUP contract ends in 2028. The Cyclic Storage account is an alternative storage account with MET. However, unlike the CUP program, OCWD controls when the water is used. The Cyclic Water Storage Program allows MET to store water in a local groundwater basin during surplus conditions, where MET has limited space in its regional storage locations. Once the water is stored via direct delivery or In-lieu the groundwater agency has the ability to purchase this water at a future date or over a five-year period. 6.3.8 Overdraft Conditions Annual groundwater basin overdraft, as defined in OCWD's Act, is the quantity by which production of groundwater supplies exceeds natural replenishment of groundwater supplies during a water year. This difference between extraction and replenishment can be estimated by determining the change in volume of groundwater in storage that would have occurred had supplemental water not been used for any groundwater recharge purpose, including seawater intrusion protection, advanced water reclamation, and the in-Lieu Program. The annual analysis of basin storage change and accumulated overdraft for water year 2019-20 has been completed. Based on the three-layer methodology, an accumulated overdraft of 200,000 AF was calculated for the water year ending June 30, 2020. The accumulated overdraft for the water year ending June 30, 2019 was 236,000 AF, which was also calculated using the three-layer storage method. Therefore, an annual increase of 36,000 AF in stored groundwater was calculated as the difference between the June 2019 and June 2020 accumulated overdrafts (OCWD, 2021). 272 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-20 6.3.9 Planned Future Sources The City plans to drill two new wells – Wells 15 and 16 – to offset the production lost from abandoned and reduced-capacity wells. Well treatment at Wells 6 and 8 are also planned to resolve nuisance odor and color issues that have caused either a reduction in production or temporary shutdown at these wells. These projects are planned to ensure reliable local groundwater and continued drinking water safety. These projects are further described in Section 6.9. On a regional scale, OCWD regularly evaluates potential projects and conducts studies to improve the existing facilities and build new facilities to include in their Long-Term Facilities Plans (LTFP). OCWD’s 2014 LTFP evaluated 65 potential projects for water supply, basin management, recharge facilities, operational improvements, and operational efficiency. Some of OCWD’s planned water projects that would increase supply are listed below. For a more detailed list of projects, refer to the 2014 LTFP (OCWD). x GWRSFE – The Final Expansion of the GWRS is currently underway and is the third and final phase of the project. When the Final Expansion is completed in early 2023, the plant’s treatment capacity will increase from 100 to 130 MGD. To produce 130 MGD, additional treated wastewater from Orange County Sanitation District (OC San)’s Treatment Plant 2 is required. This recycled water represents a high quality, drought-proof source of water to protect and enhance the OC Basin. The Final Expansion project will include expanding the existing GWRS treatment facilities, constructing new conveyance facilities at OC San Plant 2, and rehabilitating an existing pipeline between OC San Plant 2 and the GWRS. Once completed, the GWRS plant will recycle 100% of OC San’s reclaimable sources and produce enough water to meet the needs of over one million people. x Forecast Informed Reservoir Operations (FIRO) at Prado Dam – Stormwater represents a significant source of water used by OCWD to recharge the OC Basin. Much of this recharge is made possible by the capture of Santa Ana River stormflows behind Prado Dam in the Conservation Pool. FIRO represents the next generation of operating water reservoirs using the best available technology. Advances in weather and stormwater runoff forecasting hold promise to allow USACE to safety impound more stormwater while maintaining equivalent flood risk management capability behind Prado Dam. Preliminary modeling show that by expanding the Conservation Pool from elevation 505 to 512 ft msl, annual recharge to the groundwater basin could increase by as much as 4,500 to 7,000 AFY. Surface Water 6.4.1 Existing Sources There are, currently, no direct surface water uses in the City’s service area. 6.4.2 Planned Future Sources As of 2021, there are no planned direct uses of surface water in the City’s service area. 273 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-21 Stormwater 6.5.1 Existing Sources There are, currently, no direct stormwater uses in the City’s Service area. 6.5.2 Planned Future Sources As of 2021, there are no planned stormwater uses in the City’s service area. Wastewater and Recycled Water The City is directly involved in wastewater services through its ownership and operation of the wastewater collection system in its service area. However, the City does not own or operate wastewater treatment facilities. The City's sewer system includes 360 miles of sewer lines ranging from 6 inches to 30 inches in diameter, 10,000 manholes and 27 lift stations. The wastewater system serves approximately 200,000 customers. Recycled water is wastewater that is treated through primary, secondary and tertiary processes and is acceptable for most non-potable water purposes such as irrigation, and commercial and industrial process water per Title 22 requirements. Recycled water opportunities have continued to grow in southern California as public acceptance and the need to expand local water resources continues to be a priority. Recycled water also provides a degree of flexibility and added reliability during drought conditions when imported water supplies are restricted. The City is indirectly involved in recycled water production, through its supply of wastewater for IPR. The following sections expand on the existing agency collaboration involved in these efforts as well as the City’s projected recycled water use over the next 25 years. 6.6.1 Agency Coordination The City does not own or operate wastewater treatment facilities and sends all collected wastewater to Orange County Sanitation District (OC San) for treatment and disposal. OC San provides treated water to OCWD, the manager of the Orange County Groundwater Basin. OCWD strives to maintain and increase the reliability of the Orange County Groundwater Basin through replenishment with imported water, stormwater, and advanced treated wastewater. A full description of the Orange County Groundwater Basin is available in Section 6.3.2. OCWD and OC San have jointly constructed and expanded two water recycling projects to meet this goal including: 1) OCWD Green Acres Project (GAP), and 2) OCWD GWRS. 6.6.1.1 OCWD Green Acres Project OCWD owns and operates the GAP, a water recycling system that provides up to 8,400 AFY of recycled water for irrigation and industrial uses. GAP provides an alternate source of water that is mainly delivered to parks, golf courses, greenbelts, cemeteries, and nurseries in the cities of Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Newport Beach, and Santa Ana. Approximately 100 sites use GAP water, current recycled water users include Mile Square Park and Golf Courses in Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa Country Club, Chroma Systems carpet dyeing, Kaiser Permanente, and Caltrans, but the City does not receive any GAP water. 274 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-22 6.6.1.2 OCWD Groundwater Replenishment System OCWD’s GWRS allows southern California to decrease its dependency on imported water and creates a local and reliable source of water. OCWD’s GWRS purifies secondary treated wastewater from OC San to levels that meet and exceed all state and federal drinking water standards. The GWRS Phase 1 plant has been operational since January 2008 and uses a three-step advanced treatment process consisting of microfiltration (MF), reverse osmosis (RO), and ultraviolet (UV) light with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). A portion of the treated water is injected into the seawater barrier to prevent seawater intrusion into the groundwater basin. The other portion of the water is pumped to ponds where the water percolates into deep aquifers and becomes part of Orange County’s water supply. The GWRS first began operating in 2008 producing 70 MGD and in 2015, it underwent a 30 MGD expansion. Approximately 39,200 AFY of the highly purified water is pumped into the injection wells and 72,900 AFY is pumped to the percolation ponds in the City of Anaheim where the water is naturally filtered through sand and gravel to deep aquifers of the groundwater basin. The Orange County Groundwater Basin provides approximately 72% of the potable water supply for north and central Orange County. The design and construction of the first phase (78,500 AFY) of the GWRS project was jointly funded by OCWD and OC San; Phase 2 expansion (33,600 AFY) was funded solely by OCWD. The Final Expansion of the GWRS is currently underway and is the third and final phase of the project. When the Final Expansion is completed in 2023, the plant will produce 130 MGD. To produce 130 MGD, additional treated wastewater from OC San is required. This additional water will come from OC San’s Treatment Plant 2, which is in the City of Huntington Beach approximately 3.5 miles south of the GWRS. The Final Expansion project will include expanding the existing GWRS treatment facilities, constructing new conveyance facilities at OC San Plant 2 and rehabilitating an existing pipeline between OC San Plant 2 and the GWRS. Once completed, the GWRS plant will recycle 100% of OC San’s reclaimable sources and produce enough water to meet the needs of over one million people. 6.6.2 Wastewater Description and Disposal The City operates and maintains the local sewer collection pipes that feed into the OC San's trunk sewer system to convey wastewater to OC San's treatment plants. OC San has an extensive system of gravity flow sewers, pump stations, and pressurized sewers. OC San’s Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley has a capacity of 320 MGD and Plant No. 2 in the City has a capacity of 312 MGD. Both plants share a common ocean outfall, but Plant No. 1 currently provides all of its secondary treated wastewater to OCWD’s GWRS for beneficial reuse. The 120-inch diameter ocean outfall extends 4 miles off the coast of the City. A 78-inch diameter emergency outfall also extends 1.3 miles off the coast. Residential homes northwest of Sunset Beach, in the area known as Surfside, have sewer flow that goes to the Sunset Beach Sanitary District, which eventually connects into the City’s sewer collection system. The Sunset Aquatic Marina also sends its sewer flow to the City’s sewer collection system. Lastly, a property at the northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue is within the City of Westminster, but their sewage also goes to the City. 275 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-23 Table 6-6 summarizes the wastewater collected by the City and transported to OC San's system in 2020. No wastewater is treated or disposed in the City’s service area as OC San treats and disposes all the City's wastewater. 276 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-24Table 6-6: Retail: Wastewater Collected Within Service Area in 2020 DWR Submittal Table 6-2 Retail: Wastewater Collected Within Service Area in 2020 There is no wastewater collection system. The supplier will not complete the table below. Percentage of 2020 service area covered by wastewater collection system (optional) Percentage of 2020 service area population covered by wastewater collection system (optional) Wastewater Collection Recipient of Collected Wastewater Name of Wastewater Collection Agency Wastewater Volume Metered or Estimated? Volume of Wastewater Collected from UWMP Service Area 2020 Name of Wastewater Treatment Agency Receiving Collected Wastewater Treatment Plant NameIs WWTP Located Within UWMP Area? Is WWTP Operation Contracted to a Third Party? (optional) Add additional rows as needed City of Huntington Beach Estimated 19,037 OC San Plant 1 and/or 2 No No Total Wastewater Collected from Service Area in 2020: 19,037 NOTES: Assumed return rate of 65% (City of Huntington Beach, 2015) 277 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-25Table 6-7: Retail: Wastewater Treatment and Discharge Within Service Area in 2020 DWR Submittal Table 6-3 Retail: Wastewater Treatment and Discharge Within Service Area in 2020 No wastewater is treated or disposed of within the UWMP service area. The Supplier will not complete the table below. Wastewater Treatment Plant Name Discharge Location Name or Identifier Discharge Location Description Wastewater Discharge ID Number (optional) Method of Disposal Does This Plant Treat Wastewater Generated Outside the Service Area? Treatment Level 2020 volumes Wastewater Treated Discharged Treated Wastewater Recycled Within Service Area Recycled Outside of Service Area Instream Flow Permit Requirement Add additional rows as needed OC San Plant 2 Ocean Ocean outfall Ocean outfall Yes Secondary, Disinfected - 2.2 75,000 75,000 0 0 0 Total 75,000 75,000 0 0 0 NOTES: 278 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-26 6.6.3 Current Recycled Water Uses There are currently no direct recycled water uses within the City’s Retail service area. For indirect use, the City benefits from OCWD’s GWRS system that provides IPR through replenishment of Orange County Groundwater Basin with water that meets state and federal drinking water standards. 6.6.4 Projected Recycled Water Uses The City does not have any direct non-potable uses within their service area and does not currently have the potential for non-potable reuse because of nonexistent or planned recycled water infrastructure. The City has purple pipe for irrigation of various medians, parkways, and other landscaped areas, however, has plans to retire this pipe and continue to benefit from OCWD’s GWRS system. Although the 2015 UWMP acknowledged IPR of wastewater, it did not quantify projections. These projections will be prepared moving forward. The projected 2020 recycled water use from the City's 2015 UWMP are compared to the 2020 actual use in Table 6-8. Table 6-8: Retail: 2015 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projection Compared to 2020 Actual DWR Submittal Table 6-5 Retail: 2015 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projection Compared to 2020 Actual Recycled water was not used in 2015 nor projected for use in 2020. The Supplier will not complete the table below. Use Type 2015 Projection for 2020 2020 Actual Use Groundwater recharge (IPR) N/A 6,191 Total 0 6,191 NOTES: Groundwater recharge (IPR) estimated based on OCWD Groundwater Basin Production and Percent of Total Basin Production for FY 2019-20 (33.3%) 6.6.5 Potential Recycled Water Uses Currently, there are no feasible options for direct recycle sources and therefore the City has no additional plans to add direct recycled water to their system. However, the City will continue to convey its wastewater to OC San's regional treatment facilities where the wastewater is treated and recycled for IPR. 6.6.6 Optimization Plan Studies of water recycling opportunities within southern California provide a context for promoting the development of water recycling plans. Currently, most of the recycled water available is being directed toward replenishment of the groundwater basin and improvements in groundwater quality. As a user of groundwater, the City supports the efforts of OCWD and OC San to use recycled water as a primary 279 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-27 resource for groundwater recharge in Orange County. The City will continue to supply wastewater to GWRS for IPR. Public Education The City participates in the MWDOC public education and school education programs, which include extensive sections on water recycling. MWDOC's water use efficiency public information programs are a partnership with agencies throughout the county. Through a variety of public information programs, MWDOC reaches the public, including those in the City, with information regarding present and future water supplies, the demands for a suitable quantity and quality of water, including recycled water, and the importance of implementing water efficiency techniques and behaviors. Through MWDOC, water education programs have reached thousands of students in the City with grade-specific programs that include information on recycled water. Financial Incentives The implementation of recycled water projects involves a substantial upfront capital investment for planning studies, Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), engineering design and construction before there recycled water is available to the market. The establishment of new supplemental funding sources through federal, state and regional programs now provides significant financial incentives for water agencies to develop and make use of recycled water locally. Potential sources of funding include federal, state and local funding opportunities. These funding sources include the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), California Proposition 13 Water Bond, Proposition 84, and MET Local Resources Program (LRP). These funding opportunities may be sought by the City or possibly more appropriately by regional agencies. The City will continue to support seeking funding for regional water recycling projects and programs. Optimization Plan The City does not use recycled water, therefore, there is no need for a recycled water optimization plan. In other areas of Orange County, recycled water is used for irrigating golf courses, parks, schools, businesses, and communal landscaping, as well as for groundwater recharge. Analyses have indicated that present worth costs to incorporate recycled water within the City are not cost effective as compared to purchasing imported water from MWDOC or using groundwater. The City will continue to conduct feasibility studies for recycled water and seek out creative solutions such as funding, regulatory requirements, institutional arrangement, and public acceptance for recycled water use with MWDOC, OCWD, MET, and other cooperative agencies. Desalination Opportunities In 2001, MET developed a Seawater Desalination Program (SDP) to provide incentives for developing new seawater desalination projects in MET’s service area. In 2014, MET modified the provisions of their LRP to include incentives for locally produced seawater desalination projects that reduce the need for imported supplies. To qualify for the incentive, proposed projects must replace an existing demand or prevent new demand on MET’s imported water supplies. In return, MET offers three incentive formulas under the program: 280 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-28 x Sliding scale incentive up to $340 per AF for a 25-year agreement term, depending on the unit cost of seawater produced compared to the cost of MET supplies. x Sliding scale incentive up to $475 per AF for a 15-year agreement term, depending on the unit cost of seawater produced compared to the cost of MET supplies. x Fixed incentive up to $305 per AF for a 25-year agreement term. Developing local supplies within MET's service area is part of their IRP goal of improving water supply reliability in the region. Creating new local supplies reduce pressure on imported supplies from the SWP and Colorado River. On May 6th, 2015, the SWRCB approved an amendment to the state’s Water Quality Control Plan for the Ocean Waters of California (California Ocean Plan) to address effects associated with the construction and operation of seawater desalination facilities (Desalination Amendment). The amendment supports the use of ocean water as a reliable supplement to traditional water supplies while protecting marine life and water quality. The California Ocean Plan now formally acknowledges seawater desalination as a beneficial use of the Pacific Ocean and the Desalination Amendment provides a uniform, consistent process for permitting seawater desalination facilities statewide. If the following projects are developed, MET's imported water deliveries to Orange County could be reduced. These projects include the Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project and the Doheny Desalination Project. As for City-led initiatives, the City has not investigated seawater desalination as a result of economic and physical impediments. Brackish groundwater is groundwater with a salinity higher than freshwater, but lower than seawater. Brackish groundwater typically requires treatment using desalters. 6.7.1 Ocean Water Desalination Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project – Poseidon Resources LLC (Poseidon), a private company, is developing the Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project to be co-located at the AES Power Plant in the City of Huntington Beach along Pacific Coast Highway and Newland Street. The proposed project would produce up to 50 MGD (56,000 AFY) of drinking water to provide approximately 10% of Orange County’s water supply needs. Over the past several years, Poseidon has been working with OCWD on the general terms and conditions for selling the water to OCWD. OCWD and MWDOC have proposed a few distribution options to agencies in Orange County. The northern option proposes the water be distributed to the northern agencies closer to the plant within OCWD’s service area with the possibility of recharging/injecting a portion of the product water into the OC Basin. The southern option builds on the northern option by delivering a portion of the product water through the existing OC-44 pipeline for conveyance to the South Orange County water agencies. A third option is also being explored, which includes all of the product water to be recharged into the OC Basin. Currently, a combination of these options could be pursued. The Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination project plant capacity of 56,000 AFY would be the single largest source of new, local drinking water available to the region. In addition to offsetting imported 281 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-29 demand, water from this project could provide OCWD with management flexibility in the OC Basin by augmenting supplies into the Talbert Seawater Barrier to prevent seawater intrusion. In May 2015, OCWD and Poseidon entered into a non-binding Term Sheet that provided the overall partner structure in order to advance the project. Based on the initial Term Sheet, which was updated in 2018, Poseidon would be responsible for permitting, financing, design, construction, and operations of the treatment plant while OCWD would purchase the production volume, assuming the product water quality and quantity meet specific contract parameters and criteria. Furthermore, OCWD would then distribute the water in Orange County using one of the proposed distribution options described above. Currently, the project is in the regulatory permit approval process with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the California Coastal Commission. Once all of the required permits are approved, Poseidon will then work with OCWD and interested member agencies in developing a plan to distribute the water. Subsequent to the regulatory permit approval process, and agreement with interested parties, Poseidon estimates that the project could be online as early as 2027. Under guidance provided by DWR, the Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Plant’s projected water supplies are not included in the supply projections due to its current status within the criteria established by State guidelines (DWR, 2020c). Doheny Desalination Project – South Coast Water District (SCWD) is proposing to develop an ocean water desalination facility in Dana Point. SCWD intends to construct a facility with an initial capacity of up to 5 million gallons per day (MGD). The initial up to 5 MGD capacity would be available for SCWD and potential partnering water agencies to provide a high quality, locally-controlled, drought-proof water supply. The desalination facility would also provide emergency backup water supplies, should an earthquake, system shutdown, or other event disrupt the delivery of imported water to the area. The Project would consist of a subsurface slant well intake system (constructed within Doheny Beach State Park), raw (sea) water conveyance to the desalination facility site (located on SCWD owned property), a seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) desalination facility, brine disposal through an existing wastewater ocean outfall, solids handling facilities, storage, and potable water conveyance interties to adjacent local and regional distribution infrastructure. The Doheny Ocean Desalination Project has been determined as the best water supply option to meet reliability needs of SCWD and south Orange County. SCWD is pursuing the Project to ensure it meets the water use needs of its customers and the region by providing a drought-proof potable water supply, which diversifies SCWD’s supply portfolio and protects against long-term imported water emergency outages and supply shortfalls that could have significant impact to our coastal communities, public health, and local economy. Phase I of the Project (aka, the “Local” Project) will provide SCWD and the region with up to 5 MGD of critical potable water supply that, together with recycled water, groundwater, and conservation, will provide the majority of SCWD’s water supply through local reliable sources. An up to 15 MGD capacity project has been identified as a potential future “regional” project that could be phased incrementally, depending on regional needs. On June 27, 2019, SCWD certified the final EIR and approved the Project. The Final EIR included considerable additional information provided at the request of the Coastal Commission and the Regional Board, including an updated coastal hazard analysis, updated brine discharge modeling, and updated groundwater modeling, updated hydrology analysis. The approval of the Project also included a 282 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-30 commitment to 100 percent carbon neutrality through a 100 percent offset of emissions through the expansion of Project mitigation and use of renewable energy sources. SCWD is currently in the permitting process and finalizing additional due diligence studies. If implemented, SCWD anticipates an online date of 2025. Under guidance provided by DWR, the Doheny Seawater Desalination Project’s projected water supplies are not included in the supply projections due to its current status within the criteria established by State guidelines (DWR, 2020c). 6.7.2 Groundwater Desalination There are currently no brackish groundwater opportunities within the City’s service area. Water Exchanges and Transfers Interconnections with other agencies result in the ability to share water supplies during short term emergency situations or planned shutdowns of major imported water systems. However, beyond short -term outages, transfers can also be involved with longer term water exchanges to deal with droughts or water allocation situations. The following subsections describe the City’s existing and planned exchanges and transfers. 6.8.1 Existing Exchanges and Transfers The City maintains three connections with MET transmission mains as follows: x OC-9 (northeast side of City) x OC-35 (northwest side of City) x OC-44 (southeast side of City) Interconnections with other agencies result in the ability to share water supplies during short term emergency situations or planned shutdowns of major imported systems. The City maintains five emergency connections with adjacent water agencies as follows: x By Anderson Street and PCH (with Golden State Water Company) x On PCH, north of Sea Way (with Golden State Water Company) x On Garfield Avenue, east of Bushard Street (with City of Fountain Valley) x On Sugar Drive, east of Rushmoor Lane (with City of Westminster) x On Heil Ave, west of Newland (with City of Westminster) 6.8.2 Planned and Potential Exchanges and Transfers The City does not currently have plans to introduce new exchanges and transfers. However, MWDOC continues to help its retail agencies develop transfer and exchange opportunities that promote reliability within their systems. Therefore, MWDOC will look to help its retail agencies navigate the operational and administrative issues of transfers within the MET distribution system. In an indirect regional scale, the Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Project (SARCCUP) is a joint project established by five regional water agencies within the Santa Ana River Watershed 283 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-31 (Eastern Municipal Water District, Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Western Municipal Water District, OCWD, and San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District). In 2016, SARCCUP was successful in receiving $55 million in grant funds from Proposition 84 through DWR. The overall SARCCUP program awarded by Proposition 84, consists of three main program elements: x Watershed-Scale Cooperative Water Banking Program x Water Use Efficiency: Landscape Design and Irrigation Improvements and Water Budget Assistance for Agencies x Habitat Creation and Arundo Donax Removal from the Santa Ana River The Watershed-Scale Cooperative Water Banking Program is the largest component of SARCCUP and since 2016, Valley, MET, and the four SARCCUP-MWD Member Agencies, with MWDOC representing OCWD, have been discussing terms and conditions for the ability to purchase surplus water from Valley to be stored in the Santa Ana River watershed. With the Valley and MET surplus water purchase agreement due for renewal, it was the desire of Valley to establish a new agreement with MET that allows a portion of its surplus water to be stored within the Santa Ana River watershed. An agreement between MET and four SARCCUP-MWD Member Agencies was approved earlier this year that gives the SARCCUP agencies the ability to purchase a portion (up to 50%) of the surplus water that San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley), a SWP Contractor, sells to MET. Such water will be stored in local groundwater basins throughout the Santa Ana River watershed and extract during dry years to reduce the impacts from multiyear droughts. In Orange County, 36,000 AF can be stored in the OC Basin for use during dry years. More importantly, this stored SARCCUP water can be categorized as “extraordinary supplies”, if used during a MET allocation, and can enhance a participating agencies’ reliability during a drought. Moreover, if excess water is available MWDOC can purchase additional water for its service area. Further details remain to be developed between OCWD, retail agencies, and MWDOC in how the water will be distributed in Orange County and who participates. Summary of Future Water Supply Projects The City continually reviews practices that will provide its customers with adequate and reliable supplies. Trained staff continue to ensure the water quality is safe and the water supply will meet present and future needs in an environmentally and economically responsible manner. Although the City has numerous projects planned to maintain and improve the water system (Section 6.9.1), there are currently no City-specific planned projects that have both a concrete timeline and a quantifiable increase in supply. 6.9.1 City Initiatives The City anticipates water demand in the City to remain relatively constant over the next 25 years due to minimal growth combined with WUE measures and the increased use of recycled water. Any new water supply sources will be developed primarily to better manage the Basin and to replace or upgrade inefficient wells, rather than to support population growth and new development. 284 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-32 The projects that have been identified by the City to improve the City’s water supply reliability and enhance the operations of the City include replacement of water meters, fire hydrants, and electrical equipment; seismic modifications on reservoirs; water security improvements, and improvement projects on water supply wells. The projects identified in the City’s 2016 Water Master Plan Update and Capital Improvement Program include the below. For the full list of projects, refer to the City’s Water Master Plan Update (Psomas, 2016). Water Distribution System Improvements – These projects aim to install new distribution mains and infrastructure to optimize system redundancy, efficiency, and reliability. This includes aging pipe replacement, the Southeast Reservoir transmission main construction, and fire protection improvements. Water Production System Improvements – Improvements are planned at various production facilities, including new and existing wells, reservoirs, and booster stations. This includes permanent wellhead facilities for Well No. 13 and the Southeast Reservoir and Booster Pump Station. New Well 15 - A new well with a projected design capacity of around 1,500 to 2,000 gpm will be installed by Edwards Street in the Ex-NAVY Easement Right-of-Way. This project would help offset the well capacity reductions from the existing eight active wells. New Well 16 – A new well with a projected design capacity of around 1,500 to 2,000 gpm will be installed by Goldenwest Street in the Ex-NAVY Easement Right-of-Way. This project would help offset the well capacity reductions from the existing eight active wells. Well Site No. 6 and 8 Treatment – Although the existing well infrastructures are in good condition, the production rate of various wells have been reduced by at least 50% because of customer complaints. Treatment implementation projects are included in the City’s CIP. x Well No. 6: This 3,000 gpm pump design capacity well has been out of service due to customer complains of odor from presence of Hydrogen Sulfide and color in the water. Studies and an eventual treatment will be necessary to return the well to produce high quality water at full design capacity. x Well No. 8: This 3,000 gpm pump design capacity well has been out of service due to customer complains of odor from presence of Hydrogen Sulfide and color in the water. Studies and an eventual treatment will be necessary to return the well to produce high quality water at full design capacity. 6.9.2 Regional Initiatives Beyond City-specific projects, the City consistently coordinates its long-term water shortage planning with MWDOC and OCWD. MWDOC has identified the following future regional projects, some of which can indirectly benefit the City to further increase local supplies and offset imported supplies (CDM Smith, 2019): Poseidon Huntington Beach Ocean Desalination Project – Poseidon Resources LLC proposes to construct and operate the Huntington Beach Ocean Desalination Plant on a 12-acre parcel adjacent to the AES Huntington Beach Generating Station. The facility would have a capacity of 50 MGD and 56,000 AFY, with its main components consisting of a water intake system, a desalination facility, a concentrate disposal system, and a product water storage tank. This project would provide both system 285 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-33 and supply reliability benefits to the South Orange County (SOC), the OC Basin, and Huntington Beach. The capital cost in the initial year for the plant is $1.22 billion. Doheny Ocean Desalination Project – SCWD is proposing to construct an ocean water desalination facility in Dana Point at Doheny State Beach. The facility would have an initial up to 5 MGD capacity, with the potential for future expansions up to 15 MGD. The project’s main components are a subsurface water intake system, a raw ocean water conveyance pipeline, a desalination facility, a seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) desalination facility, a brine disposal system, and a product water storage tank. San Juan Watershed Project – Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD) and other project partners have proposed a multi-phased project within the San Juan Creek Watershed to capture local stormwater and develop, convey, and recharge recycled water into the San Juan Groundwater Basin and treat the water upon pumping it out of the basin. The first phase includes the installation of three rubber dams within San Juan Creek to promote in-stream recharge of the basin, with an anticipated production of 700 AFY on average. The second phase would develop additional surface water and groundwater management practices by using stormwater and introducing recycled water for infiltration into the basin and has an anticipated production of 2,660 to 4,920 AFY. The third phase will introduce recycled water directly into San Juan Creek through live stream recharge, with an anticipated production of up to 2,660 AFY (SMWD, 2021). Cadiz Water Bank – SMWD and Cadiz, Inc. are developing this project to create a new water supply by conserving groundwater that is currently being lost to evaporation and recovering the conserved water by pumping it out of the Fenner Valley Groundwater Basin to convey to MET’s CRA. The project consists of a groundwater pumping component that includes an average of 50 TAFY of groundwater that can be pumped from the basin over a 50-year period, and a water storage component that allows participants to send surplus water supplies to be recharged in spreading basins and held in storage. South Orange County Emergency Interconnection Expansion – MWDOC has been working with the SOC agencies on improvements for system reliability primarily due to the risk of earthquakes causing outages of the MET imported water system as well as extended grid outages. Existing regional interconnection agreements between IRWD and SOC agencies provides for the delivery of water through the IRWWD system to participating SOC agencies in times of emergency. MWDOC and IRWD are currently studying an expansion of the program, including the potential East Orange County Feeder No. 2 pipeline and an expanded and scalable emergency groundwater program, with a capital cost of $867,451. SARCCUP – SARCCUP is a joint project established between MET, MWDOC, Eastern MWD, Western MWD, Inland Empire Utilities Agency, and OCWD that can provide significant benefits in the form of additional supplies during dry years for Orange County. Surplus SWP water from San Bernardino Valley Water District (SBVMWD) can be purchased and stored for use during dry years. This water can even be considered an extraordinary supply under MET allocation Plan, if qualified under MET’s extraordinary supply guidelines. OCWD has the ability to store 36,000 AF of SARCCUP water and if excess water is available MWDOC has the ability to purchase additional water. Further details remain to be developed between OCWD, retail agencies, and MWDOC in how the water will be distributed in Orange County and who participates. Moulton Niquel Water District (MNWD) / OCWD Pilot Storage Program - OCWD entered into an agreement with MNWD to develop a pilot program to explore the opportunity to store water in the OC 286 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-34 Basin. The purpose of such a storage account would provide MNWD water during emergencies and/or provide additional water during dry periods. As part of the agreement, OCWD hired consultants to evaluate where and how to extract groundwater from the OC Basin with several options to pump the water to MNWD via the East Orange County Feeder No. 2; as well as a review of existing banking/exchange programs in California to determine what compensation methodologies could OCWD assess for a storage/banking program. Energy Intensity A new requirement for this 2020 UWMP is an energy intensity analysis of the Supplier’s water, wastewater, and recycled water systems, where applicable for a 12-month period. The City owns and operates a water distribution system and a wastewater collection system but no treatment systems. This section reports the energy intensity for each system using data from FY2019. The recycled water system within the City is owned and operated by OCWD, therefore it is outside of the City’s operational control. Water and energy resources are inextricably connected. Known as the "water-energy nexus", the California Energy Commission estimates the transport and treatment of water, treatment and disposal of wastewater, and the energy used to heat and consume water account for nearly 20% of the total electricity and 30% of non-power plant related natural gas consumed in California. In 2015, California issued new rules requiring 50% of its power to come from renewables, along with a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. Consistent with energy and water conservation, renewable energy production, and GHG mitigation initiatives, the City reports the energy intensity of its water and wastewater operations. The methodology for calculating water energy intensity outlined in Appendix O of the UWMP Guidebook was adapted from the California Institute for Energy Efficiency exploratory research study titled “Methodology for Analysis of the Energy Intensity of California’s Water Systems” (Wilkinson 2000). The study defines water energy intensity as the total amount of energy, calculated on a whole-system basis, required for the use of a given amount of water in a specific location. UWMP reporting is limited to available energy intensity information associated with water processes occurring within an urban water supplier’s direct operational control. Operational control is defined as authority over normal business operations at the operational level. Any energy embedded in water supplies imparted by an upstream water supplier (e.g., water wholesaler) or consequently by a downstream water purveyor (e.g., retail water provider) is not included in the UWMP energy intensity tables. The City’s calculations conform to methodologies outlined in the UWMP Guidebook and Wilkinson study. Although the standard reporting cycle for GHG emissions is calendar years, the data that follows is for the 12 month period from July 2019 to June 2020 which was the most up-to-date data at the time this report was written. 6.10.1 Water Supply Energy Intensity In FY 2019-20, the City consumed 912 kilowatt-hours (KWh) per AF for water services (Table 6-9). The basis for calculations is provided in more detail in the following subsections. 287 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-35Table 6-9: Recommended Energy Intensity – Water Supply Process Approach Urban Water Supplier:Water Delivery Product (If delivering more than one type of product use Table O-1C)Retail Potable DeliveriesTable O-1A: Recommended Energy Reporting - Water Supply Process ApproachEnter Start Date for Reporting Period7/1/2019End Date 6/29/2020Water Volume Units UsedExtract and DivertPlace into StorageConveyance Treatment DistributionTotal Utility Hydropower Net Utility Volume of Water Entering Process AF18577.2 00029286.9 29286.9029286.9Energy Consumed (kWh) N/A22,414,962 0004,301,906 26716868026716868Energy Intensity (kWh/vol.) N/A1206.6 0.00.00.0146.9 912.20.0912.2Quantity of Self-Generated Renewable Energy0kWhData Quality (Estimate, Metered Data, Combination of Estimates and Metered Data)Combination of Estimates and Metered DataData Quality Narrative:Narrative:Huntington Beach relies on imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to meet their customers' water needs. Operational control is limited to groundwater wells and potable water booster stations. This table does not include upstream embedded energy consumed prior to Huntington Beach taking control. All numbers were calculated for July 2019-June 2020. Huntington Beach has a relatively flat service area without elevated water tanks so booster pumps are used to maintain pressure in the system.Huntington BeachUrban Water Supplier Operational ControlWater Management Process Non-Consequential Hydropower (if applicable)All energy information comes from Southern California Edison and SoCalGas energy bills. Energy is a combination of electricity and natural gas. Wells 4, 7, 13, and the Peck Booster Station all share the same Natural Gas Meter. The Therms for well 7 and 13 were calculated using an average energy use per acre foot of water pumped to allocate energy use to the correct category. Volume of water extracted and diverted was based on well meters while distributed water is based on MWDOC records for groundwater withdrawals and MET deliveries.Is upstream embedded in the values reported?288 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-36 6.10.1.1 Operational Control and Reporting Board As described throughout the report, the City is a retail agency that relies on groundwater and imported water. The City does not treat water that it distributes. Water supply energy intensity was calculated for FY 2019-20. Calendar year reporting is standard for energy and GHG reporting to the Climate Registry, California Air Resources Board, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency because it provides consistency when assessing direct and indirect energy consumption within a larger geographical context, versus fiscal year starting dates which can vary between utilities and organizations. However, fiscal year data was used for this report because it was the most recent data available. 6.10.1.2 Volume of Water Entering Processes According to well meters, the City extracted 18,577 AF of groundwater from the OC Basin and distributed 29,287 AF of both groundwater and imported water. Water distribution volume is based on MWDOC records. 6.10.1.3 Energy Consumption and Generation According to Southern California Edison Electricity Bills, groundwater wells consumed 22,414,962 kWh of electricity and pump stations along the distribution system consumed 4,301,906 kWh of electricity. Wells and pump stations use a combination of electricity and natural gas but for this report, all natural gas usage was converted to kWh equivalent. Currently, the City does not generate renewable energy. Energy consumption is based on metered data. 6.10.2 Wastewater and Recycled Water Energy Intensity In FY 2019-20, the City consumed 40 KWh per AF for wastewater services (Table 6-10). The basis for calculations is provided in more detail in the following subsections. 289 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-37Table 6-10: Recommended Energy Intensity – Wastewater & Recycled Water Urban Water Supplier:Enter Start Date for Reporting Period 7/1/2019End Date 6/29/2020Is upstream embedded in the values reported?Volume of Water Units Used AFVolume of Wastewater Entering Process (volume units selected above)190370190370Wastewater Energy Consumed (kWh)760,74200760742Wastewater Energy Intensity (kWh/volume)40.00.00.00.0Volume of Recycled Water Entering Process (volume units selected above)0000Recycled Water Energy Consumed (kWh)0000Recycled Water Energy Intensity (kWh/volume)0.00.00.00.0Quantity of Self-Generated Renewable Energy related to recycled water and wastewater operations0kWhData Quality (Estimate, Metered Data, Combination of Estimates and Metered Data)Combination of Estimates and Metered DataData Quality Narrative:Narrative:Huntington Beach operates the local wastewater collection system but does not operate treatment facilities. Operational control is limited to wastewater lift stations in the local collection system. This table does not include downstream energy consumed to treat the wastewater, after Huntington Beach's control.Huntington BeachTable O-2: Recommended Energy Reporting - Wastewater & Recycled WaterUrban Water Supplier Operational ControlWater Management ProcessVolume of Water Entering Process: Estimated based potable water consumption in the service areaWastewater Energy Consumed: Based on metered dataCollection / ConveyanceTreatmentDischarge / DistributionTotal290 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-38 6.10.2.1 Operational Control and Reporting Board The City’s existing sewer system is made up of a network of gravity sewers and 27 lift stations. As explained in Section 6.6, the City owns and operates wastewater lift stations but no treatment facilities. Similar to the water supply energy intensity, wastewater energy intensity was calculated for FY 2019-20. 6.10.2.2 Volume of Wastewater Entering Processes In CY 2019, the City collected and conveyed 19,037 AF of wastewater to OC San. The City does not provide any wastewater treatment or operate any part of the recycled water system within the City. 6.10.2.3 Energy Consumption and Generation According to Southern California Edison Electricity Bills, the City’s 27 wastewater lift stations consumed 760,742 kWh of electricity. There are no other wastewater facilities that are owned and operated by the City. Currently, the City does not generate renewable energy. Energy consumption data was based on metered data from SCE. 6.10.3 Key Findings and Next Steps Calculating and disclosing direct operationally-controlled energy intensities is another step towards understanding the water-energy nexus. However, much work is still needed to better understand upstream and downstream (indirect) water-energy impacts. When assessing water supply energy intensities or comparing intensities between Suppliers, it is important to consider reporting boundaries as they do not convey the upstream embedded energy or impacts energy intensity has on downstream users. Engaging one’s upstream and downstream supply chain can guide more informed decisions that holistically benefit the environment and are mutually beneficial to engaged parties. Suggestions for further study include: x Supply-chain engagement – The City relies on a variety of water sources for their customers. While some studies have used life cycle assessment tools to estimate energy intensities, there is a need to confirm this data. The 2020 UWMP requirement for all agencies to calculate energy intensity will help the City and neighboring agencies make more informed decisions that would benefit the region as a whole regarding the energy and water nexus. A similar analysis could be performed with upstream supply chain energy, for example, with State Project Water. x Internal benchmarking and goal setting – With a focus on energy conservation and a projected increase in water demand despite energy conservation efforts, the City’s energy intensities will likely decrease with time. Conceivably, in a case where water demand decreases, energy intensities may rise as the energy required to pump or treat is not always proportional to water delivered. In the course of exploring the water-energy nexus and pursuing renewable energy goals, there is a need to assess whether energy intensity is a meaningful indicator or if it makes sense to use a different indicator to reflect the City’s commitment to energy and water conservation. 291 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 6-39 x Regional sustainability – Water and energy efficiency are two components of a sustainable future. Efforts to conserve water and energy, however, may impact the social, environmental, and economic livelihood of the region. In addition to the relationship between water and energy, over time, it may also be important to consider and assess the connection these resources have on other aspects of a sustainable future. x Consistent reporting – as discussed in this report, GHG’s are typically reported on a calendar year cycle but this report used financial year data. In the future, Huntington Beach should consider evaluating calendar year energy intensities for better benchmarking and consistency with other agencies. 292 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-1 7 WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY AND DROUGHT RISK ASSESSMENT Building upon the water supply identified and projected in Section 6, this key section of the UWMP examines the City’s projected water supplies, water demand, and the resulting water supply reliability. Water service reliability reflects the City’s ability to meet the water needs of its customers under varying conditions. For the UWMP, water supply reliability is evaluated in two assessments: 1) the Water Service Reliability Assessment and 2) the DRA. The Water Service reliability assessment compares projected supply to projected demand in 2025 through 2045 for three hydrological conditions: a normal year, a single dry year, and a drought period lasting five consecutive years. The DRA, a new UWMP requirement, assesses near-term water supply reliability. It compares projected water supply and demand assuming the City experiences a drought period for the next five consecutive years. Factors affecting reliability, such as climate change and regulatory impacts, are accounted for in the assessment. Water Service Reliability Overview Every urban water supplier is required to assess the reliability of their water service to their customers under normal, single-dry, and multiple dry water years. The City depends on a combination of imported and local supplies to meet its water demands and has taken numerous steps to ensure it has adequate supplies. Development of local supplies augments the reliability of the water system. There are various factors that may impact reliability of supplies such as legal, environmental, water quality and climatic which are discussed below. MET’s and MWDOC’s 2020 UWMPs conclude that they can meet full-service demands of their member agencies starting 2025 through 2045 during normal years, a single-dry year, and multiple-dry years. Consequently, the City is projected to meet full-service demands through 2045 for the same scenarios. MET’s 2020 IRP update describes the core water resources that will be used to meet full-service demands at the retail level under all foreseeable hydrologic conditions from 2025 through 2045. The foundation of MET’s resource strategy for achieving regional water supply reliability has been to develop and implement water resources programs and activities through its IRP preferred resource mix. This preferred resource mix includes conservation, local resources such as water recycling and groundwater recovery, Colorado River supplies and transfers, SWP supplies and transfers, in-region surface reservoir storage, in-region groundwater storage, out-of-region banking, treatment, conveyance, and infrastructure improvements. Table 7-1 shows the basis of water year data used to predict drought supply availability. The average (normal) hydrologic condition for the MWDOC service area, which the City is a part of, is represented by FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19 and the single-dry year hydrologic condition by FY 2013-14. The five consecutive years of FY 2011-12 to FY 2015-16 represent the driest five consecutive year historic sequence for MWDOC’s service area. Locally, Orange County rainfall for the five-year period totaled 36 inches, the driest on record. 293 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-2 Table 7-1: Retail: Basis of Water Year Data (Reliability Assessment) DWR Submittal Table 7-1 Retail: Basis of Water Year Data (Reliability Assessment) Year Type Base Year Available Supplies if Year Type Repeats Quantification of available supplies is not compatible with this table and is provided elsewhere in the UWMP. Location __________________________ Quantification of available supplies is provided in this table as either volume only, percent only, or both. Volume Available % of Average Supply Average Year 2018-2019 -100% Single-Dry Year 2014 - 106% Consecutive Dry Years 1st Year 2012 - 106% Consecutive Dry Years 2nd Year 2013 - 106% Consecutive Dry Years 3rd Year 2014 - 106% Consecutive Dry Years 4th Year 2015 - 106% Consecutive Dry Years 5th Year 2016 - 106% NOTES: Assumes an increase of 6% above average year demands in dry and multiple dry years based on the Demand Forecast TM (CDM Smith, 2021). 106% represents the percent of average supply needed to meet demands of a single-dry and multiple-dry years. Since the City is able to meet all of its demand with imported water from MWDOC / MET (on top of local groundwater), the percent of average supply value reported is equivalent to the percent of average demand under the corresponding hydrologic condition. 294 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-3 The following sections provide a detailed discussion of the City’s water source reliability. Additionally, the following sections compare the City’s projected supply and demand under various hydrological conditions, to determine the City’s supply reliability for the 25-year planning horizon. Factors Affecting Reliability In order to prepare realistic water supply reliability assessments, various factors affecting reliability were considered. These include climate change and environmental requirements, regulatory changes, water quality impacts, and locally applicable criteria. 7.2.1 Climate Change and the Environment Changing climate patterns are expected to shift precipitation patterns and affect water supply availability. Unpredictable weather patterns will make water supply planning more challenging. Although climate change impacts are associated with exact timing, magnitude, and regional impacts of these temperature and precipitation changes, researchers have identified several areas of concern for California water planners (MET, 2021). These areas include: x A reduction in Sierra Nevada Mountain snowpack. x Increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. x Prolonged drought periods. x Water quality issues associated with increase in wildfires. x Changes in runoff pattern and amount. x Rising sea levels resulting in: o Impacts to coastal groundwater basins due to seawater intrusion. o Increased risk of damage from storms, high-tide events, and the erosion of levees. o Potential pumping cutbacks to the SWP and CVP. Other important issues of concern due to global climate change include: x Effects on local supplies such as groundwater. x Changes in urban and agricultural demand levels and patterns. x Increased evapotranspiration from higher temperatures. x Impacts to human health from water-borne pathogens and water quality degradation. x Declines in ecosystem health and function. x Alterations to power generation and pumping regime. x Increases in ocean algal blooms affected seawater desalination supplies. The major impact in California is that without additional surface storage, the earlier and heavier runoff (rather than snowpack retaining water in storage in the mountains), will result in more water being lost to the oceans. A heavy emphasis on storage is needed in California. In addition, the Colorado River Basin supplies have been inconsistent since about the year 2000, with precipitation near normal while runoff has been less than average in two out of every three years. Climate models are predicting a continuation of this pattern whereby hotter and drier weather conditions will result in continuing lower runoff, pushing the system toward a drying trend that is often characterized as long term drought. 295 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-4 Dramatic swings in annual hydrologic conditions have impacted water supplies available from the SWP over the last decade. The declining ecosystem in the Delta has also led to a reduction in water supply deliveries, and operational constraints, which will likely continue until a long-term solution to these problems is identified and implemented (MET, 2021). Legal, environmental, and water quality issues may have impacts on MET supplies. It is felt, however, that climatic factors would have more of an impact than legal, water quality, and environmental factors. Climatic conditions have been projected based on historical patterns, but severe pattern changes are still a possibility in the future (MET, 2021). 7.2.2 Regulatory and Legal Ongoing regulatory restrictions, such as those imposed by the Biops on the effects of SWP and the federal CVP operations on certain marine life, also contributes to the challenge of determining water delivery reliability. Endangered species protection and conveyance needs in the Delta have resulted in operational constraints that are particularly important because pumping restrictions impact many water resources programs – SWP supplies and additional voluntary transfers, Central Valley storage and transfers, and in-region groundwater and surface water storage. Biops protect special-status species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESAs and imposed substantial constraints on Delta water supply operations through requirements for Delta inflow and outflow and export pumping restrictions. In addition, the SWRCB has set water quality objectives that must be met by the SWP including minimum Delta outflows, limits on SWP and CVP Delta exports, and maximum allowable salinity level. SWRCB plans to fully implement the new Lower San Joaquin River (LSJR) flow objectives from the Phase 1 Delta Plan amendments through adjudicatory (water rights) and regulatory (water quality) processes by 2022. These LSJR flow objectives are estimated to reduce water available for human consumptive use. New litigation, listings of additional species under the ESAs, or regulatory requirements imposed by the SWRCB could further adversely affect SWP operations in the future by requiring additional export reductions, releases of additional water from storage, or other operational changes impacting water supply operations. The difficulty and implications of environmental review, documentation, and permitting pose challenges for multi-year transfer agreements, recycled water projects, and seawater desalination plants. The timeline and roadmap for getting a permit for recycled water projects are challenging and inconsistently implemented in different regions of the state. IPR projects face regulatory restraints such as treatment, blend water, retention time, and Basin Plan Objectives, which may limit how much recycled water can feasibly be recharged into the groundwater basins. New regulations and permitting uncertainty are also barriers to seawater desalination supplies, including updated Ocean Plan Regulations, Marine Life Protected Areas, and Once-Through Cooling Regulations (MET, 2021). 7.2.3 Water Quality The following sub-sections include narratives on water quality issues experienced in various water supplies, if any, and the measures being taken to improve the water quality of these sources. 296 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-5 7.2.3.1 Imported Water MET is responsible for providing high quality potable water throughout its service area. Over 300,000 water quality tests are performed per year on MET’s water to test for regulated contaminants and additional contaminants of concern to ensure the safety of its waters. MET’s supplies originate primarily from the CRA and from the SWP. A blend of these two sources, proportional to each year’s availability of the source, is then delivered throughout MET’s service area. MET’s primary water sources face individual water quality issues of concern. The CRA water source contains higher total dissolved solids (TDS) and the SWP contains higher levels of organic matter, lending to the formation of disinfection byproducts. To remediate the CRA’s high level of salinity and the SWP’s high level of organic matter, MET blends CRA and SWP supplies and has upgraded all of its treatment facilities to include ozone treatment processes. In addition, MET has been engaged in efforts to protect its Colorado River supplies from threats of uranium, perchlorate, and chromium VI while also investigating the potential water quality impact of the following emerging contaminants: N- nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCP), microplastics, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and 1,4-dioxane (MET, 2021). While unforeseeable water quality issues could alter reliability, MET’s current strategies ensure the delivery of high-quality water. The presence of quagga mussels in water sources is a water quality concern. Quagga mussels are an invasive species that was first discovered in 2007 at Lake Mead, on the Colorado River. This species of mussels forms massive colonies in short periods of time, disrupting ecosystems and blocking water intakes. They can cause significant disruption and damage to water distribution systems. MET has had success in controlling the spread and impacts of the quagga mussels within the CRA, however the future could require more extensive maintenance and reduced operational flexibility than current operations allow. It also resulted in MET eliminating deliveries of CRA water into DVL to keep the reservoir free from quagga mussels (MET, 2021). 7.2.3.2 Groundwater OCWD is responsible for managing the OC Basin. To maintain groundwater quality, OCWD conducts an extensive monitoring program that serves to manage the OC Basin’s groundwater production, control groundwater contamination, and comply with all required laws and regulations. A network of nearly 700 wells provides OCWD a source for samples, which are tested for a variety of purposes. OCWD collects samples each month to monitor Basin water quality. The total number of water samples analyzed varies year-to-year due to regulatory requirements, conditions in the basin and applied research and/or special study demands. These samples are collected and tested according to approved federal and state procedures as well as industry-recognized quality assurance and control protocols (City of La Habra et al., 2017). Although PFAS have not been detected in the City’s wells, PFAS are of particular concern for groundwater quality, and since the summer of 2019, DDW requires testing for PFAS compounds in some groundwater production wells in the OCWD area. In February 2020, the DDW lowered its Response Levels (RL) for PFOA and PFOS to 10 and 40 parts per trillion (ppt), respectively. The DDW recommends Producers not serve any water exceeding the RL – effectively making the RL an interim Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) while DDW undertakes administrative action to set a MCL. In response to 297 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-6 DDW’s issuance of the revised RL, as of December 2020, approximately 45 wells in the OCWD service area have been temporarily turned off until treatment systems can be constructed. As additional wells are tested, OCWD expects this figure may increase to at least 70 to 80 wells. The state has begun the process of establishing MCLs for PFOA and PFOS and anticipates these MCLs to be in effect by the Fall of 2023. OCWD anticipates the MCLs will be set at or below the RLs. In April 2020, OCWD as the groundwater basin manager, executed an agreement with the impacted Producers to fund and construct the necessary treatment systems for production wells impacted by PFAS compounds. The PFAS treatment projects includes the design, permitting, construction, and operation of PFAS removal systems for impacted Producer production wells. Each well treatment system will be evaluated for use with either granular activated carbon (GAC) or ion exchange (IX) for the removal of PFAS compounds. These treatment systems utilize vessels in a lead-lag configuration to remove PFOA and PFOS to less than 2 ppt (the current non-detect limit). Use of these PFAS treatment systems are designed to ensure the groundwater supplied by Producer wells can be served in compliance with current and future PFAS regulations. With financial assistance from OCWD, the Producers will operate and maintain the new treatment systems once they are constructed. To minimize expenses and provide maximum protection to the public water supply, OCWD initiated design, permitting, and construction of the PFAS treatment projects on a schedule that allows rapid deployment of treatment systems. Construction contracts were awarded for treatment systems for production wells in the City of Fullerton and Serrano Water District in Year 2020. Additional construction contracts will likely be awarded in the first and second quarters of 2021. OCWD expects the treatment systems to be constructed for most of the initial 45 wells above the RL within the next 2 to 3 years. As additional data are collected and new wells experience PFAS detections at or near the current RL, and/or above a future MCL, and are turned off, OCWD will continue to partner with the affected Producers and take action to design and construct necessary treatment systems to bring the impacted wells back online as quickly as possible. Groundwater production in FY 2019-20 was expected to be approximately 325,000 AF but declined to 286,550 AF primarily due to PFAS impacted wells being turned off around February 2020. OCWD expects groundwater production to be in the area of 245,000 AF in FY 2020-21 due to the currently idled wells and additional wells being impacted by PF AS and turned off. As PFAS treatment systems are constructed, OCWD expects total annual groundwater production to slowly increase back to normal levels (310,000 to 330,000 AF) (OCWD, 2020). Salinity is a significant water quality problem in many parts of Southern California, including Orange County. Salinity is a measure of the dissolved minerals in water including both TDS and nitrates. OCWD continuously monitors the levels of TDS in wells throughout the OC Basin. TDS currently has a California Secondary MCL of 500 mg/L. The portions of the OC Basin with the highest levels are generally located in the cities of Irvine, Tustin, Yorba Linda, Anaheim, and Fullerton. There is also a broad area in the central portion of the OC Basin where TDS ranges from 500 to 700 mg/L. Sources of TDS include the water supplies used to recharge the OC Basin and from onsite wastewater treatment systems, also known as septic systems. The TDS concentration in the OC Basin is expected to decrease over time as the TDS concentration of GWRS water used to recharge the OC Basin is approximately 50 mg/L (City of La Habra et al., 2017). 298 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-7 Nitrates are one of the most common and widespread contaminants in groundwater supplies, originating from fertilizer use, animal feedlots, wastewater disposal systems, and other sources. The MCL for nitrate in drinking water is set at 10 mg/L. OCWD regularly monitors nitrate levels in groundwater and works with producers to treat wells that have exceeded safe levels of nitrate concentrations. OCWD manages the nitrate concentration of water recharged by its facilities to reduce nitrate concentrations in groundwater. This includes the operation of the Prado Wetlands, which was designed to remove nitrogen and other pollutants from the Santa Ana River before the water is diverted to be percolated into OCWD’s surface water recharge system. Although water from the Deep Aquifer System is of very high quality, it is amber-colored and contains a sulfuric odor due to buried natural organic material. These negative aesthetic qualities require treatment before use as a source of drinking water. The total volume of the amber-colored groundwater is estimated to be approximately 1 MAF. There are other potential contaminants that are of concern to and are monitored by OCWD. These include: x Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) – MTBE is an additive to gasoline that increases octane ratings but became a widespread contaminant in groundwater supplies. The greatest source of MTBE contamination comes from underground fuel tank releases. The primary MCL for MTBE in drinking water is 13 μg/L. x Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) – VOCs come from a variety of sources including industrial degreasers, paint thinners, and dry cleaning solvents. Locations of VOC contamination within the OC Basin include the former El Toro Marine Corps Air Station, the Shallow Aquifer System, and portions of the Principal Aquifer System in the Cities of Fullerton and Anaheim. x NDMA – NDMA is a compound that can occur in wastewater that contains its precursors and is disinfected via chlorination and/or chloramination. It is also found in food products such as cured meat, fish, beer, milk, and tobacco smoke. The California Notification Level for NDMA is 10 ng/L and the Response Level is 300 ng/L. In the past, NDMA has been found in groundwater near the Talbert Barrier, which was traced to industrial wastewater dischargers. x 1,4-Dioxane – 1,4-Dioxane is a suspected human carcinogen. It is used as a solvent in various industrial processes such as the manufacture of adhesive products and membranes. x Perchlorate – Perchlorate enters groundwater through application of fertilizer containing perchlorate, water imported from the Colorado River, industrial or military sites that have perchlorate, and natural occurrence. Perchlorate was not detected in 84% of the 219 production wells tested between the years 2010 through 2014. x Selenium – Selenium is a naturally occurring micronutrient found in soils and groundwater in the Newport Bay watershed. The bio-accumulation of selenium in the food chain may result in deformities, stunted growth, reduced hatching success, and suppression of immune systems in fish and wildlife. Management of selenium is difficult as there is no off-the-shelf treatment technology available. x Constituents of Emerging Concern (CEC) – CECs are either synthetic or naturally occurring substances that are not currently regulated in water supplies or wastewater discharged but can 299 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-8 be detected using very sensitive analytical techniques. The newest group of CECs include pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine disruptors. OCWD’s laboratory is one of a few in the state of California that continuously develops capabilities to analyze for new compounds (City of La Habra et al., 2017). 7.2.4 Locally Applicable Criteria Within Orange County, there are no significant local applicable criteria that directly affect reliability. Through the years, the water agencies in Orange County have made tremendous efforts to integrate their systems to provide flexibility to interchange with different sources of supplies. There are emergency agreements in place to ensure all parts of the County have an adequate supply of water. In the northern part of the County, agencies are able to meet a majority of their demands through groundwater with very little limitation, except for the OCWD BPP. For the agencies in southern Orange County, most of their demands are met with imported water where their limitation is based on the capacity of their system, which is very robust. However, if a major earthquake on the San Andreas Fault occurs, it will be damaging to all three key regional water aqueducts and disrupt imported supplies for up to six months. The region would likely impose a water use reduction ranging from 10-25% until the system is repaired. However, MET has taken proactive steps to handle such disruption, such as constructing DVL, which mitigates potential impacts. DVL, along with other local reservoirs, can store a six to twelve-month supply of emergency water (MET, 2021). Water Service Reliability Assessment This Section assesses the City’s reliability to provide water services to its customers under various hydrological conditions. This is completed by comparing the projected long-term water demand (Section 4), to the projected water supply sources available to the City (Section 6), in five-year increments, for a normal water year, a single dry water year, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years. 7.3.1 Normal Year Reliability The water demand forecasting model developed for the Demand Forecast TM (described in Section 4.3.1), to project the 25-year demand for Orange County water agencies, also isolated the impacts that weather and future climate can have on water demand through the use of a statistical model. The explanatory variables of population, temperature, precipitation, unemployment rate, drought restrictions, and conservation measures were used to create the statistical model. The impacts of hot/dry weather condition are reflected as a percentage increase in water demands from the average condition. The average (normal) demand is represented by the average water demand of FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19 (CDM Smith, 2021). The City is 100 percent reliable for normal year demands from 2025 through 2045 (Table 7-2) due to diversified supply and conservation measures. The City has entitlements to receive imported water from MET through MWDOC via connections to MET's regional distribution system. For simplicity, the table shows supply to balance demand in the table. However, the City can purchase more MET water through MWDOC, should the need arise. The City has entitlements to receive imported water from MET through 300 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-9 MWDOC via connections to MET's regional distribution system. All imported water supplies are assumed available to the City from existing water transmission facilities, as per MET’s and MWDOC’s 2020 UWMPs. The demand and supplies listed in Table 7-2 also include local groundwater supplies that are available to the City through OCWD by an assumed BPP of 85%, per Section 6.3.4. Table 7-2: Retail: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison DWR Submittal Table 7-2 Retail: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Supply totals (AF) 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 26,054 Demand totals (AF) 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 26,054 Difference (AF) 0 0 0 0 0 NOTES: This table compares the projected demand and supply volumes determined in Sections 4.3.2 and 6.1, respectively. 7.3.2 Single Dry Year Reliability A single dry year is defined as a single year of minimal to no rainfall within a period where average precipitation is expected to occur. The water demand forecasting model developed for the Demand Forecast TM (described in Section 4.3.1) isolated the impacts that weather and future climate can have on water demand through the use of a statistical model. The impacts of hot/dry weather condition are reflected as a percentage increase in water demands from the normal year condition (average of FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19). For a single dry year condition (FY 2013-14), the model projects a 6% increase in demand for the OC Basin area where the City’s service area is located (CDM Smith, 2021). Detailed information of the model is included in Appendix E. The City has documented that it is 100% reliable for single dry year demands from 2025 through 2045 with a demand increase of 6% from normal demand with significant reserves held by MET, local groundwater supplies, and conservation. A comparison between the supply and the demand in a single dry year is shown in (Table 7-3). For simplicity, the table shows supply to balance demand in the table. However, the City can purchase more MET water through MWDOC, should the need arise. 301 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-10 Table 7-3: Retail: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison DWR Submittal Table 7-3 Retail: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Supply totals (AF) 27,983 28,115 27,919 27,658 27,617 Demand totals (AF) 27,983 28,115 27,919 27,658 27,617 Difference (AF) 0 0 0 0 0 NOTES: It is conservatively assumed that a single dry year demand is 6% greater than each respective year's normally projected total water demand. Groundwater is sustainably managed through the BPP and robust management measures (Section 6.3.4 and Appendix G) and based on MET’s and MWDOC's UWMPs, imported water is available to close any potable water supply gap that local sources cannot meet (Section 7.5.1). 7.3.3 Multiple Dry Year Reliability Assessing the reliability to meet demand for five consecutive dry years is a new requirement for the 2020 UWMP, as compared to the previous requirement of assessing three or more consecutive dry years. Multiple dry years are defined as five or more consecutive dry years with minimal rainfall within a period of average precipitation. The water demand forecasting model developed for the Demand Forecast TM (described in Section 4.3.1) isolated the impacts that weather and future climate can have on water demand through the use of a statistical model. The impacts of hot/dry weather condition are reflected as a percentage increase in water demands from the normal year condition (average of FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19). For a single dry year condition (FY 2013-14), the model projects a 6% increase in demand for the OC Basin area where the City’s service area is located (CDM Smith, 2021). It is conservatively assumed that a five consecutive dry year scenario is a repeat of the single dry year over five consecutive years. Even with a conservative demand increase of 6% each year for five consecutive years, the City is capable of meeting all customers’ demands from 2025 through 2045 (Table 7-4), with significant reserves held by MET and conservation. For simplicity, the table shows supply to balance demand in the table. However, the City can purchase more MET water through MWDOC, should the need arise. 302 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-11 Table 7-4: Retail: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison DWR Submittal Table 7-4 Retail: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison (AF) 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 First year Supply totals 30,432 28,009 28,076 27,867 27,650 Demand totals 30,432 28,009 28,076 27,867 27,650 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Second year Supply totals 29,819 28,036 28,037 27,815 27,642 Demand totals 29,819 28,036 28,037 27,815 27,642 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Third year Supply totals 29,207 28,062 27,998 27,763 27,634 Demand totals 29,207 28,062 27,998 27,763 27,634 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Fourth year Supply totals 28,595 28,089 27,958 27,710 27,625 Demand totals 28,595 28,089 27,958 27,710 27,625 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Fifth year Supply totals 27,983 28,115 27,919 27,658 27,617 Demand totals 27,983 28,115 27,919 27,658 27,617 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 NOTES: It is conservatively assumed that a five consecutive dry year scenario is a repeat of the single dry year (106% of projected normal year values) over five consecutive years. The 2025 column assesses supply and demand for FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25; the 2030 column assesses FY 2025-26 through FY 2029-30 and so forth, in order to end the water service reliability assessment in FY 2044-45. Groundwater is sustainably managed through the BPP and robust management measures (Section 6.3.4 and Appendix G) and based on MET’s and MWDOC's UWMPs, imported water is available to close any potable water supply gap that local sources cannot meet (Section 7.5.1). 303 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-12 Management Tools and Options Existing and planned water management tools and options for the City and MWDOC’s service area that seek to maximize local resources and result in minimizing the need to import water are described below. x Reduced Delta Reliance: MET has demonstrated consistency with Reduced Reliance on the Delta Through Improved Regional Water Self-Reliance (Delta Plan policy WR P1) by reporting the expected outcomes for measurable reductions in supplies from the Delta. MET has improved its self-reliance through methods including water use efficiency, water recycling, stormwater capture and reuse, advanced water technologies, conjunctive use projects, local and regional water supply and storage programs, and other programs and projects. In 2020, MET had a 602,000 AF change in supplies contributing to regional-self-reliance, corresponding to a 15.3%change, and this amount is projected to increase through 2045 (MET, 2021). For detailed information on the Delta Plan Policy WR P1, refer to Appendix C. x The continued and planned use of groundwater: The water supply resources within MWDOC’s service area are enhanced by the existence of groundwater basins that account for the majority of local supplies available and are used as reservoirs to store water during wet years and draw from storage during dry years, subsequently minimizing MWDOC’s reliance on imported water. Groundwater basins are managed within a safe basin operating range so that groundwater wells are only pumped as needed to meet water use. Although MWDOC does not produce or manage recycled water, MWDOC supports and partners in recycled water efforts, including groundwater recharge. The City is currently planning for various well improvement projects (Section 6.9). x Groundwater storage and transfer programs: MWDOC and OCWD’s involvement in SARCCUP includes participation in a CUP that improves water supply resiliency and increases available dry-year yield from local groundwater basins. The groundwater bank has 137,000 AF of storage (OCWD, 2020b). Additionally, MET has numerous groundwater storage and transfer programs in which MET endeavors to increase the reliability of water supplies, including the AVEK Waster Agency Exchange and Storage Program and the High Desert Water Bank Program. The IRWD Strand Ranch Water Banking Program has approximately 23,000 AF stored for IRWD’s benefit, and by agreement, the water is defined to be an "Extraordinary Supply" by MET and counts essentially 1:1 during a drought/water shortage condition under MET’s Water Supply Allocation Plan. In addition, MET has encouraged storage through its cyclic and conjunctive use programs that allow MET to deliver water into a groundwater basin in advance of agency demands, such as the Cyclic Storage Agreements under the Main San Gabriel Basin Judgement. x Water Loss Program: The water loss audit program reduces MWDOC’s dependency on imported water from the Delta by implementing water loss control technologies after assessing audit data and leak detection. x Increased use of recycled water: MWDOC partners with local agencies in recycled water efforts, including OCWD to identify opportunities for the use of recycled water for irrigation purposes, groundwater recharge and some non-irrigation applications. OCWD’s GWRS and GAP allow Southern California to decrease its dependency on imported water and create a local 304 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-13 and reliable source of water that meet or exceed all federal and state drinking level standards. Expansion of the GWRS is currently underway to increase the plant’s production to 130 MGD, and further reduce reliance on imported water. x Implementation of demand management measures during dry periods: During dry periods, water reduction methods to be applied to the public through the retail agencies, will in turn reduce MWDOC’s overall demands on MET and reliance on imported water. MWDOC is assisting its retail agencies by leading the coordination of Orange County Regional Alliance for all of the retail agencies in Orange County. MWDOC assists each retail water supplier in Orange County in analyzing the requirements of and establishing their baseline and target water use, as guided by DWR. The City’s specific demand management measures (DMMs) are further discussed in Section 9. Drought Risk Assessment Water Code Section 10635(b) requires every urban water supplier include, as part of its UWMP, a DRA for its water service as part of information considered in developing its DMMs and water supply projects and programs. The DRA is a specific planning action that assumes the City is experiencing a drought over the next five years and addresses the City’s water supply reliability in the context of presumed drought conditions. Together, the water service reliability assessment (Sections 7.1 through 7.3), DRA, and WSCP (Section 8 and Appendix H) allow the City to have a comprehensive picture of its short-term and long-term water service reliability and to identify the tools to address any perceived or actual shortage conditions. Water Code Section 10612 requires the DRA to be based on the driest five-year historic sequence of the City’s water supply. However, Water Code Section 10635 also requires that the analysis consider plausible changes on projected supplies and demands due to climate change, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria. The following sections describe the City’s methodology and results of its DRA. 7.5.1 DRA Methodology The water demand forecasting model developed for the Demand Forecast TM (described in Section 4.3.1 isolated the impacts that weather and future climate can have on water demand through the use of a statistical model. The impacts of hot/dry weather condition are reflected as a percentage increase in water demands from the average condition (average of FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19). For a single dry year condition (FY 2013-14), the model projects a 6% increase in demand for the region encompassing the City’s service area (CDM Smith, 2021). Locally, the five-consecutive years of FY 2011-12 through FY 2015-16 represent the driest five consecutive year historic sequence for the City’s water supply. This period that spanned water years 2012 through 2016 included the driest four-year statewide precipitation on record (2012-2015) and the smallest Sierra Cascades snowpack on record (2015, with 5% of average). It was marked by extraordinary heat: 2014, 2015 and 2016 were California’s first, second and third warmest year in terms of statewide average temperatures. Locally, Orange County rainfall for the five-year period totaled 36 inches, the driest on record. 305 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-14 As explained in Section 6, the City currently relies on, and will continue to rely on, two main water sources: local groundwater and imported water supply from MWDOC / MET. The City maximizes local water supply use before the purchase of imported water. The difference between total forecasted potable demands and local groundwater supply projections is the demand on MWDOC’s imported water supplies, which are supplied by MET. Local groundwater supply for the City comes from the OC Basin and is dictated by the BPP set annually by OCWD. Therefore, the City’s DRA focuses on the assessment of imported water from MWDOC / MET, which will be used to close any local water supply gap. This assessment aligns with the DRA presented in MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP. Water Demand Characterization All of MWDOC’s water supplies are purchased from MET, regardless of hydrologic conditions. As described in Section 6.2, MET’s supplies are from the Colorado River, SWP, and in-region storage. In its 2020 UWMP, MET’s DRA concluded that even without activating WSCP actions, MET can reliably provide water to all of their member agencies, including MWDOC, and in effect the City, assuming a five -year drought from FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25. Beyond this, MET’s DRA indicated a surplus of supplies that would be available to all of its member agencies, including MWDOC, should the need arise. Therefore, any increase in demand that is experienced in MWDOC's service area, which includes the City, will be met by MET's water supplies. Based on the Demand Forecast TM, in a single dry year, demand is expected to increase by 6% above a normal year. Both MWDOC and the City’s DRA conservatively assumes a drought from FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25 is a repeat of the single dry year over five consecutive years. The City’s demand projections were developed as a part of the Demand Forecast TM, led by MWDOC. As a part of this study, MWDOC first estimated total retail demand for its service area. This was based on estimated future demands using historical water use trends, future expected water use efficiency measures, additional projected land-use development, and changes in population. The City’s projected water use, linearly interpolated per the demand forecast, is presented annually for the next five years in in Table 4-2. Next, MWDOC estimated the projections of local supplies derived from current and expected local supply programs from their member agencies. Finally, the demand model calculated the difference between total forecasted demands and local supply projections. The resulting difference between total demands net of savings from conservation and local supplies is the expected regional demands on MWDOC from their member agencies, such as the City. Water Supply Characterization MWDOC’s assumptions for its supply capabilities are discussed and presented in five-year increments under its 2020 UWMP water reliability assessment. For MWDOC’s DRA, these supply capabilities are further refined and presented annually for the years 2021 to 2025 by assuming a repeat of historic conditions from FY 2011-12 to FY 2015-16. For its DRA, MWDOC assessed the reliability of supplies available to MWDOC through MET using historical supply availability under dry-year conditions. MET’s supply sources under the Colorado River, SWP, and in-region supply categories are individually listed and discussed in detail in MET’s UWMP. Future supply capabilities for each of these supply sources are also individually tabulated in Appendix 3 of MET’s UWMP, with consideration for plausible changes on projected supplies under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other factors. MWDOC’s supplies are used to meet consumptive use, surface water and groundwater 306 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-15 recharge needs that are in excess of locally available supplies. In addition, MWDOC has access to supply augmentation actions through MET. MET may exercise these actions based on regional need, and in accordance with their WSCP, and may include the use of supplies and storage programs within the Colorado River, SWP, and in-region storage. 7.5.2 Total Water Supply and Use Comparison The City’s DRA reveals that its supply capabilities are expected to balance anticipated total water use and supply, assuming a five-year consecutive drought from FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25 (Table 7-5). For simplicity, the table shows supply to balance the modeled demand in the table. However, the City can purchase more MET water from MWDOC, should the need arise. Table 7-5: Five-Year Drought Risk Assessment Tables to Address Water Code Section 10635(b) DWR Submittal Table 7-5: Five-Year Drought Risk Assessment Tables to address Water Code Section 10635(b) 2021 Total Total Water Use 30,432 Total Supplies 30,432 Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0 Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0 WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0 Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0 Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0% 2022 Total Total Water Use 29,819 Total Supplies 29,819 Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0 Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0 WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0 Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0 Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0% 2023 Total Total Water Use 29,207 Total Supplies 29,207 Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0 307 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-16 DWR Submittal Table 7-5: Five-Year Drought Risk Assessment Tables to address Water Code Section 10635(b) Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0 WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0 Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0 Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0% 2024 Total Total Water Use 28,595 Total Supplies 28,595 Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0 Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0 WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0 Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0 Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0% 2025 Total Total Water Use 27,983 Total Supplies 27,983 Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0 Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0 WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0 Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0 Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0% Notes: Groundwater is sustainably managed through the BPP and robust management measures (Section 6.3.4 and Appendix G), direct and indirect recycled water uses provide additional local supply (Section 6.6), and based on MET’s and MWDOC's UWMPs, imported water is available to close any potable water supply gap that local sources cannot meet (Section 7.5.1). 7.5.3 Water Source Reliability Locally, approximately 77% (BPP for Water Year 2021-22) of the City’s total water supply can rely on OC Basin groundwater through FY 2024-25. The BPP is projected to increase to 85% starting in FY 2024-25. Based on various storage thresholds and hydrologic conditions, OCWD, who manages the OC Basin, has numerous management measures that can be taken, such as adjusting the BPP or 308 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 7-17 seeking additional supplies to refill the basin, to ensure the reliability of the Basin. For more information on the OC Basin’s management efforts, refer to Section 6.3. Additionally, the City’s use of indirect recycled water (OCWD GWRS) should also be considered. The ability to continue producing water locally greatly improves the City’s water reliability. More detail on these programs is available in Section 6.6. Moreover, even though they would not normally be considered part of the City’s water portfolio, the emergency interconnections the City has with the Cities of Seal Beach, Fountain Valley, and Westminster could help mitigate any water supply shortages in a non-drought situation, though shortages are not expected. Emergency interconnections are described in Section 6.8. The City’s DRA concludes that its water supplies meet total water demand, assuming a five-year consecutive drought from FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25 (Table 7-5). For simplicity, the table shows supply to balance the modeled demand in the table. However, the City can purchase more MET water from MWDOC, should the need arise. As detailed in Section 8, the City has in place a robust WSCP and comprehensive shortage response planning efforts that include demand reduction measures and supply augmentation actions. However, since the City’s DRA shows a balance between water supply and demand, no water service reliability concern is anticipated and no shortfall mitigation measures are expected to be exercised over the next five years. The City and its wholesale supplier, MWDOC, will periodically revisit its representation of the supply sources and of the gross water use estimated for each year, and will revise its DRA if needed. 309 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 8-1 8 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING Layperson Description Water shortage contingency planning is a strategic planning process that the City engages to prepare for and respond to water shortages. A water shortage, when water supply available is insufficient to meet the normally expected customer water use at a given point in time, may occur due to a number of reasons, such as water supply quality changes, climate change, drought, and catastrophic events (e.g., earthquake). The City’s WSCP provides real-time water supply availability assessment and structured steps designed to respond to actual conditions. This level of detailed planning and preparation will help maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions. Water Code Section 10632 requires that every urban water supplier that serves more than 3,000 AFY or have more than 3,000 connections prepared and adopt a standalone WSCP as part of its UWMP. The WSCP is required to plan for a greater than 50% supply shortage. This WSCP due to be updated based on new requirements every five years and will be adopted as a current update for submission to DWR by July 1, 2021. Overview of the WSCP The WSCP serves as the operating manual that the City will use to prevent catastrophic service disruptions through proactive, rather than reactive, mitigation of water shortages. The WSCP contains processes and procedures documented in the WSCP, which are given legal authority through the WSCP Response Ordinance. This way, when shortage conditions arise, the City’s governing body, its staff, and the public can easily identify and efficiently implement pre-determined steps to mitigate a water shortage to the level appropriate to the degree of water shortfall anticipated. Figure 8-1 illustrates the interdependent relationship between the three procedural documents related to planning for and responding to water shortages. 310 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 8-2 Figure 8-1: UWMP Overview A copy of the City’s WSCP is provided in Appendix H and includes the steps to assess if a water shortage is occurring, and what level of shortage drought actions to trigger the best response as appropriate to the water shortage conditions. WSCP has prescriptive elements, including an analysis of water supply reliability; the drought shortage actions for each of the six standard water shortage levels, that correspond to water shortage percentages ranging from 10% to greater than 50%; an estimate of potential to close supply gap for each measure; protocols and procedures to communicate identified actions for any current or predicted water shortage conditions; procedures for an annual water supply and demand assessment; monitoring and reporting requirements to determine customer compliance; reevaluation and improvement procedures for evaluating the WSCP. Summary of Water Shortage Response Strategy and Required DWR Tables This WSCP is organized into three main sections with Section 3 aligned with the Water Code Section 16032 requirements. Section 1 Introduction and WSCP Overview gives an overview of the WSCP fundamentals. Section 2 Background provides a background on the City’s water service area. Section 3.1 Water Supply Reliability Analysis provides a summary of the water supply analysis and water reliability findings from the 2020 UWMP. Section 3.2 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment Procedures provide a description of procedures to conduct and approve the Annual Assessment. Section 3.3 Six Standard Water Shortage Stages explains the WSCP’s six standard water shortage levels corresponding to progressive ranges of up to 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and more than 50% shortages. 311 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 8-3 Section 3.4 Shortage Response Actions describes the WSCP’s shortage response actions that align with the defined shortage levels. Section 3.5 Communication Protocols addresses communication protocols and procedures to inform customers, the public, interested parties, and local, regional, and state governments, regarding any current or predicted shortages and any resulting shortage response actions. Section 3.6 Compliance and Enforcement describes customer compliance, enforcement, appeal, and exemption procedures for triggered shortage response actions. Section 3.7 Legal Authorities is a description of the legal authorities that enable the City to implement and enforce its shortage response actions. Section 3.8 Financial Consequences of the WSCP provides a description of the financial consequences of and responses for drought conditions. Section 3.9 Monitoring and Reporting describes monitoring and reporting requirements and procedures that ensure appropriate data is collected, tracked, and analyzed for purposes of monitoring customer compliance and to meet state reporting requirements. Section 3.10 WSCP Refinement Procedures addresses reevaluation and improvement procedures for monitoring and evaluating the functionality of the WSCP. Section 3.11 Special Water Feature Distinction is a required definition for inclusion in a WSCP per the Water Code. Section 3.12 Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Implementation provides a record of the process the City followed to adopt and implement its WSCP. The WSCP is based on adequate details of demand reduction and supply augmentation measures that are structured to match varying degrees of shortage will ensure the relevant stakeholders understand what to expect during a water shortage situation. The City has adopted water shortage levels consistent with the requirements identified in Water Code Section 10632 (a)(3)(A) (Table 8-1). The supply augmentation actions that align with each shortage level are described in DWR Table 8-3 (Appendix B). These augmentations represent short-term management objectives triggered by the WSCP and do not overlap with the long-term new water supply development or supply reliability enhancement projects. The demand reduction measures that align with each shortage level are described in DWR Table 8-2 (Appendix B). This table also estimates the extent to which that action will reduce the gap between supplies and demands to demonstrate to the that choose suite of shortage response actions can be expected to deliver the expected outcomes necessary to meet the requirements of a given shortage level. 312 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 8-4 Table 8-1: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Submittal Table 8-1 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Shortage Level Percent Shortage Range Shortage Response Actions 0 0% (Normal) A Level 0 Water Supply Shortage –Condition exists when the City notifies its water users that no supply reductions are anticipated in this year. The City proceeds with planned water efficiency best practices to support consumer demand reduction in line with state mandated requirements and local City goals for water supply reliability. Permanent water waste prohibitions are in place as stipulated in the City’s Water Shortage Response Ordinance. 1 hƉƚŽϭϬйථ A Level 1 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City notifies its water users that due to drought or other supply reductions, a consumer demand reduction of up to 10% is necessary to make more efficient use of water and respond to existing water conditions. City shall implement the mandatory Level 1 conservation measures identified in this WSCP. The type of event that may prompt the City to declare a Level 1 Water Supply Shortage may include, among other factors, a finding that its wholesale water provider calls for extraordinary water conservation. 2 ථϭϭйƚŽϮϬй A Level 2 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City notifies its water users that due to drought or other supply reductions, a consumer demand reduction of up to 20% is necessary to make more efficient use of water and respond to existing water conditions. Upon declaration of a Level 2 Water Supply Shortage condition, the City shall implement the mandatory Level 2 conservation measures identified in this WSCP. 3 ϮϭйƚŽϯϬйථ A Level 3 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 30% consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. 4 ථϯϭйƚŽϰϬй A Level 4 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 40% consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. 313 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 8-5 Submittal Table 8-1 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Shortage Level Percent Shortage Range Shortage Response Actions 5 ථϰϭйƚŽϱϬй A Level 5 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 50% or more consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. 6 >50% A Level 6 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that greater than 50% or more consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. NOTES: Water shortage contingency planning is a strategic planning process to prepare for and respond to water shortages. Detailed planning and preparation can help maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions. This chapter provides a structured plan for dealing with water shortages, incorporating prescriptive information and standardized action levels, along with implementation actions in the event of a catastrophic supply interruption. A well-structured WSCP allows real-time water supply availability assessment and structured steps designed to respond to actual conditions, to allow for efficient management of any shortage with predictability and accountability. A water shortage, when water supply available is insufficient to meet the normally expected customer water use at a given point in time, may occur due to a number of reasons, such as population growth, climate change, drought, and catastrophic events. The WSCP is the City’s operating manual that is used to prevent catastrophic service disruptions through proactive, rather than reactive, management. This way, if and when shortage conditions arise, the City’s governing body, its staff, and the public can easily identify and efficiently implement pre-determined steps to manage a water shortage. 314 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-1 9 DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES The City, along with other Retail water agencies throughout Orange County, recognizes the need to use existing water supplies efficiently. This ethic of efficient use of water has evolved as a result of the development and implementation of water use efficiency programs that make good economic sense and reflect responsible stewardship of the region’s water resources. The City works closely with MWDOC to promote regional efficiency by participating in the regional water savings programs, leveraging MWDOC local program assistance, and applying the findings of MWDOCs research and evaluation efforts. This chapter communicates the City’s efforts to promote conservation and to reduce demand on water supplies. A detailed description of demand management measures is available in Appendix J. Demand Management Measures for Retail Suppliers The goal of the DMM section is to provide a comprehensive description of the water conservation programs that a supplier has implemented, is currently implementing, and plans to implement in order to meet its urban water use reduction targets. The reporting requirements for DMM has been significantly modified and streamlined in 2014 by Assembly Bill 2067. Additionally, this section of the UWMP will report on the role of MWDOC’s programs in meeting new state regulations for complying with the SWRCB’s new Conservation Framework. These categories of demand management measures are as follows: x Water waste prevention ordinances; x Metering; x Conservation pricing; x Public education and outreach; x Programs to assess and manage distribution system real loss; x Water conservation program coordination and staffing support; x Other DMMs that have a significant impact on water use as measured in GPCD, including innovative measures, if implemented; x Programs to assist retailers with Conservation Framework Compliance. 9.1.1 Water Waste Prevention Ordinances The City Council adopted the Water Conservation and Water Supply Shortage Program Ordinance No. 4022 on April 21, 2014; per Huntington Beach Municipal Code 14.18.050. Ordinance No. 4022 establishes permanent water conservation requirements and prohibition against waste that are effective at all times and is not dependent upon a water shortage for implementation, as follows: x Limits on watering hours x Limit on watering duration x No excessive water flow or runoff x No washing down hard or paved surfaces x Obligation to fix leaks, break, or malfunctions x Re-circulating water required for water fountains and decorative water features 315 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-2 x Limits on washing vehicles x Drinking water served upon request only x Commercial lodging establishments must provide guests option to decline daily linen services x No installation of single pass cooling systems x No installation of non-recirculating water systems in commercial car wash and laundry systems x Restaurants required to use water conserving dish wash spray valves x Commercial car wash systems x Construction activities may not use potable water for compaction or dust control when non- potable water is available and must use hoses with an automatic shut-off nozzle x Hydrants must only be used for emergencies without first obtaining a permit x Indiscriminate use prohibited x Measurable rainfall event- watering prohibited In an event of a water supply shortage, the ordinance further establishes six levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage or declared water shortage emergency, with increasing restrictions on water use in response to worsening drought or emergency conditions and decreasing supplies. The provisions and water conservation measures to be implemented in response to each shortage level are described in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) located in Appendix H of this 2020 UWMP. The City’s water conservation ordinance is included in Appendix D of the WSCP. The City has a water conservation hot line and a website to receive water waste complaints and water conservation related service requests. Once a complaint is received, the City’s water conservation coordinator investigates the complaint then notifies the resident and/or tag with a water conservation ordinance brochure accordingly. When a service request is received, a work order is filled out and entered into the City’s Work Order system known as the Huntington Beach Service Maintenance System (HBSMS). The HBSMS is used to track data related to water waste and non-compliance on irrigation schedule to be reported to State Water Resource Control Board. During FY 2014-15, the City also conducted field patrol to identify water waste and non-compliance on irrigation schedule. The field inspector leaves a door hanger and follows up with a phone call during business hours. 9.1.2 Metering All of the City’s water connections are fully metered and customers are billed for volume of use. The City does not have any mixed-use meters (e.g., meters that measure irrigation as well as restroom uses at parks). All new irrigation meters for commercial/industrial/institutional customers are required to be dedicated irrigation meters. The City uses an Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system by ACLARA. About 98 % of the City has AMI meters installed. The City plans to be fully converted by the end of 2020. The City has 34 Data Collection Units (DCU) operating throughout the City. The DCU receives the reads from the Meter Transmission Unit (MTU) multiple times per day. The DCU then sends all of the captured reads to the Network Control Center (NCC). The City is able to view hourly reads for customer’s consumption. 316 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-3 To ensure accurate billing based on consumption, water utilities replace water meters periodically. Water meters and their registers often lose accuracy as they age; this requirement allows the City to provide you with continued accurate meter readings. These meter replacements are a regulatory requirement and are not optional. They are typically replaced every 15 to 20 years. 9.1.3 Conservation Pricing The entirety of the City is metered and this method is used to determine consumption per connection. The charge for water service is made up of three components: (1) the basic monthly (meter) charge, (2) the water usage or commodity charge, and 3) a capital facilities charge. The fees charged for each of these are designed to recover the cost of providing this component to the customer. The City’s basic daily charge per meter size is shown in Table 9-1. The City usage charge is uniform at $2.1653 per 100 cubic feet of water. These rates are effective as of July 1, 2019 and are generally updated annually with City Council approval. Table 9-1: Water Rates Effective July 1 2019 Meter Size/Type Daily Rate ¾” or 5/8” $0.4504 1” $0.7509 1”-1 ½” $1.5015 2” $2.4023 3” $5.2547 4” compound $7.5067 4” Fire Meter $10.5094 6” compound $15.0135 6” Fire Meter $24.0214 8” Fire Meter $42.0372 10” Fire Meter $66.0582 9.1.4 Public Education and Outreach The City’s public education and outreach program is administered by MWDOC, its wholesale supplier. MWDOC develops, coordinates, and delivers a substantial number of public information, education, and outreach programs aimed at elevating water agency and consumer awareness and understanding of current water issues as well as efficient water use and water-saving practices, sound policy, and water reliability investments that are in the best interest of the region. These efforts encourage good water 317 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-4 stewardship that benefit all City residents, businesses, and industries across all demographics. Several examples are included below: Print and Electronic Materials MWDOC offers a variety of print and electronic materials that are designed to assist City water users of all ages in discovering where their water comes from, what the City and other water industry professionals are doing to address water challenges, how to use water most efficiently, and more. Through the City’s robust social media presence, award-winning website, eCurrents newsletter, media tool kits, public service announcements, flyers, brochures, and other outreach materials, MWDOC ensures that stakeholders are equipped with sufficient information and subject knowledge to assist them in making good behavioral and civic choices that ultimately affect the quality and quantity of the region’s water supply. Public Events Each year, MWDOC hosts an array of public events intended to engage a diverse range of water users in targeted discussions and actions that homes in on their specific interests or needs. Some of these public events include: x MWDOC Water Policy Forums and Orange County Water Summit are innovative and interactive symposiums that bring together hundreds of business professionals, elected officials, water industry stakeholders, and community leaders from throughout the state for a discussion on new and ongoing water supply challenges, water policy issues, and other important topics that impact our water supply, economy, and public health. x Inspection Trips of the state’s water supply systems are sponsored each year by MWDOC and MET. Orange County elected officials, residents, business owners, and community leaders are invited to tour key water facilities throughout the state and learn more about the critical planning, procurement, and management of southern California’s water supply, as well as the issues surrounding delivery and management of our most precious natural resource – water. x Community Events and Events Featuring MWDOC Mascot Ricky the Rambunctious Raindrop provide opportunities to interact with Orange County water users in a fun and friendly way, offer useful water-related information or education, and engage them in important discussions about the value of water and how their decisions at home, at work, and as tax- or ratepayers may impact Orange County’s quality and quantity of water for generations to come. Education Programs and Initiatives Over the past several years, MWDOC has amplified its efforts in water education programs and activities for Orange County’s youngest water users. This is accomplished by continuing to grow professional networks and partnerships that consist of leading education groups, advisors, and teachers, and by leading the way for the City and its 28 member agencies to be key contributors of both southern California and Orange County water-centric learning. Several key water education programs and initiatives include: x Environmental Literacy is an individual’s awareness of the interconnectedness and interdependency between people and natural systems, being able to identify patterns and systems within their communities, while also gathering evidence to argue points and solve problems. By using the environment as the context for learning, K-12 students gain real-world 318 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-5 knowledge by asking questions and solving problems that directly affect them, their families, and their communities. This approach to K-12 education builds critical thinking skills and promotes inquiry, and is the foundation for all MWDOC education programs, initiatives, and activities. x MWDOC Choice School Programs have provided Orange County K-12 students water-focused learning experiences for nearly five (5) decades. Interactive, grade-specific lessons invite students to connect with, and learn from, their local ecosystems, guiding them to identify and solve local water-related environmental challenges affecting their communities. Choice School Programs are aligned with state standards, and participation includes a dynamic in-class or virtual presentation, and pre- and post-activities that encourage and support Science Technology Engineering Arts and Mathematics (STEAM)-based learning and good water stewardship. x Water Energy Education Alliance (WEEA) is a coalition of education and water and energy industry professionals led by MWDOC that works together to build and bolster Career Technical Education programs (CTE) for southern California high school students. These CTEs focus on workforce pathways in the Energy, Environment, and Utility Sectors, and connections established through this powerful southern California alliance assist stakeholders as they thoughtfully step up their investment in the education and career success of California’s future workforce. x MWDOC Water Awareness Poster Contest is an annual activity developed to encourage Orange County’s K-12 students to investigate and explore their relationship to water, connect the importance of good water stewardship to their daily lives, and express their conclusions creatively through art. Each year, MWDOC receives hundreds of entries, and 40 winners from across Orange County are invited to attend a special awards ceremony with their parents and teachers, and Ricky the Rambunctious Raindrop. x Boy Scouts Soil and Water Conservation Merit Badge and Girl Scouts Water Resources and Conservation Patch Programs guide Orange County Scouts on a learning adventure of where their water comes from, the importance of Orange County water resources, and how to be water efficient. These STEAM-based clinics are hosted by MWDOC and include interactive learning stations, hands-on activities, and a guided tour of an Orange County water source, water treatment facility, or ecological reserve x Partnerships are an integral part of achieving water-related goals that impact all Orange County water users. MWDOC’s partner list is extensive, and acts as a collective catalyst for all those involved to grow and prosper. Some of the City’s most recognized partners include local, regional, state, and federal legislators, educators, water and energy industry leaders, environmental groups, media, and business associations all focused on the common goals of water education, water use efficiency, and advocacy on behalf of the region. 9.1.5 Programs to Assess and Manage Distribution System Real Loss Senate Bill 1420 signed into law in September 2014 requires urban water suppliers that submit UWMPs to calculate annual system water losses using the water audit methodology developed by AWWA. SB 1420 requires the water loss audit be submitted to DWR every five years as part of the urban water supplier’s UWMP. Water auditing is the basis for effective water loss control. DWR’s UWMP Guidebook include a water audit manual intended to help water utilities complete the AWWA Water 319 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-6 Audit on an annual basis. A Water Loss Audit was completed for the City which identified areas for improvement and quantified total loss. Based on the data presented, the three priority areas identified were customer metering inaccuracies, billed metered, and volume from own sources. Multiple criteria are a part of each validity score and a system wide approach will need to be implemented for the City’s improvement. The City completes a system water audit to calculate water losses on an annual basis. Expressing water loss audit results in terms of Real Losses per Service Connection per Day allows for standardized comparison across MWDOC retailer agencies and is a metric consistent with the Water Board’s forthcoming economic model. The Real Losses per Service Connection per Day for calendar year 2019 was 22.51 gal/connection/day. The City does not have a leak detection program. However, sudden drastic changes in monthly water bills are monitored as customers are notified of potential leaks by either mail notification or by phone. 9.1.6 Water Conservation Program Coordination and Staffing Support The City’s Public Works Department shares the implementation and promotion of water conservation programs as part of its duties. the City’s Water Conservation Coordinator, has obtained the Water Conservation Practitioner Certificate from the AWWA. The City’s Water Conservation Coordinator participates in the Water Use Efficiency meetings hosted by MWDOC, and works with MWDOC to implement the DMM’s. Funding for the City’s water conservation program is from the City’s Water Fund. 9.1.7 Other Demand Management Measures 9.1.7.1 Residential Program MWDOC assists the City with the implementation of residential DMMs by making available the following programs aimed at increasing landscape and indoor water use efficiency for residential customers. High Efficiency Clothes Washer Rebate Program The High Efficiency Clothes Washer (HECW) Rebate Program provides residential customers with rebates for purchasing and installing HECWs that. Approximately 15% of home water use goes towards laundry, and HECWs use 35-50% less water than standard washer models, with savings of approximately 10,500 gallons per year, per device. Devices must meet or exceed the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) Tier 1 Standard, and a listing of qualified products can be found at ocwatersmart.com. There is a maximum of one rebate per home. Premium High Efficiency Toilet Rebate Program The largest amount of water used inside a home, 30 percent, goes toward flushing the toilet. The Premium High Efficiency Toilet (HET) Rebate Program offers incentives to residential customers for replacing their toilets using 1.6 gallons per flush or more. Premium HETs use just 1.1 gallons of water or less per flush, which is 20% less water than WaterSense standard toilets. In addition, Premium HETs save an average of 9 gallons of water per day while maintaining high performance standards. 320 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-7 9.1.7.2 CII Programs MWDOC provides a variety of financial incentives to help City businesses, restaurants, institutions, hotels, hospitals, industrial facilities, and public sector sites achieve their efficiency goals. Water users in these sectors have options to choose from a standardized list of water efficient equipment/devices or may complete customized projects through a pay-for-performance where the incentive is proportional to the amount of water saved. Such projects include high efficiency commercial equipment installation and manufacturing process improvements. Water Savings Incentive Program The Water Savings Incentive Program (WSIP) is designed for non-residential customers to improve their water efficiency through upgraded equipment or services that do not qualify for standard rebates. WSIP is unique because it provides an incentive based on the amount of water customers actually save. This “pay-for-performance” design lets customers implement custom projects for their sites. Projects must save at least 10 million gallons of water to qualify for the Program and are offered from $195 to $390 per acre foot of water saved. Examples of successfully projects include but are not limited to changing industrial process system water, capturing condensation and using it to supplement cooling tower supply, and replacing water-using equipment with more efficient products. On-site Retrofit Program The On-site Retrofit Program (ORP) provides another pay-for-performance financial incentive to commercial, industrial and institutional property owners, including Homeowner Associations, who convert potable water irrigation or industrial water systems to recycled water use. Projects commonly include the conversion of mixed or dedicated irrigation meters using potable water to irrigate with reclaimed water, or convert industrial processes use to recycled water, such as a cooling towers. Financial incentives of up to $1,300 per AF of potable water saved are available for customer-side on the meter retrofits. Funding is provided by MET, USBR, and DWR. Multi-Family Premium High Efficiency Toilet Incentive Program MWDOC makes an effort to reach all water-users in Orange County. For the Multi-Family Premium HET Rebate Program, MWDOC targets multi-family buildings in both disadvantaged communities (DAC) and non-DAC communities, in addition to targeting all commercial buildings, and single-family residential homes through Premium HET device rebates. MWDOC offers the DAC Multi-Family HET Program, a special version of the HET Program, to ensure regardless of economic status all water-users in Orange County can benefit from the rebate. This Program targets 3.5 gallon per flush (gpf) or greater toilets to replace them with WaterSense Labeled 1.1 gpf or less. For this purpose, DAC are referenced as communities facing economic hardship. This is defined using criteria established by DWR and the County of Orange, which includes communities where the MHI is less than 85% of the Orange County MHI. The DAC Multi-Family Program is contractor-driven, where a contractor works with building owners to replace all of the toilets in the building(s). To avoid any cost to tenants, the rebate is $200 per toilet paid to the contractor, essentially covering the contractor’s cost; therefore, there is little to no charge to the building owners that may be passed through to tenants. This process was formed after consulting 321 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-8 contractors and multi-family building owners in Orange County. To serve those in multi-family buildings outside of designated DAC locations, MWDOC offers $75 per toilet through the same contractor-driven format. An additional option is available through SoCal Water$mart, which offers up to $250 per toilet to multi-family buildings that were built before 1994, therefore targeting buildings built before legislation required low-flow plumbing fixtures in new construction. Device Retrofits MWDOC offers additional financial incentives under the SoCal Water$mart Rebate Program which offers rebates for various water efficient devices to CII customers. Core funding is provided by MET and supplemental funding is sourced from MWDOC via grant funds and/or retail water agencies. 9.1.7.3 Landscape Programs One of the most active and exciting water use efficiency sectors MWDOC provides services for are those programs that target the reduction of outdoor water use. With close to 60% of water consumed outdoors, this sector has been and will continue to be a focus for MWDOC and the City. Turf Removal Program The Orange County Turf Removal Program offers incentives to remove turf grass from residential, commercial, and public properties throughout the County. This program is a partnership between MWDOC, MET, and local retail water agencies. The goals of this program are to increase water use efficiency through sustainable landscaping practices that result in multi-benefit projects across Orange County. Participants replace their turf grass with drought-tolerant, CA Friendly, or CA Native landscaping, and retrofit their irrigation systems to high efficiency equipment, such as drip, or remove it entirely, and are encouraged to utilize smart irrigation timers. Furthermore, projects are required to include a stormwater capture feature, such as a rain garden or dry stream bed, and have a minimum of three plants per 100 square feet to increase plant density and promote healthy soils. These projects save water and also reduce dry and wet weather runoff, increase urban biomass, and sequester more carbon than turf landscapes. Landscape Design and Maintenance Plan Assistance Programs To maximize the water efficiency and quality of Orange County’s Turf Removal Program Projects, MWDOC offers free landscape designs and free landscape maintenance plans to participating residential customers. The Landscape Design Assistance Program is offered at the beginning stages of their turf removal project so that customers may receive a customized, professionally designed landscape to replace their turf. Landscape designs include plant selection, layout, irrigation plans, and a stormwater capture feature. These designs help ensure climate appropriate plants are chosen and planted by hydrozone, that appropriate high efficiency irrigation is properly utilized, that water savings are maximized as a result of the transformation. Landscape maintenance plans are offered after a project is complete to ensure that the new landscape is cared for properly and water savings are maximized. Smart Timer Rebate Program Smart Timers are irrigation clocks that are either weather-based irrigation controllers (WBICs) or soil moisture sensor systems. WBICs adjust automatically to reflect changes in local weather and site-specific landscape needs, such as soil type, slopes, and plant material. When WBICs are programmed properly, 322 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-9 turf and plants receive the proper amount of water throughout the year. During the fall months, when property owners and landscape professionals often overwater, Smart Timers can save significant amounts of water. Rotating Nozzles Rebate Program The Rotating Nozzle Rebate Program provides incentives to residential and commercial properties for the replacement of high-precipitation rate spray nozzles with low-precipitation rate multi-stream, multi- trajectory rotating nozzles. The rebate offered through this Program aims to offset the cost of the device and installation. Spray-to-Drip Rebate Program The Spray to Drip Rebate Program offers residential, commercial, and public agency customers rebates for converting areas irrigated by traditional high-precipitation rate spray heads to low-precipitation rate drip irrigation. Drip irrigation systems are extremely water-efficient. Rather than spraying wide areas subject to wind drift, overspray and runoff, drip systems use point emitters to deliver water to specific locations at or near plant root zones. Water drips slowly from the emitters either onto the soil surface or below ground. As a result, less water is lost to wind, evaporation, and overspray, saving water and reducing irrigation runoff and non-point source pollution. SoCal Water$mart Rebate Program for Landscape The City through MWDOC also offers financial incentives under the SoCal Water$mart Rebate Program for a variety of water efficient landscape devices, such as Central Computer Irrigation Controllers, large rotary nozzles, and in-stem flow regulators. Landscape Training Classes The California Friendly and Native Landscape Training and the T urf Removal and Garden Transformation Workshops provide education to residential homeowners, property managers, and professional landscape contractors on a variety of landscape water efficiency practices that they can employ and use to help design a beautiful garden using California Friendly and native plant landscaping principles. The California Friendly and Native Landscape Class demonstrates how to: implement storm water capture features in the landscape; create a living soil sponge that holds water; treat rainwater by a resource; select and arrange plants to maximize biodiversity and minimize water use; and control irrigation to minimize water waste, runoff and non-point source pollution. The Turf Removal and Garden Transformation Workshop teaches participants how to transform thirsty turfgrass into a beautiful, climate-appropriate water efficient garden. This class teaches how to: evaluate the landscape’s potential; plan for garden transformation; identify the type of turfgrass in the yard; remove grass without chemicals; build healthy, living soils; select climate-appropriate plants that minimize water use and maximize beauty and biodiversity; and implement a maintenance schedule to maintain the garden. Qualified Water Efficient Landscape Certification (Commercial) Since 2018, MWDOC along with the City, has offered free Qualified Water Efficient Landscaper (QWEL) certification classes designed for landscape professionals. Classes are open to any city staff, professional landscaper, water district employee, or maintenance personnel that would like to become a Qualified Water Efficient Landscaper. The QWEL certification program provides 20 hours of instruction on water 323 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-10 efficient areas of expertise such as local water supply, sustainable landscaping, soil types, irrigation systems and maintenance, as well as irrigation controller scheduling and programing. QWEL has received recognition from EPA WaterSense for continued promotion of water use efficiency. To earn the QWEL certification, class participants must demonstrate their ability to perform an irrigation audit as well as pass the QWEL exam. Successful graduates will be listed as a Certified Professional on the WaterSense website as well as on MWDOC’s landscape resources page, to encourage Turf Removal participants or those making any landscape improvements to hire a QWEL certified professional. Started in December 2020, a hybrid version of QWEL is available in conjunction with the California Landscape Contractors Association’s Water Management Certification Program. This joint effort allows landscape industry an opportunity to obtain two nationally recognized EPA WaterSense Professional Certifications with one course and one written test. This option is offered through MET. Orange County Water Smart Gardens Resource Page MWDOC’s Orange County Water Smart Gardens webpage provides a surplus of helpful guides and fact sheets, as well as an interactive photo gallery of water-saving landscape ideas. The purpose of this resource is to help Orange County residents find a broad variety of solutions for their water efficient landscaping needs. This includes a detailed plant database with advanced to search features; photo and/or video-based garden tours; garden gallery with images organized into helpful landscape categories such as back yards, hillsides, full sun, and/or shade with detailed plant information; and the ability to select and store plants in a list that the user can print for use when shopping. Additional technical resources are available such as a watering calculator calibrated for local evapotranspiration rates, and a garden resources section with fact sheets on sustainable landscape fundamentals, water and soil management, composting, solving run-off, and other appropriate topics. Web page is accessible through mwdoc.com and directly at www.ocwatersmartgardens.com. Implementation over the Past Five Years During the past five years, FY 2015-16 to 2020-21, the City, with the assistance of MWDOC, has continued water use efficiency programs for its residential, CII, and landscape customers as described in Table 9-2. Implementation data is provided in Appendix I. The City will continue to implement all applicable programs in the next five years. 324 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-11 Table 9-2: City of Huntington Beach Conservation Efficiency Program Participation Huntington Beach Measure Metric FY15/16 FY16/17 FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 Central Computer Irrigation Controllers computer controllers - - - - - Flow Restrictor restrictors - - - 191 - HECWs washers 235 183 142 94 115 HETs toilets 692 - - 4 2 Rain Barrels barrels 852 51 11 8 10 Cisterns cisterns - - - - - Premium HETs toilets 1,091 526 13 - 270 Rotating Nozzles nozzles 4,317 3,511 - - 65 CII Weather Based Irrigation Controllers clocks 12 95 30 65 22 Residential WBICs clocks 48 89 89 113 81 Zero Water Urinals urinals 4 5 - - - Plumbing Flow Control valves - - - 17 - Soil Moisture Sensor controllers 1 - - - - 325 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-12 Huntington Beach Measure Metric FY15/16 FY16/17 FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 Turf sf 575,723 31,094 20,268 50,772 23,418 Spray-to- Drip sf 4,280 1,350 - 6,449 WSIP projects 2 - 1 - - Recycled Water projects; sf irrigated - - - - - Multi- Family HET (Contractor install) toilets 124 Landscape Design Assistance designs 6 14 Water Use Objectives (Future Requirements) To support Orange County retailers with SB 606 and AB 1668 compliance (Conservation Framework), MWDOC is providing multi-level support to members agencies to ensure they meet the primary goals of the legislation including to Use Water More Wisely and to Eliminate Water Waste. Beginning in 2023, Urban water suppliers are required to calculate and report their annual urban water use objective (WUO), submit validated water audits annually, and to implement and report best management practice (BMP) CII performance measures. Urban Water Use Objective An Urban Water Supplier’s urban WUO is based on efficient water use of the following: x Aggregate estimated efficient indoor residential water use; x Aggregate estimated efficient outdoor residential water use; x Aggregate estimated efficient outdoor irrigation landscape areas with dedicated irrigation meters or equivalent technology in connection with CII water use; x Aggregate estimated efficient water losses; x Aggregate estimated water use for variances approved the State Water Board; x Allowable potable reuse water bonus incentive adjustments. MWDOC offers a large suite of programs, described in detail throughout section 1.3.6, that will assist Orange County retailers in meeting and calculating their WUO. 326 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-13 Table 9-3 describes MWDOC’s programs that will assist agencies in meeting their WUO through both direct measures: programs/activities that result in directly quantifiable water savings; and indirectly: programs that provide resources promoting water efficiencies to the public that are impactful but not directly measurable. Table 9-3: MWDOC Programs to Assist in Meeting WUO WUO Component Calculation Program Impact Indoor Residential Population and GPCD standard Direct Impact x HECW x HET x Multi-Family HET (DAC/ non-DAC) Direct Impact: Increase of indoor residential efficiencies and reductions of GPCD use Outdoor Residential Irrigated/irrigable area measurement and a percent factor of local ETo Direct Impact x Turf Removal x Spray-to-Dip x Smart Timer x High Efficiency Nozzle (HEN) x Rain Barrels/Cisterns Indirect Impact x Landscape Design and Maintenance Assistance x Orange County Friendly Gardens Webpage x CA Friendly/Turf Removal Classes x QWELL Direct Impact: Increase outdoor residential efficiencies and reductions of gallons per ft2 of irrigated/ irrigable area used Indirect Impact: Provide information, resources, and education to promote efficiencies in the landscape Outdoor Dedicated Irrigation Meters Irrigated/irrigable area measurement and a percent factor of local ETo Direct Impact x Turf Removal x Spray-to-Dip x Smart Timer x HEN Direct Impact: Increase outdoor residential efficiencies and reductions of gallons 327 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-14 WUO Component Calculation Program Impact x Central Computer Irrigation Controllers x Large Rotary Nozzles x In-Stem Flow Regulators Indirect Impact x Orange County Friendly Gardens Webpage x CA Friendly/Turf Removal Classes x QWEL per ft2 of irrigated/ irrigable area used Indirect Impact: Provide information, resources, and education to promote efficiencies in the landscape Water Loss Following the AWWA M36 Water Audits and Water Loss Control Program, Fourth Edition and AWWA Water Audit Software V5 Direct Impact x Water Balance Validation x Customer Meter Accuracy Testing x Distribution System Pressure Surveys x Distribution System Leak Detection x No-Discharge Distribution System Flushing x Water Audit Compilation x Component Analysis Direct Impact: Identify areas of the distribution system that need repair, replacement or other action Bonus Incentives One of the following: x Volume of potable reuse water from existing facilities, not to Direct Impact x GWRS Direct Impact: The GWRS (run by OCWD) significantly increases the availability of potable reuse water 328 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-15 WUO Component Calculation Program Impact exceed 15% of WUO x Volume of potable reuse water from new facilities, not to exceed 10% of WUO In addition, MWDOC is providing support to agencies to assist with the calculation of WUOs. DWR will provide residential outdoor landscape measurements; however, Urban Water Suppliers are responsible for measuring landscape that is irrigated/irrigable by dedicated irrigation meters. MWDOC is contracting for consultant services to assist agencies in obtaining these measurements. Services may include but are not limited to: x Accounting/database clean up (e.g., data mining billing software to determine dedicated irrigation customers); x Geolocation of dedicated irrigation meters; x In-field measurements; x GIS/Aerial imagery measurements; x Transformation of static/paper maps to digital/GIS maps. These services will help agencies organize and/or update their databases to determine which accounts are dedicated irrigation meters and provide landscape area measurements for those accounts. These data points are integral when calculating the WUO. MWDOC is also exploring funding options to help reduce retail agencies’ costs of obtaining landscape area measurements for dedicated irrigation meters. CII Performance Measures Urban water supplies are expected to report BMPs and more for CII customers. MWDOC offers a broad variety of programs and incentives to help CII customers implement BMPs and increase their water efficiencies. 329 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 9-16 Table 9-4: CII BMP Implementation Programs Offered Component Program Offered Impact CII Performance Measures x WSIP x ORP x HETs x High Efficiency Urinals x Plumbing Flow Control Valves x Connectionless Food Steamers x Air-cooled Ice Machines x Cooling Tower Conductivity controllers x Cooling Tower pH Controllers x Dry Vacuum Pumps x Laminar Flow Restrictors WSIP incentivizes customized CII water efficiency projects that utilize BMPs. ORP incentivizes the conversion of potable to recycled water and is applicable to CII dedicated irrigation meters or CII mixed-use meters that may be split to utilize recycled water for irrigation. Additional CII rebates based on BMPs increase the economic feasibility of increasing water efficiencies. These efforts to assist Orange County retail agencies are only just beginning. Our plan is to ensure that all agencies are fully ready to begin complying with the new water use efficiency standards framework called for in SB 606 and SB 1668 by the start date of 2023. 330 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 10-1 10 PLAN ADOPTION, SUBMITTAL, AND IMPLEMENTATION The Water Code requires the UWMP to be adopted by the Supplier’s governing body. Before the adoption of the UWMP, the Supplier has to notify the public and the cities and counties within its service area per the Water Code and hold a public hearing to receive input from the public on the UWMP. Post adoption, the Supplier submits the UWMP to DWR and the other key agencies and makes it available for public review. This section provides a record of the process the City followed to adopt and implement its UWMP. Overview Recognizing that close coordination among other relevant public agencies is key to the success of its UWMP, the City worked closely with many other entities, including representation from diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the City’s service area, to develop and update this planning document. The City also encouraged public involvement through its public hearing process, which provided residents with an opportunity to learn and ask questions about their water supply management and reliability. Through the public hearing, the public has an opportunity to comment and put forward any suggestions for revisions of the Plan. Table 10-1 summarizes external coordination and outreach activities carried out by the City and their corresponding dates. The UWMP checklist to confirm compliance with the Water Code is provided in Appendix A. 331 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 10-2 Table 10-1: External Coordination and Outreach External Coordination and Outreach Date Reference Notified the cities and counties within the Supplier’s service area that Supplier is preparing an updated UWMP (at least 60 days prior to public hearing) 3/3/2021 Appendix K Public Hearing Notice 5/25/2021 & 5/12/2021 Appendix K Held Public Hearing 6/7/2021 Appendix K Adopted UWMP 6/7/2021 Appendix L Submitted UWMP to DWR (no later than 30 days after adoption) 7/1/2021 - Submitted UWMP to the California State Library (no later than 30 days after adoption) 7/1/2021 - Submitted UWMP to the cities and counties within the Supplier’s service area (no later than 30 days after adoption) 7/1/2021 - Made UWMP available for public review (no later than 30 days after filing with DWR) 7/31/2021 - This UWMP was adopted by the City Council on June 7, 2021. A copy of the adopted resolution is provided in Appendix L. Agency Coordination The Water Code requires the Suppliers preparing UWMPs to notify any city or county within their service area at least 60 days prior to the public hearing. As shown in Table 10-2, the City sent a Letter of Notification to the County of Los Angeles, County of Orange and the cities within its service area on March 3, 2021 to state that it was in the process of preparing an updated UWMP (Appendix K). 332 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 10-3 Table 10-2: Retail: Notification to Cities and Counties DWR Submittal Table 10-1 Retail: Notification to Cities and Counties City Name 60 Day Notice Notice of Public Hearing Add additional rows as needed Bolsa Chica Fountain Valley Seal Beach Westminster County Name 60 Day Notice Notice of Public Hearing Los Angeles County Orange County NOTES: The City's water supply planning relates to the policies, rules, and regulations of its regional and local water providers. The City is dependent on imported water from MET through MWDOC, its regional wholesaler. The City is also dependent on groundwater from OCWD, the agency that manages the OC Basin. As such, the City involved the relevant agencies in this 2020 UWMP at various levels of contribution as described below. MWDOC provided assistance to the City’s 2020 UWMP development by providing much of the data and analysis such as population projections from the California State University at Fullerton CDR and the information quantifying water availability to meet the City’s projected demands for the next 25 years, in five-year increments. Additionally, MWDOC led the effort to develop a Model Water Shortage Ordinance that its retail suppliers can adopt as is or customize and adopt as part of developing their WSCPs. This 2020 UWMP was developed in collaboration with MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP to ensure consistency between the two documents. As a groundwater producer who relies on supplies from the OCWD-managed OC Basin, the City coordinated the preparation of this 2020 UWMP with OCWD. Several OCWD documents, such as the Groundwater Reliability Plan, Engineer’s Report, and 2017 Basin 8-1 Alternative were used to retrieve the required relevant information, including the projections of the amount of groundwater the City is allowed to extract in the 25-year planning horizon. The various planning documents of the key agencies that were used to develop this UWMP are listed in Section 2.2.1. 333 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 10-4 Public Participation The City encouraged community and public interest involvement in the Plan update through a public hearing and inspection of the draft document on June 7, 2021. As part of the public hearing, the City discussed adoption of the UWMP, SBx7-7 baseline values, compliance with the water use targets (Section 5), implementation, and economic impacts of the water use targets (Section 9). Copies of the draft plan were made available on the City's website. Notices of public meetings were posted in the City Hall. Legal public notices for the meeting were published in the local newspaper and posted at City facilities. A copy of the published Notice of Public Hearing is included in Appendix K. The hearing was conducted during a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. UWMP Submittal The City Council reviewed and approved the 2020 UWMP at its June 7, 2021 meeting after the public hearing. See Appendix L for the resolution approving the Plan. By July 1, 2021, the City’s adopted 2020 UWMP was filed with DWR, California State Library, the County of los Angeles, the County of Orange and the cities within its service area. The submission to DWR was done electronically through the online submittal tool – WUE Data Portal. The City will make the Plan available for public review on its website no later than 30 days after filing with DWR. Amending the Adopted UWMP or WSCP Based on DWR’s review of the UWMP, the City will make any amendments in its adopted UWMP, as required and directed by DWR and will follow each of the steps for notification, public hearing, adoption, and submittal for the amending the adopted UWMP. If the City revises its WSCP after UWMP is approved by DWR, then an electronic copy of the revised WSCP will be submitted to DWR within 30 days of its adoption. 334 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 11-1 11 REFERENCES California Department of Water Resources (DWR). (2020a, January). California’s Most Significant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent Conditions. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR- Website/Web-Pages/What-We-Do/Drought-Mitigation/Files/Publications-And- Reports/a6022_CalSigDroughts19_v9_ay11.pdf. Accessed on October 12, 2020. California Department of Water Resources (DWR). (2020b, August 26). The Final State Water Project Delivery Capability Report (DCR) 2019. https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/state-water-project- delivery-capability-report-dcr-2019. Accessed on December 28, 2020. California Department of Water Resources (DWR). (2020c, August). Draft Urban Water Management Plan Guidebook 2020. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Water- Use-And-Efficiency/Urban-Water-Use-Efficiency/Urban-Water-Management-Plans/Draft-2020- UWMP-Guidebook.pdf?la=en&hash=266FE747760481ACF779F0F2AAEE615314693456. Accessed on December 28, 2020. CDM Smith. (2021, March 30). Orange County Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD Technical Memorandum. City of La Habra, Irvine Ranch Water District, & Orange County Water District. (2017, January 1). Basin 8-1 Alternative. https://www.ocwd.com/media/4918/basin-8-1-alternative-final-report-1.pdf. Accessed on December 29, 2020. City of Huntington Beach. (2015). Urban Water Management Plan. City of Huntington Beach. (2017). General Plan. https://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/government/departments/planning/gp/index.cfm. Accessed on May 3, 2021. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET). (2021, June). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission (OC LAFCO). (2020, September). Municipal Service Review for the Municipal Water District of Orange County. Orange County Water District. (2021). 2019-2020 Engineer’s Report on the Groundwater Conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District. Orange County Water District. (2020, February). 2018-2019 Engineer’s Report on the Groundwater Conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District. https://www.ocwd.com/media/8791/2018-19-engineers-report-final.pdf. Accessed on December 30, 2020. PSOMAS. (2016, October). City of Huntington Beach 2016 Water Master Plan Update. Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD). (2021). San Juan Watershed Project. About the Project: Phases. http://sanjuanwatershed.com/about-the-project/eir/phases/. Accessed on April 20, 2021. 335 Huntington Beach 2020 Urban Water Management Plan arcadis.com 11-2 The Metropolitan Water District Act. (1969). http://www.mwdh2o.com/Who%20We%20Are%20%20Fact%20Sheets/1.2_Metropolitan_Act.pdf United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). (2012, December). Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study: Study Report. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/crbstudy/finalreport/Study%20Report/CRBS_Study_Rep ort_FINAL.pdf. Accessed on December 29, 2020. University of California Berkeley. (2020). About Accessory Dwelling Units. https://www.aducalifornia.org/. Accessed on December 9, 2020. 336 APPENDICES Appendix A. UWMP Water Code Checklist Appendix B. DWR Standardized Tables Appendix C. Reduced Delta Reliance Appendix D. SBx7-7 Verification and Compliance Forms Appendix E. 2021 OC Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD Technical Memorandum Appendix F. AWWA Water Loss Audits Appendix G. 2017 Basin 8-1 Alternative Appendix H. Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix I. Water Use Efficiency Implementation Report Appendix J. Demand Management Measures Appendix K. Notice of Public Hearing Appendix L. Adopted UWMP Resolution 337 arcadis.com Arcadis U.S., Inc. 320 Commerce Suite 200 Irvine, California 92602 Tel 714 730 9052 Fax 714 730 9345 www.arcadis.com Maddaus Water Management, Inc. 105 Zephyr Place Danville California 94526 www.maddauswater.com 338 339 340 EXHIBIT “A” 2020 WATER SHORTAGE CONTIGENCY PLAN 341 June 2021 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Final Draft 342 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan i 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan June 2021 Prepared By: Prepared For: Arcadis U.S., Inc. City of Huntington Beach 320 Commerce, Suite 200 2000 Main Street Irvine Huntington Beach California 92602 California 92648 Phone: 714 730 9052 Phone: 714 536 5431 https://www.arcadis.com https://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov Maddaus Water Management, Inc. Danville, California 94526 Sacramento, California 95816 www.maddauswater.com Our Ref: 30055240 ________________________________________ Lisa Maddaus, PE Technical Lead Maddaus Water Management, Inc. ________________________________________ Sarina Sriboonlue, PE Project Manager Arcadis U.S., Inc. 343 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan ii Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................. v 1 INTRODUCTION AND WSCP OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Requirements and Organization .............................................. 1-1 1.2 Integration with Other Planning Efforts ............................................................................................. 1-2 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 City Service Area .................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Relationship to Wholesalers ............................................................................................................... 2-2 2.3 Relationship with Wholesaler Water Shortage Planning .................................................................. 2-5 2.3.1 MET Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan .................................................................... 2-5 2.3.2 MET Water Supply Allocation Plan ................................................................................................. 2-6 2.3.3 MWDOC Water Supply Allocation Plan .......................................................................................... 2-8 3 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE PLANNING ........................ 3-1 3.1 Water Supply Reliability Analysis ....................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment Procedures.......................................................... 3-1 3.2.1 Decision-Making Process ................................................................................................................ 3-2 City Steps to Approve the Annual Assessment Determination ........................................... 3-2 3.2.2 Data and Methodologies .................................................................................................................. 3-3 Assessment Methodology ....................................................................................................... 3-3 Locally Applicable Evaluation Criteria ................................................................................... 3-4 Water Supply ............................................................................................................................. 3-4 Unconstrained Customer Demand ......................................................................................... 3-5 Planned Water Use for Current Year Considering Dry Subsequent Year ........................... 3-5 Infrastructure Considerations ................................................................................................. 3-6 Other Factors ............................................................................................................................ 3-6 3.3 Six Standard Water Shortage Levels .................................................................................................. 3-7 3.4 Shortage Response Actions ................................................................................................................ 3-9 3.4.1 Demand Reduction ........................................................................................................................... 3-9 3.4.2 Supply Augmentation ..................................................................................................................... 3-10 3.4.3 Operational Changes ...................................................................................................................... 3-10 3.4.4 Additional Mandatory Restrictions ............................................................................................... 3-10 3.4.5 Emergency Response Plan (Hazard Mitigation Plan) ................................................................. 3-10 MET’s WSDM and WSAP ........................................................................................................ 3-11 344 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan iii Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County Emergency Operations Plan 3-11 City of Huntington Beach Emergency Response Plan ....................................................... 3-12 3.4.6 Seismic Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan ........................................................................... 3-12 3.4.7 Shortage Response Action Effectiveness ................................................................................... 3-13 3.5 Communication Protocols ................................................................................................................. 3-14 3.6 Compliance and Enforcement ........................................................................................................... 3-14 3.7 Legal Authorities ................................................................................................................................ 3-14 3.8 Financial Consequences of WSCP ................................................................................................... 3-15 3.9 Monitoring and Reporting .................................................................................................................. 3-16 3.10 WSCP Refinement Procedures ......................................................................................................... 3-16 3.11 Special Water Feature Distinction .................................................................................................... 3-17 3.12 Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Availability ...................................................................................... 3-17 4 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Tables Table 3-1: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels ....................................................................................... 3-8 Table 3-2: Agency Contacts and Coordination Protocols .............................................................................. 3-15 Figures Figure 2-1: City Service Area ............................................................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-2: Regional Location of the City and Other MWDOC Member Agencies ......................................... 2-4 Figure 2-3: Resource Stages, Anticipated Actions, and Supply Declarations ............................................... 2-6 Figure 3-1: Annual Assessment Reporting Timeline ........................................................................................ 3-3 Figure 3-2: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Annual Assessment Framework .......................................... 3-4 345 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan iv Appendices DWR Submittal Tables Table 8-1: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Table 8-2: Demand Reduction Actions Table 8-3: Supply Augmentation and Other Actions Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program Water Shortage Communication Plan Notice of Public Hearing Adopted WSCP Resolution 346 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan v Acronyms and Abbreviations % Percent AF Acre-Feet Annual Assessment Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment BPP Basin Production Percentage City City of Huntington Beach CRA Colorado River Aqueduct DDW Division of Drinking Water DRA Drought Risk Assessment DVL Diamond Valley Lake DWR California Department of Water Resources EAP Emergency Operations Center Actions Plan EOC Emergency Operation Center EOP Emergency Operations Plan FY Fiscal Year GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan HMP Hazard Mitigation Plan IRP Integrated Water Resource Plan M&I Municipal and Industrial MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MET Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Metropolitan Act Metropolitan Water District Act MGD Million Gallons per Day MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County NIMS National Incident Management System OC Basin Orange County Groundwater Basin OCWD Orange County Water District PFAS Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances PFOA Perfluorooctanoic Acid PFOS Perfluorooctane Sulfonate PPT Parts Per Trillion Producer Groundwater Producer RL Response Level SEMS California Standardized Emergency Management System Supplier Urban Water Supplier SWP State Water Project SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board UWMP Urban Water Management Plan WARN Water Agency Response Network Water Code California Water Code 347 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan vi WEROC Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County WSAP Water Supply Allocation Plan WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan WSDM Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan 348 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 1-1 1 INTRODUCTION AND WSCP OVERVIEW The Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) is a strategic planning document designed to prepare for and respond to water shortages. This Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) complies with California Water Code (Water Code) Section 10632, which requires that every urban water supplier (Supplier) shall prepare and adopt a WSCP as part of its Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). This level of detailed planning and preparation is intended to help maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions. The WSCP is the City of Huntington Beach (City)’s operating manual that is used to prevent catastrophic service disruptions through proactive, rather than reactive, management. A water shortage, when water supply available is insufficient to meet the normally expected customer water use at a given point in time, may occur due to a number of reasons, such as drought, climate change, and catastrophic events. This plan provides a structured guide for the City to deal with water shortages, incorporating prescriptive information and standardized action levels, along with implementation actions in the event of a catastrophic supply interruption. This way, if and when shortage conditions arise, the City’s governing body, its staff, and the public can easily identify and efficiently implement pre-determined steps to manage a water shortage. A well-structured WSCP allows real-time water supply availability assessment and structured steps designed to respond to actual conditions, to allow for efficient management of any shortage with predictability and accountability. The WSCP also describes the City’s procedures for conducting an Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment (Annual Assessment) that is required by Water Code Section 10632.1 and is to be submitted to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) on or before July 1 of each year, or within 14 days of receiving final allocations from the State Water Project (SWP), whichever is later. The City’s 2020 WSCP is included as an appendix to its 2020 UWMP which will be submitted to DWR by July 1, 2021. However, this WSCP is created separately from the City’s 2020 UWMP and can be amended, as needed, without amending the UWMP. Furthermore, the Water Code does not prohibit a Supplier from taking actions not specified in its WSCP, if needed, without having to formally amend its UWMP or WSCP. 1.1 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Requirements and Organization The WSCP provides the steps and water shortage response actions to be taken in times of water shortage conditions. WSCP has prescriptive elements, such as an analysis of water supply reliability; the water shortage response actions for each of the six standard water shortage levels that correspond to water shortage percentages ranging from 10% to greater than 50%; an estimate of potential to close supply gap for each measure; protocols and procedures to communicate identified actions for any current or predicted water shortage conditions; procedures for an Annual Assessment; monitoring and reporting requirements to determine customer compliance; and reevaluation and improvement procedures for evaluating the WSCP. This WSCP is organized into three main sections, with Section 3 aligned with Water Code Section 16032 requirements. 349 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 1-2 Section 1 Introduction and WSCP Overview gives an overview of the WSCP fundamentals. Section 2 Background provides a background on the City of Huntington Beach’s water service area. Section 3 Water Shortage Contingency Preparedness and Response Planning Section 3.1 Water Supply Reliability Analysis provides a summary of the water supply analysis and water reliability findings from the 2020 UWMP. Section 3.2 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment Procedures provide a description of procedures to conduct and approve the Annual Assessment. Section 3.3 Six Standard Water Shortage Stages explains the WSCP’s six standard water shortage levels corresponding to progressive ranges of up to 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and more than 50% shortages. Section 3.4 Shortage Response Actions describes the WSCP’s shortage response actions that align with the defined shortage levels. Section 3.5 Communication Protocols addresses communication protocols and procedures to inform customers, the public, interested parties, and local, regional, and state governments, regarding any current or predicted shortages and any resulting shortage response actions. Section 3.6 Compliance and Enforcement describes customer compliance, enforcement, appeal, and exemption procedures for triggered shortage response actions. Section 3.7 Legal Authorities is a description of the legal authorities that enable the City to implement and enforce its shortage response actions. Section 3.8 Financial Consequences of the WSCP provides a description of the financial consequences of and responses for drought conditions. Section 3.9 Monitoring and Reporting describes monitoring and reporting requirements and procedures that ensure appropriate data is collected, tracked, and analyzed for purposes of monitoring customer compliance and to meet state reporting requirements. Section 3.10 WSCP Refinement Procedures addresses reevaluation and improvement procedures for monitoring and evaluating the functionality of the WSCP. Section 3.11 Special Water Feature Distinction is a required definition for inclusion in a WSCP per the Water Code. Section 3.12 Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Implementation provides a record of the process the City followed to adopt and implement its WSCP. 1.2 Integration with Other Planning Efforts As a retail water supplier in Orange County, the City considered other key entities in the development of this WSCP, including the Municipal Water District of Orange County ([MWDOC] (regional wholesale supplier)), the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California ([MET] (regional wholesaler for Southern California and the direct supplier of imported water to MWDOC)), and Orange County Water District ([OCWD] (Orange County Groundwater Basin manager and provider of recycled water in North Orange 350 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 1-3 County)). As a MWDOC member agency, the City also developed this WSCP with input from several coordination efforts led by MWDOC. Some of the key planning and reporting documents that were used to develop this WSCP are: x MWDOC’s 2020 UWMP provides the basis for the projections of the imported supply availability over the next 25 years for the City’s service area. x MWDOC’s 2020 WSCP provides a water supply availability assessment and structured steps designed to respond to actual conditions that will help maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions. x 2021 Orange County Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD Technical Memorandum (Demand Forecast TM) provides the basis for water demand projections for MWDOC’s member agencies as well as Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana. x MET’s 2020 Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) is a long-term planning document to ensure water supply availability in Southern California and provides a basis for water supply reliability in Orange County. x MET’s 2020 UWMP was developed as a part of the 2020 IRP planning process and was used by MWDOC as another basis for the projections of supply capability of the imported water received from MET. x MET’s 2020 WSCP provides a water supply assessment and guide for MET’s intended actions during water shortage conditions. x OCWD’s 2019-20 Engineer’s Report provides information on the groundwater conditions and basin utilization of the Orange County Groundwater Basin (OC Basin). x OCWD’s 2017 Basin 8-1 Alternative is an alternative to the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the OC Basin and provides significant information related to sustainable management of the basin in the past and hydrogeology of the basin, including groundwater quality and basin characteristics. x 2020 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) provides the basis for the seismic risk analysis of the water system facilities. x Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission’s 2020 Municipal Service Review for MWDOC Report provides a comprehensive service review of the municipal services provided by MWDOC. x Water Master Plan and Sewer Master Plan of the City provide information on water infrastructure planning projects and plans to address any required water system improvements. x Groundwater Management Plans provide the groundwater sustainability goals for the basins in the MWDOC’s service area and the programs, actions, and strategies activities that support those goals. 351 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-1 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City was incorporated in 1909 and is governed by a seven-member elected City Council. In 1964, the City's Water Division was established as a Division of the Public Works Department. The City is a predominantly residential community located along the California coastline in Orange County. It was incorporated in 1909 and is a charter city. From 1936 to 1964, the water system serving the City was owned and operated by the Southern California Water Company. In 1964, the City purchased the private system and the City's Water Division was established as a Division of the Public Works Department. In 2003, the Public Works Wastewater Section was incorporated into the Water Division to form the Utilities Division. 2.1 City Service Area The City is located 35 miles southeast of Los Angeles and 90 miles northwest of San Diego along the Southern California Coast of Orange County. The City's water service area is 27.3 square miles. The City is generally flat, with elevations ranging from a low of about five feet below sea level to 120 feet above sea level. The City’s Public Works Department operates four storage and distribution reservoirs with a combined capacity of 55 million gallons, four booster stations, eight active groundwater wells and manages a 6,31-mile water mains system with 53,091 service connections. The City also has 71 parks and public facilities and 8.5 miles of beaches. The City formerly supplied water to Sunset Beach, which is approximately 68 acres of land located off of the Pacific Coast Highway near Huntington Harbor. A map of the City’s water service area is shown on Figure 2-1. 352 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-2 Figure 2-1: City Service Area 2.2 Relationship to Wholesalers MET: MET is the largest water wholesaler for domestic and municipal uses in California, serving approximately 19 million customers. MET wholesales imported water supplies to 26 member cities and water districts in six Southern California counties. Its service area covers the Southern California coastal plain, extending approximately 200 miles along the Pacific Ocean from the City of Oxnard in the north to 353 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-3 the international boundary with Mexico in the south. This encompasses 5,200 square miles and includes portions of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura counties. Approximately 85% of the population from the aforementioned counties reside within MET's boundaries. MET is governed by a Board of Directors comprised of 38 appointed individuals with a minimum of one representative from each of MET’s 26 member agencies. The allocation of directors and voting rights are determined by each agency’s assessed valuation. Each member of the Board shall be entitled to cast one vote for each ten million dollars ($10,000,000) of assessed valuation of property taxable for district purposes, in accordance with Section 55 of the Metropolitan Water District Act (Metropolitan Act). Directors can be appointed through the chief executive officer of the member agency or by a majority vote of the governing board of the agency. Directors are not compensated by MET for their service. MET is responsible for importing water into the region through its operation of the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) and its contract with the State of California for SWP supplies. Member agencies receive water from MET through various delivery points and pay for service through a rate structure made up of volumetric rates, capacity charges and readiness to serve charges. Member agencies provide estimates of imported water demand to MET annually in April regarding the amount of water they anticipate they will need to meet their demands for the next five years. MWDOC: In Orange County, MWDOC and the Cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana are MET member agencies that purchase imported water directly from MET. Furthermore, MWDOC purchases both treated potable and untreated water from MET to supplement its retail agencies’ local supplies. The City is one of MWDOC’s 28 member agencies receiving imported water from MWDOC. The City’s location within MWDOC’s service area is shown on Figure 2-2. 354 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-4 Figure 2-2: Regional Location of the City and Other MWDOC Member Agencies 355 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-5 2.3 Relationship with Wholesaler Water Shortage Planning The WSCP is designed to be consistent with MET’s Water Shortage and Demand Management (WSDM) Plan, MWDOC’s Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP), and other emergency planning efforts as described below. MWDOC’s WSAP is integral to the WSCP’s shortage response strategy in the event that MET or MWDOC determines that supply augmentation (including storage) and lesser demand reduction measures would not be sufficient to meet a projected shortage levels needed to meet demands. 2.3.1 MET Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan MET evaluates the level of supplies available and existing levels of water in storage to determine the appropriate management stage annually. Each stage is associated with specific resource management actions to avoid extreme shortages to the extent possible and minimize adverse impacts to retail customers should an extreme shortage occur. The sequencing outlined in the WSDM Plan reflects anticipated responses towards MET’s existing and expected resource mix. Surplus stages occur when net annual deliveries can be made to water storage programs. Under the WSDM Plan, there are four surplus management stages that provides a framework for actions to take for surplus supplies. Deliveries in Diamond Valley Lake (DVL) and in SWP terminal reservoirs continue through each surplus stage provided there is available storage capacity. Withdrawals from DVL for regulatory purposes or to meet seasonal demands may occur in any stage. The WSDM Plan distinguishes between shortages, severe shortages, and extreme shortages. The differences between each term are listed below. x Shortage: MET can meet full-service demands and partially meet or fully meet interruptible demands using stored water or water transfers as necessary. x Severe Shortage: MET can meet full-service demands only by using stored water, transfers, and possibly calling for extraordinary conservation. x Extreme Shortage: MET must allocate available supply to full-service customers. There are six shortage management stages to guide resource management activities. These stages are defined by shortfalls in imported supply and water balances in MET’s storage programs. When MET must make net withdrawals from storage to meet demands, it is considered to be in a shortage condition. Figure 2-3 gives a summary of actions under each surplus and shortage stages when an allocation plan is necessary to enforce mandatory cutbacks. The goal of the WSDM plan is to avoid Stage 6, an extreme shortage (MET, 1999). 356 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-6 Figure 2-3: Resource Stages, Anticipated Actions, and Supply Declarations Source: MET, 1999. MET’s Board of Directors adopted a Water Supply Condition Framework in June 2008 in order to communicate the urgency of the region’s water supply situation and the need for further water conservation practices. The framework has four conditions, each calling increasing levels of conservation. Descriptions for each of the four conditions are listed below: x Baseline Water Use Efficiency: Ongoing conservation, outreach, and recycling programs to achieve permanent reductions in water use and build storage reserves. x Condition 1 Water Supply Watch: Local agency voluntary dry-year conservation measures and use of regional storage reserves. x Condition 2 Water Supply Alert: Regional call for cities, counties, member agencies, and retail water agencies to implement extraordinary conservation through drought ordinances and other measures to mitigate use of storage reserves. x Condition 3 Water Supply Allocation: Implement MET’s WSAP. As noted in Condition 3, should supplies become limited to the point where imported water demands cannot be met, MET will allocate water through the WSAP (MET, 2021a). 2.3.2 MET Water Supply Allocation Plan MET’s imported supplies have been impacted by a number of water supply challenges as noted earlier. In case of extreme water shortage within the MET service area is the implementation of its WSAP. 357 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-7 MET’s Board of Directors originally adopted the WSAP in February 2008 to fairly distribute a limited amount of water supply and applies it through a detailed methodology to reflect a range of local conditions and needs of the region’s retail water consumers (MET, 2021a). The WSAP includes the specific formula for calculating member agency supply allocations and the key implementation elements needed for administering an allocation. MET’s WSAP is the foundation for the urban water shortage contingency analysis required under Water Code Section 10632 and is part of MET’s 2020 UWMP. MET’s WSAP was developed in consideration of the principles and guidelines in MET’s 1999 WSDM Plan with the core objective of creating an equitable “needs-based allocation”. The WSAP’s formula seeks to balance the impacts of a shortage at the retail level while maintaining equity on the wholesale level for shortages of MET supplies of greater than 50% supply shortage. The formula takes into account a number of factors, such as the impact on retail customers, growth in population, changes in supply conditions, investments in local resources, demand hardening aspects of water conservation savings, recycled water, extraordinary storage and transfer actions, and groundwater imported water needs. The formula is calculated in three steps: 1) based period calculations, 2) allocation year calculations, and 3) supply allocation calculations. The first two steps involve standard computations, while the third step contains specific methodology developed for the WSAP. Step 1: Base Period Calculations – The first step in calculating a member agency’s water supply allocation is to estimate their water supply and demand using a historical based period with established water supply and delivery data. The base period for each of the different categories of supply and demand is calculated using data from the two most recent non-shortage years. Step 2: Allocation Year Calculations – The next step in calculating the member agency’s water supply allocation is estimating water needs in the allocation year. This is done by adjusting the base period estimates of retail demand for population growth and changes in local supplies. Step 3: Supply Allocation Calculations – The final step is calculating the water supply allocation for each member agency based on the allocation year water needs identified in Step 2. In order to implement the WSAP, MET’s Board of Directors makes a determination on the level of the regional shortage, based on specific criteria, typically in April. The criteria used by MET includes current levels of storage, estimated water supplies conditions, and projected imported water demands. The allocations, if deemed necessary, go into effect in July of the same year and remain in effect for a 12- month period. The schedule is made at the discretion of the Board of Directors (MET, 2021b) As demonstrated by the findings in MET’s 2020 UWMP both the Water Reliability Assessment and the Drought Risk Assessment (DRA) demonstrate that MET is able to mitigate the challenges posed by hydrologic variability, potential climate change, and regulatory risk on its imported supply sources through the significant storage capabilities it has developed over the last two decades, both dry-year and emergency storage (MET, 2021a). Although MET’s 2020 UWMP forecasts that MET will be able to meet projected imported demands throughout the projected period from 2025 to 2045, uncertainty in supply conditions can result in MET needing to implement its WSAP to preserve dry-year storage and curtail demands (MET, 2021b). 358 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-8 2.3.3 MWDOC Water Supply Allocation Plan To prepare for the potential allocation of imported water supplies from MET, MWDOC worked collaboratively with its 28 retail agencies to develop its own WSAP that was adopted in January 2009 and amended in 2016. The MWDOC WSAP outlines how MWDOC will determine and implement each of its retail agency’s allocation during a time of shortage. The MWDOC WSAP uses a similar method and approach, when reasonable, as that of the MET’s WSAP. However, MWDOC’s plan remains flexible to use an alternative approach when MET’s method produces a significant unintended result for the member agencies. The MWDOC WSAP model follows five basic steps to determine a retail agency’s imported supply allocation. Step 1: Determine Baseline Information – The first step in calculating a water supply allocation is to estimate water supply and demand using a historical based period with established water supply and delivery data. The base period for each of the different categories of demand and supply is calculated using data from the last two non-shortage years. Step 2: Establish Allocation Year Information – In this step, the model adjusts for each retail agency’s water need in the allocation year. This is done by adjusting the base period estimates for increased retail water demand based on population growth and changes in local supplies. Step 3: Calculate Initial Minimum Allocation Based on MET’s Declared Shortage Level – This step sets the initial water supply allocation for each retail agency. After a regional shortage level is established, MWDOC will calculate the initial allocation as a percentage of adjusted Base Period Imported water needs within the model for each retail agency. Step 4: Apply Allocation Adjustments and Credits in the Areas of Retail Impacts and Conservation– In this step, the model assigns additional water to address disparate impacts at the retail level caused by an across-the-board cut of imported supplies. It also applies a conservation credit given to those agencies that have achieved additional water savings at the retail level as a result of successful implementation of water conservation devices, programs and rate structures. Step 5: Sum Total Allocations and Determine Retail Reliability – This is the final step in calculating a retail agency’s total allocation for imported supplies. The model sums an agency’s total imported allocation with all of the adjustments and credits and then calculates each agency’s retail reliability compared to its Allocation Year Retail Demand. The MWDOC WSAP includes additional measures for plan implementation, including the following (MWDOC, 2016): x Appeal Process – An appeals process to provide retail agencies the opportunity to request a change to their allocation based on new or corrected information. MWDOC anticipates that under most circumstances, a retail agency’s appeal will be the basis for an appeal to MET by MWDOC. x Melded Allocation Surcharge Structure – At the end of the allocation year, MWDOC would only charge an allocation surcharge to each retail agency that exceeded their allocation if MWDOC exceeds its total allocation and is required to pay a surcharge to MET. MET enforces allocations to retail agencies through an allocation surcharge to a retail agency that exceeds its total annual allocation at the end of the 12-month allocation period. MWDOC’s surcharge would be assessed 359 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2-9 according to the retail agency’s prorated share (acre-feet over usage) of MWDOC amount with MET. Surcharge funds collected by MET will be invested in its Water Management Fund, which is used to in part to fund expenditures in dry-year conservation and local resource development. x Tracking and Reporting Water Usage – MWDOC will provide each retail agency with water use monthly reports that will compare each retail agency’s current cumulative retail usage to their allocation baseline. MWDOC will also provide quarterly reports on its cumulative retail usage versus its allocation baseline. x Timeline and Option to Revisit the Plan – The allocation period will cover 12 consecutive months and the Regional Shortage Level will be set for the entire allocation period. MWDOC only anticipates calling for allocation when MET declares a shortage; and no later than 30 days from MET’s declaration will MWDOC announce allocation to its retail agencies. 360 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-1 3 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE PLANNING The City’s WSCP is a detailed guide of how the City intends to act in the case of an actual water shortage condition. The WSCP anticipates a water supply shortage and provides pre-planned guidance for managing and mitigating a shortage. Regardless of the reason for the shortage, the WSCP is based on adequate details of demand reduction and supply augmentation measures that are structured to match varying degrees of shortage will ensure the relevant stakeholders understand what to expect during a water shortage situation. 3.1 Water Supply Reliability Analysis Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(1), the WSCP shall provide an analysis of water supply reliability conducted pursuant to Water Code Section 10635, and the key issues that may create a shortage condition when looking at the City’s water asset portfolio. Understanding water supply reliability, factors that could contribute to water supply constraints, availability of alternative supplies, and what effect these have on meeting customer demands provides the City with a solid basis on which to develop appropriate and feasible response actions in the event of a water shortage. In the 2020 UWMP, the City conducted a Water Reliability Assessment to compare the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with long-term projected water use over the next 20 years, in five-year increments, for a normal water year, a single dry water year, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years (Huntington Beach, 2021). The City also conducted a DRA to evaluate a drought period that lasts five consecutive water years starting from the year following when the assessment is conducted. An analysis of both assessments determined that the City is capable of meeting all customers’ demands from 2021 through 2045 for a normal year, a single dry year, and a drought lasting five consecutive years with significant imported water supplemental dedicated drought supplies from MWDOC/MET and ongoing conversation program efforts. The City also has added reliability through receiving the majority of its water supply from groundwater from the OC Basin and supplemental imported supplies from MET/MWDOC. As a result, there is no projected shortage condition due to drought that will trigger customer demand reduction actions until MWDOC notifies the City of insufficient imported supplies. More information is available in the City’s 2020 UWMP Section 6 and 7 (Huntington Beach, 2021). 3.2 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment Procedures Per Water Code Section 10632.1, the City will conduct an Annual Assessment pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 10632 and by July 1st of each year, beginning in 2022, submit an Annual Assessment with information for anticipated shortage, triggered shortage response actions, compliance and enforcement actions, and communication actions consistent with the Supplier’s WSCP. The City must include in its WSCP the procedures used for conducting an Annual Assessment. The Annual Assessment is a determination of the near-term outlook for supplies and demands and how a perceived shortage may relate to WSCP shortage stage response actions in the current calendar year. This determination is based on information available to the City at the time of the analysis. Starting in 2022, the Annual Assessment will be due by July 1 of every year. 361 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-2 This section documents the decision-making process required for formal approval of the City’s Annual Assessment determination of water supply reliability each year and the key data inputs and the methodologies used to evaluate the water system reliability for the coming year, while considering that the year to follow would be considered dry. 3.2.1 Decision-Making Process The following decision-making process describes the functional steps that the City will take to formally approve the Annual Assessment determination of water supply reliability each year. City Steps to Approve the Annual Assessment Determination The Annual Assessment will be predicated on the OCWD Basin Production Percentage (BPP) and on MWDOCs Annual Assessment outcomes. The City is supplied groundwater from OCWD. The OC Basin is not adjudicated and as such, pumping from the OC Basin is managed through a process that uses financial incentives to encourage groundwater producers (Producers) to pump a sustainable amount of water. The framework for the financial incentives is based on establishing the BPP, the percentage of each Producer’s total water supply that comes from groundwater pumped from the OC Basin. The BPP is set uniformly for all Producers by OCWD on an annual basis in by OCWD Board of Directors. Based on the projected water demand and water modeled water supply, over the long-term, OCWD anticipates sustainably supporting a BPP of 85%; however, volumes of groundwater and imported water may vary depending on OCWD's actual BPP projections. A supply reduction that may result from the annual BPP projection will be included in the Annual Assessment. While the City’s primary source of water is OCWD groundwater, any remaining source to meet retail demands comes from the purchase of imported water from MWDOC. MWDOC surveys its member agencies annually for anticipated water demands and supplies for the upcoming year. MWDOC utilizes this information to plan for the anticipated imported water supplies for the MWDOC service area. This information is then shared and coordinated with MET and is incorporated into their analysis of their service area’s annual imported water needs. Based on the year’s supply conditions and WSDM actions, MET will present a completed Annual Assessment for its member agencies’ review from which they will then seek Board approval in April of each year. Additionally, MET expects that any triggers or specific shortage response actions that result from the Annual Assessment would be approved by their Board at that time. Based upon MET’s Assessment and taking into consideration information provided to MWDOC through the annual survey, MWDOC will provide an anticipated estimate of imported supplies for the City to incorporate into the Annual Assessment. The Annual Assessment findings will determine the approval process. If a shortage is identified, the Annual Assessment will be taken to City Council for approval and formally submitted to DWR prior to the July 1 deadline. If no shortage is identified, the Annual Assessment will be approved by the Public Works Director, or designee, and formally submitted to DWR prior to the July 1 deadline. 362 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-3 Figure 3-1: Annual Assessment Reporting Timeline 3.2.2 Data and Methodologies The following paragraphs document the key data inputs and methodologies that are used to evaluate the water system reliability for the coming year, while considering that the year to follow would be considered dry. Assessment Methodology The City will evaluate water supply reliability for the current year and one dry year for the purpose of the Annual Assessment. The Annual Assessment determination will be based on considerations of unconstrained water demand, local water supplies, MWDOC imported water supplies, planned water use, and infrastructure considerations. The balance between projected in-service area supplies, coupled with MWDOC imported supplies, and anticipated unconstrained demand will be used to determine what, if any, shortage stage is expected under the WSCP framework as presented in Figure 3-2. The WSCP’s standard shortage stages are defined in terms of shortage percentages. Shortage percentages will be calculated by dividing the difference between water supplies and unconstrained demand by total unconstrained demand. This calculation will be performed separately for anticipated current year conditions and for assumed dry year conditions. 363 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-4 Figure 3-2: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Annual Assessment Framework Locally Applicable Evaluation Criteria Within Orange County, there are no significant local applicable criteria that directly affect reliability. Through the years, the water agencies in Orange County have made tremendous efforts to integrate their systems to provide flexibility to interchange with different sources of supplies. There are emergency agreements in place to ensure all parts of the County have an adequate supply of water. In the northern part of the County, agencies have the ability to meet a majority of their demands through groundwater with very little limitation, except for the OCWD BPP. The City will also continue to monitor emerging supply and demand conditions related to supplemental imported water from MWDOC/MET and take appropriate actions consistent with the flexibility and adaptiveness inherent to the WSCP. The City’s Annual Assessment was based on the City’s service area, water sources, water supply reliability, and water use as described in Water Code Section 10631, including available data from state, regional, or local agency population, land use development, and climate change projections within the service area of the City. Some conditions that affect MWDOC’s wholesale supply and demand, such as groundwater replenishment, surface water and local supply production, can differ significantly from earlier projections throughout the year. If a major earthquake on the San Andreas Fault occurs, it has the potential to damage all three key regional water aqueducts and disrupt imported supplies for up to six months. The region would likely impose a water use reduction ranging from 10-25% until the system is repaired. However, MET has taken proactive steps to handle such disruption, such as constructing DVL, which mitigates potential impacts. DVL, along with other local reservoirs, can store a six to twelve-month supply of emergency water (MET, 2021b). Water Supply As detailed in the City’s 2020 UWMP, the City meets all of its customers’ demands with a combination of local groundwater from the OC Basin and imported water from MWDOC/MET. The City’s main source of water supply is groundwater, with imported water making up the rest of the City’s water supply portfolio. In fiscal year (FY) 2019-20, the City relied on 70% groundwater and 30% imported water. It is projected that by 2045, the water 364 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-5 supply portfolio will change to approximately 85% groundwater and 15% imported water, reflecting the increase in OCWD’s BPP to 85% beginning in 2025 (Huntington Beach, 2021). Unconstrained Customer Demand The WSCP and Annual Assessment define unconstrained demand as expected water use prior to any projected shortage response actions that may be taken under the WSCP. Unconstrained demand is distinguished from observed demand, which may be constrained by preceding, ongoing, or future actions, such as emergency supply allocations during a multi-year drought. WSCP shortage response actions to constrain demand are inherently extraordinary; routine activities such as ongoing conservation programs and regular operational adjustments are not considered as constraints on demands. The City’s DRA reveals that its supply capabilities are expected to balance anticipated total water use and supply, assuming a five-year consecutive drought from FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25 (Huntington Beach, 2021). Water demands in a five-year consecutive drought are calculated as a 6% increase in water demand above a normal year for each year of the drought (CDM Smith, 2021). Planned Water Use for Current Year Considering Dry Subsequent Year Water Code Section 10632(a)(2)(B)(ii) requires the Annual Assessment to determine “current year available supply, considering hydrological and regulatory conditions in the current year and one dry year.” The Annual Assessment will include two separate estimates of City’s annual water supply and unconstrained demand using: 1) current year conditions, and 2) assumed dry year conditions. Accordingly, the Annual Assessment’s shortage analysis will present separate sets of findings for the current year and dry year scenarios. The Water Code does not specify the characteristics of a dry year, allowing discretion to the Supplier. The City will use its discretion to refine and update its assumptions for a dry year scenarios in each Annual Assessment as information becomes available and in accordance with best management practices. Supply and demand analyses for the single-dry year case was based on conditions affecting the SWP as this supply availability fluctuates the most among MET’s, and therefore MWDOC and the City’s, sources of supply. FY 2013-14 was the single driest year for SWP supplies with an allocation of 5% to Municipal and Industrial (M&I) uses. Unique to this year, the 5% SWP allocation was later reduced to 0%, before ending up at its final allocation of 5%, highlight the stressed water supplies for the year. Furthermore, on January 17, 2014 Governor Brown declared the drought State of Emergency citing 2014 as the driest year in California history. Additionally, within MWDOC’s service area, precipitation for FY 2013-14 was the second lowest on record, with 4.37 inches of rain, significantly impacting water demands. The water demand forecasting model developed for the Demand Forecast TM isolated the impacts that weather and future climate can have on water demand through the use of a statistical model. The impacts of hot/dry weather condition are reflected as a percentage increase in water demands from the normal year condition (average of FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19). For a single dry year condition (FY 2013-14), the model projects a 6% increase in demand for the OC Basin area where the City’s service area is located (CDM Smith, 2021). Detailed information of the model is included in the City’s 2020 UWMP. The City has documented that it is 100% reliable for single dry year demands from 2025 through 2045 with a demand increase of 6% from normal demand with significant reserves held by MET, local groundwater supplies, and water use efficiency (Huntington Beach, 2021). 365 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-6 Infrastructure Considerations The Annual Assessment will include consideration of any infrastructure issues that may pertain to near-term water supply reliability, including repairs, construction, and environmental mitigation measures that may temporarily constrain capabilities, as well as any new projects that may add to system capacity. MWDOC closely coordinates with MET and its member agencies, including the City, on any planned infrastructure work that may impact water supply availability. Throughout each year, MET regularly carries out preventive and corrective maintenance of its facilities within the MWDOC service area that may require shutdowns to inspect and repair pipelines and facilities and support capital improvement projects. These shutdowns involve a high level of planning and coordination between MWDOC, MWDOC’s member agencies, and MET to ensure that major portions of the distribution system are not out of service at the same time. Operational flexibility within MET’s system and the cooperation of member agencies allow shutdowns to be successfully completed while continuing to meet all system demands. Specifically for the City, as of July 2021, there are no foreseen near-term infrastructure issues that would impact supply; however, the City is planning to update the Water Master Plan in 2022 and will update infrastructure considerations based on Water Master Plan outcomes. Other Factors For the Annual Assessment, any known issues related to water quality would be considered for their potential effects on water supply reliability. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of thousands of manmade chemicals that includes perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). PFAS compounds were once commonly used in many products including, among many others, stain- and water-repellent fabrics, nonstick products (e.g., Teflon), polishes, waxes, paints, cleaning products, and fire-fighting foams. Beginning in the summer of 2019, the California State Division of Drinking Water (DDW) began requiring testing for PFAS compounds in some groundwater production wells in the OCWD area. Although PFAS have not been detected in the City’s wells, PFAS are of particular concern for groundwater quality, and since the summer of 2019, DDW requires testing for PFAS compounds in some groundwater production wells in the OCWD area. In February 2020, the DDW lowered its Response Levels (RL) for PFOA and PFOS to 10 and 40 parts per trillion (ppt), respectively. The DDW recommends Producers not serve any water exceeding the RL – effectively making the RL an interim Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) while DDW undertakes administrative action to set a MCL. In response to DDW’s issuance of the revised RL, as of December 2020, approximately 45 wells in the OCWD service area have been temporarily turned off until treatment systems can be constructed. As additional wells are tested, OCWD expects this figure may increase to at least 70 to 80 wells. The state has begun the process of establishing MCLs for PFOA and PFOS and anticipates these MCLs to be in effect by the Fall of 2023. OCWD anticipates the MCLs will be set at or below the RLs. In April 2020, OCWD as the groundwater basin manager, executed an agreement with the impacted Producers to fund and construct the necessary treatment systems for production wells impacted by PFAS compounds. The PFAS treatment projects includes the design, permitting, construction, and operation of PFAS removal systems for impacted Producer production wells. Each well treatment system will be evaluated for use with either granular activated carbon or ion exchange for the removal of PFAS compounds. These treatment systems utilize vessels in a lead-lag configuration to remove PFOA and PFOS to less than 2 ppt (the current non-detect limit). Use of these PFAS treatment systems are designed to ensure the groundwater supplied by Producer wells can be 366 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-7 served in compliance with current and future PFAS regulations. With financial assistance from OCWD, the Producers will operate and maintain the new treatment systems once they are constructed. To minimize expenses and provide maximum protection to the public water supply, OCWD initiated design, permitting, and construction of the PFAS treatment projects on a schedule that allows rapid deployment of treatment systems. Construction contracts were awarded for treatment systems for production wells in the City of Fullerton and Serrano Water District in Year 2020. Additional construction contracts will likely be awarded in the first and second quarters of 2021. OCWD expects the treatment systems to be constructed for most of the initial 45 wells above the RL within the next 2 to 3 years. As additional data are collected and new wells experience PFAS detections at or near the current RL, and/or above a future MCL, and are turned off, OCWD will continue to partner with the affected Producers and take action to design and construct necessary treatment systems to bring the impacted wells back online as quickly as possible. Groundwater production in FY 2019-20 was expected to be approximately 325,000 acre-feet (AF) but declined to 286,550 AF primarily due to PFAS impacted wells being turned off around February 2020. OCWD expects groundwater production to be in the area of 245,000 AF in FY 2020-21 due to the currently idled wells and additional wells being impacted by PFAS and turned off. As PFAS treatment systems are constructed, OCWD expects total annual groundwater production to slowly increase back to normal levels (310,000 to 330,000 AF) (OCWD, 2020). 3.3 Six Standard Water Shortage Levels Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(3)(A), the City must include the six standard water shortage levels that represent shortages from the normal reliability as determined in the Annual Assessment. The shortage levels have been standardized to provide a consistent regional and statewide approach to conveying the relative severity of water supply shortage conditions. This is an outgrowth of the severe statewide drought of 2012-2016, and the widely recognized public communication and state policy uncertainty associated with the many different local definitions of water shortage Levels. The six standard water shortage levels correspond to progressively increasing estimated shortage conditions (up to 10, 20, 30, 40, 50%, and greater than 50% shortage compared to the normal reliability condition) and align with the response actions the Supplier would implement to meet the severity of the impending shortages. 367 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-8 Table 3-1: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Submittal Table 8-1 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Shortage Level Percent Shortage Range Shortage Response Actions 0 0% (Normal) A Level 0 Water Supply Shortage –Condition exists when the City notifies its water users that no supply reductions are anticipated in this year. The City proceeds with planned water efficiency best practices to support consumer demand reduction in line with state mandated requirements and local City goals for water supply reliability. Permanent water waste prohibitions are in place as stipulated in the City’s Water Shortage Response Ordinance. 1 hƉƚŽϭϬйථ A Level 1 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City notifies its water users that due to drought or other supply reductions, a consumer demand reduction of up to 10% is necessary to make more efficient use of water and respond to existing water conditions. The City shall implement the mandatory Level 1 conservation measures identified in this WSCP. The type of event that may prompt the City to declare a Level 1 Water Supply Shortage may include, among other factors, a finding that its wholesale water provider calls for extraordinary water conservation. 2 ථϭϭйƚŽϮϬй ௗA Level 2 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City notifies its water users that due to drought or other supply reductions, a consumer demand reduction of up to 20% is necessary to make more efficient use of water and respond to existing water conditions. Upon declaration of a Level 2 Water Supply Shortage condition, the City shall implement the mandatory Level 2 conservation measures identified in this WSCP. 3 ϮϭйƚŽϯϬйථ ௗA Level 3 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 30% consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. 4 ථϯϭйƚŽϰϬй ௗA Level 4 Water Supply Shortage - Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 40% consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. 368 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-9 Submittal Table 8-1 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Shortage Level Percent Shortage Range Shortage Response Actions 5 ථϰϭйƚŽϱϬй A Level 5 Water Supply Shortage - Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 50% or more consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. 6 >50% A Level 6 Water Supply Shortage – Condition exists when the City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that greater than 50% or more consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. The City must declare a Water Supply Shortage Emergency in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. NOTES: 3.4 Shortage Response Actions Water Code Section 10632 (a)(4) requires the WSCP to specify shortage response actions that align with the defined shortage levels. The City has defined specific shortage response actions that align with the defined shortage levels in DWR Tables 8-2 and 8-3 (Appendix A). These shortage response actions were developed with consideration to the system infrastructure and operations changes, supply augmentation responses, customer- class or water use-specific demand reduction initiatives, and increasingly stringent water use prohibitions. 3.4.1 Demand Reduction The demand reduction measures that would be implemented to address shortage levels are described in DWR Table 8-2 (Appendix A). This table indicates which actions align with specific defined shortage levels and estimates the extent to which that action will reduce the gap between supplies and demands. DWR Table 8-2 (Appendix A) demonstrates to the that choose suite of shortage response actions can be expected to deliver the expected outcomes necessary to meet the requirements of a given shortage level (e.g., target of an additional 10% water savings). This table also identifies the enforcement action, if any, associated with each demand reduction measure. 369 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-10 3.4.2 Supply Augmentation The supply augmentation actions are described in DWR Table 8-3 (Appendix A). These augmentations represent short-term management objectives triggered by the MET’s WSDM Plan and do not overlap with the long-term new water supply development or supply reliability enhancement projects. Supply Augmentation is made available to the City through MWDOC and MET. The City relies on MET’s reliability portfolio of water supply programs including existing water transfers, storage and exchange agreements to supplement gaps in the City’s supply/demand balance. MET has developed significant storage capacity (over 5 million AF) in reservoirs and groundwater banking programs both within and outside of the Southern California region. Additionally, MET can pursue additional water transfer and exchange programs with other water agencies to help mitigate supply/demand imbalances and provide additional dry-year supply sources. MWDOC, and in turn its retail agencies, including the City, has access to supply augmentation actions through MET. MET may exercise these actions based on regional need, and in accordance with their WSCP, and may include the use of supplies and storage programs within the Colorado River, SWP, and in-region storage. The City has the ability to augment its supply to reduce the shortage gap by up to 100% by purchasing additional imported water through MWDOC or pumping additional groundwater in the OC Basin; however, both are subject to rate penalties from MWDOC and OCWD, respectively. 3.4.3 Operational Changes During shortage conditions, operations may be affected by supply augmentation or demand reduction responses. The City will consider their operational procedures when it completes its Annual Assessment or as needed to identify changes that can be implemented to address water shortage on a short-term basis. The City can alter maintenance cycles, such as system flushing, and defer planned construction activities and capital improvement projects to limit or defer planned system outages. The City has one pressure zone and all water sources (the City’s wells and connections to MET) pump directly into the system, in which the City would have to adjust control valves to lower the pressure in the system and restrict flows for operational control. 3.4.4 Additional Mandatory Restrictions Water Code Section 10632(a)(4)(D) calls for “additional, mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices that are in addition to state-mandated prohibitions and appropriate to the local conditions” to be included among the WSCP’s shortage response actions. The City will identify additional mandatory restrictions as needed based on the existing Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program (Appendix B). The City intends to update any mandatory restrictions in a subsequently adopted ordinance which will supersede the existing ordinance. 3.4.5 Emergency Response Plan (Hazard Mitigation Plan) A catastrophic water shortage would be addressed according to the appropriate water shortage level and response actions. It is likely that a catastrophic shortage would immediately trigger Shortage Level 6 and response actions have been put in place to mitigate a catastrophic shortage. In addition, there are several Plans that address catastrophic failures and align with the WSCP, including MET’s WSDM and WSAP, the City’s HMP, and the Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County (WEROC)’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). 370 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-11 MET’s WSDM and WSAP MET has comprehensive plans for stages of actions it would undertake to address a catastrophic interruption in water supplies through its WSDM and WSAP. MET also developed an Emergency Storage Requirement to mitigate against potential interruption in water supplies resulting from catastrophic occurrences within the Southern California region, including seismic events along the San Andreas Fault. In addition, MET is working with the state to implement a comprehensive improvement plan to address catastrophic occurrences outside of the Southern California region, such as a maximum probable seismic event in the Sacramentro-San Joaquin River Delta that would cause levee failure and disruption of SWP deliveries. Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County Emergency Operations Plan In 1983, the Orange County water community identified a need to develop a plan on how agencies would respond effectively to disasters impacting the regional water distribution system. The collective efforts of these agencies resulted in the formation of WEROC to coordinate emergency response on behalf of all Orange County water and wastewater agencies, develop an emergency plan to respond to disasters, and conduct disaster training exercises for the Orange County water community. WEROC was established with the creation of an indemnification agreement between its member agencies to protect each other against civil liabilities and to facilitate the exchange of resources. WEROC is unique in its ability to provide a single point of contact for representation of all water and wastewater utilities in Orange County during a disaster. This representation is to the county, state, and federal disaster coordination agencies. Within the Orange County Operational Area, WEROC is the recognized contact for emergency response for the water community, including the City. As a member of WEROC, the City will follow WEROC’s EOP in the event of an emergency and coordinate with WEROC to assess damage, initiate repairs, and request and coordinate mutual aid resources in the event that the City is unable to provide the level of emergency response support required by the situation. The EOP defines the actions to be taken by WEROC Emergency Operations Center (EOC) staff to reduce the loss of water and wastewater infrastructure; to respond effectively to a disaster; and to coordinate recovery operations in the aftermath of any emergency involving extensive damage to Orange County water and wastewater utilities. The EOP includes activation notification protocol that will be used to contact partner agencies to inform them of the situation, activation status of the EOC, known damage or impacts, or resource needs. The EOP is a standalone document that is reviewed annually and approved by the Board every three years. WEROC is organized on the basis that each member agency is responsible for developing its own EOP in accordance with the California Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), National Incident Management System (NIMS), and Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 to meet specific emergency needs within its service area. The WEROC EOC is responsible for assessing the overall condition and status of the Orange County regional water distribution and wastewater collection systems including MET facilities that serve Orange County. The EOC can be activated during an emergency situation that can result from both natural and man-made causes, and can be activated through automatic, manual, or standby for activation. WEROC recognized four primary phases of emergency management, which include: 371 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-12 x Preparedness: Planning, training, and exercises that are conducted prior to an emergency to support and enhance response to an emergency or disaster. x Response: Activities and programs designed to address the immediate and short-term effects of the onset of an emergency or disaster that helps to reduce effects to water infrastructure and speed recovery. This includes alert and notification, EOC activation, direction and control, and mutual aid. x Recovery: This phase involved restoring systems to normal, in which short-term recovery actions are taken to assess the damage and return vital life-support systems to minimum operating standards, while long-term recovery actions have the potential to continue for many years. x Mitigation/Prevention: These actions prevent the occurrence of an emergency or reduce the area’s vulnerability in ways that minimize the adverse impacts of a disaster or emergency. MWDOC’s HMP outlines threats and identifies mitigation projects. The EOC Action Plans (EAP) provide frameworks for EOC staff to respond to different situations with the objectives and steps required to complete them, which will in turn serve the WEROC member agencies. In the event of an emergency which results in a catastrophic water shortage, the City will declare a water shortage condition of up to Level 6 for the impacted area depending on the severity of the event, and coordination with WEROC is anticipated to begin at Level 4 or greater (WEROC, 2018). City of Huntington Beach Emergency Response Plan The City will also refer to its current American Water Infrastructure Act Risk and Resilience Assessment and Emergency Response Plan in the event of a catastrophic supply interruption. 3.4.6 Seismic Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan Per the Water Code Section 10632.5, Suppliers are required to assess seismic risk to water supplies as part of their WSCP. The plan also must include the mitigation plan for the seismic risk(s). Given the great distances that imported supplies travel to reach Orange County, the region is vulnerable to interruptions along hundreds of miles aqueducts, pipelines and other facilities associated with delivering the supplies to the region. Additionally, the infrastructure in place to deliver supplies are susceptible to damage from earthquakes and other disasters. In lieu of conducting a seismic risk assessment specific to the City’s 2020 UWMP, the City has included the previously prepared regional HMP by MWDOC, as the regional imported water wholesaler, and the City’s local HMP, that is required under the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390). MWDOC’s HMP identified that the overarching goals of the HMP were the same for all of its member agencies, which include: x Goal 1: Minimize vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure to minimize damages and loss of life and injury to human life caused by hazards. x Goal 2: Minimize security risks to water and wastewater infrastructure. x Goal 3: Minimize interruption to water and wastewater utilities. x Goal 4: Improve public outreach, awareness, education, and preparedness for hazards in order to increase community resilience. x Goal 5: Eliminate or minimize wastewater spills and overflows. x Goal 6: Protect water quality and supply, critical aquatic resources, and habitat to ensure a safe water supply. 372 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-13 x Goal 7: Strengthen Emergency Response Services to ensure preparedness, response, and recovery during any major or multi-hazard event. MWDOC’s HMP evaluates hazards applicable to all jurisdictions in its entire planning area, prioritized based on probability, location, maximum probable extent, and secondary impacts. The identification of hazards is highly dependent on the location of facilities within the City’s jurisdiction and takes into consideration the history of the hazard and associated damage, information provided by agencies specializing in a specific hazard, and relies upon the City’s expertise and knowledge. Earthquake fault rupture and seismic hazards, including ground shaking and liquefaction, are among the highest ranked hazards to the region as a whole because of its long history of earthquakes, with some resulting in considerable damage. A significant earthquake along one of the major faults could cause substantial casualties, extensive damage to infrastructure, fires, damages and outages of water and wastewater facilities, and other threats to life and property. Nearly all of Orange County is at risk of moderate to extreme ground shaking, with liquefaction possible throughout much of Orange County but the most extensive liquefaction zones occur in coastal areas. Based on the amount of seismic activity that occurs within the region, there is no doubt that communities within Orange County will continue to experience future earthquake events, and it is a reasonable assumption that a major event will occur within a 30 year timeframe (MWDOC, 2019). The mitigation actions identify the hazard, proposed mitigation action, location/facility, local planning mechanism, risk, cost, timeframe, possible funding sources, status, and status rationale, as applicable. For the City, mitigation actions for seismic risks include (Huntington Beach, 2017): x Conduct a survey of seismically vulnerable buildings in the City, including soft first-story and older concrete structures. Ensure that the survey remains accurate through regular survey updates. x Develop an incentive program for property owners to retrofit seismically vulnerable structures. x Require a seismic hazard assessment for new buildings or significant retrofits within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or in an area with high liquefaction risk. Require buildings in seismic hazard-prone areas to reduce their vulnerability as appropriate. x Explore adopting amendments to the City’s building code requiring new buildings to exceed the minimum seismic standards in the state Buildings Standards Code. Emphasize constructing buildings to remain safely habitable and functional following an earthquake. x Incorporate the possibility of a major urban fire or tsunami following a significant earthquake into Fire Department training and emergency response procedures. 3.4.7 Shortage Response Action Effectiveness For each specific Shortage Response Action identified in the plan, the WSCP also estimates the extent to which that action will reduce the gap between supplies and demands identified in DWR Table 8-2 (Appendix A). To the extent feasible, the City has estimated percentage savings for the chosen suite of shortage response actions, which can be anticipated to deliver the expected outcomes necessary to meet the requirements of a given shortage level. 373 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-14 3.5 Communication Protocols Timely and effective communication is a key element of the WSCP implementation. Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(5), the City has established communication protocols and procedures to inform customers, the public, interested parties, and local, regional, and state governments regarding any current or predicted shortages as determined by the Annual Assessment described pursuant to Section 10632.1; any shortage response actions triggered or anticipated to be triggered by the Annual Assessment described pursuant to Section 10632.1; and any other relevant communications. The City’s Water Shortage Communication Plan is documented in Appendix C. 3.6 Compliance and Enforcement Per the Water Code Section 10632 (a)(6), the City has defined customer compliance, enforcement, appeal, and exemption procedures for triggered shortage response actions. Procedures to ensure customer compliance are described in Section 3.5 Communication Protocols and customer enforcement, appeal, and exemption procedures are defined in the City’s existing Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program (Appendix B). The City intends to update any enforcement procedures in a subsequently adopted ordinance which will supersede the existing ordinance. 3.7 Legal Authorities Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(7)(A), the City has provided a description of the legal authorities that empower the City of Huntington Beach to implement and enforce its shortage response in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program (Appendix B). Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(7) (B), the City shall declare a water shortage emergency condition to prevail within the area served by such wholesaler whenever it finds and determines that the ordinary demands and requirements of water consumers cannot be satisfied without depleting the water supply of the distributor to the extent that there would be insufficient water for human consumption, sanitation, and fire protection. Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(7)(C), the City shall coordinate with any agency or county within which it provides water supply services for the possible proclamation of a local emergency under California Government Code, California Emergency Services Act (Article 2, Section 8558). Table 3-2 identifies the contacts for all cities or counties for which the Supplier provides service in the WSCP, along with developed coordination protocols, can facilitate compliance with this section of the Water Code in the event of a local emergency as defined in subpart (c) of Government Code Section 8558. 374 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-15 Table 3-2: Agency Contacts and Coordination Protocols Contact Agency Coordination Protocols City Manager City of Huntington Beach In person/Phone/Email/Memo City Council City of Huntington Beach Memo/Council Meeting Director of Public Works County of Orange Public Works Call/email 3.8 Financial Consequences of WSCP Per Water Code Section 10632(a)(8), Suppliers must include a description of the overall anticipated financial consequences to the Supplier of implementing the WSCP. This description must include potential reductions in revenue and increased expenses associated with implementation of the shortage response actions. This should be coupled with an identification of the anticipated mitigation actions needed to address these financial impacts. During a catastrophic interruption of water supplies, prolonged drought, or water shortage of any kind, the City will experience a reduction in revenue due to reduced water sales. Throughout this period of time, expenditures may increase or decrease with varying circumstances. Expenditures may increase in the event of significant damage to the water system, resulting in emergency repairs. Expenditures may also decrease as less water is pumped through the system, resulting in lower power costs. Water shortage mitigation actions will also impact revenues and require additional costs for drought response activities such as increased staff costs for tracking, reporting, and communications. The City receives water revenue from a service charge and a commodity charge based on consumption. The service charge recovers costs associated with providing water to the serviced property. The service charge does not vary with consumption and the commodity charge is based on water usage. Rates have been designed to recover the full cost of water service in the charges. Therefore, the total cost of purchasing water would decrease as the usage or sale of water decreases. In the event of a drought emergency, the City will impose excessive water use penalties on its customers, which may include additional costs associated with reduced water revenue, staff time taken for penalty enforcement, and advertising the excessive use penalties. The excessive water use penalties are further described in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program (Appendix B). However, there are significant fixed costs associated with maintaining a minimal level of service. The City will monitor projected revenues and expenditures should an extreme shortage and a large reduction in water sales occur for an extended period of time. To overcome these potential revenue losses and/or expenditure impacts, the City may use reserves. If necessary, the City may reduce expenditures by delaying implementation of its Capital Improvement Program and equipment purchases to reallocate funds to cover the cost of operations and critical maintenance, adjust the work force, implement a drought surcharge, and/or make adjustments to its water rate structure. 375 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-16 Based on current water rates, a volumetric cutback of 50% and above of water sales may lead to a range of reduction in revenues. The impacts to revenues will depend on a proportionate reduction in variable costs related to supply, pumping, and treatment for the specific shortage event. The City has set aside reserve funding as a Drought Reserve Fund to mitigate short-term water shortage situation. 3.9 Monitoring and Reporting Per Water Code Section 10632(a)(9), the City is required to provide a description of the monitoring and reporting requirements and procedures that have been implemented to ensure appropriate data is collected, tracked, and analyzed for purposes of monitoring customer compliance and to meet state reporting requirements. Monitoring and reporting key water use metrics is fundamental to water supply planning and management. Monitoring is also essential in times of water shortage to ensure that the response actions are achieving their intended water use reduction purposes, or if improvements or new actions need to be considered (see Section 3.10). Monitoring for customer compliance tracking is also useful in enforcement actions. Under normal water supply conditions, potable water production figures are recorded daily. Weekly and monthly reports are prepared and monitored. This data will be used to measure the effectiveness of any water shortage contingency level that may be implemented. As levels of water shortage are declared by MET and MWDOC, the City will follow implementation of those levels as appropriate based on the City’s risk profile provided in UWMP Chapter 6 and continue to monitor water demand levels. When MET calls for extraordinary conservation, MET’s Drought Program Officer will coordinate public information activities with MWDOC and monitor the effectiveness of ongoing conservation programs. The City will participate in monthly member agency manager meetings with both MWDOC and OCWD to monitor and discuss monthly water allocation charts. This will enable the City to be aware of import and groundwater use on a timely basis as a result of specific actions taken responding to the City’s WSCP. 3.10 WSCP Refinement Procedures Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(10), the City must provide reevaluation and improvement procedures for systematically monitoring and evaluating the functionality of the water shortage contingency plan in order to ensure shortage risk tolerance is adequate and appropriate water shortage mitigation strategies are implemented as needed. The City’s WSCP is prepared and implemented as an adaptive management plan. The City will use the monitoring and reporting process defined in Section 3.9 to refine the WSCP. In addition, if certain procedural refinements or new actions are identified by City staff, or suggested by customers or other interested parties, the City will evaluate their effectiveness, incorporate them into the WSCP, and implement them quickly at the appropriate water shortage level. It is envisioned that the WSCP will be periodically re-evaluated to ensure that its shortage risk tolerance is adequate and the shortage response actions are effective and up to date based on lessons learned from implementing the WSCP. The WSCP will be revised and updated during the UWMP update cycle to incorporate updated and new information. For example, new supply augmentation actions will be added, and actions that are no longer applicable for reasons such as program expiration will be removed. However, if revisions to the WSCP are warranted before the UWMP is updated, the WSCP will be updated outside of the UWMP update cycle. In the 376 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 3-17 course of preparing the Annual Assessment each year, City staff will routinely consider the functionality the overall WSCP and will prepare recommendations for City Council if changes are found to be needed. 3.11 Special Water Feature Distinction Per Water Code Section 10632 (b), the City has defined water features in that are artificially supplied with water, including ponds, lakes, waterfalls, and fountains, separately from swimming pools and spas, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 115921 of the Health and Safety Code, in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program (Appendix B). 3.12 Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Availability Per Water Code Section 10632 (a)(c), the City provided notice of the availability of the draft 2020 UWMP and draft 2020 WSCP and notice of the public hearing to consider adoption of the WSCP. The public review drafts of the 2020 UWMP and the 2020 WSCP were posted prominently on the City’s website in advance of the public hearing on June 7, 2021. Copies of the draft WSCP were also made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s and Utilities Department offices and public hearing notifications were published in local newspapers. A copy of the published Notice of Public Hearing is included in Appendix D. The City held the public hearing for the draft 2020 UWMP and draft WSCP on June 7, 2021, at the City Council meeting. The City Council reviewed and approved the 2020 UWMP and the WSCP at its June 7, 2021 meeting after the public hearing. See Appendix E for the resolution approving the WSCP. By July 1, 2021, the City’s adopted 2020 UWMP and WSCP was filed with DWR, California State Library, and the County of Orange. The City will make the WSCP available for public review on its website no later than 30 days after filing with DWR. Based on DWR’s review of the WSCP, the City will make any amendments in its adopted WSCP, as required and directed by DWR. If the City revises its WSCP after UWMP is approved by DWR, then an electronic copy of the revised WSCP will be submitted to DWR within 30 days of its adoption. 377 Huntington Beach 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 4-1 4 REFERENCES CDM Smith. (2021, March 30). Orange County Water Demand Forecast for MWDOC and OCWD Technical Memorandum. City of Huntington Beach. (2021, July). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. City of Huntington Beach. (2017, December). Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET). (2021a, March). Water Shortage Contingency Plan. http://www.mwdh2o.com/PDF_About_Your_Water/Draft_Metropolitan_WSCP_March_2021.pdf Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET). (2021b, June). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET). (1999, August). Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan. http://www.mwdh2o.com/PDF_About_Your_Water/2.4_Water_Supply_Drought_Management_Plan.pdf Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). (2016). Water Supply Allocation Plan. Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). (2019, August). Orange County Regional Water and Wastewater Hazard Mitigation Plan. Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County (WEROC). (2018, March). WEROC Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). 378 APPENDICES DWR Submittal Tables Table 8-1: Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels Table 8-2: Demand Reduction Actions Table 8-3: Supply Augmentation and Other Actions Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 Water Management Program Water Shortage Communication Plan Notice of Public Hearing Adopted WSCP Resolution 379 Arcadis. Improving quality of life. Arcadis U.S., Inc. 320 Commerce, Suite 200 Irvine California 92602 Phone: 714 730 9052 www.arcadis.com Maddaus Water Management, Inc. Danville, California 94526 Sacramento, California 95816 Phone: 916 730 1456 www.maddauswater.com 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 EXHIBIT “A” APPENDIX “L” – REDUCED DELTA RELIANCE REPORTING 397 The City of Huntington Beach REDUCED DELTA RELIANCE REPORTING L.1 Background Under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Reform Act of 2009, state and local public agencies proposing a covered action in the Delta, prior to initiating the implementation of that action, must prepare a written certification of consistency with detailed findings as to whether the covered action is consistent with applicable Delta Plan policies and submit that certification to the Delta Stewardship Council. Anyone may appeal a certification of consistency, and if the Delta Stewardship Council grants the appeal, the covered action may not be implemented until the agency proposing the covered action submits a revised certification of consistency, and either no appeal is filed, or the Delta Stewardship Council denies the subsequent appeal. An urban water supplier that anticipates participating in or receiving water from a proposed covered action such as a multi-year water transfer, conveyance facility, or new diversion that involves transferring water through, exporting water from, or using water in the Delta should provide information in their 2015 and 2020 Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) that can then be used in the covered action process to demonstrate consistency with Delta Plan Policy WR P1, Reduce Reliance on the Delta Through Improved Regional Water Self-Reliance (WR P1). WR P1 details what is needed for a covered action to demonstrate consistency with reduced reliance on the Delta and improved regional self-reliance. WR P1 subsection (a) states that: (a)Water shall not be exported from, transferred through, or used in the Delta if all of the following apply: (1)One or more water suppliers that would receive water as a result of the export, transfer, or use have failed to adequately contribute to reduced reliance on the Delta and improved regional self-reliance consistent with all of the requirements listed in paragraph (1)of subsection (c); (2)That failure has significantly caused the need for the export, transfer, or use; and (3)The export, transfer, or use would have a significant adverse environmental impact in the Delta. WR P1 subsection (c)(1) further defines what adequately contributing to reduced reliance on the Delta means in terms of (a)(1) above. (c)(1) Water suppliers that have done all the following are contributing to reduced reliance on the Delta and improved regional self-reliance and are therefore consistent with this policy: (A)Completed a current Urban or Agricultural Water Management Plan (Plan) which has been reviewed by the California Department of Water Resources for compliance with the applicable requirements of Water Code Division 6, Parts 2.55, 2.6, and 2.8; (B)Identified, evaluated, and commenced implementation, consistent with the implementation schedule set forth in the Plan, of all programs and projects included in the Plan that are locally cost effective and technically feasible which reduce reliance on the Delta; and (C)Included in the Plan, commencing in 2015, the expected outcome for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improvement in regional self-reliance. The expected outcome for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improvement in regional self- reliance shall be reported in the Plan as the reduction in the amount of water used, or in the percentage of water used, from the Delta watershed. For the purposes of reporting, water efficiency is considered a new source of water supply, consistent with Water Code section 1011(a). The analysis and documentation provided below include all of the elements described in WR P1(c)(1) that need to be included in a water supplier’s UWMP to support a certification of consistency for a future covered action. 398 L.2 Summary of Expected Outcomes for Reduced Reliance on the Delta As stated in WR P1 (c)(1)(C), the policy requires that, commencing in 2015, UWMPs include expected outcomes for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improved regional self- reliance. WR P1 further states that those outcomes shall be reported in the UWMP as the reduction in the amount of water used, or in the percentage of water used, from the Delta. The expected outcomes for the City of Huntington Beach (hereafter referred to as ‘City’) regional self-reliance were developed using the approach and guidance described in Appendix C of DWR’s Urban Water Management Plan Guidebook 2020 – Final Draft (Guidebook Appendix C) issued in March 2021. The data used in this analysis represent the total regional efforts of Metropolitan, the city, and its member agencies and were developed in conjunction with Metropolitan as part of the UWMP coordination process. The following provides a summary of the near-term (2025) and long-term (2045) expected outcomes for the city’s Delta reliance and regional self-reliance. The results show that as a region, the City, Metropolitan, and its member agencies are measurably reducing reliance on the Delta and improving regional self-reliance, both as an amount of water used and as a percentage of water used. Expected Outcomes for Regional Self-Reliance for the City x Near-term (2025) – Normal water year regional self-reliance is expected to increase by 18,185 AF from the 2010 baseline; this represents an increase of about 46.0 percent of 2025 normal water year retail demands (Table L-2). x Long-term (2040) – Normal water year regional self-reliance is expected to increase by nearly 20,830 AF from the 2010 baseline, this represents an increase of about 51.7 percent of 2045 normal water year retail demands (Table L-2). L.3 Demonstration of Reduced Reliance on the Delta The methodology used to determine the City’s reduced Delta reliance and improved regional self-reliance is consistent with the approach detailed in DWR’s UWMP Guidebook Appendix C, including the use of narrative justifications for the accounting of supplies and the documentation of specific data sources. Some of the key assumptions underlying the City’s demonstration of reduced reliance include: x All data were obtained from the current 2020 UWMP or previously adopted UWMPs and represent average or normal water year conditions. x All analyses were conducted at the service area level, and all data reflect the total contributions of the City and MWDOC, in conjunction with information provided by Metropolitan. x No projects or programs that are described in the UWMPs as “Projects Under Development” were included in the accounting of supplies. Baseline and Expected Outcomes In order to calculate the expected outcomes for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improved regional self-reliance, a baseline is needed to compare against. This analysis uses a normal water year representation of 2010 as the baseline, which is consistent with the approach described in the Guidebook Appendix C. Data for the 2010 baseline were taken from the city’s 2005 UWMP as the UWMPs generally do not provide normal water year data for the year that they are adopted (i.e., 2005 UWMP forecasts begin in 2010, 2010 UWMP forecasts begin in 2015, and so on). Consistent with the 2010 baseline data approach, the expected outcomes for reduced Delta reliance and improved regional self-reliance for 2015 and 2020 were taken from the City’s 2010 and 2015 UWMPs respectively. Expected outcomes for 2025-2040 are from the current 2020 UWMP. Documentation of the specific data sources and assumptions are included in the discussions below. Service Area Demands without Water Use Efficiency In alignment with the Guidebook Appendix C, this analysis uses normal water year demands, rather than normal 399 water year supplies to calculate expected outcomes in terms of the percentage of water used. Using normal water year demands serves as a proxy for the amount of supplies that would be used in a normal water year, which helps alleviate issues associated with how supply capability is presented to fulfill requirements of the UWMP Act versus how supplies might be accounted for to demonstrate consistency with WR P1. Because WR P1 considers water use efficiency savings a source of water supply, water suppliers such as the City need to explicitly calculate and report water use efficiency savings separate from service area demands to properly reflect normal water year demands in the calculation of reduced reliance. As explained in the Guidebook Appendix C, water use efficiency savings must be added back to the normal year demands to represent demands without water use efficiency savings accounted for; otherwise the effect of water use efficiency savings on regional self-reliance would be overestimated. Table L-1 shows the results of this adjustment for the City. Supporting narratives and documentation for the all of the data shown in Table L-1 are provided below. Table L-1 – Calculation of Water Use Efficiency Service Area Water Use Efficiency Demands Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Service Area Water Demands with Water Use Efficiency 36,931 32,616 28,090 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 Non-Potable Water Demands - - - Potable Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency 36,931 32,616 28,090 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 Total Service Area Population Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Service Area Population 191,004 197,787 201,327 203,713 206,499 207,479 207,402 Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Per Capita Water Use (GPCD) 173 147 125 116 115 113 112 Change in Per Capita Water Use from Baseline (GPCD) (25) (48) (57) (58) (59) (60) Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline 5,627 10,837 12,990 13,403 13,778 14,009 Total Service Area Water Demands Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Service Area Water Demands with Water Use Efficiency 36,931 32,616 28,090 26,399 26,524 26,339 26,093 Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline 5,627 10,837 12,990 13,403 13,778 14,009 Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency 36,931 38,243 38,927 39,388 39,927 40,116 40,102 400 Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency The service area demands shown in Table L-1 represent the total retail water demands for the City’s service area and may include municipal and industrial demands, agricultural demands, recycled, seawater barrier demands, and storage replenishment demands. These demand types and the modeling methodologies used to calculate them are described in Section 4-3 of the City’s UWMP. Non-Potable Water Demands Any non-potable water demands shown in Table L-1 represent demands for non-potable recycled water, water used for purposes such as surface reservoir storage, and replenishment water for groundwater basin recharge and sweater barrier demands. Additionally, non-potable supplies have a demand hardening effect due to the inability to shift non-potable supplies to meet potable water demands. When water use efficiency or conservation measures are implemented, they fall solely on the potable water users. This is consistent with the approach for water conservation reporting used by the State Water Resources Control Board. Note that the City of Fullerton does not have recycled water/non-potable water demands; this is demonstrated in Table L-1. Total Service Area Population The City’s total service area population as shown in Table L-1 come from the Center for Demographic Research, with actuals and projections further described in Section 3.4 of the City’s 2020 UWMP. Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline The water use efficiency numbers shown in Table L-1 represent the formulation that City utilized, consistent with Appendix C of the UWMP Guidebook approach. Service area demands, excluding non-potable demands, are divided by the service area population to get per capita water use in the service area in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) for each five-year period. The change in per capita water use from the baseline is the comparative GPCD from that five-year period compared to the 2010 baseline. Changes in per capita water use over time are then applied back to the City’s service area population to calculate the estimated WUE Supply. This estimated WUE Supply is considered an additional supply that may be used to show reduced reliance on Delta water supplies. The demand and water use efficiency data shown in Table L-1 were collected from the following sources: x Baseline (2010) values – City’s 2005 UWMP x 2015 values – City’s 2010 UWMP x 2020 values – City’s 2015 UWMP x 2025-2040 values – City’s 2020 UWMP It should be noted that the results of this calculation differ from what the City calculated under section 5.2 pertaining to the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7) due to differing formulas. L.4 Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance For a covered action to demonstrate consistency with the Delta Plan, WR P1 subsection (c)(1)(C) states that water suppliers must report the expected outcomes for measurable improvement in regional self-reliance. Table L-2 shows expected outcomes for supplies contributing to regional self-reliance both in amount and as a percentage. The numbers shown in Table L-2 represent efforts to improve regional self-reliance for the City’s entire service area and include the total contributions of the City. Supporting narratives and documentation for the all of the data shown in Table L-2 are provided below. The results shown in Table L-2 demonstrate that the City’s service area is measurably improving its regional self- reliance. In the near-term (2025), the expected outcome for normal water year regional self-reliance increases by 18,185 AF from the 2010 baseline; this represents an increase of about 46.0 percent of 2025 normal water year retail demands. In the long-term (2040), normal water year regional self-reliance is expected to increase by more than 20,830 AF from the 2010 baseline; this represents an increase of about 51.7 percent of 2040 normal water year 401 retail demands. Table L-2 – Supplies Contributing to Regional Self Reliance Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self- Reliance (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Water Use Efficiency - 5,627 10,837 12,990 13,403 13,778 14,009 Water Recycling - - - - - - - Stormwater Capture and Use Advanced Water Technologies 1,037 4,515 6,097 6,232 7,987 7,931 7,857 Conjunctive Use Projects Local and Regional Water Supply and Storage Projects Other Programs and Projects the Contribute to Regional Self-Reliance Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self- Reliance 1,037 10,141 16,934 19,222 21,390 21,709 21,866 Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency 36,931 38,243 38,927 39,388 39,927 40,116 40,102 Change in Regional Self Reliance (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self- Reliance 1,037 10,141 16,934 19,222 21,390 21,709 21,866 Change in Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 9,105 15,897 18,185 20,354 20,673 20,830 Change in Regional Self Reliance (As a Percent of Water Demand w/out WUE) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self- Reliance 2.8% 26.5% 43.5% 48.8% 53.6% 54.1% 54.5% Change in Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 23.7% 40.7% 46.0% 50.8% 51.3% 51.7% Water Use Efficiency The water use efficiency information shown in Table L-2 is taken directly from Table L-1 above. Water Recycling The water recycling values shown in Table L-2 reflect the total recycled water production in the service area as described in Section 4.3 of City’s UWMP. Note that Fullerton does not have recycled water production. Advanced Water Technologies (AWT) 402 AWT is calculated by multiplying the estimated GW production for that year (Section 6.1 of the City’s UWMP) with the percentage of Total Basin Production for that year. L.5 Reliance on Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed Metropolitan’s service area as a whole, reduces reliance on the Delta through investments in non-Delta water supplies, local water supplies and demand management measures. Quantifying the City’s investments in self-reliance, locally, regionally, and throughout Southern California is infeasible for the reasons as noted in Section C.6. Due to the regional nature of these investments, the City is relying on Metropolitan’s regional accounting of measurable reductions in supplies from the Delta Watershed. The results shown in Table A.11-3 demonstrate that Metropolitan’s service area, including the City, is measurably reducing its Delta reliance. In the near-term (2025), the expected outcome for normal water year reliance on supplies from the Delta watershed decreased by 301 TAF from the 2010 baseline; this represents a decrease of 3 percent of 2025 normal water year retail demands. In the long- term (2045), normal water year reliance on supplies from the Delta watershed decreased by 314 TAF from the 2010 baseline; this represents a decrease of just over 5 percent of 2045 normal water year retail demands. Table L-3 Metropolitan Reliance on Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 CVP/SWP Contract Supplies 1,472,000 1,029,000 984,000 1,133,000 1,130,000 1,128,000 1,126,000 1,126,000 Delta/Delta Tributary Diversions - - - - - - - - Transfers and Exchanges of Supplies from the Delta Watershed 20,000 44,000 91,000 58,000 52,000 52,000 52,000 52,000 Other Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed - - - - - - - - Total Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed 1,492,000 1,073,000 1,075,000 1,191,000 1,182,000 1,180,000 1,178,000 1,178,000 Service Area Demands without Water Use Efficiency (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Service Area Demands without Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 5,493,000 5,499,000 5,219,000 4,925,000 5,032,000 5,156,000 5,261,000 5,374,000 Change in Supplies from the Delta Watershed (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed 1,492,000 1,073,000 1,075,000 1,191,000 1,182,000 1,180,000 1,178,000 1,178,000 Change in Supplies from the Delta Watershed NA (419,000) (417,000) (301,000) (310,000) (312,000) (314,000) (314,000) Percent Change in Supplies from the Delta Watershed (As a Percent of Demand w/out WUE) Baseline (2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Percent of Supplies from the Delta Watershed 27.2% 19.5% 20.6% 24.2% 23.5% 22.9% 22.4% 21.9% Change in Percent of Supplies from the Delta Watershed NA -7.6% -6.6% -3.0% -3.7% -4.3% -4.8% -5.2% L.6 Infeasibility of Accounting Supplies from the Delta Watershed for Metropolitan’s Member Agencies and their Customers Metropolitan’s service area, as a whole, reduces reliance on the Delta through investments in non-Delta water supplies, local water supplies, and regional and local demand management measures. Metropolitan’s member agencies coordinate reliance on the Delta through their membership in Metropolitan, a regional cooperative providing wholesale water service to its 26 member agencies. Accordingly, regional reliance on the Delta can only be measured regionally—not by individual Metropolitan member agencies and not by the customers of those member agencies. Metropolitan’s member agencies, and those agencies’ customers, indirectly reduce reliance on the Delta through their collective efforts as a cooperative. Metropolitan’s member agencies do not control the amount of Delta water they receive from Metropolitan. Metropolitan manages a statewide integrated conveyance system consisting of its participation in the State Water Project (SWP), its Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) including Colorado River water resources, programs and water exchanges, and its regional storage portfolio. Along with the SWP, CRA, storage 403 programs, and Metropolitan’s conveyance and distribution facilities, demand management programs increase the future reliability of water resources for the region. In addition, demand management programs provide system-wide benefits by decreasing the demand for imported water, which helps to decrease the burden on the district’s infrastructure and reduce system costs, and free up conveyance capacity to the benefit of all member agencies. Metropolitan’s costs are funded almost entirely from its service area, with the exception of grants and other assistance from government programs. Most of Metropolitan’s revenues are collected directly from its member agencies. Properties within Metropolitan’s service area pay a property tax that currently provides approximately 8 percent of the fiscal year 2021 annual budgeted revenues. The rest of Metropolitan’s costs are funded through rates and charges paid by Metropolitan’s member agencies for the wholesale services it provides to them.1 Thus, Metropolitan’s member agencies fund nearly all operations Metro politan undertakes to reduce reliance on the Delta, including Colorado River Programs, storage facilities, Local Resources Programs and Conservation Programs within Metropolitan’s service area. Because of the integrated nature of Metropolitan’s systems and operations, and the collective nature of Metropolitan’s regional efforts, it is infeasible to quantify each of Metropolitan member agencies’ individual reliance on the Delta. It is infeasible to attempt to segregate an entity and a system that were designed to work as an integrated regional cooperative. In addition to the member agencies funding Metropolitan’s regional efforts, they also invest in their own local programs to reduce their reliance on any imported water. Moreover, the customers of those member agencies may also invest in their own local programs to reduce water demand. However, to the extent those efforts result in reduction of demands on Metropolitan, that reduction does not equate to a like reduction of reliance on the Delta. Demands on Metropolitan are not commensurate with demands on the Delta because most of Metropolitan member agencies receive blended resources from Metropolitan as determined by Metropolitan—not the individual member agency—and for most member agencies, the blend varies from month-to-month and year-to-year due to hydrology, operational constraints, use of storage and other factors. Colorado River Programs As a regional cooperative of member agencies, Metropolitan invests in programs to ensure the continued reliability and sustainability of Colorado River supplies. Metropolitan was established to obtain an allotment of Colorado River water, and its first mission was to construct and operate the CRA. The CRA consists of five pumping plants, 450 miles of high voltage power lines, one electric substation, four regulating reservoirs, and 242 miles of aqueducts, siphons, canals, conduits and pipelines terminating at Lake Mathews in Riverside County. Metropolitan owns, operates, and manages the CRA. Metropolitan is responsible for operating, maintaining, rehabilitating, and repairing the CRA, and is responsible for obtaining and scheduling energy resources adequate to power pumps at the CRA’s five pumping stations. Colorado River supplies include Metropolitan’s basic Colorado River apportionment, along with supplies that result from existing and committed programs, including supplies from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID)-Metropolitan Conservation Program, the implementation of the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) and related agreements, and the exchange agreement with San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA). The QSA established the baseline water use for each of the agreement parties and facilitates the transfer of water from agricultural agencies to urban uses. Since the QSA, additional programs have been implemented to increase Metropolitan’s CRA supplies. These include the PVID Land Management, Crop Rotation, and Water Supply Program, as well as the Lower Colorado River Water Supply Project. The 2007 Interim Guidelines provided for the coordinated operation of Lake Powell and Lake Mead, as well as the Intentionally Created Surplus (ICS) program that allows Metropolitan to store water in Lake Mead. Storage Investments/Facilities Surface and groundwater storage are critical elements of Southern California’s water resources strategy and help 1 A standby charge is collected from properties within the service areas of 21 of Metropolitan’s 26 member agencies, ranging from $5 to $14.20 per acre annually, or per parcel if smaller than an acre. Standby charges go towards those member agencies’ obligations to Metropolitan for the Readiness-to-Serve Charge. The total amount collected annually is approximately $43.8 million, approximately 2 percent of Metropolitan’s fiscal year 2021 annual budgeted revenues. 404 Metropolitan reduce its reliance on the Delta. Because California experiences dramatic swings in weather and hydrology, storage is important to regulate those swings and mitigate possible supply shortages. Surface and groundwater storage provide a means of storing water during normal and wet years for later use during dry years, when imported supplies are limited. The Metropolitan system, for purposes of meeting demands during times of shortage, regulating system flows, and ensuring system reliability in the event of a system outage, provides over 1,000,000 acre-feet of system storage capacity. Diamond Valley Lake provides 810,000 acre-feet of that storage capacity, effectively doubling Southern California’s previous surface water storage capacity. Other existing imported water storage available to the region consists of Metropolitan’s raw water reservoirs, a share of the SWP’s raw water reservoirs in and near the service area, and the portion of the groundwater basins used for conjunctive-use storage. Since the early twentieth century, DWR and Metropolitan have constructed surface water reservoirs to meet emergency, drought/seasonal, and regulatory water needs for Southern California. These reservoirs include Pyramid Lake, Castaic Lake, Elderberry Fo rebay, Silverwood Lake, Lake Perris, Lake Skinner, Lake Mathews, Live Oak Reservoir, Garvey Reservoir, Palos Verdes Reservoir, Orange County Reservoir, and Metropolitan’s Diamond Valley Lake (DVL). Some reservoirs such as Live Oak Reservoir, Garvey Reservoir, Palos Verdes Reservoir, and Orange County Reservoir, which have a total combined capacity of about 3,500 AF, are used solely for regulating purposes. The total gross storage capacity for the larger remaining reservoirs is 1,757,600 AF. However, not all of the gross storage capacity is available to Metropolitan; dead storage and storage allocated to others reduce the amount of storage that is available to Metropolitan to 1,665,200 AF. Conjunctive use of the aquifers offers another important source of dry year supplies. Unused storage in Southern California groundwater basins can be used to optimize imported water supplies, and the development of groundwater storage projects allows effective management and regulation of the region’s major imported supplies from the Colorado River and SWP. Over the years, Metropolitan has implemented conjunctive use through various programs in the service area; the following table lists the groundwater conjunctive use programs that have been developed in the region. 405 Metropolitan Demand Management Programs Demand management costs are Metropolitan’s expenditures for funding local water resource development programs and water conservation programs. These Demand Management Programs incentivize the development of local water supplies and the conservation of water to reduce the need to import water to deliver to Metropolitan’s member agencies. These programs are implemented below the delivery points between Metropolitan’s and its member agencies’ distribution systems and, as such, do not add any water to Metropolitan’s supplies. Rather, the effect of these downstream programs is to produce a local supply of water for the local agencies and to reduce demands by member agencies for water imported through Metropolitan’s system. The following discussions outline how Metropolitan funds local resources and conservation programs for the benefit of all of its member agencies and the entire Metropolitan service area. Notably, the history of demand management by Metropolitan’s member agencies and the local agencies that purchase water from Metropolitan’s members has spanned more than four decades. The significant history of the programs is another reason it would be difficult to attempt to assign a portion of such funding to any one individual member agency. Local Resources Programs In 1982, Metropolitan began providing financial incentives to its member agencies to develop new local supplies to assist in meeting the region’s water needs. Because of Metropolitan’s regional distribution system, these programs benefit all member agencies regardless of project location because they help to increase regional water supply reliability, reduce demands for imported water supplies, decrease the burden on Metropolitan’s infrastructure, reduce system costs and free up conveyance capacity to the benefit of all the agencies that rely on water from Metropolitan. For example, the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) operated by the Orange County Water District is the 406 world’s largest water purification system for indirect potable reuse. It was funded, in part, by Metropolitan’s member agencies through the Local Resources Program. Annually, the GWRS produces approximately 103,000 acre-feet of reliable, locally controlled, drought-proof supply of high-quality water to recharge the Orange County Groundwater Basin and protect it from seawater intrusion. The GWRS is a premier example of a regional project that significantly reduced the need to utilize imported water for groundwater replenishment in Metropolitan’s service area, increasing regional and local supply reliability and reducing the region’s reliance on imported supplies, including supplies from the State Water Project. Metropolitan’s local resource programs have evolved through the years to better assist Metropolitan’s member agencies in increasing local supply production. The following is a description and history of the local supply incentive programs. Local Projects Program In 1982, Metropolitan initiated the Local Projects Program (LPP), which provided funding to member agencies to facilitate the development of recycled water projects. Under this approach, Metropolitan contributed a negotiated up-front funding amount to help finance project capital costs. Participating member agencies were obligated to reimburse Metropolitan over time. In 1986, the LPP was revised, changing the up-front funding approach to an incentive-based approach. Metropolitan contributed an amount equal to the avoided State Water Project pumping costs for each acre-foot of recycled water delivered to end-use consumers. This funding incentive was based on the premise that local projects resulted in the reduction of water imported from the Delta and the associated pumping cost. The incentive amount varied from year to year depending on the actual variable power cost paid for State Water Project imports. In 1990, Metropolitan’s Board increased the LPP contribution to a fixed rate of $154 per acre-foot, which was calculated based on Metropolitan’s avoided capital and operational costs to convey, treat, and distribute water, and included considerations of reliability and service area demands. Groundwater Recovery Program The drought of the early 1990s sparked the need to develop additional local water resources, aside from recycled water, to meet regional demand and increase regional water supply reliability. In 1991, Metropolitan conducted the Brackish Groundwater Reclamation Study which determined that large amounts of degraded groundwater in the region were not being utilized. Subsequently, the Groundwater Recovery Program (GRP) was established to assist the recovery of otherwise unusable groundwater degraded by minerals and other contaminants, provide access to the storage assets of the degraded groundwater, and maintain the quality of groundwater resources by reducing the spread of degraded plumes. Local Resources Program In 1995, Metropolitan’s Board adopted the Local Resources Program (LRP), which combined the LPP and GRP into one program. The Board allowed for existing LPP agreements with a fixed incentive rate to convert to the sliding scale up to $250 per acre-foot, similar to GRP incentive terms. Those agreements that were converted to LRP are known as “LRP Conversions.” Competitive Local Projects Program In 1998, the Competitive Local Resources Program (Competitive Program) was established. The Competitive Program encouraged the development of recycled water and recovered groundwater through a process that emphasized cost- efficiency to Metropolitan, timing new production according to regional need while minimizing program administration cost. Under the Competitive Program, agencies requested an incentive rate up to $250 per acre-foot of production over 25 years under a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the development of up to 53,000 acre-feet per year of new water recycling and groundwater recovery projects. In 2003, a second RFP was issued for the development of an additional 65,000 acre-feet of new recycled water and recovered groundwater projects through the LRP. Seawater Desalination Program Metropolitan established the Seawater Desalination Program (SDP) in 2001 to provide financial incentives to member agencies for the development of seawater desalination projects. In 2014, seawater desalination projects became eligible for funding under the LRP, and the SDP was ended. 407 2007 Local Resources Program In 2006, a task force comprised of member agency representatives was formed to identify and recommend program improvements to the LRP. As a result of the task force process, the 2007 LRP was established with a goal of 174,000 acre-feet per year of additional local water resource development. The new program allowed for an open application process and eliminated the previous competitive process. This program offered sliding scale incentives of up to $250 per acre-foot, calculated annually based on a member agency’s actual local resource project costs exceeding Metropolitan’s prevailing water rate. 2014 Local Resources Program A series of workgroup meetings with member agencies was held to identify the reasons why there was a lack of new LRP applications coming into the program. The main constraint identified by the member agencies was that the $250 per acre-foot was not providing enough of an incentive for developing new projects due to higher construction costs to meet water quality requirements and to develop the infrastructure to reach end-use consumers located further from treatment plants. As a result, in 2014, the Board authorized an increase in the maximum incentive amount, provided alternative payment structures, included onsite retrofit costs and reimbursable services as part of the LRP, and added eligibility for seawater desalination projects. The current LRP incentive payment options are structured as follows: x Option 1 – Sliding scale incentive up to $340/AF for a 25-year agreement term x Option 2 – Sliding scale incentive up to $475/AF for a 15-year agreement term x Option 3 – Fixed incentive up to $305/AF for a 25-year agreement term On-site Retrofit Programs In 2014, Metropolitan’s Board also approved the On-site Retrofit Pilot Program which provided financial incentives to public or private entities toward the cost of small-scale improvements to their existing irrigation and industrial systems to allow connection to existing recycled water pipelines. The On-site Retrofit Pilot Program helped reduce recycled water retrofit costs to the end-use consumer which is a key constraint that limited recycled water LRP projects from reaching full production capacity. The program incentive was equal to the actual eligible costs of the on-site retrofit, or $975 per acre-foot of up-front cost, which equates to $195 per acre-foot for an estimated five years of water savings ($195/AF x 5 years) multiplied by the average annual water use in previous three years, whichever is less. The Pilot Program lasted two years and was successful in meeting its goal of accelerating the use of recycled water. In 2016, Metropolitan’s Board authorized the On-site Retrofit Program (ORP), with an additional budget of $10 million. This program encompassed lessons learned from the Pilot Program and feedback from member agencies to make the program more streamlined and improve its efficiency. As of fiscal year 2019/20, the ORP has successfully converted 440 sites, increasing the use of recycled water by 12,691 acre-feet per year. Stormwater Pilot Programs In 2019, Metropolitan’s Board authorized both the Stormwater for Direct Use Pilot Program and a Stormwater for Recharge Pilot Program to study the feasibility of reusing stormwater to help meet regional demands in Southern California. These pilot programs are intended to encourage the development, monitoring, and study of new and existing stormwater projects by providing financial incentives for their construction/retrofit and monitoring/reporting costs. These pilot programs will help evaluate the potential benefits delivered by stormwater capture projects and provide a basis for potential future funding approaches. Metropolitan’s Board authorized a total of $12.5 million for the stormwater pilot programs ($5 million for the District Use Pilot and $7.5 million for the Recharge Pilot). Current Status and Results of Metropolitan’s Local Resource Programs Today, nearly one-half of the total recycled water and groundwater recovery production in the region has been developed with an incentive from one or more of Metropolitan’s local resource programs. During fiscal year 2020, Metropolitan provided about $13 million for production of 71,000 acre-feet of recycled water for non-potable and indirect potable uses. Metropolitan provided about $4 million to support projects that produced about 50,000 acre- 408 feet of recovered groundwater for municipal use. Since 1982, Metropolitan has invested $680 million to fund 85 recycled water projects and 27 groundwater recovery projects that have produced a cumulative total of about 4 million acre-feet. Conservation Programs Metropolitan’s regional conservation programs and approaches have a long history. Decades ago, Metropolitan recognized that demand management at the consumer level would be an important part of balancing regional supplies and demands. Water conservation efforts were seen as a way to reduce the need for imported supplies and offset the need to transport or store additional water into or within the Metropolitan service area. The actual conservation of water takes place at the retail consumer level. Regional conservation approaches have proven to be effective at reaching retail consumers throughout Metropolitan’s service area and successfully implementing water saving devices, programs and practices. Through the pooling of funding by Metropolitan’s member agencies, Metropolitan is able to engage in regional campaigns with wide-reaching impact. Regional investments in demand management programs, of which conservation is a key part along with local supply programs, benefit all member agencies regardless of project location. These programs help to increase regional water supply reliability, reduce demands for imported water supplies, decrease the burden on Metropolitan’s infrastructure, reduce system costs, and free up conveyance capacity to the benefit of all member agencies. Incentive-Based Conservation Programs Conservation Credits Program In 1988, Metropolitan’s Board approved the Water Conservation Credits Program (Credits Program). The Credits Program is similar in concept to the Local Projects Program (LPP). The purpose of the Credits Program is to encourage local water agencies to implement effective water conservation projects through the use of financial incentives. The Credits Program provides financial assistance for water conservation projects that reduce demands on Metropolitan’s imported water supplies and require Metropolitan’s assistance to be financially feasible. Initially, the Credits Program provided 50 percent of a member agency’s program cost, up to a maximum of $75 per acre-foot of estimated water savings. The $75 Base Conservation Rate was established based Metropolitan’s avoided cost of pumping SWP supplies. The Base Conservation Rate has been revisited by Metropolitan’s Board and revised twice since 1988, from $75 to $154 per acre-foot in 1990 and from $154 to $195 per acre-foot in 2005. In fiscal year 2020 Metropolitan processed more than 30,400 rebate applications totaling $18.9 million. Member Agency Administered Program Some member agencies also have unique programs within their service areas that provide local rebates that may differ from Metropolitan’s regional program. Metropolitan continues to support these local efforts through a member agency administered funding program that adheres to the same funding guidelines as the Credits Program. The Member Agency Administered Program allows member agencies to receive funding for local conservation efforts that supplement, but do not duplicate, the rebates offered through Metropolitan’s regional rebate program. Water Savings Incentive Program There are numerous commercial entities and industries within Metropolitan’s service area that pursue unique savings opportunities that do not fall within the general rebate programs that Metropolitan provides. In 2012, Metropolitan designed the Water Savings Incentive Program (WSIP) to target these unique commercial and industrial projects. In addition to rebates for devices, under this program, Metropolitan provides financial incentives to businesses and industries that created their own custom water efficiency projects. Qualifying custom projects can receive funding for permanent water efficiency changes that result in reduced potable demand. Non-Incentive Conservation Programs In addition to its incentive-based conservation programs, Metropolitan also undertakes additional efforts throughout its service area that help achieve water savings without the use of rebates. Metropolitan’s non-incentive conservation efforts include: x residential and professional water efficient landscape training classes 409 x water audits for large landscapes x research, development and studies of new water saving technologies x advertising and outreach campaigns x community outreach and education programs x advocacy for legislation, codes, and standards that lead to increased water savings Current Status and Results of Metropolitan’s Conservation Programs Since 1990, Metropolitan has invested $824 million in conservat ion rebates that have resulted in a cumulative savings of 3.27 million acre-feet of water. These investments include $450 million in turf removal and other rebates during the last drought which resulted in 175 million square feet of lawn turf removed. During fiscal year 2020, 1.06 million acre-feet of water is estimated to have been conserved. This annual total includes Metropolitan’s Conservation Credits Program; code-based conservation achieved through Metropolitan-sponsored legislation; building plumbing codes and ordinances; reduced consumption resulting from changes in water pricing; and pre-1990 device retrofits. Infeasibility of Accounting Regional Investments in Reduced Reliance Below the Regional Level The accounting of regional investments that contribute to reduced reliance on supplies from the Delta watershed is straightforward to calculate and report at the regional aggregate level. However, any similar accounting is infeasible for the individual member agencies or their customers. As described above, the region (through Metropolitan) makes significant investments in projects, programs and other resources that reduce reliance on the Delta. In fact, all of Metropolitan’s investments in Colorado River supplies, groundwater and surface storage, local resources development and demand management measures that reduce reliance on the Delta are collectively funded by revenues generated from the member agencies through rates and charges. Metropolitan’s revenues cannot be matched to the demands or supply production history of an individual agency, or consistently across the agencies within the service area. Each project or program funded by the region has a different online date, useful life, incentive rate and structure, and production schedule. It is infeasible to account for all these things over the life of each project or program and provide a nexus to each member agency’s contributions to Metropolitan’s revenue stream over time. Accounting at the regional level allows for the incorporation of the local supplies and water use efficiency programs done by member agenc ies and their customers through both the regional programs and through their own specific local programs. As shown above, despite the infeasibility of accounting reduced Delta reliance below the regional level, Metropolitan’s member agencies and their customers have together made substantial contributions to the region’s reduced reliance. References http://www.mwdh2o.com/WhoWeAre/Board/Board-Meeting/Board%20Archives/2017/12- Dec/Reports/064863458.pdf http://www.mwdh2o.com/PDF_About_Your_Water/Annual_Achievement_Report.pdf http://www.mwdh2o.com/WhoWeAre/Board/Board-Meeting/Board%20Archives/2016/12- Dec/Reports/064845868.pdf http://www.mwdh2o.com/WhoWeAre/Board/Board-Meeting/Board%20Archives/2012/05%20- %20May/Letters/064774100.pdf http://www.mwdh2o.com/WhoWeAre/Board/Board-Meeting/Board%20Archives/2020/10%20- %20Oct/Letters/10132020%20BOD%209-3%20B-L.pdf http://www.mwdh2o.com/WhoWeAre/Board/Board-Meeting/Board%20Archives/2001/10- October/Letters/003909849.pdf 410 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACHCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACHCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACHCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN & WATER SHORTAGE2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN & WATER SHORTAGE2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN & WATER SHORTAGE2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN & WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANCONTINGENCY PLANCONTINGENCY PLANCONTINGENCY PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach (“City”) will hold a public hear- ing on June 1, 2021, or as soon thereafter as the Agenda permits, to consider the City’s proposed 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (“UWMP”), 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (“WSCP”), and Appendix L, an Addendum to its 2015 UWMP, in advance of their proposed adoption. The public hearing is being held in accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656; herein referred to as the “Act”). The Act requires “every urban water supplier providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually” to prepare, adopt, and file a UWMP with the California Department of Water Resources and review and update its UWMP every five years. The purpose of the public hearing will be to solicit public comment prior to adop- tion of the proposed updated UWMP, WSCP, and Appendix L. Copies of the proposed 2020 UWMP, 2020 WSCP, and Appendix L, an Addendum to the 2015 UWMP are available for public inspection at the Public Works Counter at City Hall, which is located at 2000 Main Street, on the first floor, dur- ing normal business hours, from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. It will also be available on the City’s website at https://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/. City’s public hearing is scheduled for June 1, 2021 at 6:00 PM as a part of the City Council Meeting. The City offers several ways to view City Council meetings live or on-demand. Council meetings are livestreamed on HBTV Channel 3. In addition, live and archived meetings for on-demand viewing can be accessed from https://huntingtonbeach.legistar.com/calendar, or from any Roku or Apple device by downloading the Cablecast Screenweave App and searching for the City of Huntington Beach channel. PUBLIC COMMENTSPUBLIC COMMENTSPUBLIC COMMENTSPUBLIC COMMENTS: At 6:00 PM, individuals wishing to attend the meeting to provide a comment on agendized or nonagendized items may enter Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528Zoom Webinar ID 971 5413 0528 via computer device, or by phone at (669) 900- 6833. The Webinar can be accessed here: https://huntingtonbeach.zoom.us/j/97154130528. Attendees utilizing comput- er devices to request to speak may select the “Raise Hand” feature in the Webinar Controls section. Attendees enter- ing the Webinar and requesting to speak by phone can enter *9 to enable the “Raise Hand” feature, followed by the *6 prompt that unmutes their handheld device microphone. Once the Mayor opens Public Comments, speakers will be provided a 15-minute window to raise their hands, and will be prompted to speak when the City Clerk announces their name or the last three digits of their phone number. Speakers are encouraged, but not required to identify them- selves by name. Each person may have up to 3 minutes to speak, but the Mayor, at her discretion, may reduce the time allowance if warranted by the volume of calls. The Public Comment process will only be active during designat- ed portions of the agenda (Public Comments and/or Public Hearing). After a speaker concludes their comment, their microphone will be muted, but they may remain in Webinar attendance for the duration of the meeting. Robin Estanislau, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 714-536-5227 http://huntingtonbeachca.gov/HBPublicComments/ Publication Dates: May 18thth and 25th, 2021 11462461 411 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California Public HearingJune 1, 2021 •2020 Urban Water Management Plan •2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan •Ordinance No. 4233 Amending Chapter 14.18 of the HB Municipal Code •Appendix L –Addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 412 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) •City’s planning elements to satisfy the UWMP Act •2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) •City’s planned actions to respond to water shortage conditions •Ordinance No. 4233 •An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program •Appendix L –Addendum to the 2015 UWMP •Amendment to include Reduced Delta Reliance reporting to satisfy Delta Plan Policy WR P1 Public Hearing Items 413 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983 •UWMP is a long-term planning document to ensure adequate water supplies •Required for agencies supplying more than 3,000 customers, or 3,000 acre-feet of water annually •Update is required every five (5) years on July 1 2020 UWMP -Background 414 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •Long-term Assessment (20-25 years) •Near-term Assessment (5 years) NEW •Annual Assessment (due July 1) NEW Reliability Assessments2020 UWMP –Assessment OverviewWater Supply Water Demand Water Reliability 415 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •Long-term drought assessment for 2025-2045 in 5-year increments •Near-term drought risk assessment for 2021-2025 •Water Shortage Contingency Plan •Annual Supply and Demand Assessment Procedures •Six (6) Shortage Stages with corresponding Shortage Response Actions •Seismic Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan •Energy Intensity Reporting •Reduced Delta Reliance Reporting 2020 UWMP –New Items 416 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •City is projected to meet full- service demands through 2045 •MET’s 2020 UWMP concludes they can meet full-service demands of all member agencies through 2045 •OCWD projects a Basin Pumping Percentage of 85% through 2045 •Projected 1.7% decrease in water usage from 2025-2045 •Projected future ratio of 85% groundwater and 15% import water after GWRS Phase 3 done 2020 UWMP –Key Findings 417 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •New Requirement of 2018 Wa ter Conservation Legislation •Included in 2020 UWMP, but also a standalone document •Key Elements •Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment •Six (6) Wa ter Shortage Levels •Shortage Response Actions •Communication Protocols 2020 WSCP -Overview 418 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California 2020 WSCP –Annual Assessment Framework 419 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California Six Shortage Levels & Response ActionsShortage Level % Shortage Range Shortage Response Actions 0 0% (Normal)No supply reductions are anticipated in this year.The City proceeds with planned water efficiency best practices 1 Up to 10%City notifies its water users, a consumer demand reduction of up to 10% is necessary to make more efficient use of water and respond to existing water conditions. 2 11% to 20%City notifies its water users, a consumer demand reduction of up to 20% is necessary to make more efficient use of water and respond to existing water conditions. City shall implement the mandatory Level 2 conservation measures identified in the WSCP. 3 21% to 30%City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 30% consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption,sanitation and fire protection. 4 31% to 40%City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 40% consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption,sanitation and fire protection. 5 41% to 50% City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that up to 50% or more consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. 6 >50% City declares a water shortage emergency condition pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its residents and businesses that greater than 50% or more consumer demand reduction is required to ensure sufficient supplies for human consumption, sanitation and fire protection. 420 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program •Chapter Title Revision •Before: Conservation and Water Supply Shortage Program •After: Water Shortage Contingency Response •Based on the Model Water Shortage Contingency Response Ordinance developed by MWDOC •References the WSCP for processes, procedures, and communication protocols during water shortages Ordinance No. 4233 421 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •Delta Plan Policy WR P1 was developed and implemented by the Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Reform Act 2009) •Actions or projects subject to Delta Plan policies are called “covered actions” •Agencies must demonstrate consistency with applicable policies to proceed with implementation of covered action projects Appendix L –Addendum to the 2015 UWMP 422 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California •MET working toward building the Delta Conveyance Project •Addendum to the 2015 UWMP is required by MET, MWDOC, and all agencies receiving water from the Delta, including HB •DWR guidance issued late-2020 •2020 UWMP Guidebook Appendix C helps suppliers provide reporting in accordance with Delta Plan Policy WR P1 Appendix L –Addendum to the 2015 UWMP 423 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California A.Adopt Resolution No. 2021-34, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011”; and, B.Adopt Resolution No. 2021-35, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011”; and, C.Approve for introduction Ordinance No. 4233, “An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Water Management Program; and, D.Adopt Resolution No. 2021-33, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the Amendment to the Adopted 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Pursuant to AB797 and SB1011.” Recommendation Actions 424 City of Huntington Beach, CaliforniaCity of Huntington Beach, California End of Public HearingJune 1, 2021 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 City of Huntington Beach File #:21-477 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY:Chris Slama, Director of Community & Library Services Subject: Consideration of Proposed Pilot Concert Program in conjunction with the Pacific Airshow Statement of Issue: Since 2014, the City has followed a practice of denying large-format, ticketed concert events at the City Beach. Given prior City Council direction, there is an opportunity to coordinate a pilot concert program to be embedded into the 2021 Pacific Airshow event in October 2021. Financial Impact: If authorized by the City Council, all direct public safety staffing and operational costs associated with the proposed pilot concert program will be reimbursed by the promoter. In addition, a $5.00 per person charge will be paid to the City by the event promoter, Code Four, to offset various indirect administrative costs. Recommended Action: A) Authorize a one-time pilot concert program at the City Beach, to be embedded into the Air Show event on the evenings of October 1 and October 2, 2021; and, B) Cap attendance for the concert at no more than 12,000 people per evening; and , C) Direct that the event would be authorized at the City Beach located adjacent to Beach Boulevard / Pacific Coast Highway; and D) Through the Special Event permitting process, direct that staff require the following: ·Event organizer would have to provide a full event security plan vetted and approved by the Police Department; and, ·Full general liability and ABC liability insurance coverage would be required; and, ·Require direct payment for all City-provided services, including public safety costs, and institute a $5 per person charge to be paid by Code Four (the event promoter) to offset various indirect administrative costs. Alternative Action(s): Do not approve the recommended actions, and direct staff accordingly. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™449 File #:21-477 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Analysis: In the early 1990’s, the City permitted concerts and live music in conjunction with Specific Events at the beach. Around 2010, the concerts coordinated as part of the U.S. Open of Surfing began to grow in popularity and size. In 2013, a civil disturbance occurred downtown during the U.S. Open of Surfing, an event which incorporated a music/concert program component. Of note, the 2013 civil disturbance did not occur on the same day as a concert. Following a City Council Study Session in 2014, the determination was made to employ a practice of denying any Specific Event permit that contemplated large-format ticketed concerts. Further, on August 20, 2018, the City Council directed that the practice should be maintained. The City is regularly approached by professional event promoters regarding possible production of large-scale ticketed concerts at two City venues. One such venue is at the City Beach. Our current practice has been to allow live entertainment as part of smaller scale events focused at Pier Plaza, such as Surfin’ Sundays.A small concert venue has also been allowed south of the Pier as part of the US Open of Surfing. Central Park is the other City venue where concerts are requested. We have hosted ticketed and non-ticketed cultural festivals at Central Park. The Cherry Blossom Festival, Pacific Islander Festival, and the BB Jazz Festival are event examples that incorporate significant live music components. These events typically benefit local non-profit organizations. Within City limits, the State Beach also frequently hosts many large-scale concert events, with minimal issues. The State considers concerts to be a high quality outdoor recreational experience, and has embraced concerts on State Beach property for many years. Since 2013, Huntington State Beach has hosted several multi-day concert festivals on the sand. Typically, attendance at these events is capped at around 12,000-15,000 people per day. Further, the State Beach charges concert promoters $10.00 per person, which covers costs for applicable public safety efforts and permit fees. Starting in 2022, the State will be hosting large-scale concerts two weekends per year, in the Spring and in the Fall. On April 5, 2021, the City Council voted unanimously to direct staff to develop updated procedures that would “…facilitate ticketed, stand-alone musical entertainment events at certain appropriate City venues.” Staff was also asked to assess the viability of instituting a per-person charge to reimburse City costs. Benefits of bringing larger scale concert-type events to Huntington Beach include strengthening our “Surf City” brand, enhancing community pride, and providing an additional outdoor recreational opportunity. As with all large community events here in Huntington Beach, there is opportunity for increased tourism and positive economic impact. While those benefits can be significant, concerns also have to be weighed in the consideration of hosting large-scale events. These include challenges such as impacted traffic and parking, noise disturbances, and commercial/residential impacts. Large group gatherings also create potential for City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™450 File #:21-477 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 public safety impacts. Based on City Council direction, staff has been reviewing the possibility of permitting large-scale, multi-day musical events at the City Beach and at Central Park. City Beach event considerations identified include: ·Possibly permit two multi-day events per year - one in the Spring and one in the Fall ·Concert attendance should be capped at no more than 12,000 attendees ·Concert venues should be limited to the area between Huntington Street and Beach Blvd. Huntington Central Park event considerations identified include: ·Possibly permit two multi-day concert events per year, aside from existing annual permitted events ·Events could be allowed between Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends ·Concert attendance should be capped at no more than 3,000 attendees ·Potential venue locations could be at the Huntington Central Park Bandstand or at the Huntington Central Park Sports Complex facility As staff works to refine and develop the overall concert program, an opportunity to conduct a pilot trial concert has presented itself. Code Four has approached the City regarding the possibility of embedding a concert into the 2021 Pacific Airshow event. That proposal is as follows: ·Concert would occur on Friday, October 1, and Saturday, October 2. ·Attendance would be capped at 12,000 maximum. ·Event would be located adjacent to Beach Boulevard / Pacific Coast Highway. ·Musical acts contemplated for Friday evening are of the Sammy Hagar / REO Speedwagon genre. ·Musical acts contemplated for Saturday evening are of the Florida Georgia Line / Nelly genre . If the pilot concert program concept is authorized by City Council, staff would permit the event through our existing Special Event permitting process in conjunction with the Pacific Airshow event. Key permitting considerations would include: ·Code Four would have to provide a full event security plan vetted and approved by the Police Department. ·General liability and ABC liability insurance coverage would be required. ·Direct payment for all City provided services would be required, including public safety costs ·Per prior City Council direction, consider charging Code Four $5.00 per person to be paid to the City as part of the permitting process to recover administrative costs. Environmental Status: Not applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™451 File #:21-477 MEETING DATE:6/15/2021 Community Engagement Economic Development & Housing Attachment(s): None. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/9/2021Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™452