|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
MINUTES, LETTER and VIDEO. From the Pescadero Municipal Advisory Council (PMAC) meeting on Tuesday, November 12th, 2024 at 6:00pm, as a hybrid meeting. Public agency people commenting were CALFIRE’s Deputy Chief Jonathan Cox, San Mateo County Planning’s Assistant Director Sophie Mintier and Deputy County Executive Adam Ely.
LINK to PMAC Video/Audio for 11/12/2024
Letter to LAFCO from Mark Wallace, Chair, Pescadero Municipal Advisory Council (PMAC)
on behalf of the members of PMAC
MINUTES: Agenda Item: LAFCO Annexation, CSA-11.
- Council will discuss the prospective extension of CSA-11 to the high school, and related issues
- Amy Wooliever gives presentation
- Been in contact with SMC since 2015
- Provides water
- 2015 issues several corrective actions
- As a result we have been using bottled water
- Asking for connection for CSA-11 for the school
- 2016. water assessment and provided existing wells and water quality options
- 2017. 1.74 acres was designated as the preferred location for the fire station
- 2019. as part of the evaluation a second well was drilled and did not produce sufficient flow
- Draft feasibility report for an extension of CSA 11
- March 2020 work was accepted
- A second grant authorized through Prop 1 funded
- Grant is focused on consolidated water sources
- 2021. Annexation of CSA 11 – necessary for water
- Land loss – not in district – CA coastal commission in 2023 considered to lose as part of the condition of fire station approval.
- The land has been historically farmed; not under lease by any farmer
- CSA 11 rates have not been adjusted since 2012
- Will increase the price to CSA 11 users, adjusted because they have not been raised, not because of the project, but because the fee has been stagnant
BJ Burns Farm Bureau Representative
- Believes the LAFCO meeting in September there was not enough information
- False information and the public should be a part of it
- CSA-11 Clients should have been present
- Farm Bureaus is asking for a hydraulic study and another investigation on another site course for water.
- BJ Burns has a well on the property that could serve the purpose
- That farm land has been farmed
- 2006 and the new school still hasn’t been built, a promise that was made
- Lack of accountability and the people should know
- You have to have a board that pays for the project before the project is being done
- CSA 11 clients should be worried because of the quantity of water
- There 16-18% leakage in the line
- Requesting a neutral party to come and analyze the water source.
- Primary agricultural ground and the CA coastal commission is needed to find 2 times that amount.
- POST is to create a parcel and create a restriction.
- 3.5 acres that have never been farmed, not a parcel that POST will create that will never be farmed.
- Encourage they find the parcel and find the 3.5 acres for the firehouse
Jonathan Cox
- Location of the fire station
- Members of the steering committee for the fire location and facility, highlighting the High School as the most viable location.
- Criteria:
- Outside flood plain/ above flood plain
- Access to community, nearby for response time
- Sewage needed
- Land size to accommodate site
- We can’t do our job because of the susceptibility to flooding
- Station 59 is the only career staffed station
- Response time requirements (advanced life support member)
- Always a paramedic on duty
- We are Zone 5/ remote
- Have to meet a response time of 21:59 throughout the entire district.
- Contractual Obligation
- During the flood season we are cut off from our areas.
- Significantly reduces ability to respond in time
- Firefighters don’t feel safe.
- Work complaints due to mold/unsafe conditions
- August 2013 Board of supervisors accepted the recommendation for the new site
- August 2015 steering committee was formed
- Site selection matrix – (image shared)
- High School Location that works for the report
- November 2016 – majority of the steering committee recommended the school site and this was the most preferable.
- Project has been in the works for over 10 years
- Drilled a test well that did not produce sufficient water quality
- Brought the water extension and the county has put through the entire process.
- 2019 began defining the project scope and seeing what approvals will be necessary (marking the impact)
- Studied the biological and cultural impacts/ wetlands delineation prepared.
- State water board provided initial funding
- Key changes to the project:
- Required the project to mitigate on prime ag soils
- Need to permanently protect 3.5 acres elsewhere in the proximity of the project
- Edgar – project manager for station 59
- Architecture firm has been hired
- May 2024 in project status to PMAC
- Held 2 community meetings
- Architectures have completed 20% of the design
- Prequalification for contractors which will be opened to seek a construction company
- Building is 12,00 square foot
- Community facilities for first aid
Questions from Council:
Rob Skinner: Primary issue is the mitigation, 2:1 and still needs to be done. There was talk of a 2 story building and that is what was preferred and that is disparaging. And that it looks appropriate for the community. Not ultra modern, suggestions for a water tower, another serious concern what happened from the first bond issue.
Amy Wooliever, La Honda-Pescadero Unified Superintendent: Not in bond language to have a football field
Rob Skinner: I don’t recall the number. Cost the community an arm and a leg. Project manager company, BlackRock, hired the same company overseeing the first issue. Several reasons on why we should slow this down. And unfortunately, asking for a slow down. None of the CSA 11 issues were consulted. No issues with that. Property itself. Requesting a slow down, an aquifer.
Dr. Patrick Horn: We have had several presentations and have some questions; Determine some facts. Concerns that I have.
What kind of action are we going to take as a recommendation to LAFCO? Rob mentioned calling in. My reason, and I have never heard anything about it. Attempted to contact us and didn’t hear from us. Asked the county on how to attempt to contact us. The role is to gather input from the community. Information sharing that is necessary, and the reason to call in the LAFCO meeting and read the report and extremely concerned about the life of the aquifer. Expected to experience supply disruptions in 30 years. Face that issue now, so we can do something about it. Appeal stated that the additional tapping of the water aquifer would call upon a problem 20 years from now. How do we do that and what are those solutions. Alternatives have not been explored. Aquifer study as a line item.
- Regarding the clean water at the school, RCD offered to become a water filtration system. Not the school’s responsibility. Not a complicated
- Why doesn’t the school feel it could maintain a water system?
- Water systems require credentialed people to oversee them. Can’t have a water system. $65-$70,000 a year. Butano Canyon and maintenance.
- Steering committee for the fire station and have said that they are in shock and how have
Memo was issued in 2016. Memo stated that in 2016 mentioned that the school site recommended the site as the preferred location. Community meetings and felt that they were very superficial.
Response: station was not designed before the report.
Operationally efficient for the station.
Is it a good idea to build the fire station there?
Response:
- CSA water supply yield and feasibility study (2021)
- Operating in overdraft since 1992
- Study looked at the near term and long term impact
- Near: 1 and 3 can handle the
- Storage tanks have sufficient buffer
- Long term: when looking at water levels, without the project and demand
- Well 1 would drop by 2039
- Well #3 (primary)
- With additional demand by about 4% it found that well 3 in 21 years with the project forecast.
- Pumping water levels
- #1 break suction in 2057 (can be lowered further)
- #3 break suction 2064 – lowered to extend lifetime of that well
- Long term CSA 11 has sufficient demand for the next 30-40 years
- Important to look for long term additional water sources
- Many systems need to look for fresh water sources in the next 30-40 years
Dr. Kassi Talbot: What is your understanding of the well capacity and the CSA 11 fee?
- Rates proposed for the board in this incoming January
- Does not reflect the additional revenue
- Rate study to develop the proposed water rates
- Unfortunate coincidence but not because of this project
Mark Wallace: land use mitigation question:
Response: CA coastal commission gave us how we were to convert the prime ag soils.
Certified by board and what went forward and the Coastal development. Trying to find land with equal quality soils and meet the requirements of the CA coastal commission. We have studied many parcels. Began working with POST and discussing local sources. The CA coastal commission has given their blessing on that concept.
Mark Wallace: parcels have not been selected yet. CSA 11 there is an urgent need to explore other water sources we will run into trouble in 70 ish years. Response: yes, this necessitates finding additional sources.
Mark: has been on council for years and communication has been difficult and the thing that strikes us in this issue and this has been going on for a long time. Recommended by committee in 2016.
Public Comment:
BJ Burns: Told to find a new piece of property and now that got switched around. POST is subdividing and they shouldn’t be subdividing. Senseless for what they are talking about. Asking about RCD, talked to KellyX and turned down every time.
Dante: Wells, locations of wells. Wells outside the county. We are gonna spend 4 million for the school and others are in need of safe water. Interference in between the wells. The new well is deeper and so many feet above sea level. Basically we have 1 well out there. The other thing about the fire house selection process. We looked even west that didn’t revolve around the flooding and now we are hearing the deciding factor was not one side of the flood plain.
- Response: remove barracks and have a station to support the crew.
Farm Bureau Attorney: Practicing environmental law for years. Farm Bureau agrees that water to the school is a priority. Considerable amount of data gaps: 2021 ground water report should have been conducted before this project was well underway. Well life is going to be cut shorter and 30% reduction of the life of the aquifer. It becomes a school issue as well when the pump fails. Everyone should be involved and this is a community issue. Asking LAFCO to stop and give pause to allow community members to weigh in. What was the extent of the 2019 analysis? Come forward with sustainable solution
Catherine Peery: Wanted to address the overdraft and there have been many. There were other water studies done. There were well studies done. Became clear that you can drill wells at 250 ft. lot of acres that belong to the county that can add to CSA11. We have an abundance of water nor are we limited. It is not insurmountable. Dante, I feel, was trying to say that. The overdraft problem is solvable.
Ash: Teaches environmental science at PHS. My primary concern is considering the community priorities, there could be potential other sources in the future. We have to consider 1.) The school has been without water for decades and can’t ignore the fact that it will affect CSA 11 clients. 2.) we are going to have to look at projects 50,60,100 years in the future. Students have been cleaning their hands with contaminated water and shortage of water and have to shut down school when there is no drinking water. Kids are our future here and we need them to be able to feel pride in where they live. When it comes to what we represent and what we portray it is kind of embarrassing. Other schools come and they can drink from there and it is embarrassing. Land use and take land into consideration. Is it being farmed sustainably? Is it contributing to the pollution of our water.
Cal FIRE: Labor organization protecting our state from wildfires. Address a pressing issue. The urgent need for a fire station that does not flood. This is a direct threat for public safety. Requires movements of equipment around the county. In a rural area like ours this is a reality and every second counts. Divert attention to salvage their own equipment. Waiting for other people to respond. Fire station should be a hub of readiness and not a liability. These damages are costly and require financial resources from the county. It is about a resilient future and it needs to be done now.
Ophelie Vico: Access to clean water is essential to the success of our communities’ children and provide safety and reliability and strengthen the rural residents for years to come.
Ana Polacek: Beyond the drinking water is that the well goes out and the bathrooms just stop working. We have portopotties and that is constant. How do you retain teachers when the building is not falling apart? We should have multiple sources of fresh water.
Lisa Mateja: Years and years of hard work to make this project possible. I want to talk about how long and deliberate this project has been. No more stalling and this has been stalled. And this project works really well. The school district should be focused on education and not a water company. Extend deep thanks to our community.
Dante Silvestre: Would like to see a tank and see that as a back up in case of failure and it not just coming from one location. System maintained by the county and well system. 1982 thats our evacuation center. County brought a big stainless steel trailer. CSA 11 water is more safe water
Peter Marchi: Fire station to be hooked up and others can not. A few years back and what property has not been famed and the committee for many generations and they have weighed in on this as well. 8 years ago, the superintendent asked years ago, we were no longer using our filtration system. It was a minimal system and it was designed to serve. We have tried to and its not a lot of water out there.
Cotton Skinner: Everybody in this room wants clean water. Knows what it’s like to live in a flooded environment. We are not opposing each other. Someone is dropping the ball. Take two issues and don’t try to make the puzzle pieces fit.
Corina Rodriguez: Attended school here and stands in support of CSA 11 and support of the high school. Disappointed that it took this long to have this conversation. This debate is whether we give clean water to a public school. As a human who cares about their wellbeing, and as a mother and a homeowner with a CSA 11 extension. Regardless of this I care about the community and support this proposal. And it’s not perfect but it gives a clear path on how we move forward. Children have waited too long for this.
Clark: Resident in Dearborn for 17 years. Member of Cuesta La Honda Guild board. When we were able to extend for clean drinking water and extend it to children. Better service for emergency services is even better. There is no reason to slow it down. We are at the point of being ridiculous.
Any Lagow: Whether to annex the high school site. That is all that is up for discussion. So everybody agrees that the school deserves clean water. Tonight as it is stated. We just need to tell LAFCO that PMAC is behind this proposal.
Bridget: I just want to say we are here for the same reason. There are other sources on the land itself. Surface water treatment and we are looking at cost. Use existing resources. Why would they not explore more and we could have done this year ago. No excuse to not build another test well. Measure K funds easily. Many people did not know about this project. The students knew about it and the school knew about it. The pipes need to be replaced again. Have to change the pipes. Never been attended to. We should be able to fund something.
Alejandra: Resident for the past 31 years, graduated in 2006 and the water issue has been a problem before our time. Everyone agrees that the water should not be yellow. For the first time I thought that someone didn’t flush but it is actually the color of the water. I would like to be informed, we need to get together and get more informed. Difficult to attend these meetings, languages are barriers, there are organizations that communicate very well out to the community. Send out mailers to all PO boxes, get everyone to attend these meetings. It does affect people who are home owners. If we want students to consider thriving we need more time.
Tanya Zavala: Parent, teacher, homeowner on north street. Please PMAC do not slow down the process. We are almost 2 years old. When we ask for just a little more time. How many more decades is that going to be.
Mark Wallace: Things we are going to have to do regardless of the water line. Things that could have or should have happened. And things as a body that we will continue along with the county. Advisory councils such as ours that don’t have decision making power and we advise. How long that well lasts, depends on who gets to drink that water. In one sense that is being made is who do we want to support with that water? And to say that we do not want to extend CSA 11 to the high school and or delay this project, its hard for me to back up on this that we will have an easy time going forward.
Rob Skinner: if we were any other community we would not be in this situation. We should partner with Kellyx. Butano Canyon is a good example of a working system. This system doesn’t even need to be tested and we need to take it to RCD. Negligible from a financial standpoint. If you have a storage treated system. This is not brain surgery.
Dr. Kassi Talbot: Do I believe we need a communication protocol internally and from SMC sure. Many people speaking today are people who work at the high school, who have children there and some comments would not be made if you were actually experiencing the water situation today. And the plan that has happened for this many years, represents how long it would take if we divert and we should not delay this process.
Dr. Patrick Horn: Should we have water yes. Current bottled water and there aren’t currently any health risks. Raises concerns about the local aquifer. There could be alternative solutions and other approaches and the concern is the lack of input from constituents. The council has to decide whether or not to support the annexation. I would like to see the exploration of viable alternatives. This council has to make a decision about whether or not to support the reconsideration of LAFCO.
Virginia Chang Kiraly (LAFCO): this will be an agenda item at LAFCO regardless. Listening to move the farm bureaus appeal.
BJ Burns turns and faces Amy Wooliever and asks why didn’t you test the water.
Dante, now we have filtration systems.
Bridget: Vote of the people
2019 the county amended the LCP to allow this project to happen, this needed to be placed to a vote. Based on consultation with the Coastal Commission. It was not required to take it to a vote. From that determination we moved forward without that voter approval.
Heraclio Serrano: It has been talked about and I am all for the water and the fire department. We have been talking about it and I have never been notified and the county hasn’t communicated with the customers. And I am all for this. Why not in the process of doing it, life expectancy, why hasn’t there been a talk about creating a bond, finding money in case the system needs it. What happens in the future?
Moved the council Dr. Patrick letter supporting annexation of the high school site:
Second: Mark
Passed Unanimously: Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes
Dr. Patrick will write the letter and then send the letter off to Mark Wallace for send off.
Motion to Adjourn: Mark Wallace
Second: Kassi Talbot
Passed Unanimously
More on PMAC on Coastside Buzz
Author: Coastside Buzz
Me
