AGENDA
Pismo Beach City Council
Tuesday, May 3, 2022
Regular Meeting Zoom Meeting ID: 848 2371 5585 - Phone Number (669) 900-6833 Zoom Meeting Link https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84823715585 Regular Meeting in-person access: Council Chamber, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, 93449
0. HYBRID MEETING INSTRUCTIONS:
To continue conducting the people’s business within San Luis Obispo County, State of California, and CDC health and safety guidelines, these meetings are being conducted in a hybrid format with both in-person and virtual public participation. Ways to watch this meeting and submit public comment are provided below.
Watch and participate in person:
• Regular Meeting: Visit the Council Chamber at City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449. • To make Regular Meeting public comment, please submit an optional blue “speaker slip” to staff; the Mayor will ask you to approach the lectern to speak during the public comment period on your item of interest. • To make Closed Session public comment, please be present in the Chamber at the start of Closed Session; the Mayor will call for public comment prior to commencing the closed proceedings.
Watch and participate via Zoom:
• Regular Meeting: Click this link on any computer or mobile device: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84823715585 .
This URL may also be typed into a web browser.
• To make public comment, press the “raise your hand” button when the comment period for your item of interest begins. You will be notified when you’ve been unmuted and it’s your turn to speak.
Listen and participate via telephone:
• Regular Meeting: Call 1-669-900-6833 to join by telephone audio only. Enter Meeting ID 848 2371 5585 when prompted.
• To make public comment, press *9 to “raise your hand” when the comment period on your item of interest begins. You will be notified when you’ve been unmuted and it’s your turn to speak.
Watch online:
• Regular Meeting: Visit www.pismobeach.org/agenda and scroll to “Upcoming Events.” When the live broadcast begins, an “In Progress” link will appear; click this link to watch the livestream.
Watch on Channel 20:
• Regular Meeting: Tune to local cable channel 20 in Pismo Beach; the meeting will be broadcast live. Meetings are also replayed at 9:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m., and 1:00 a.m. each day the following week.
Submit written comment:
• Regular Meeting and Closed Session: In advance of the meeting, written comments may be emailed to [email protected] or mailed or delivered to the City Clerk’s Office, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449. During the meeting no later than the start of the comment period for your item of interest, written comment may be emailed to [email protected] or hand-delivered to staff in the Council Chamber.
Submit voicemail comment:
• Regular Meeting and Closed Session: Call 805-773-7005 and leave a voicemail before the meeting; or during the meeting no later than the start of the comment period for your item of interest. This phone number is an automated voicemail line only and will not be answered or monitored for other purposes.
Please note:
• Meetings may begin a few minutes after the scheduled start time. • Meetings will be recorded, except closed sessions; these recordings are public record. • Phone numbers of call-in participants may be visible to other meeting participants, or in meeting recordings; Members of the public may create free Zoom accounts in order to change their screen names via the Zoom software when joining the virtual call.
• Phone numbers of voicemail commenters may be visible in the public record along with transcripts. • Public commenters wishing to display written comment or pictorial exhibit during a comment period must email the materials ahead of the comment period in order to permit display of the materials.
Please contact City Clerk Erica Inderlied at [email protected] with questions.
Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 3, 2022
Special Closed Session—5:00 p.m.
Administration Conference Room, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Waage
1. ROLL CALL:
Mayor: Waage
Mayor Pro Tem: Reiss
Council Members: Blake, Guthrie, Newton
2. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item appearing on the agenda.
Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
• Please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less.
• Unduly disruptive behavior will not be permitted.
Documents submitted to the Council become public record unless otherwise exempt from disclosure.
3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
Item 3.A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code §54956.9: One potential case
4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
5. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Time Date Location
Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 3, 2022 Council Chamber, City Hall
Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 3, 2022
Regular Meeting—5:30 p.m.
Council Chamber, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Zoom Meeting ID: 848 2371 5585 – Phone Number (669) 900-6833
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Waage
1. ROLL CALL:
Mayor: Waage
Mayor Pro Tem: Reiss
Council Members: Blake, Guthrie, Newton
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA
4. PRESENTATIONS
Item 4.A: Presentation: Update on Supervisory Districts for June 2022 Election (San Luis Obispo County Clerk-Recorder)
Item 4.B: Proclamation: National Foster Care Month (San Luis Obispo County Social Services)
5. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item NOT appearing on the agenda. For items appearing on the agenda, including the Consent Calendar, the public will be invited to make comments during Council consideration of the item. In accordance with state law, matters raised as part of this comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon by the City Council at this time.
However, in response to a matter raised as part of this comment period, the Council may, during Item 13, City Council Comments and Requests, direct staff to assist a speaker, or schedule the matter for consideration on a future agenda.
Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
• Please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less.
• Unduly disruptive behavior will not be permitted.
Documents submitted to the Council become public record unless otherwise exempt from disclosure.
6. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
7. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT / CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 3, 2022
8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Air Pollution Control District, SLO County (Waage/Newton)
2. California Coastal Coalition Board (Reiss/Blake)
3. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority Board (Reiss)
4. Central Coast Community Energy Policy Board (Mayor)
5. Chapman Estate Foundation Liaison (Reiss)
6. Coastal Cities Group, League of CA Cities (Waage)
7. CAPSLO Board of Directors (Reiss)
8. Conference and Visitors Bureau Board Liaison (Newton)
9. Friends of Price House Liaison (Waage)
10. Hazard Mitigation & Fire Safety (Blake/Waage)
11. Homeless Services Oversight Council (Guthrie)
12. Integrated W aste Management Authority (Newton)
13. Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Subcommittee (Blake/Waage)
14. REACH (formerly EVC) (Blake)
15. Regional Transit Authority, SLO (Waage/Reiss)
16. Shell Beach Improvement Group Liaison (Newton/Reiss)
17. SLOCOG (Waage/Reiss)
18. South County Chambers of Commerce Gov’t Affairs (Blake)
19. Visit SLO CAL Advisory Committee (Newton)
20. Water Resources Advisory Committee, SLO (Guthrie)
21. Zone 3 Water Advisory Committee, SLO (Guthrie)
(Govt Code Section 53232.3)
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All Consent Calendar items will be acted upon by a single action of the City Council unless otherwise requested by an individual Council Member for separate consideration. Public comment on Consent Calendar items will be invited prior to action on the Calendar.
Item 9.A: Adoption of Meeting Minutes (Inderlied)
Recommendation:
1. Adopt Minutes of the February 14, 2022 Closed Session;
2. Adopt Minutes of the February 23, 2022 Closed Session;
3. Adopt Minutes of the April 19, 2022 Meeting.
Item 9.B: Payroll Register and Register of Demands (Feeser)
Recommendation:
1. Approve the Summary of Payroll Register for April 10, 2022;
2. Approve the Register of Demands for April 8, 2022; and April 22, 2022.
Item 9.C: Monthly Investment Transaction Report of the City’s Cash and Investments for March 2022 of FY 2021-2022 (Feeser)
Recommendation:
No action required; information only.
Item 9.D: Fiscal Year 2022 Third Quarter Financial Status Report (Feeser)
Recommendation:
Receive as information only. No actions are requested or recommended.
Item 9.E: Quarterly Investment Report for the Three Months of January Through March 2022 – The Third Quarter of FY 2022 (Feeser)
Recommendation:
No action required; information only.
Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 3, 2022
Item 9.F: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART:
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant Application in FY 2022 for Central Coast Blue (Feeser)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution approving the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant application in FY 2022 for Central Coast Blue.
Item 9.G: Approval of the Fiscal Year 2022 Paving Project for Proposed Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Funding (SB1) (Feeser)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2023 Paving Project for proposed Senate Bill 1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account funding for Fiscal Year 2023.
Item 9.H: Agreement with Walker Consultants to Complete an Update to the Parking Management Plan (Downing)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Walker Consultants, Inc. to complete an update to the Parking Management Plan in the amount of $25,000, and appropriating related budget adjustments.
Item 9.I: 2022 Fourth of July Fireworks Display Authorization (Jackson)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution approving the 2022 Fourth of July fireworks display and appropriating related budget adjustments in Fiscal Year 2023.
Item 9.J: Adoption of Findings Relating to AB 361 (Virtual Meetings) (Inderlied)
Recommendation:
Adopt the following findings with respect to the City of Pismo Beach’s utilization of the provisions of Assembly Bill 361, relating to Brown Act teleconferences:
1. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency created by the coronavirus pandemic.
2. The following circumstances exist:
• State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
10. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 3, 2022
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS No earlier than 6:00 p.m.
GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS (Mayor/Presiding Officer reserves discretion to set speaking allowances):
1. City staff will present the staff report and recommendation, and respond to technical/clarifying questions from Council;
2. Mayor will open the public hearing, and invite the project applicant, or representative, to present the project (Limited to 10 mins);
3. In an Appeal Hearing, the Mayor will then invite the appellant, or representative, to present their appeal (Limited to 10 mins);
4. Mayor will then ask other interested persons to testify regarding the project (Limited to 3 mins per speaker);
5. Mayor will invite the project applicant, or representative, to make a rebuttal if desired (Limited to 5 mins);
6. In an Appeal Hearing, the Mayor will then invite the appellant, or representative, to make a rebuttal if desired (Limited to 5 mins);
7. Mayor will close the public hearing, following which the Council will deliberate and act on the matter.
Item 11.A: Second Amendment to the Amended and Restated Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement with South County Sanitary Service, Inc. for Solid Waste Collection Services and Adoption of Integrated Solid Waste Rates for May 1, 2022, January 1, 2023, and January 1, 2024 (Feeser)
Recommendation:
1. Adopt a Resolution approving, and authorizing the City Manager to execute, a second amendment to the Amended and Restated Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement with South County Sanitary Service, Inc. for solid waste collection services;
2. Conduct a public hearing to hear public comment on proposed solid waste rates;
3. Adopt a Resolution approving Integrated Solid Waste rates charged by South County Sanitary Service for May 1, 2022, January 1, 2023, and January 1, 2024.
12. BUSINESS ITEMS May be reordered and heard prior to Public Hearings
Item 12.A: 2021 Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA) Annual Report and Water Supply Update (Fine)
Recommendation:
No action required; information only.
13. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
14. ADJOURNMENT
To the following meeting(s). Special and Closed Session times may be subject to change, as noticed. Meetings will be held in a hybrid virtual format unless otherwise noted:
Meeting Time Date Location
Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Council Chamber, City Hall Regular Council meetings will adjourn by 11:00 p.m. unless four-fifths of the Council votes to continue past that time. If the meeting is adjourned at 11:00 p.m., any remaining agenda items will be continued to the next regular meeting (R-97-04).
Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 3, 2022
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Erica Inderlied, City Clerk for the City of Pismo Beach, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the May 3, 2022 meeting(s) of the Pismo Beach City Council was posted on April 28, 2022, at City Hall, located at 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA, as well as on the City’s website.
Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Meeting Schedule: The City Council of Pismo Beach regularly meets on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 5:30 p.m., unless otherwise noticed. Closed and Special sessions will be duly noticed as needed.
Council Agendas: Agendas for Regular Meetings are available for public review on the City’s website at pismobeach.org/agenda and upon request from the City Clerk’s Office, typically by 4:00 p.m. on the Thursday prior to the meeting, but no later than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Agendas for Closed Sessions and other Special meetings are made available at least 72 hours prior to the meeting when possible, but no later than 24 hours prior to the meeting.
Related Materials: All materials submitted to the Council relating to items on this agenda are open for public inspection unless otherwise exempt by law. Staff reports and attachments published as part of this agenda packet, as well as copies of correspondence received relating to these agenda items and materials distributed at the meeting, may be obtained 1) in the consolidated online Agenda Center at pismobeach.org/agenda, 2) in the Access Pismo public records portal at pismobeach.org/accesspismo, 3) by request from the City Clerk at [email protected], or 4) in person at the City Clerk's Office, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, Mon–-Fri 8:00 a.m.–-5:00 p.m. Please call (805) 773-7003 with any questions.
Broadcasting: Regular (televised) City Council meetings are available for viewing 24/7 at pismobeach.org/agenda, broadcast live on Channel 20, and re-broadcast during the week following the meeting on Channel 20 at 9:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m., and 1:00 a.m. each day.
Use of Equipment: Please contact the City Clerk’s Office if requesting to use the chamber equipment during public comment or as part of a scheduled presentation, 24 hours prior to the meeting at (805) 773-7003.
Notice Regarding Americans with Disabilities Act
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting or if you need agenda documents provided in an alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 773-7003 as soon as possible prior to the meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made (28CFR 35.102-
35.104 ADA Title II).
A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA RECOGNIZING MAY 2022 AS NATIONAL FOSTER CARE MONTH
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach recognizes the importance of providing children safe, healthy and loving homes when they are unable to remain in the home of their biological family; and
WHEREAS, there are more than 430,000 children in the United States in the foster care system; and
WHEREAS, more than 60,000 children in California are in the foster care system; and
WHEREAS, there are over 350 children, youth, and teenagers in the City of Pismo Beach who are in the foster care system; and
WHEREAS, to help these children have a healthy, loving, and stable home environment where they can thrive and feel connected to a community that cares for them, and to support the resource families that provide these critical homes, the County of San Luis Obispo Department of Social Services is acknowledging National Foster Care Month to raise awareness about the need for more resource family homes in our county for local children and join other organizations to celebrate resource families in our community; and
WHEREAS, this effort, along with similar celebrations in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, will offer children the chance to live with healthy, loving, and stable resource families when they cannot live with their birth families and encourage other dedicated individuals to make a powerful difference in the lives of a child through resource family care.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby recognizes May as “National Foster Care Month” in the City of Pismo Beach and in so doing, urges all citizens to join in a national effort to raise awareness about the importance of foster care and resource family care.
Dated this 3rd day of May, 2022
________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor
4.A-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.A
`
SUBJECT/TITLE:
ADOPTION OF MEETING MINUTES
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Minutes of the February 14, 2022 Closed Session;
2.Adopt Minutes of the February 23, 2022 Closed Session;
3. Adopt Minutes of the April 19, 2022 Regular Meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Attached for the Council’s consideration are the draft minutes of the subject meetings for review and adoption.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with the preparation or adoption of meeting minutes.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt the minutes with revisions.
2. Decline to adopt the minutes; provide direction or request additional information.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Minutes of the February 14, 2022 Closed Session
2.Minutes of the February 23, 2022 Closed Session
3. Minutes of the April 19, 2022 Regular Meeting
Submitted by: Erica Inderlied, City Clerk Meeting Date: May 3, 2022 City Manager Approval:
9.A-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
DRAFT MINUTES
Pismo Beach City Council
Tuesday, February 14, 2022
Special Closed Session—12:00 p.m.
Meeting Held Virtually
The City Council of the City of Pismo Beach met this date in a special closed session in with Mayor Waage presiding.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Waage called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m.
1.ROLL CALL:
Present: Absent:
Mayor Ed Waage (via teleconference) None
Mayor Pro Tem Mary Ann Reiss (via teleconference)
Council Member Sheila Blake (via teleconference)
Council Member Marcia Guthrie (via teleconference)
Council Member Scott Newton (via teleconference)
Staff Present:
Matt Downing, Community Development Director (via teleconference) Jorge Garcia, Assistant City Manager (via teleconference) David Fleishman, City Attorney (via teleconference)
James R. Lewis, City Manager (via teleconference)
2.PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Mayor Waage called for public comment. There being no one wishing to comment, Mayor Waage closed the public comment period.
3.ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
City Attorney Fleishman announced the Closed Session item listed below.
Item 3.A: Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) Agency designated representatives: James R. Lewis
Employee organization: Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and Pismo Beach Police Officers Association (POA)
Unrepresented Employees: All Unrepresented Employees
Attachment 1
9.A-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Item 3.B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Government Code §54956.9: One potential case
4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Fleishman would report in the next regular open session that no reportable action was taken on the above items.
5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Waage adjourned the meeting at 1:26 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________________________ Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 1
9.A-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
DRAFT MINUTES
Pismo Beach City Council
Tuesday, February 23, 2022
Special Closed Session—9:30 a.m.
Meeting Held Virtually
The City Council of the City of Pismo Beach met this date in a special closed session in with Mayor Waage presiding.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Waage called the meeting to order at 9:31 a.m.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Absent:
Mayor Ed Waage (via teleconference) None
Mayor Pro Tem Mary Ann Reiss (via teleconference)
Council Member Sheila Blake (via teleconference)
Council Member Marcia Guthrie (via teleconference)
Council Member Scott Newton (via teleconference)
Staff Present:
Benjamin Fine, Public Works Director/City Engineer (via teleconference) Jorge Garcia, Assistant City Manager (via teleconference) David Fleishman, City Attorney (via teleconference)
James R. Lewis, City Manager (via teleconference)
2. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Mayor Waage called for public comment. There being no one wishing to comment, Mayor Waage closed the public comment period.
3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
City Attorney Fleishman announced the Closed Session item listed below.
Item 3.A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code §54956.9: Two potential cases
Attachment 2
9.A-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Item 3.B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code §54956.9) Name of Case:
1. San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission et al. v. City of Pismo Beach et al. (2d Civ. No. B296968 / San Luis Obispo County Superior Court Case CV130383)
2. City of Pismo Beach v. SDRMA, California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division 6; Case No. B304144
3. Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District v. City of Santa Maria, et al. Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 1-97-CV-770214
Item 3.C: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code §54956.9) Name of Case:
• Dominguez v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 20CV-0616
• McCartney v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 20CV-0576
• Rodman v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 21CV-0324
• Hayden v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 21CV-0325
• Brinkerhoff v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 21CV-0710
• Diaz v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 21CV-0701
• Franzen v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 22CV-0061
• Huerta v. Universal Precast Concrete et al. San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. 22CV-0062
4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Fleishman would report in the next regular open session that no reportable action was taken on the above items.
5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Waage adjourned the meeting at 10:40 a.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________________________ Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 2
9.A-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022
DRAFT MINUTES
Pismo Beach City Council
Tuesday, April 19, 2022
Regular Meeting—5:30 p.m.
Council Chamber, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449
The City Council of the City of Pismo Beach met this date in a regular session with Mayor Waage presiding.
CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Absent:
Mayor Ed Waage None
Mayor Pro Tem Mary Ann Reiss
Council Member Sheila Blake
Council Member Marcia Guthrie
Council Member Scott Newton
Staff Present:
Matt Downing, Community Development Director
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
David Fleishman, City Attorney
Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Gordon Jackson, Director of Tourism and Events
Paul Lee, Battalion Chief
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Jeff Smith, Chief of Police
Chad Stoehr, Engineer
Other staff present as noted below
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Waage led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA
No requests to reorder the agenda.
Attachment 3
9.A-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022
4. PRESENTATIONS
Item 4.A: Proclamation: Sexual Assault Action Month
Presented to Nancy DePue, Lumina Alliance.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Call for public comment:
The following commented:
David Ferdinandi
Ken Meersand
Shelly Higginbotham
Don Day
6. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Lewis commented on various topics.
7. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT / CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Fleishman had nothing to report.
8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
The Council reported on recent and upcoming meetings of various external bodies:
Council Member Newton:
San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) Board.
Mayor Waage:
League of California Cities Coastal Cities Group; San Luis Obispo County Community Fire Safe Council; San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (SLO LAFCO).
The Council commended Recreation Division staff for their work on the Easter Eggstravaganza event.
Attachment 3
9.A-7Council Agenda 5-3-2022
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
Call for public comment: No comment.
Action: Adopt Consent Calendar.
Motion: Blake
Second: Reiss
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote (Items 9.A through 9.H):
Ayes: 5 Blake, Reiss, Guthrie, Newton, Waage
Noes: 0
Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 0
Item 9.A: Adoption of Meeting Minutes (Inderlied)
Recommendation:
Adopt Minutes of the April 5, 2022 Closed and Regular Joint Meetings.
Item 9.B: Payroll Register and Register of Demands (Feeser)
Recommendation:
1. Approve the Summary of Payroll Register for March 27, 2022.
2. Approve the Register of Demands for March 25, 2022 and April 1, 2022.
Item 9.C: Department Activity Reports for March 2022 (All)
Recommendation:
Receive reports as information only.
Item 9.D: Paid Parking Quarterly Update – Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2022 (Downing)
Recommendation:
Receive report; information only.
Item 9.E: Amendment #2 to Agreement with SP Maintenance Services, Inc. for Parking Lot and Street Sweeping (Fine)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment #2 with SP Maintenance Services, Inc. in the amount of Attachment 3
9.A-8Council Agenda 5-3-2022
$56,265 per year for two years of parking lot and street sweeping services.
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-024 adopted.
Item 9.F: Annual City Weed Abatement Program; Declaration of Nuisances (Lee)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution declaring that grass, weeds, and rubbish on certain lots in the City of Pismo Beach constitute public nuisances and ordering said public nuisances to be abated.
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-025 adopted.
Item 9.G: Purchase of Two APX 8000 All-Band, Portable Radios from Motorola Solutions for the Fire Department (Feeser)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of two APX 8000 All- Band, portable radios from Motorola Solutions in the amount of $16,550.18 and appropriating $8,545.00 in the Lifeguard Operating Supplies Fund to support the purchase in Fiscal Year 2022.
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-026 adopted.
Item 9.H: Adoption of Findings Relating to AB 361 (Virtual Meetings) (Inderlied)
Recommendation:
Adopt the following findings with respect to the City of Pismo Beach’s utilization of the provisions of Assembly Bill 361, relating to Brown Act teleconferences:
1. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency created by the coronavirus pandemic.
2. The following circumstances exist:
• State or local officials continue to impose or
recommend measure to promote social distancing.
10. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT
None.
Attachment 3
9.A-9Council Agenda 5-3-2022
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Item 11.A: General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment to the City of Pismo Bach Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) to Eliminate Development Restrictions Imposed by Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’; and Adoption of a Negative Declaration (Downing)
Council Member Newton announced his recusal from Items 11.A and 11.B.
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution adopting a General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment to the City of Pismo Beach Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) to eliminate development restrictions imposed by Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’; and adopting a Negative Declaration.
Presenting staff:
Matt Downing, Community Development Director
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Public Hearing / Call for public comment:
The following spoke:
Frances Romero, Applicant’s Representative
Tarren Collins
Stacy Inman
Shelly Higginbotham
Adam Werner
Action: Adopt a Resolution adopting a General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment to the City of Pismo Beach Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) to eliminate development restrictions imposed by Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’; and adopting a Negative Declaration.
Motion: Reiss
Second: Guthrie
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 3 Reiss, Guthrie, Waage
Noes: 1 Blake
Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 1 Newton
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-027 adopted.
Attachment 3
9.A-10Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Item 11.B: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of a Coastal Development Permit to Construct a New Single-Family Residence at 171 Naomi Avenue (P21-000015); the Project is located in the Coastal Appeal Zone and is Appealable to the California Coastal Commission; APN 010-501-005 (Downing)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution denying the appeals and upholding the March 22, 2022, Planning Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (P21- 000015) to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new 3,648-square-foot single-family residence at 171 Naomi Avenue, and adopting a Negative Declaration.
Presenting staff:
Matt Downing, Community Development Director
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Appeal Hearing / Call for public comment:
The following spoke:
Frances Romero, Applicant’s Representative
Tarren Collins, Appellant
Adam Werner, Appellant
Tedd
Frances Romero, Applicant’s Representative
Tarren Collins, Appellant
Adam Werner, Appellant
Action: Adopt a Resolution denying the appeals and upholding the March 22, 2022, Planning Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (P21-000015) to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new 3,648-square-foot single-family residence at 171 Naomi Avenue, and adopting a Negative Declaration.
Motion: Guthrie
Second: Reiss
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 3 Guthrie, Reiss, Waage
Noes: 1 Blake
Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 1 Newton
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-028 adopted.
Attachment 3
9.A-11Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Council Member Newton resumed his seat at the dais.
Item 11.C: Resolution Levying the 2% Annual Assessment for the Pismo Beach Lodging Business Improvement District (LBID) for Fiscal Year 2023:
July 1, 2022 Through June 30, 2023 (Feeser)
Recommendation:
1. Open public hearing; accept protests, if any, to the proposed assessments; close public hearing;
2. Adopt a Resolution levying a 2% annual assessment for the Pismo Beach Lodging Business Improvement District (LBID) for Fiscal Year 2023: July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023.
Presenting staff:
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Public Hearing / Call for public comment:
The following commented:
Shelly Higginbotham
Action: Adopt a Resolution levying a 2% annual assessment for the Pismo Beach Lodging Business Improvement District (LBID) for Fiscal Year 2023:
July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023
Motion: Guthrie
Second: Blake
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 5 Guthrie, Blake, Newton, Reiss, Waage
Noes: 0
Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 0
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-029 adopted.
12. BUSINESS ITEMS
Item 12.A: Review of Administrative Coastal Development Permit Process (Downing)
Recommendation: Review Municipal Code provisions regarding Administrative Coastal Development Permits and provide direction to staff if desired.
Attachment 3
9.A-12Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Presenting staff:
Matt Downing, Community Development Director
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Call for public comment: No comment.
Action: No action.
Item 12.B: Award Construction and Construction Management Contracts to CalPortland Construction, Cannon Corporation, and Pavement Engineering for the 2022 Paving Project (Fine)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to:
1. Award a contract to CalPortland Construction, in the amount of $10,587,902.10 for the construction of the 2022 Paving Project;
2. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Cannon Corporation, in the amount of $1,291,907.30 for Construction Management, Inspection, Materials Testing and Administrative Services for the 2022 Paving Project;
3. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Pavement Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $252,450 for Engineering Services During Construction of the 2022 Paving Project;
4. Appropriating related budget adjustments.
Presenting staff:
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Chad Stoehr, Engineer
Call for public comment:
The following commented:
Tedd
Action: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to:
1. Award a contract to CalPortland Construction, in the amount of $10,587,902.10 for the construction of the 2022 Paving Project;
2. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Cannon Corporation, in the amount of $1,291,907.30 for Construction Management, Inspection, Materials Testing and Administrative Services for the 2022 Paving Project;
3. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Pavement Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $252,450 for Engineering Services During Construction of the 2022 Paving Project;
4. Appropriating related budget adjustments.
Attachment 3
9.A-13Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Motion: Blake
Second: Guthrie
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 5 Blake, Guthrie, Newton, Reiss, Waage
Noes: 0
Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 0
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2022-030 adopted.
13. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
No requests.
14. ADJOURNMENT
At 8:09 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________________________ Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 3
9.A-14Council Agenda 5-3-2022
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.B
SUBJECT/TITLE:
PAYROLL REGISTER AND REGISTER OF DEMANDS
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Approve the Summary of Payroll Register for April 10, 2022;
2. Approve the Register of Demands for April 8, 2022; and April 22, 2022.
BACKGROUND:
Attached are the Summary of Payroll Register(s) and Register(s) of Demands (Check Registers) noted above, provided for Council approval.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As demonstrated in the attached payroll and check registers.
ALTERNATIVES:
1.Request additional information from staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.Payroll Summary
2.Register of Demands
Submitted by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director / City Treasurer City Manager Approval:
Council Agenda 5-3-2022 9.B-1
FOR PERIOD ENDING 04/10/22
CHECKS DATED 04/15/22
PAYROLL CHECKS AND DIRECT DEPOSIT TRANSACTIONS
Checks 556791 ‐ 556793 3
ACH 118
EARNINGS
REGULAR 322,431.48
HOLIDAY 4,625.60
OVERTIME (Includes Comp Time Payouts)14,863.58
Administration ‐
Building ‐
Conference & Visitors Bureau ‐
Police Department 12,255.79
Parking ‐
Engineering ‐
Fire ‐
Recreation ‐
Public Works 934.69
Water 973.10
Wastewater 700.00
Motor Vehicles
Subtotal‐Overtime 14,863.58$
SALARY ADJUSTMENTS 5,169.36
TRAINING / UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 591.50
OTHER EARNINGS 14,414.58
$362,096.10
LESS AUTHORIZED PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
FEDERAL WITHHOLDING TAX 33,908.46
FICA & MEDICARE 28,071.96
STATE INCOME TAX 11,908.04
STATE DISABILITY INSURANCE 4,253.70
GARNISHMENTS 0.00
HEALTH 1,657.96
SUPPLEMENTAL DISABILITY 1,684.81
SECTION 125 2,557.72
PERS 30,411.16
DEFERRED COMPENSATION 9,551.49
ADDITIONAL LIFE INSURANCE 296.17
UNION DUES 2,193.23
PISMO ATHLETIC CLUB 307.50
OTHER
NET PAYROLL $235,293.90
DIRECT DEPOSIT DEDUCTION 233,431.28
NET PAYROLL AFTER ACH DEPOSIT 1,862.62
SUMMARY PAYROLL REGISTER
Council Agenda 5-3-2022 9.B-2
Attachment 1
City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 04/08/2022
US BANK
ACH/Vendor Check Check
Check#Number Payee Date Amount Description
ACH 11224 Richards, Watson, Gershon Attorneys At Law 4/8/2022 14,447.65$ Professional Legal Services Feb 2022 121998 12275 Airgas West Inc 4/8/2022 204.26 Cylinder Rental March 2022 121999 11800 Allan Hancock College 4/8/2022 1,015.00 PD Training 122000 14302 Donald C. Allcock 4/8/2022 25.00 PRBC 1st Qtr 2022 Stipend 122001 11915 American Leak Detection 4/8/2022 360.00 Leak Detection Services - City Hall 122002 11365 American Legal Publishing Corporation 4/8/2022 167.37 March 2022 S-13 Folio/Internet Editing - Supp No. 41 122003 11943 American Swing Products Inc 4/8/2022 1,998.92 Beach Swing Replacement Parts 122004 14309 Terry Anderson 4/8/2022 800.00 Refund for Conference Room- 3/8-3/10/22 122005 12362 Applied Industrial Technologies 4/8/2022 415.20 Process Equipment Repair- Belt Press Auger 122006 10830 Aramark 4/8/2022 1,313.11 Uniforms - Mar 2022 122007 11589 Austin's Wet Pets and Pond Maintenance, Inc 4/8/2022 140.00 Pond Maintenance Mar 2022 - Chapman Estate 122008 14314 Brian Bennett 4/8/2022 68.00 Refund: Spyglass Park Rental Cancelled 122009 14119 Boone Printing & Graphics, Inc.4/8/2022 245.07 A-Frame Open Signs for City Hall 122010 10818 Bosch Landscape 4/8/2022 1,400.00 Price House Mow & Weed Abatement 122011 14248 Boys and Girls Club of So. San Luis Obispo County 4/8/2022 1,700.00 Childcare Support Services Feb 2022 122012 11392 Brenntag Pacific Inc.4/8/2022 1,861.39 Sodium Bisulfite 25% 122013 10028 Brisco Mill & Lumber Yard 4/8/2022 86.01 Maintenance Supplies 122014 11333 California Rural Water Association 4/8/2022 2,350.00 CRWA Expo 4/25/22 - 4/28/22 Lake Tahoe- NV 122015 13028 Jose Camacho 4/8/2022 250.00 Reimb: Safety Boots 2022 122016 14288 Capital One Trade Credit 4/8/2022 573.34 Maintenance Supplies 122017 10269 Carquest Auto Parts 4/8/2022 61.58 Diatom Oil Absorb 122018 10799 Lindsay Carter Coates 4/8/2022 604.00 Yoga w/ Lindsay March 2022 #10842 122019 13669 Joseph Cedillos 4/8/2022 577.50 Security: PBVH BSR Event Date 1/30/22 122020 13951 Central Coast Portables 4/8/2022 4,412.10 Portable Restrooms - DCP During Construction 1/26/22 - 2/23/22 122021 11451 Channel Islands Technology Integrators' Group 4/8/2022 51,908.26 Professional IT Services - Multiple Projects/Months 122022 13105 Chapman Foundation 4/8/2022 1,890.00 Docent Tour Fees July-Oct 2021 122023 11566 City Of Morro Bay 4/8/2022 754.40 Reimbursement for City Mgr Regional Meeting 122024 11231 Coastal Peaks Coffee 4/8/2022 46.50 Coffee Supplies 122025 11227 Cole Chrysler Dodge 4/8/2022 1,135.99 Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs 122026 13257 Core & Main LLP 4/8/2022 426.86 Water Meters 122027 14146 Pamela Ann Coslick 4/8/2022 88.00 Tae Kwon Do March 2022 #10833 122028 12156 County Of San Luis Obispo 4/8/2022 1,284.10 Chargeable Report Writing/Correspondence Jan/Feb 2022 122029 13386 Cuesta Polygraph & Investigations, LLC.4/8/2022 6,000.00 Pre Employment Background Checks & Psych Eval 122030 11986 Culligan/Central Coast Water 4/8/2022 95.00 Soft Water Tank Rental Apr 2022 122031 14313 Culligan/Santa Maria 4/8/2022 201.00 Drinking Water March 2022 122032 12628 Dell Marketing LP 4/8/2022 5,003.68 Dispatch Computers - Mobile Command Unit 122033 13675 Michael Drew Devine 4/8/2022 50.00 PRBC 1st Qtr 2022 Stipend 122034 11469 Eikhof Design Group Inc 4/8/2022 9,000.35 Dolphin Bay Storm Drain Repair Feb 2022 122035 12589 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.4/8/2022 3,188.03 Distribution maintenance 122036 13544 Flynn's Painting & Refinishing, Inc.4/8/2022 775.00 Shell Beach & Pismo Beach Vets Hall Painting 122037 12554 Gov Connection, Inc.4/8/2022 42.00 Acrobat Pro License 122038 10398 Liliana Graham 4/8/2022 544.00 Ballroom Dance March 2022 #10874 122039 12952 GSI Water Solutions Inc 4/8/2022 2,029.14 NCMA Annual Monitoring Report Feb 2022 122040 10806 Hach Company 4/8/2022 573.89 Chlorine Reagent for CL17 for Wells 122041 11977 Dan Hall 4/8/2022 453.60 Yoga with Dan March 2022 # 10824 122042 13385 IPS Group, Inc.4/8/2022 2,417.10 Parking Kiosk Supplies 122043 12525 JJ Fisher Construction 4/8/2022 52,938.54 Dino Caves Restroom - Jan 2022 122044 11833 Keylock Security Specialists 4/8/2022 1,466.60 City Hall Rekey After Remodel & Maintenance Supplies 122045 12668 Rachelle Lapan 4/8/2022 365.00 M&IE: Cape Conf. 4/25/22 - 4/29/22 R. LaPan 122046 10175 Life-Assist, Inc.4/8/2022 435.16 Medical Supplies - Fire 122047 11942 Maintenance Superintendents Association 4/8/2022 70.00 MSA 2022 Dues - Ben Fine 122048 14245 Mary McGrath Architects 4/8/2022 25,000.00 Criteria & Bridging Docs - Public Safety Facility Feb 2022 122049 11230 MBS Land Surveys 4/8/2022 9,774.00 Surveying Services 990-940 Bello 122050 12279 McMaster Carr 4/8/2022 1,415.47 Bypass & Lift Station Pump Accessories 122051 14315 Michael Miner 4/8/2022 3,000.00 Bond Release E19-000028- 1558 Ocean Blvd 122052 10097 Miners Hardware 4/8/2022 1,708.16 Maintenance Supplies 122053 10039 New Times 4/8/2022 212.00 Legal Notice Advertising 122054 10753 Nick's Telecom 4/8/2022 210.00 Bello and Avila Radio Site Maintenance 122055 11119 Sandra Nielsen 4/8/2022 50.00 PRBC 1st Qtr 2022 Stipend 122056 12199 Noble Saw, Inc 4/8/2022 638.04 Equipment Maintenance 122057 12270 Office Depot 4/8/2022 1,082.85 Office Supplies 122058 13197 Olin Corporation 4/8/2022 4,830.54 Sodium Hypochlorite 122059 10138 Online Solutions LLC 4/8/2022 641.03 Citizenserve 1 User 9/21/21 - 3/31/22 122060 12453 Polydyne, Inc.4/8/2022 3,590.98 Polymer Tote for Solids Handling System 122061 12335 Procare Janitorial Supply Inc 4/8/2022 3,881.64 Janitorial Supplies 122062 14201 Procare Medical Supplies 4/8/2022 1,195.00 Safety Supplies Council Agenda 5-3-2022 9.B-3
Attachment 2
City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 04/08/2022
US BANK
ACH/Vendor Check Check
Check#Number Payee Date Amount Description
122063 13898 Quadient, Inc.4/8/2022 1,000.00 Postage 02/28/22 122064 10240 R & T Embroidery, Inc.4/8/2022 40.00 Lifeguard Uniform Patch Sewing 122065 12218 R. Baker Inc.4/8/2022 9,121.44 Wilmar Sewer Emergency Repair 122066 12348 Rayne Water Conditioning 4/8/2022 102.90 Soft Water - Station 63 & 64 Apr 2022 122067 13796 ReadyRefresh by Nestle 4/8/2022 458.27 Drinking Water Mar 2022 122068 10904 Ron Rodriguez 4/8/2022 50.00 PRBC 1st Qtr 2022 Stipend 122069 11266 San Luis Auto Parts Inc 4/8/2022 181.13 Vehicle Maintenance Supplies 122070 12108 Santa Maria Tire, Inc.4/8/2022 783.78 Vehicle Maintenance 122071 14190 Santa Ynez Valley Elite Event Party Rentals 4/8/2022 1,073.04 Table rentals for July 4th Celebration 122072 12570 SLO Roasted Coffee 4/8/2022 37.00 Coffee Supplies 122073 14113 Southpaw Sign Co., Inc.4/8/2022 42,197.36 St Jude's Tunnel - Lighting and Signs 50% Deposit 122074 12031 Stanley Convergent Security Solutions 4/8/2022 1,961.42 Monthly Security & Fire Monitoring - Apr 2022 122075 14316 Inday Stenvall 4/8/2022 6,500.00 Bond Release - E19-000028 - 1558 Ocean Blvd 122076 10711 Robert Stock 4/8/2022 495.00 DJ for Easter Eggstravaganza Event 4/16 122077 11323 Streator Pipe & Supply 4/8/2022 190.85 Restroom Supplies 122078 14293 Sean Sullivan 4/8/2022 200.00 Easter Event Performance 4/16/22 122079 13530 TCA Tools Inc 4/8/2022 208.71 WasteWater Tools & Supplies 122080 13582 TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.4/8/2022 28,985.02 Ocean Blvd Design - Jan 2022 122081 11001 Toste Construction, Inc.4/8/2022 990.00 Parking Lot and Water Line Repairs 122082 12924 Traffic Management Inc 4/8/2022 76.98 Street Signs 122083 11165 Tri County Office Furniture 4/8/2022 5,415.66 Office Equipment - Engineering 122084 14115 Vanir Construction Mgmt, Inc.4/8/2022 5,221.00 Construction Mgmt- Design-Build Safety Facility Feb 2022 122085 12155 Western Microscope 4/8/2022 420.00 Preventative Maintenance for Microscope 122086 12132 White Flag Pest Control Inc 4/8/2022 716.00 Pest Control Services 122087 14312 Kenneth Wilson 4/8/2022 181.43 UB Payment Refund Acct# 012344-000 122088 11956 Zorros Cafe & Cantina LLC 4/8/2022 268.91 Breakfast Burritos for Volunteers - Easter Event 4/16/22 Total 342,363.31
Council Agenda 5-3-2022 9.B-4
Attachment 2
City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 04/22/2022
US BANK
ACH/Vendor Check Check
Check#Number Payee Date Amount Description
ACH 10002 Internal Revenue Service 4/22/2022 90,052.38$ Federal Income Tax PD 04/15/22 ACH 11224 Richards, Watson, Gershon Attorneys At Law 4/22/2022 34,138.58 Professional Legal Services Feb 2022 ACH 11305 Public Employees Retirement System 4/22/2022 64,496.53 PERS Retirement EE & ER PD 04/15/22 ACH 12017 Vantagepoint Transfer Agents 4/22/2022 11,217.00 Retiree Health Premiums May 2022 ACH 12260 dba: Mission Square ICMA Retirement Trust - 457 4/22/2022 19,537.66 ICMA 457 Deferred Comp PD 04/15/22 ACH 12305 Franchise Tax Board 4/22/2022 16,161.74 SDI & State Income Tax PD 04/15/22 ACH 12360 CalPERS 457 Plan 4/22/2022 187.50 457 Deferred Comp PD 04/15/22 ACH 12708 dba: Mission Square ICMA Retirement Trust-Roth IRA4/22/2022 370.00 ICMA Roth IRA PD 04/15/22 ACH 12944 Leaf 4/22/2022 1,231.19 City Wide Copier Lease Apr 2022 ACH 13455 Wex 4/22/2022 768.30 Fuel for City Vehicles 3/7/22 - 4/06/22 122089 10434 Abalone Coast Analytical Inc 4/22/2022 392.00 Water Analysis 122090 11800 Allan Hancock College 4/22/2022 1,595.00 PD EVOC/ARCON Training 122091 11365 American Legal Publishing Corporation 4/22/2022 14.71 March 2022 (S-41) Folio/Internet editing - Supp No. 41 122092 13278 AT&T 9391059148 4/22/2022 1,463.35 Phone Bill - 03/10/22 - 04/09/22 122093 13460 AT&T Mobility 287284035974 4/22/2022 1,122.73 Phone and Wireless Services March 2022 122094 14317 Marie Bolin 4/22/2022 12.19 Processing Fee Refund: Withdrawal of Class #10856 122095 14248 Boys and Girls Club of So. San Luis Obispo County 4/22/2022 1,700.00 Childcare Support Services March 2022 122096 11392 Brenntag Pacific Inc.4/22/2022 1,615.72 Sodium Bisulfite 25% 122097 13591 Ryan Bullock 4/22/2022 236.00 M&IE: CRWA Expo 4/25-4/29/22 Nevada 122098 10964 California Building Standards Commission - CBSC 4/22/2022 191.70 Green Fees Jan-Mar 2022 122099 10085 Cannon Associates 4/22/2022 13,019.84 Ocean Blvd Construction Management Feb 2022 122100 10269 Carquest Auto Parts 4/22/2022 46.20 Equipment Maintenance 122101 13951 Central Coast Portables 4/22/2022 566.94 Tennis Court & Price House Portable Toilets - 03/06/22-04/02/22 122102 11451 Channel Islands Technology Integrators' Group 4/22/2022 12,678.16 Professional IT Services 122103 13893 Charles P. Crowley Company, Inc 4/22/2022 36,066.62 Spyglass Lift Station Pump Rebuild Parts 122104 11231 Coastal Peaks Coffee 4/22/2022 130.85 Coffee Supplies 122105 13257 Core & Main LLP 4/22/2022 283.14 March Meters 122106 14092 Aaron Cribbs 4/22/2022 8,325.00 St. Jude's Tunnel Artwork - 50% Deposit 122107 14142 Crosno Construction, Inc.4/22/2022 271,837.47 Shell Beach Reservoir #1 Replacement Project March 2022 122108 14313 Culligan/Santa Maria 4/22/2022 66.00 Drinking Water March 2022- Police 122109 11803 Department Of Conservation 4/22/2022 543.05 SMIP Fees Jan-Mar 2022 122110 12320 Dept Of Forestry and Fire Protection 4/22/2022 609,488.37 4th Qtr Estimate-Schedule A 4/1/22 - 6/30/22 122111 12790 Diversified Project Services International 4/22/2022 10,656.10 Storm Drain Project - March 2022 122112 13697 Dudek 4/22/2022 22,375.00 General Plan/LCP Planning Consultant Jan & Feb 2022 122113 11469 Eikhof Design Group Inc 4/22/2022 1,075.00 Stormwater Consulting Services Feb 2022 122114 10191 Nadia Feeser 4/22/2022 480.74 M&IE/Mileage - CMTA Annual Conf 5/3/22 - 5/6/22 Newport Beach 122115 12589 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.4/22/2022 328.07 Water Distribution System Repairs 122116 14206 Filippin Engineering, Inc.4/22/2022 5,385.00 Price Canyon CM - Feb 2022 122117 12035 Ben Fine 4/22/2022 79.77 Reimb Fuel: League of CA PW Expo 3/22-3/25/22 122118 UB*00874RICK FUJINO 4/22/2022 69.74 Refund Check 014533-002, 452 STIMSON 122119 UB*00876SHAWN GLEASON (T)4/22/2022 105.17 Refund Check 018224-000, 276 ENCANTO 122120 13809 Jeffrey Gorham 4/22/2022 711.02 M&IE: CRWA Expo 4/25-4/29/22 Nevada 122121 13603 Grand Awards - Arroyo Grande 4/22/2022 482.72 Door Name Plates for City Hall Employees 122122 12691 Billy Haas 4/22/2022 749.02 M&IE: CRWA Expo 4/25-4/29/22 Nevada 122123 14043 Health & Human Resource Center, Inc.4/22/2022 260.10 Employee Assistance Program Feb 2022 122124 13025 Stacy Jo L. Inman 4/22/2022 150.00 1st Qtr 2022 PC Meeting Attendance Stipend 122125 13385 IPS Group, Inc.4/22/2022 1,954.75 IPS Transaction Fees - March 2022 122126 12255 Iron Mountain Information Mgmt, Inc 4/22/2022 86.52 Shredding Services- 09/22/21-10/26/21 122127 12083 Daniel Johnson 4/22/2022 236.00 M&IE: CRWA Expo 4/25-4/29/22 Nevada 122128 10612 Andrew Jones 4/22/2022 300.00 1st Qtr 2022 PC Meeting Attendance Stipend 122129 13679 KC Partners Corp 4/22/2022 174.01 Fuel Tanks - Filter Changes 122130 11325 KCBXNET 4/22/2022 1,876.00 Cablecast & Channel 20 Maintenance Services Feb 2022 122131 UB*00878WENDY WEISS KEITH FALERIOS 4/22/2022 180.00 Refund Check 018696-000, 771 WHITE OAK 122132 UB*00875DELANEY GOVE KEVIN ZIEMANN (T)4/22/2022 137.66 Refund Check 018106-000, 327 PLACENTIA 122133 11833 Keylock Security Specialists 4/22/2022 1,785.21 City Hall Re-Key, and Pier Lot Restroom Door Handles 122134 10175 Life-Assist, Inc.4/22/2022 23.27 Medical Supplies - Fire 122135 13768 Mark Schwind Electric, Inc.4/22/2022 3,300.00 Electrical Assembly - 2 Shell Beach Light Poles 122136 12279 McMaster Carr 4/22/2022 243.19 WWTP Maintenance Supplies 122137 14318 Elizabeth Miller 4/22/2022 2,500.00 Release Bond - 971 Fresno E22-000007 122138 10097 Miners Hardware 4/22/2022 1,498.95 Maintenance Supplies 122139 11780 Moondoggies Beach Club, Inc.4/22/2022 1,176.00 Surf Camp 4/19-4/21/22 AM #10829 122140 10039 New Times 4/22/2022 213.00 Legal Notice Advertising 122141 12270 Office Depot 4/22/2022 1,568.89 Office Supplies 122142 12315 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 4/22/2022 2,851.18 Electricity 03/08/22 - 04/06/22 122143 12022 Pismo Beach Police Officer's Association 4/22/2022 1,506.15 POA Dues PD 04/15/22 122144 14319 Virgil Porter 4/22/2022 190.18 Over payment for meter release B20-000203 122145 14079 Clare Malone Prichard 4/22/2022 300.00 1st Qtr 2022 PC Meeting Attendance Stipend 122146 10276 Printpal Promotions & Printing 4/22/2022 236.44 Chapman Estate Membership Cards 122147 12335 Procare Janitorial Supply Inc 4/22/2022 1,815.39 Janitorial Supplies Council Agenda 5-3-2022 9.B-5
Attachment 2
122148 10140 Quincy Engineering Inc 4/22/2022 2,449.79 Bello Bridge ESDC - Feb 2022 122149 13796 ReadyRefresh by Nestle 4/22/2022 397.29 Drinking Water Mar 2022 122150 13201 Rincon Consultants, Inc.4/22/2022 735.65 Consultant for EIR for GP/LCP Feb 2022 122151 12436 S & S Worldwide 4/22/2022 113.35 Neighborhood Event Craft Supplies 122152 14320 Joey Salazar 4/22/2022 711.02 M&IE: CRWA Expo 4/25-4/29/22 Nevada 122153 14049 San Luis Obispo Coast Wine Collective 4/22/2022 250.00 DCP Deposit Refund: Event Date 4/1 & 4/2/22 122154 14169 Sandpiper Investments, Inc.4/22/2022 1,000.00 Bond Release - 104 Wave (E22-000012) 122155 13994 SBRK Finance Holdings, Inc.4/22/2022 548.50 CivicPay IVR Transaction Fees Mar 2022 122156 UB*00877ANTHONY & JENNIFER SCHAAR (T)4/22/2022 87.85 Refund Check 017081-000, 130 PALISADE 122157 11208 SEIU Local 620 AFL/CIO 4/22/2022 687.08 SEIU Dues PD 04/15/22 122158 14099 Jeffrey Smith 4/22/2022 69.00 M&IE: CPOA BOD Meeting 5/5/22-5/6/22 122159 UB*00879ROBERT & SALLIE SOLIS (T)4/22/2022 25.99 Refund Check 017886-000, 306 CLIFF 122160 14113 Southpaw Sign Co., Inc.4/22/2022 23,139.81 Bello Bridge Art - Deposit, City Hall Sign Replacement 122161 11722 SP Maintenance Services Inc 4/22/2022 4,413.75 Parking Lot & Street Sweeping Services Mar 2022 122162 UB*00880NATHAN STARRETT 4/22/2022 180.00 Refund Check 018638-000, 150 ESPARTO 122163 10025 State Water Resource Ctrl Brd 4/22/2022 548.00 Annual Permit Fee Bello Bridge - 4/1/22-3/31/23 122164 UB*00873HANNAH & SYLAS STEPHENS (T)4/22/2022 24.88 Refund Check 018079-000, 749 VISTA PACIFICA 122165 11323 Streator Pipe & Supply 4/22/2022 152.22 Building Maintenance Supplies 122166 13582 TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.4/22/2022 35,718.48 Ocean Blvd ESDC Feb 2022 122167 12461 TJA Advertising 4/22/2022 43,355.00 LBID SMAR Insights Services 122168 12301 TK Elevator 4/22/2022 444.05 Elevator Servicing - City Hall 04/01/22 - 06/30/22 122169 12991 TransUnion Risk and Alternative 4/22/2022 150.00 Investigative Services- 3/1/22 - 3/31/22 122170 12982 Ultrex Business Products 4/22/2022 1,481.53 City-Wide Copier Usage March 2022 122171 14095 Reed Van Rozeboom 4/22/2022 300.00 1st Qtr 2022 PC Meeting Attendance Stipend 122172 14034 Vital Records Holdings, LLC 4/22/2022 119.95 Document Storage April 2022 122173 14298 Watts Regulator Company 4/22/2022 1,410.48 Well 23 Repairs & Maintenance 122174 UB*00872KEVIN & CHRISTIE WAYMENT (T)4/22/2022 30.56 Refund Check 018333-000, 522 HARLOE 122175 12132 White Flag Pest Control Inc 4/22/2022 270.00 Pest Control Services 122176 UB*00871HEATHER ROBINS (T) WILLIAM CARSON (T)4/22/2022 20.60 Refund Check 017460-000, 756 PANORAMA 122177 14273 Shauna Wills 4/22/2022 300.00 1st Qtr 2022 PC Meeting Attendance Stipend 122178 12897 Zero Waste USA 4/22/2022 10,403.26 Dog Waste Bags with Logo Total 1,396,154.25
Council Agenda 5-3-2022 9.B-6
Attachment 2
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.C
SUBJECT/TITLE:
MONTHLY INVESTMENT TRANSACTION REPORT OF THE CITY’S CASH AND INVESTMENTS FOR MARCH 2022 OF FY 2021-2022
RECOMMENDATION:
No action required; information only.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report updates the City Council on the City of Pismo Beach’s monthly transactions of the City’s investment portfolio for the month ending March 31, 2022. California State Government Code Section 53607 states that if the authority of the legislative body to invest or reinvest funds for the City is delegated to the City Treasurer, the City Treasurer shall make a monthly report of those transactions to the legislative body.
The attached report includes all transactions of the City’s investments managed by the City, including funds invested in various securities and the City’s pooled funds invested in various financial instruments.
Attachment 1 provides a summary of the City’s cash, investments, and monthly interest earnings based on book value as of March 31, 2022. Attachment 2 provides details on the investment transactions for the General Fund Reserve and City Pooled Funds A (for deferred capital projects), including: purchases or deposits; sales, maturities, calls or withdrawals; and interest earnings. Attachment 3 provides details of the monthly transactions by fund for City Pooled Funds B (for current year expenditures) for the month ending March 31, 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact from the report itself—information only.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. No Council action is proposed, other than to receive the information.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Summary Table for ALL Funds, including Book Values and Earnings Data for Investments in Other Financial Instruments
2. For the General Fund Reserve and City Pooled Funds A—Transactions on Investments in Securities
3. For City Pooled Funds B—Summary of monthly transactions by fund Prepared by: Vanessa Garris, Finance Manager Meeting Date: May 3, 2022 Submitted by: Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director / City Treasurer City Manager Approval:
9.C-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach
Investment Name Name of Institution Type of Investment
Current
Earnings
Rate Book Value
Actual Interest
Earned March
2022
Actual Year-to-
Date Interest
Earned Ending
3/31/2022 * Data Sources
General Fund Reserves US Bank CDs/GASs/Corp/
Muni Bonds
1.82% avg 7,328,013 9,943$ 82,495$ 1 City Pooled Funds - A US Bank CDs/GASs/Corp/
Muni Bonds
1.64% avg 22,143,579 19,466 229,476 1 Total All Securities 29,471,592$ 29,409$ 311,971$ City Pooled Funds - B US Bank Custody 0.00% -$ 0$ 7$ 1 City Pooled Funds - B Local Agency Invest.
Fund
State Investment
Pool
0.32% 19,278,941 15,192 38,010 2 City Pooled Funds - B US Bank Checking 0.00% 21,338,588 96 708 3 City Pooled Funds - B 40,617,529$ 15,288$ 38,725$ City Pooled Funds total A + B 62,761,108$ 34,754$ 268,200$ Funds Held with Fiscal
Agent
Bond funds:
Wilmington Trust
2017 Pier Project 4$ -$ 4$ 4 Funds Held with Fiscal
Agent
Bond funds:
Wilmington Trust
2017 CREB's
Project
6$ -$ 3$ 4 CalPERS Benefit Trust
OPEB Trust Account CalPERS Benefit
Trust Account
Various managed by
CalPERS
4,957,672$ (231,943)$ (21,084)$ 5 TOTAL, Cash and Investments at March 31, 2022: 75,046,803$ (187,246)$ 329,618$ TOTAL for City Managed Portfolio, Cash and Investments: 70,089,121$ 44,697$ 350,696$ Notes:
* Data Sources for Book Values and Actual Interest Earned:
1 = Monthly Customer Statement from US Bank
2 = Monthly statement from Local Agency Investment Fund 3 = Monthly reconciled bank statement from US Bank
4 = Monthly statement from Wilmington Trust
5 = Monthly statement from CalPERS Benefit Trust Account Attachment 1: Summary Table for All Funds,
including Book Values and Earnings Data for Investments in Other Financial Instruments
9.C-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 1
CITY OF PISMO BEACH
Attachment 2: For the General Fund Reserve and City Pooled Funds A Transactions on Investments in Securities
March 31, 2022
INVESTMENT ACTIVITY
PURCHASES OR DEPOSITS
03/10/22 Purchase FHLB 500,000$
03/23/22 Purchase State Bank India 245,000
03/30/22 Purchase FHLB 500,000
Total 1,245,000$
SALES, MATURITIES, CALLS OR WITHDRAWALS
03/01/22 Matured Capital One Bank 245,000$
03/01/22 Matured United Community Bank 245,000
03/14/22 Matured State Bank India 245,000
03/30/22 Matured Private Bank 245,000
Total 980,000$
ACTIVITY TOTAL 265,000$
INTEREST REVENUE
GENERAL FUND RESERVE INVESTMENTS
Interest Earned on Investments 9,943$
POOLED INVESTMENTS
Interest Earned on Investments 19,466$
TOTAL INTEREST EARNED 29,409$
Data Source: Monthly Download of Transactions from US Bank
9.C-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 2
Attachment 3: For City Pooled Funds B - Summary of monthly transactions by fund City of Pismo Beach - Bank Account Proof of Cash for the month ending: 3/31/2022 Bank Account Description Bank ID
Beginning
Balance Cash Receipts Disbursements Transfers-In
Transfers-
Out
Ending
Balance
General Checking US Bank 21,606,593$ 5,362,498$ (4,394,912)$ 264,409$ (1,500,000)$ 21,338,588$ LAIF LAIF 19,278,941 - - - - 19,278,941 Total all Bank Accounts 40,885,534$ 5,362,498$ (4,394,912)$ 264,409$ (1,500,000)$ 40,617,529$ Fund Description Fund #
Beginning
Balance Cash Receipts Disbursements Transfers-In
Transfers-
Out
Ending
Balance
General Fund
General Fund 1001-10101 15,260,361 1,868 (2,384,975) ‐ - 12,877,254 General Fund-Reserve 1001-10105 364,766 (254,758) - ‐ - 110,008 Half Cent Sales Tax Fund 1002 2,984,646 271,037 - ‐ - 3,255,682 Special Revenue Funds
Gas Tax Fund 2001 41,999 28,255 - ‐ - 70,254 LTF - Streets 2002 423,672 (26,741) - ‐ - 396,931 PEG Access Fund 2003 147,380 84 - ‐ - 147,464 Police Grant Fund 2004 305,695 (22,744) - ‐ - 282,951 Housing In Lieu Fund 2005 2,194,080 2,451 - ‐ - 2,196,532 LBID Fund 2006 1,946,816 187,989 (57,107) ‐ - 2,077,698 Chapman House 2007 259,624 (136,130) (21,415) ‐ - 102,078 Capital Projects Funds
Capital Projects Fund 3001 (821,435) 2,728,016 (1,127,832) ‐ - 778,750 Public Facilities Fund 3002 868 1 - ‐ - 868 Park Development Fund 3003 430,296 6,867 (5,029) ‐ - 432,133 Circulation Fund 3101 361,907 5,241 - ‐ - 367,148 Development Impact Fee Fund 3102 156,920 441 - ‐ - 157,362 Developer Impact Fee Fund 3103 165,210 103 - ‐ - 165,312 Underground Utility Fund 3201 16,333 10 - ‐ - 16,343
9.C-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 3
Attachment 3: For City Pooled Funds B - Summary of monthly transactions by fund City of Pismo Beach - Bank Account Proof of Cash for the month ending: 3/31/2022 Fund Description Fund #
Beginning
Balance Cash Receipts Disbursements Transfers-In
Transfers-
Out
Ending
Balance
Debt Service Funds
Public Finance Authority Fund 4001 - - - ‐ - - Public Finance Authority Fund 4002 - - - ‐ - - Freeway Foothills AD Fund 4101 756 0 - ‐ - 756 Spyglass AD Fund 4102 12,581 8 - ‐ - 12,589 Indio-El Portal AD Fund 4112 731 0 - ‐ - 731 Visalia Street AD Fund 4113 99,906 62 - ‐ - 99,968 Enterprise Funds
Water Enterprise/Tax Fund 6101/6102 2,699,602 287,053 (135,767) - - 2,850,887 Water Tax - Gragg Fund 6102-10102 100 0 - ‐ - 100 Water Construction Fund 6103 597,628 172,401 (164,862) ‐ - 605,167 Water Expansion Fund 6104 1,187,998 7,642 - ‐ - 1,195,640 Wastewater Enterprise Fund 6201 3,070,848 401,572 (121,307) ‐ - 3,351,112 Wastewater Construction Fund 6202 1,233,176 628 - ‐ - 1,233,804 Wastewater Expansion Fund 6203 1,938,644 12,354 - ‐ - 1,950,998 LTF - Transit Fund 6301 29,099 (53) - ‐ - 29,045 Pier Operations Fund 6401 20,708 6,203 (2,935) ‐ - 23,975 Parking Fund 6501 2,809,160 228,862 (43,102) ‐ - 2,994,919 Internal Service Funds
Technology Service Fund 7101 81,688 75,412 (22,033) ‐ - 135,068 Motor Vehicle Fund 7201 2,025,942 114,707 (92,543) ‐ - 2,048,106 Trust & Agency Funds
SLO County TMD 8201 107,912 145,271 (112,237) ‐ - 140,946 Control Funds
Payroll Control Fund 9301 494,517 (231,427) 35,582 ‐ - 298,672 Interest Control Fund 9302 23,430 (23,158) - ‐ - 272 Utility Billing Control Fund 9304 209,289 727 (14) ‐ - 210,002 M/R Control Fund 9305 - - - ‐ - - Total all cash funds 40,882,851 3,990,256 (4,255,578) - - 40,617,529
9.C-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 3
Attachment 3: For City Pooled Funds B - Summary of monthly transactions by fund City of Pismo Beach - Bank Account Proof of Cash for the month ending: 3/31/2022 Fund Description Fund #
Beginning
Balance Cash Receipts Disbursements Transfers-In
Transfers-
Out
Ending
Balance
INVESTMENTS
General Fund
General Fund Money Mrkt Csh 1001-10108 0 - - ‐ - 0 General Fund - CD's 1001-10404 4,588,000 - - ‐ - 4,588,000 General Fund - Fed Agency 1001-10405 3,799,000 - - ‐ - 3,799,000 GF - Half Cent Sales Tax CD's 1002-10404 1,225,000 - - ‐ - 1,225,000 GF - Half Cent Sales Tax 1002-10405 - - - ‐ - - GF - Half Cent Sales Tax Mny M1002-10108 0 - - ‐ - 0 GF Reserve Money Mkt Cash 1001-10109 0 - - ‐ - 0 GF Reserve - CD's 1001-10403 3,097,000 (490,000) - ‐ - 2,607,000 GF Reserve - Fed Agency 1001-10402 1,453,000 755,000 - ‐ - 2,208,000 GF Reserve - Building 1001-10406 447,000 (245,000) - ‐ - 202,000 GF Reserve - Building - Federal 1001-10146 53,000 245,000 - ‐ - 298,000 GF Reserve - Risk Mgmt - CD's 1001-10407 150,000 - - ‐ - 150,000 GF Reserve - Risk Mgmt - Fed A 1001-10140 50,000 - - ‐ - 50,000 GF Corp Bond - Pooled 1001-10141 529,143 - - ‐ - 529,143 GF Corp Bond - Reserve 1001-10145 500,000 - - ‐ - 500,000 GF Municipal Bonds Pooled 1001-10142 435,101 - - ‐ - 435,101 GF Municipal Bonds Reserve 1001-10143 1,263,013 - - ‐ - 1,263,013 Risk Mgmt Muni Bonds Reserve 1001-10144 50,000 - - ‐ - 50,000 Half Cent Sales Tax - Pooled 1002-10141 499,685 - - ‐ - 499,685 Half Cent Sales Tax - Muni Bond 1002-10142 571,288 - - ‐ - 571,288 GF CREB's Fiscal Agent 1001-10515 (0) - - ‐ - (0) Special Revenue Funds
Housing In Lieu - Mny Mkt Csh 2005-10108 (0) - - ‐ - (0) Housing In Lieu Fund 2005-10404 875,000 - - ‐ - 875,000 Housing In-Lieu Fed Agencies 2005-10405 140,000 - - ‐ - 140,000 Capital Projects Funds
Park Develop. Fund Mny Mkt 3003-10108 - - - ‐ - - Park Development Fund 3003-10404 - - - ‐ - - Park Develop Federal Agencies 3003-10405 - - - ‐ - - Circulation Fees Mny Mkt 3101-10108 - - - ‐ - - Circulation Fees 3101-10404 245,000 - - ‐ - 245,000 Develop. Impact Fee Mny Mkt 3102-10108 0 - - ‐ - 0 Development Impact Fee Fund 3102-10404 490,000 - - ‐ - 490,000 Impact Fees Federal Agencies 3102-10405 - - - ‐ - -
9.C-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 3
Attachment 3: For City Pooled Funds B - Summary of monthly transactions by fund City of Pismo Beach - Bank Account Proof of Cash for the month ending: 3/31/2022 Fund Description Fund #
Beginning
Balance Cash Receipts Disbursements Transfers-In
Transfers-
Out
Ending
Balance
INVESTMENTS
Debt Service Funds
Public Fin Fiscal Agent-Pier 4002-10510 4 - - ‐ - 4 Public Fin Fiscal Agent-CREBs 4002-10515 6 - - ‐ - 6 Enterprise Funds
Water Fund Money Mrkt Csh 6101-10108 0 - - ‐ - 0 Water Fund CD's 6101-10404 590,000 - - ‐ - 590,000 Wtr Fund Federal Agencies 6101-10405 2,155,000 - - ‐ - 2,155,000 Wtr Fund Corp Bond - Pooled 6101-10141 - - - ‐ - - Water Construction Money Mkt 6103-10108 (0) - - ‐ - (0) Water Construction 6103-10404 504,363 - - ‐ - 504,363 Wastewater Fund Money Market 6201-10108 0 - - ‐ - 0 Wastewater Fund CD's 6201-10404 245,000 - - ‐ - 245,000 Wastewater Fund Fed Agencies 6201-10405 2,100,000 - - ‐ - 2,100,000 WWtr Fund Corp Bond - Pooled 6201-10141 1,062,000 - - ‐ - 1,062,000 Parking Enterprise Money Mrkt 6501-10108 (0) - - ‐ - (0) Parking Fund Corp Bond-Pooled 6501-10141 500,000 - - ‐ - 500,000 Parking Enterprise 6501-10404 490,000 - - ‐ - 490,000 Parking Fund Federal Agencies 6501-10405 1,000,000 - - ‐ - 1,000,000 Internal Service Funds
MVR Fund Money Mrkt Csh 7201-10108 0 - - ‐ - 0 MVR Fund CD's 7201-10404 100,000 - - ‐ - 100,000 MVR Fund Federal Agencies 7201-10405 0 - - ‐ - 0 CalPers Benefit Trust
OPEB Trust Account 8101-10408 4,956,606 1,066 - ‐ - 4,957,672 Total all Investments 34,163,207$ 266,066$ -$ -$ -$ 34,429,273$ Total all Funds 75,046,059$ 4,256,322$ (4,255,578)$ -$ -$ 75,046,803$
9.C-7Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 3
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.D
SUBJECT/TITLE:
FISCAL YEAR 2022 THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive as information only. No actions are requested or recommended.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report updates the City Council on the status of Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 ending on June 30, 2022, or FY 2022, financial status based on actual revenues and expenditures during the first half of the fiscal year.
Overall, the City of Pismo Beach’s funds are projected to be financially stable, with sufficient fund balances. The FY 2022 ending General Fund unassigned fund balance is projected to be $3.36 million, which is $12.31 million less than the FY 2021 ending unassigned fund balance. The one-time and capital project expenditures, including the 2022 Paving Project, spend down the fund balance.
For most the City’s other funds, revenues and expenditures in the City’s other funds are projected to be balanced and the ending fund balances are in line with the FY 2022 Adopted Budget ending fund balances. In most of the funds, there are sufficient fund balances and projected revenues to cover projected expenditures.
The following sections provide details of the General Fund financial picture, followed by a summary and highlights of the City’s other funds.
I. General Fund Budget Summary
In summary, based on actual revenues and expenditures during the first nine months of the fiscal year, the General Fund is projected to end FY 2022 with a $3.36 million unassigned fund balance. The FY 2022 projected $3.36 million unassigned fund balance is $1.14 million greater than the FY 2022 Revised Budget. This projected increase is largely attributable to $182 thousand greater operating revenues, $1.34 million fewer operating expenditures, and $389 thousand greater one-time revenues. The unassigned fund balance is used to pay for future one-time investments included in the FY 2023 budget and in the 10-year Capital Improvement Plan. In addition to the General Fund unassigned fund balance, the General Fund includes the Budget Stabilization Reserve set-aside of $2.00 million.
The following table is a summary of the FY 2021 actuals and the FY 2022 General Fund revised budget, projected actuals, and a variance comparing the budget to projected actuals.
9.D-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Table 1: FY 2022 General Fund Budget Summary
The FY 2022 projected ending unassigned fund balance of $3.63 million does not yet include anticipated Council project expenditures that may be appropriated partially in FY 2022, but more likely in FY 2023 with potential additional operating surplus. These additional anticipated costs total $4.0 million, which is $636 thousand greater than the current estimated unassigned fund balance. The following table illustrates these anticipated costs and the impact on the ending unassigned fund balance. This is for illustrative purposes only to demonstrate that the unassigned ending fund balance can only partially support these costs in FY 2022, but will likely be able to support these costs in FY 2023 with additional net operating surpluses.
AB CD = C - B
($ thousands)
FY 2021
Actuals
FY 2022
Revised
Budget
FY 2022
Year-End
Projected
Actuals
Variance
(Actuals-
Budget)
Unassigned Fund Balance 6,642$ 14,225$ 14,225$ -$ Committed Fund Balance 7,569 3,976 3,976 - a Beginning Fund Balance 14,210 18,200 18,200 - b Operating Revenues 28,851 31,497 31,679 182 c Operating Expenditures 19,764 25,263 23,920 (1,342) d = b - c Net Operating Surplus/(Deficit) 9,087 6,235 7,759 1,524 e One-time Revenues 1,247 489 101 (389) f One-time/Capital Expenditures 2,800 20,695 4,331 (16,364) g =
a+d+e-f Ending Fund Balance 21,745$ 4,230$ 21,730$ 17,500$ Unassigned Fund Balance 15,669$ 2,227$ 3,363$ 1,136$ Committed Fund Balance 3,976 - 16,364 16,364 Contribution to Reserves 100 3 3 - Budget Stabilitation Set-Aside 2,000 2,000 2,000 - FY 2022 Projected Ending Unassigned Fund
Balance 3,363,097$
Anticipated Projects in FY 2023
Public Safety Facility - PAYG/Cash portion only 1,000,000 James Way Beautification 1,166,608
Chumash Park improvements 279,339
Palisades Park 353,339
Tennis Court Relocation 1,200,000
Total Anticipated Projects 3,999,286
Ending Unassigned Fund Balance (636,189)$
9.D-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
II. General Fund Beginning Fund Balance
The General Fund beginning fund balance is comprised of two different components:
the unassigned fund balance, which are funds that are not committed for any specific purpose and could be used for various one-time projects, and the committed or carryforward fund balance, which are funds that are committed for a specific budgeted use.
As illustrated in the following table, the FY 2022 Adopted Budget General Fund beginning fund balance was projected to be $14.15 million. Based on changes during FY 2021 and carrying forward fund balance to cover previously budgeted but not-yet-spent expenditures, the beginning fund balance is revised to $18.20 million. This includes $14.23 million of unassigned fund balance and $3.98 million of carryforward fund balances.
Table 2: FY 2022 General Fund, Beginning Fund Balance
III. General Fund Reserve
The City maintains various General Fund reserves totaling $7.06 million for emergency operations, building depreciation, and risk management. These reserves are crucial to avoid disrupting the City’s operations following unanticipated events. The reserves are shown in the table below, followed by a summary of each reserve.
Table 3: General Fund Reserves
Reserve Amount ($ thousands)
General Fund 25% Reserve $6,315
City Building Reserve 500
Risk Management Reserve 250
Total $7,065
General Fund 25% Reserve
The City has adopted a fiscal policy to fund a General Fund Reserve of 25% of General Fund budgeted annual operating expenditures for FY 2022. The General Fund reserve should be equal to $6.32 million, which is 25% of the total FY 2022 budgeted annual operating expenditures of $25.26 million. Currently, the General Fund Reserve is $6.31 ($ thousands)
Adopted
Budget
Budget
Revisions Actuals
Unassigned Fund Balance 14,149$ 76$ 14,225$
Capital Funds Carryforward 3,516 3,516
Purchase Orders Carryforward 414 414
Prepayment Carryforward 45 45
Total Fund Balance 14,149$ 4,051$ 18,200$
$3,976
Carryforward
9.D-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
million, which is invested in various securities. This reserve allows the City to maintain its operations for a couple of months in the event that an emergency or disaster impacts the City’s finances.
City Building Reserve
The Council created a City Building Reserve of $500 thousand, for the maintenance and upkeep of City facilities and buildings, particularly if funds are not available. This amount is equal to five years of annual depreciation on City-owned buildings.
Risk Management Reserve
The City Council established a Risk Management Reserve, contributing $50 thousand each year to budget for unanticipated risk management costs. This reserve has a balance of $250 thousand, which is the maximum contribution level.
IV. General Fund Revenues
The FY 2022 Revised Budget revenues total $31.99 million. FY 2022 projected actual revenues are $31.78 million, or $206 thousand less than budget. Compared to the previous year, FY 2022 projected actual revenues are $1.68 million, or 5.6% greater than FY 2021. This increase over the prior year is largely due to additional projected transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues in FY 2022 in comparison to TOT revenues in FY 2021.
This projected TOT revenue increase is largely due to reflecting a full year of the additional 1.0% TOT revenue compared to only half a year of the additional 1% TOT in FY 2021. The table below summarizes the General Fund revenue budget and projected actual revenues for FY 2022, which is followed by a brief discussion of the top three FY 2022 projected actual sources of revenues.
9.D-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Table 4: FY 2022 General Fund Revenue Budget and Projected Actuals
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues are projected to be equal to budget and are projected to be $3.16 million, or 22.2%, greater than the previous year’s TOT revenues. TOT revenues are equal to 11% of the rent charged by all lodging businesses for a person exercising occupancy for 30 consecutive calendar days or less. This increase in TOT revenues compared to the prior year is largely due to reflecting a full year of the additional 1.0% TOT revenue (Measure B-20 that was approved by the voters on November 3, 2020 increasing TOT from 10% to 11% of gross lodging revenues and effective January 2021), compared to only half a year of the additional 1% TOT in FY 2021. In addition, FY 2022 projected TOT revenues reflect fewer closures and travel restrictions from COVID-19 compared to FY 2021 and higher room rates. The following table illustrates the actual TOT revenues received by month in FY 2022 and FY 2021, showing an increase of 33.9% compared to the previous year.
A B C D = C - B E = C - A F = C/A-1
($ thousands)
Revenue Category
FY 2021
Actuals
FY 2022
Revised
Budget
FY 2022
Projected
Actuals
Variance
(Projected
Actuals -
Revised
Bdgt)
Variance
(FY22 Proj Act
- FY21
Actuals)
%
Variance
(FY22
Proj Act
v FY21
Actuals)
Proj
Actual
% of
Total
Transient Occupancy Tax 14,210$ 17,370$ 17,370$ -$ 3,160$ 22.2% 54.7% Property Related Taxes 6,221 6,250 6,250 - 30 0.5% 19.7% Sales and Use Tax 3,661 3,445 3,750 305 89 2.4% 11.8% Other revenues 1,902 1,868 1,781 (87) (121) -6.4% 5.6% Permits 1,137 912 978 65 (159) -14.0% 3.1% Franchise Taxes 657 631 631 - (26) -4.0% 2.0% Departmental Revenues 354 425 366 (59) 11 3.1% 1.2% Business Tax 218 211 227 16 8 3.8% 0.7% Transfers In 140 140 140 - - 0.0% 0.4% Other Finan Sources - 96 - (96) - 0.0% 0.0% Other Taxes 244 78 142 64 (102) -41.8% 0.4% Intergovernmental Revenue 55 43 46 2 (9) -16.8% 0.1% Grants 52 28 - (28) (52) -100.0% 0.0% Total Operating Revenues 28,851$ 31,497$ 31,679$ 182$ 2,828$ 9.8% 99.7% One-time Revenues 1,247 489 101 (389) (1,146) -91.9% 0.3% Total Revenues 30,099$ 31,987$ 31,780$ (206)$ 1,682$ 5.6% 100.0%
9.D-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Table 5: TOT Revenues for the First Eight Months of FY 2022 and FY 2021
Based on data obtained from Smith Travel Research Inc., a provider of competitive benchmarking, information services, and research to the hotel industry, the increase in TOT revenues is largely due to an increase in room revenue. The average daily rate increased by 23.0% on average during the first eight months of FY 2022 compared to the same period in the prior fiscal year. In addition, occupancy rates during the first six months of FY 2021 increased by 10.7% compared to the same period in the prior fiscal year.
Staff projects TOT revenues to reach $17.37 million, which is equal to budget and are projected to be $3.16 million, or 22.2%, greater than the previous year’s TOT revenues. The additional 1% of TOT revenues is programmed to be used to pay the debt service on construction of the proposed Public Safety Facility.
Property related tax revenues are projected to be equal to budget and $30 thousand, or 0.5%, greater than previous year’s property tax related revenues. There are two sources of property related tax revenues:
o Property Tax Assessed Value revenues: equivalent to 1% of assessed values o Property Tax In Lieu of Vehicle License Fees: 1% tax on the market value of a registered vehicle.
Assessed value cannot increase by more than 2.0% per year per Section 2 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. However, the San Luis Obispo County Auditor- Controller’s office is projecting assessed values to increase by 3.3%. This reflects supplemental assessments (new construction and change in ownership) and the recovery of Proposition 8 reductions which can increase assessed values over the
2.0% per year rate. About half of the Proposition 8 reductions remain to be recovered, which means property tax revenues should continue to increase above the 2.0% per year rate if property values continue to rise at their current pace.
($ thousands)
Month FY 2021 FY 2022 Variance % Change
July 1,488 2,354 866$ 58.2%
August 1,479 1,886 406 27.5%
September 1,238 1,553 315 25.4%
October 1,198 1,298 101 8.4%
November 819 1,150 331 40.4%
December 470 970 500 106.3%
January 674 822 148 22.0%
February 895 1,033 138 15.4%
8,261$ 11,065$ 2,804$ 33.9%
9.D-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Sales and Use Tax revenues are projected to be $305 thousand greater than budget and $89 thousand, or 2.4%, greater than the prior year. Sales and use tax revenues are made up of two sources:
o Bradley-Burns uniform sales and use tax, which is a 1.0% tax on taxable sales within the city.
o Public safety tax, which is a 0.5% tax on taxable sales for specified public safety purposes.
The Bradley-Burns uniform sales and use tax is expected to be $305 thousand greater than the prior year. The public safety sales tax revenues are budgeted at $105 thousand in FY 2022 and are anticipated to be on budget.
In summary, sales and use tax revenues are projected to be $305 thousand greater than budget and $89 thousand, or 2.4%, greater than the prior year.
V. General Fund Expenditures
The FY 2022 Revised Budget expenditures total $45.96 million. Operating expenditures are projected to be $1.34 million less than the Revised Budget based on expenditures in the first three quarters of the fiscal year. One-time capital costs are projected to be $16.36 million less than budget based on the timing of the capital projects, including the 2022 Paving project that is projected to be spent over the next two fiscal years and the General Fund supported portion of the Public Safety Facility project that is projected to be spent in the next fiscal year.
Total operating expenditures through the third quarter should be about 75% of the budget, assuming the timing of expenditures is consistent throughout the year. This year, about 62% of the operating budget has been spent through the third quarter, while only 7% of the one-time capital expenditure budget has been spent through the third quarter. These one-time costs are dependent on the timing of construction of these projects. The table below provides details of actuals as a percentage of budget by expenditure category, followed by explanations of the large variances from the 75% mark.
9.D-7Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Table 6: FY 2022 General Fund Expenditure Budget and Projected Actuals
Some operating costs that do not reflect consistent monthly spending include:
Professional Services, which reflects that 49% was spent through the third quarter.
These costs are based on the timing of work performed and are not set amounts per month.
Contract Services, which reflects that 62% was spent through the third quarter. These costs include the $400 thousand Next Level contract services, of which only $104 thousand has been allocated to date. Details of those allocations are provided in Section VII. Next Level Budget of this report. Based on expenditures in the first nine months of the year, staff estimates that there will be $514 thousand of various contracted services, advertising and promotion costs, electricity, travel, training, and risk management cost savings in FY 2022.
Operations & Maintenance, which reflects that 58% was spent through the third quarter. Projected actuals reflect $170 thousand of savings based on savings in the first nine months, primarily in operating supplies and maintenance and minor equipment costs.
Other Expenses, which reflects that 62% was spent through the third quarter.
Projected actuals reflect $167 thousand of savings based on savings in the first nine months, primarily in technology cost savings.
Other Financing Uses, which includes a $1.00 million general contingency budget and reflects that only 18% of the budget has been spent through the third quarter. This budget is allocated over time based on unanticipated costs that come up throughout the year and are not a consistent allocation of expenditures. Retiree Medical Insurance costs, which reflects that 38% of budget was spent through the third quarter. The monthly costs are payments to Retirees, but most of these A B C D = C/B E F = B - E
($ thousands)
Expenditure Category
FY 2021
Actuals
FY 2022
Revised
Budget
FY 2022
Third
Quarter
Actuals
Third
Quarter
Actuals
% of
Budget
FY 2022
Projected
Actuals
Variance
(Revised
Bdgt -
Projected
Actuals)
Proj
Actual %
of Total
Salaries & Wages 6,995$ 8,055$ 5,364$ 67% 7,725$ 330$ 27.3% Benefits 4,390 5,131 3,760 73% 5,214 (84) 18.5% Professional Services 3,389 4,054 1,970 49% 3,802 253 13.5% Contract Services 2,048 3,146 1,947 62% 2,632 514 9.3% Operations & Maintenance 930 1,790 1,047 58% 1,620 170 5.7% Other Expenses 722 953 589 62% 786 167 2.8% Other Financing Uses 135 649 115 18% 649 - 2.3% Transfers Out 465 576 343 60% 576 - 2.0% Retiree Medical Insurance 207 458 175 38% 466 (8) 1.7% Debt Service 435 434 301 69% 434 - 1.5% Capital Projects 49 16 2 10% 16 - 0.1% Total Operating Expenditures 19,764$ 25,263$ 15,611$ 62% 23,920$ 1,342$ 84.7% One-time Capital Costs 2,800 20,695 1,538 7% 4,331 16,364 15.3% Total Expenditures 22,564$ 45,957$ 17,149$ 37% 28,251$ 17,706$ 100.0%
9.D-8Council Agenda 5-3-2022
payments are contributions to CalPERS for the actuarially determined contribution and are paid toward the end of the fiscal year.
One-time capital costs reflect payments based on the timing of various capital projects.
Staff projects that $4.33 million of the $20.70 million budget will be spent this fiscal year.
These projects include the 2022 Paving project, the Public Safety Facility project, the City Hall Corporation Yard project, the Ocean Boulevard Improvements project, the Chapman Estate Improvements project, the Chumash Park Improvements, the James Way Beautification project, and various other projects. Total projected one-time savings for FY 2022 are $16.36 million, which will be carried forward to FY 2023. These savings do not contribute to an increase in fund balance, as these are committed funds.
VI. General Fund Contingency Budgets
General Contingency
The FY 2022 Adopted Budget included $1.00 million in the General Fund general contingency account that may be used for various one-time items that come up during the year. Of this amount, $471 thousand of this appropriation was allocated, leaving $529 thousand remaining. Details of the allocation is provided in the following table.
Table 7: FY 2022 General Fund General Contingency Budget
Council Contingency
The FY 2022 Adopted Budget also includes a $5 thousand City Council contingency appropriation that may be used for various one-time items that come up during the year.
Of this amount, $3 thousand of this appropriation was allocated, leaving $2 thousand remaining. Details of the allocation is provided in the following table.
Table 8: FY 2022 City Council Contingency Budget
Beginning Balance July 1, 2021 1,000,000$
Appropriations
Janitorial Services (42,721)
General Plan LCP Amendment (207,922)
Public Art for Bello Bridge (56,694)
Public Safety Radio Communications Project (160,597)
St. Jude's Tunnel painted mural support (3,000)
Total Appropriations (470,934)
Ending Balance as of June 30, 2022 529,066$
Beginning Balance July 1, 2021 5,000$
Appropriations
2022 Advisory Body Recruitment Mailer Postage (949)
2022 Advisory Body Recruitment Mailer Printing (1,822)
Total Appropriations (2,771)
Ending Balance as of June 30, 2022 2,229$
9.D-9Council Agenda 5-3-2022
VII. Next Level Budget
The FY 2022 Adopted Budget included $400 thousand in the General Fund non- department contract services account that may be used for various “next-level” contract services. Of this amount, $140 thousand of this appropriation is proposed to be allocated, leaving $260 thousand remaining. Details of the allocation is provided in the following table.
Table 9: FY 2022 Next Level Budget
Beginning Balance July 1, 2021 400,000$
Appropriations
Public Records Request Clerk (26,085)
Public Interactive Digital Budget Book and Budget
In Brief (16,170)
Price House additonal landscaping (18,000)
Pothole repairs (40,000)
Community Development public records scanning (10,000)
St. Jude's tunnel fence work (30,000)
Total Appropriations (140,255)
Ending Balance as of June 30, 2022 259,745$
9.D-10Council Agenda 5-3-2022
VIII. Other Funds
The following table reflects fund balance, projected revenue, and projected expenditure activity in the City’s other funds. For most funds, revenues and expenditures are projected to be on budget and the ending fund balances are in line with the FY 2023 Adopted Budget beginning fund balances.
Table 10: Other Funds
AB CD = B ‐ CE = A + DFG = E ‐ F
Fund
Type Fund Fund Title
Beginning
Fund Balance
Projected
Actual Revenue
Projected Actual
Expenditure Net Rev ‐ Exp
Projected
Ending Fund
Balance Carryforward
Unrestricted
Fund Balance
General Operating Funds
1001 General Fund 18,200,272 31,780,441 28,251,115 3,529,326 21,729,598 16,363,868 5,365,730 1002 Half‐Cent Sales Tax Fund 4,935,391 2,051,600 803,753 1,247,847 6,183,238 5,803,370 379,869 Special Revenue Funds
2001 Gas Tax Fund 98,552 366,902 399,769 (32,867) 65,685 65,231 454 2002 Local Transportation 403,644 312,369 438,259 (125,890) 277,754 136,882 140,873 2003 PEG Fund 138,494 13,207 10,000 3,207 141,700 24,732 116,968 2004 Grants‐NonCapital 193,111 180,000 44,407 135,593 328,704 265,726 62,977 2005 Housing In Lieu Fee 4,209,633 18,669 1,130,192 (1,111,523) 3,098,110 2,246,574 851,536 2006 LBID Operations 718,387 1,501,550 1,414,519 87,031 805,418 ‐ 805,418 2006 LBID Improvements (2,067,697) 1,501,550 358,888 1,142,662 (925,035) ‐ (925,035) 2007 Chapman Estate 42,921 449,964 489,651 (39,687) 3,234 ‐ 3,234 Capital Project Funds
3001 Capital Projects 613,814 9,669,679 9,669,679 ‐ 613,814 613,814 ‐ 3002 Public Facilities Fund 875 ‐ ‐ ‐ 875 ‐ 875 3003 Park Development Fund 594,249 184,138 427,540 (243,402) 350,847 262,571 88,276 3101 Circulation Fees 580,090 149,341 115,270 34,071 614,161 90,000 524,161 3102 Impact Fees 1,026,661 252,796 630,567 (377,770) 648,891 59,747 589,144 3103 Developer Impact Fee 62,182 ‐ ‐ ‐ 62,182 ‐ 62,182 3201 Underground Utility Fnd 16,466 ‐ ‐ ‐ 16,466 ‐ 16,466 Debt Service Funds
4001 PFA Debt Service ‐ 390,988 390,988 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 4002 PF Agency Debt 5 709,572 709,572 ‐ 5 ‐ 5 4101 Reass 92‐1 Fwy Fthlls 762 ‐ ‐ ‐ 762 ‐ 762 4102 Spyglass 92‐4 12,683 ‐ ‐ ‐ 12,683 ‐ 12,683 Enterprise Funds
6101 Water Enterprise 6,882,780 5,217,517 6,444,983 (1,227,465) 5,655,314 5,655,314 ‐ 6102 Water Tax (Lopez/State) 210,888 2,125,155 2,319,526 (194,371) 16,517 16,517 ‐ 6103 Water Construction Fund 1,064,892 1,444,818 1,470,009 (25,191) 1,039,701 1,039,701 ‐ 6104 Water Expansion Fund 994,609 282,169 ‐ 282,169 1,276,778 1,276,778 ‐ Water Enterprise Funds 9,153,168 9,069,660 10,234,518 (1,164,858) 7,988,310 7,988,310 ‐ 6201 Wastewater Treatment 7,576,680 5,524,900 5,210,260 314,640 7,891,320 7,891,320 ‐ 6202 Wastewater Capital Proj 861,761 339,211 343,747 (4,536) 857,225 857,225 ‐ 6203 Wastewater Expansion 1,594,513 502,682 473 502,209 2,096,722 2,096,722 ‐ Wastewater Enterprise Fund 10,032,954 6,366,793 5,554,480 812,313 10,845,267 10,845,267 ‐ 6301 Local Trans Transit 29,902 ‐ 644 (644) 29,258 29,258 ‐ 6401 Pier Enterprise 93,600 89,886 63,674 26,212 119,812 119,812 ‐ 6501 Parking Enterprise 3,409,461 2,673,221 656,388 2,016,833 5,426,295 3,514,425 1,911,869 Internal Service Funds
7101 Technology Service Fund 129,023 857,804 787,977 69,827 198,850 ‐ 198,850 7201 Motor Vehicle Fund 2,154,880 1,145,002 1,182,624 (37,622) 2,117,258 196,873 1,920,385
9.D-11Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Highlights of Other Funds
Half-Cent Sales Tax Fund (1002)
The Half-Cent Sales Tax Fund is part of the General Fund which includes a 0.50% transaction sales and use tax. This tax was approved by Pismo Beach voters in June 2008, effective October 1, 2008, and renewed in November 2014, which extends the tax to March 31, 2027. The tax proceeds are used exclusively for infrastructure projects. This fund started the year with a $4.94 million beginning fund balance (after including carryforward fund balances). Projected actual revenues are $2.05 million. Projected actual expenditures are $804 thousand. Based on the projected revenues and expenditures for the current year, there is a $379 thousand projected ending fund balance in this fund. This amount will be used to support the 2022 Paving Project in FY 2023. The following table lists the budgeted projects in this fund for FY 2022.
Table 11: Half-Cent Sales Tax Fund FY 2022 Budgeted Projects and Projected Actuals
Gas Tax Fund (2001)
The Gas Tax Fund is a Special Revenue Fund whose revenues include State gas tax funds based on the State’s apportionment formula. These funds are used for City street light costs, City traffic signal maintenance costs, and street repairs and/or capital improvements. This fund started the year with a $99 thousand beginning fund balance (after including carryforward fund balances). Projected actual revenues are $367 thousand and projected actual expenditures are $400 thousand for the 2022 Paving Project. Based on the projected revenues and expenditures for the current year, there is a $454 projected ending fund balance in this fund.
Local Transportation Fund (2002)
The Local Transportation Fund is a Special Revenue Fund whose funds are used for construction and maintenance of streets, bluff protection, and beach access. Revenues for this fund consist of State Transportation Development Act funds, which remain after funds are allocated for regional transit, local transit, and Ride-on services. Projected actual revenues are $312 thousand and $438 thousand of expenditures are budgeted for the 2022 Paving project. Based on the projected revenues and expenditures for the current year, there is $141 thousand projected ending fund balance for this fund.
Projects
FY 2022
Budget
FY 2022
Projected
Actuals
Ocean Blvd Improvement Project $1,516,810 $ 76,347 City Hall Parking Lot 25,000 -
Storm Drains Project 720,214 720,214
2022 Paving Project 4,010,098 -
Tennis Bball Court relocation 335,000 7,192 Total $6,607,122 $ 803,753
9.D-12Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Public Education Government Fund (2003)
The Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) Access Fee Fund includes revenues from a PEG Access Fee collected from cable television providers (i.e. Spectrum) with franchise operations within city limits. Expenditures include capital costs related to governmental cable broadcasting and equipment. Based on projected revenues of $13 thousand and projected expenditures of $10 thousand, the PEG Fund is expected to end the year with a $117 thousand fund balance.
Housing In Lieu Fund (2005)
The Housing In Lieu Fund is a Special Revenue Fund with revenues from a development impact fee paid to the City as an alternative to the production of affordable housing (housing in-lieu fee). These funds are used for the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of affordable housing. The fund is projected to have $852 thousand of funds available by the end of the year for this purpose.
Lodging Business Improvement District Fund (2006) Operations The Pismo Beach Lodging Business Improvement District (LBID) Fund for operations reflects a 1% assessment on transient rents at transient lodging providers as revenues and budgeted expenditures to promote Pismo Beach lodging businesses. The LBID Fund started the year with a $718 thousand beginning fund balance. City staff projects that LBID assessment revenues and interest earnings will be $1.50 million. Operating expenditures are projected $1.41 million. The fund is expected to end the year with an $805 thousand ending unrestricted fund balance.
LBID Fund (2006) Improvements
The LBID Fund for improvements includes a 1% assessment for physical improvements, in particular the Pier Plaza project. The LBID Fund started the year with a negative $2.07 million beginning fund balance after including a $2.32 million remaining balance on the interfund loan payable to the Motor Vehicle Replacement (MVR) Fund and pre-funding the Pier Plaza project in FY 2020 and FY 2021. City staff projects that LBID assessment revenues and interest earnings will be $1.50 million. The LBID Improvements expenditure budget includes $359 thousand for the Spyglass sidewalk under US-101, Beach Swing replacements at Addie and Main Streets, and interest costs to the MVR Fund. The second interfund loan payment is expected to be $1,245,321. The fund is expected to end the year with a negative $925 thousand ending unrestricted fund balance. The fund is expected to have a positive balance at the end of FY 2023 when the loan is paid in full.
Chapman Estate Fund (2007)
The Chapman Estate Fund reflects donations or other contributions for the Chapman Estate as revenues and ongoing maintenance and one-time infrastructure improvements to the Chapman Estate as expenditures. The fund started the year with $43 thousand and is expected to receive $450 thousand of revenues, largely due to the $382 thousand payment from the Chapman Estate trust and interest earnings. Proposed private event revenues are not anticipated at this time until the roofing project, window replacement project, and the accessible restrooms are built. Projected actual expenditures are $490 thousand, including $363 thousand that is transferred out of the Chapman Estate Fund
9.D-13Council Agenda 5-3-2022
into the Capital Projects Fund to support a portion of the Chapman Estate roofing project, $64 thousand for the Chapman Estate improvement project (window replacement and accessible restrooms), and $64 thousand for operating costs of the home and grounds and monthly maintenance costs for utilities and gardening. Although the projected revenues support the projected expenditures this fiscal year, the fund will either need General Fund support or a reduction of the transfer out of the trust funds at the end of the year to continue to operate as the operating costs were originally anticipated to be covered by a portion of the trust fund revenues and those are now supporting the Chapman roof project. The remaining projected ending balance of this fund is $3,234.
Park Development Fund (3003)
The Park Development Fund is a Capital Project Fund with Quimby Act (park development in-lieu) fees and Impact Fees as funding sources to support construction costs of new parks and park lands, and the enhancement of existing parks to serve new development. The fund started the year with $594 thousand and is projected to receive $184 thousand in revenues. Projected actual expenditures total $428 thousand and include the following projects.
Table 12: Park Development Fund FY 2022 Budgeted Projects
The fund is expected to end the year with a $88 thousand ending fund balance.
Water Enterprise Fund (6101)
The Water Enterprise Fund is an Enterprise Fund consisting of revenues from water billings and expenditures for: contract meter reading; direct water services and supplies; on-going inspection, repair, and maintenance of the City’s wells, tanks, booster stations, hydro-pneumatic system, and water distribution system components; water conservation efforts; and ensuring that a safe, drinkable supply of water is provided to Pismo Beach.
Water revenues are projected to be $5.22 million and expenditures are projected to be $6.45 million.
The projected ending fund balance for the Water Enterprise Fund is $5.66 million, which is allocated for future water system capital costs, including the Central Coast Blue project.
Note that the Water Enterprise Fund also includes the Water Tax, Water Construction, Projects
FY 2022
Budget
FY 2022
Projected
Actuals
Dinosaur Caves Restroom 384,038$ 384,427$
Price Historic Park/ Meherin House 141,366 38,067
Palisades Park improvements 100,000 339
South Palisades Outdoor fitness equipment/trail 60,000 - Overhead costs 4,707 4,707
Total 690,111$ 427,540$
9.D-14Council Agenda 5-3-2022
and Water Expansion Funds and the ending fund balance across all these funds is $7.99 million.
Wastewater Treatment Fund (6201)
The Wastewater Treatment Fund is an Enterprise Fund consisting of revenues from wastewater billings and expenditures for direct services and supplies; operation and maintenance of the City’s wastewater treatment plant and the wastewater collection facilities including pumps and pipelines; and ensuring the City’s treatment and collection system operations meet City, federal, and state laws and requirements. The ending fund balance is $7.89 million which is already allocated for other wastewater capital projects.
Note that the Wastewater Treatment Funds also include the Wastewater Capital Fund and the Wastewater Expansion Fund. The total combined ending fund balance across all these funds is $10.85 million.
Pier Enterprise Fund (6401)
The Pier Enterprise Fund includes revenues from a concession lease on the Pier and expenditures for repair and maintenance of the Pier, Promenade, and nearby facilities.
The beginning fund balance is $94 thousand and projected revenues are $90 thousand, primarily from revenues from the Pier Airstreams. Projected expenditures are $64 thousand, including $58 thousand primarily for pier and pier plaza operating costs. The Pier Enterprise Fund is expected to end the year with a $120 thousand ending fund balance.
Parking Enterprise Fund (6501)
The Parking Enterprise Fund is an Enterprise Fund consisting of revenues from parking kiosks, parking citations, and parking permits to support a Parking Supervisor and implement the goals of the Pismo Beach Parking Management Plan to administer existing parking more efficiently, provide more downtown parking, improve enforcement and parking management, and provide funds for future parking structures. Revenues are projected to reach $2.67 million to fund operating expenditures of $651 thousand.
In addition to operating expenditures, the budget includes $3.74 million for one-time projects, including $2.51 million for the purchase of property to increase the City’s parking inventory, $750 thousand for paving the parking lots, $250 thousand for a Police Downtown Sub-station, $101 thousand for the Secure Communication Radio project, $100 thousand for the Addie Street Parking and Access Improvements project, $19 thousand for additional parking meters, $4 thousand for a radio system upgrade and reliability project, and $824 for other projects. The FY 2022 projected ending fund balance is $1.91 million.
Motor Vehicle Replacement Fund (7201)
The Motor Vehicle Replacement (MVR) Fund is an Internal Service Fund that funds the City’s motor vehicle operations and maintenance and motor vehicle replacements for various City departments. These costs are funded by accumulated fund balance, transfers from other funds, and motor vehicle rental charges to other funds. In FY 2020, the MVR Fund is provided a $3.28 million interfund loan from its cash balance to the LBID Fund for the Pier Plaza project. Consequently, the MVR Fund has a $2.15 million
9.D-15Council Agenda 5-3-2022
beginning fund balance. The interfund loan is anticipated to be paid overtime during FY 2021 through FY 2023. The FY 2022 projected ending fund balance is $1.92 million, which are accumulated funds necessary to fund future replacements.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact from receiving this report as it is information only.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Request additional information from staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Submitted by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
City Manager Approval:
9.D-16Council Agenda 5-3-2022
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.E
SUBJECT / TITLE:
QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE THREE MONTHS OF JANUARY THROUGH MARCH 2022—THE THIRD QUARTER OF FY 2022
RECOMMENDATION:
No action required; information only.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report updates City Council on the City’s investment portfolio as of the quarter ending on March 31, 2022. This report complies with regulations set forth in California State Government Code Section 53646 in which the City Treasurer is required to submit to the legislative body (City Council) a quarterly report containing various information on the City’s investments.
The report includes all investments managed by the City, including funds invested in various securities, the City’s pooled funds invested in various financial instruments, and funds held in reserve with fiscal agents.
• Table 1 (Attachment 1) provides a summary of the City’s cash, investments, and earnings based on book value as of March 31, 2022.
• Tables 2 and 3 (Attachments 2 and 3) provides details on the investment type, issuer, maturity date, book value, market value, and interest rates as of March 31, 2022 for the General Fund Reserve and City Pooled Funds A, respectively.
All of the City’s investments and the City’s allocation of funds in the various financial instruments comply with State Government Code Sections 53610—53686 and with the City’s Investment Policy’s primary objective to safeguard the principal. Additionally, the City of Pismo Beach’s invested funds as described in this report comply with the City’s Investment Policy and meet the City’s pooled expenditure requirements for the next six months.
Description of Cash and Investment Accounts
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (CDs), US Government Agency Securities (GASs), Corporate Bonds (Corp Bonds), and Municipal Bonds (Munis) • General Fund Reserves: The City has three reserves invested in various financial instruments that mature at various periods over the next five years. The total amount invested for these three reserves is $7.33 million, earning a projected 1.82% average interest rate during Fiscal Year (FY) 2022. Specifics of each reserve are provided below:
o General Fund Reserve: The City adopted a Fiscal Policy that maintains a General Fund Reserve of 25% of budgeted annual operating expenditures. This Reserve should be $6.32 million, which is 25% of the FY 2022 budgeted annual operating
9.E-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
expenditures. Currently, $6.58 million is invested in various CDs, GASs, Corp Bonds, and Munis earning 1.76% on average per year.
o City Building Reserve: The City Council created a City Building Reserve of $500 thousand for the maintenance and upkeep of City facilities and buildings. Currently, this Reserve is invested in various CDs and GASs earning on average 2.22% per year during FY 2022.
o Risk Management Reserve: The City Council established a Risk Management Reserve, contributing $50 thousand each year. Currently, this Reserve is $250 thousand, which is invested in CDs, GASs, and Munis earning 2.57% on average per year.
• City-Pooled Funds A (for deferred capital projects): Based on the City’s 10-year capital plan and the cash flow needs for the next five years, the City has invested $21.75 million in various CDs, GASs, Corp Bonds, and Munis that mature at various periods over the next five years and have a 1.64% average interest rate during FY 2022.
Other Financial Instruments
City-Pooled Funds B (for current year expenditures): The City follows the practice of pooling cash for all funds in financial instruments. Interest earned on pooled cash and investments is allocated quarterly to the various funds based on the respective fund’s average quarterly cash balance. As of March 31, 2022, the City-Pooled Funds B are allocated or invested as described below.
• $19.28 million in Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF): LAIF is a State investment pool earning 0.32% annually and is the City’s main savings account where the majority of cash is held for current year expenditures.
• $21.34 million in U.S. Bank Checking: This account is the City’s primary checking account.
OPEB Trust Account
The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requires public-sector entities to account for the promise to provide other post-employment benefits (OPEB) over the working life of the employee rather than on a pay-as-you-go basis. The City has an actuarial study performed every two years to determine how much to set aside each year to partially or completely fund our future obligations for retiree health costs.
The OPEB Trust Account is the California Employers’ Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT) Fund that was set up for the purpose of receiving employer contributions to prefund retiree health and OPEB costs for retirees and their beneficiaries. This trust fund helps finance future costs in large part from the investment earnings provided by CalPERS, rather than the City’s restricted investment earnings. The projected earnings are 6.75% per year and fluctuate from quarter to quarter. The City contributes to the account at the Actuarial Determined Contribution amount of $234 thousand for this year toward the City’s unfunded liability. This contribution now appears as an asset for the City’s future retiree health costs instead of a significant liability on the City’s balance sheet.
9.E-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Portfolio Allocation
Per the State Government Code 53600 et seq., and the City's Investment Policy, the City may invest up to a maximum percentage of the entire portfolio of funds in authorized financial instruments. The following table shows a summary of the authorized financial instruments, the maximum percentage limits, the book value as of March 31, 2022 of the City’s funds, and the percentage of the total City’s pooled funds that are invested in each financial instrument.
Financial Instrument
Maximum
%
Book Value as
of 3/31/22
% of
Portfolio
Local Agency Investment Fund 100% 19,278,941$ 28%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 30% 12,066,363 17% Checking Account 100% 21,338,588 30%
Corporate Bond 30% 3,335,828 5%
Issues of Other California entities 30% 2,319,402 3% US Government Agency Obligations 50% 11,750,000 17% 70,089,121$ 100%
Bond funds: Wilmington Trust 9$
OPEB Trust Account 4,957,672
Total Book Value 75,046,803$
Local Agency
Investment Fund,
28%
Negotiable
Certificates of
Deposit, 17%Checking Account,
30%
Corporate Bond,
5%
Issues of Other
California entities, 3%
US Government
Agency
Obligations, 17%
Portfolio Allocation
9.E-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Portfolio Liquidity
The portion of the City’s portfolio that is managed by the City Treasurer (all accounts except the Bond Funds and OPEB Trust Account) is sufficiently liquid to meet the City’s expenditure requirements for the next 6 months. The majority of funds are invested in LAIF, which has a liquidity of one day. The following table and chart illustrate the liquidity of the City’s managed portfolio.
Liquidity Amount
0 to 30 days 40,617,529$
FY 2022 2,116,685
FY 2023 3,288,506
FY 2024 1,130,862
FY 2025 9,211,177
FY 2026 8,445,000
FY 2027 5,279,363
70,089,121$
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000
0 to 30 days
FY 2022
FY 2023
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
Portfolio Amount ($ thousands)
Li
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
P
e
r
i
o
d
Portfolio Liquidity
9.E-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Investment Value
Book Value: The book value represents the initial outlay for an investment and is the amount carried on a balance sheet. In the past quarter ending March 31, 2022, the City’s total book value of cash and investments was $75.05 million. This is $377 thousand greater than the last quarter’s ending balance. There are a number of factors that impact changes in cash and investment balances from quarter to quarter. These changes may include receiving periodic payments (e.g., property taxes are received in December and April), large payments on debt service or capital projects, seasonal revenues and expenditures, and other factors affecting cash flow.
Market Value: The market value represents the current price at which a security can be traded and is the value of an investment comparing the various aspects of the security to other factors in the market such as interest rates. The market value as of March 31, 2022 for CDs, GASs, Municipal Bonds, and Corporate Bonds was $29.47 million, which is $1.09 million less than the book value. The City expects to hold onto the majority of its investments to maturity and would receive the book value of its investment.
Investment Name Type of Investment
Book Value as
of 3/31/22
Book Value as of
12/31/21 Variance
General Fund Reserve CDs/GASs/Corp
Bonds/Muni Bonds
7,328,013$ 7,063,013$ 265,000$
City Pooled Funds - A CDs/GASs/Corp
Bonds/Muni Bonds
22,143,579 21,629,217 514,363
City Pooled Funds - B Various 40,617,529 41,020,919 (403,390) Bond funds Blackrock Federal
Fund
9 9 -
OPEB Trust Account Benefit Trust
Account
4,957,672 4,956,606 1,066
TOTAL 75,046,803$ 74,669,763$ 377,039$
Investment Name
Type of
Investment
Book Value as of
3/31/22
Market Value as
of 3/31/22 Variance
General Fund Reserve CDs/GASs/
Corp Bonds/
Muni Bonds
7,328,013$ 7,035,544$ (292,469)$
City Pooled Funds - A CDs/GASs/
Corp Bonds/
Muni Bonds
22,143,579 21,342,180 (801,399)
Total All Securities 29,471,592$ 28,377,725$ (1,093,867)$
9.E-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Investment Earnings and Performance
Interest Earnings: In the past quarter ending March 31, 2022, the City’s total interest earnings were a gain of $330 thousand, including a $351 thousand gain in the City’s managed portfolio and a $232 thousand loss in OPEB. The estimated interest earnings for FY 2022 are $788 thousand, which is 1.05% for the year for the City’s entire portfolio and 0.70% for the City’s managed portfolio. Note that as the City’s cash and investments change, the interest earnings change correspondingly.
Performance: The projected annual interest earnings rate for FY 2022 is 1.05% for the City’s entire portfolio. The projected annual interest earnings rate for FY 2022 is 0.70% for the City’s managed portfolio (excludes Bond funds and OPEB Trust Account). This is compared to LAIF, which earned 0.32% as of March 31, 2022, or the 1-year U.S. Treasury Note, which earned 1.57% as of March 31, 2022. The U.S. Treasury rate has increased by 1.19% in the third quarter, whereas the City’s investments are typically held for 5 years.
The City Treasurer is seeking investments to sell existing lower earning securities and buying higher earning securities to improve performance compared to the benchmarks.
The following table lists the various performance measures regarding the various annual earnings rate for the City’s entire portfolio, the City’s managed portfolio, and the two benchmarks of LAIF and the 1-year U.S. Treasury Note.
Performance Measure Earnings
Rate
City’s Annual Earnings Rate for entire Portfolio 1.05%
City’s Annual Earnings Rate for Managed Portfolio 0.70% LAIF Average Annual Earnings Rate 0.32%
1 Year U.S. Treasury Note 1.57%
Investment Name
Type of
Investment
Book Value as
of 3/31/22
Actual
Interest
Earned 3rd
Quarter
Annual
Interest
Earnings
Estimated
Annual
Interest
Earnings
Estimated
Annual Interest
Earnings Rate
General Fund Reserves CDs/GASs/
Corp Bonds/
Muni Bonds
7,328,013$ 24,709$ 82,495$ 115,855$ 1.58% City Pooled Funds - A CDs/GASs/
Corp Bonds/
Muni Bonds
22,143,579 78,956 229,476 320,277 1.45% City Pooled Funds - B Various 40,617,529 15,465 38,725 54,190 0.13% Bond funds Wilmington
Trust
9 - 7 7 71.55% OPEB Trust Account*Benefit Trust
Account
4,957,672 (231,943) (21,084) 297,460 6.00% TOTAL 75,046,803$ (112,813)$ 329,618$ 787,789$ 1.05% Total Managed Portfolio 70,089,121$ 119,130$ 350,696$ 490,322$ 0.70%
9.E-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Future Outlook
Indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen, including strong job gains in recent months and a declining unemployment rate. Inflation remains elevated, reflecting supply and demand imbalances related to the pandemic, higher energy prices, and broader price pressures. The invasion of Ukraine by Russia may have implications for the U.S. economy, and are likely to create additional upward pressure on inflation and weigh on economic activity.
On March 16, 2022, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate from 0.25% to 0.50%. The Committee expects further ongoing increases in the target range until it is confident the economy is on track to achieve maximum employment and price stability, exceeding 2% inflation for a period of time.
With inflation, the market interest rates are increasing. Based on increasing interest rates, the City’s investment earnings potential is improving and could lead to greater investment earnings as the City’s current investments mature and are reinvested in higher yielding securities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact from the report itself—information only.
ALTERNATIVES:
No Council action is proposed, other than to receive the information.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.Table 1: Summary Table for ALL Funds, including Book Values and Earnings Data for Investments in Other Financial Instruments
2.Table 2: For the General Fund Reserve—Basic Data on Investments in Securities
3.Table 3: For City Pooled Funds A—Basic Data on Investments in Securities Submitted by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director/City Treasurer City Manager Approval:
9.E-7Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Investment Name Name of Institution Type of Investment Current
Earnings
Rate
Book Value
as of 3/31/22
Actual Interest
Earned 3rd
Quarter Ending
3/31/22
Year-to-Date
Interest
Earned
Ending
3/31/22
* Data
Source
Estimated
Annual Interest
Earnings **
General Fund Reserves Union Bank CDs/GASs/Corp
Bonds/Muni Bonds
1.82% avg 7,328,013$ 24,709$ 82,495$ 1 115,855$ City Pooled Funds - A Union Bank CDs/GASs/Corp
Bonds/Muni Bonds
1.64% avg 22,143,579 78,956 229,476 1 320,277 Total All Securities 29,471,592$ 103,665$ 311,971$ 436,132$ City Pooled Funds - B US Bank Custody 0.00%-$ 1$ 7$ 1 8 City Pooled Funds - B Local Agency Invest.
Fund
State Investment Pool 0.32%19,278,941 15,192 38,010 2 53,203 City Pooled Funds - B US Bank Checking 0.00%21,338,588 272 708 3 979 City Pooled Funds - B 40,617,529$ 15,465$ 38,725$ 54,190$ City Pooled Funds total A + B 62,761,108$ 94,421$ 268,200$ 490,322$ Funds Held with Fiscal
Agent
Bond funds: Wilmington
Trust
2017 Pier Project 4$ -$ 4$ 4 4 Funds Held with Fiscal
Agent
Bond funds: Wilmington
Trust
2017B CREBs 6$ -$ 3$ 4 3 Calpers Benefit Trust
OPEB Trust Account CalPERS Benefit Trust
Account
Various managed by
CalPERS
4,957,672$ (231,943)$ (21,084)$ 5 297,460 TOTAL, Cash and Investments at March 31, 2022:75,046,803$ (112,813)$ 329,618$ 787,789$ TOTAL for City Managed Portfolio, Cash and Investments:70,089,121$ 119,130$ 350,696$ 490,322$ Notes:
* Data Sources for Book Values and Actual Interest Earned:
1 = Monthly Customer Statement from US Bank
2 = Monthly statement from Local Agency Investment Fund. 3 = Monthly reconciled bank statement from respective bank. 4 = Monthly statement from Wilmington Trust
5 = Monthly statement from CalPERS Benefit Trust Account ** Estimated Annual Interest Earnings for the current Fiscal Year FY 2022:
1. Estimated Earnings on Government Agency Securities and Certificates of Deposit are based on scheduled Interest Payments during FY 2022
2. Estimated Earnings on Other Financial Instruments are based on anticipated average account balances (Book Values) and interest rates during FY 2022.
City of Pismo Beach
Table 1: Summary Table for All Funds,
including Book Values & Earnings Data for Investments in Other Financial Instruments
9.E-8Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 1
City of Pismo Beach
March 31, 2022 QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT
Table 2: For the General Fund Reserves - Basic Data on Investments in Securities:
Government Agency Securities and Bank Certificates of Deposit CUSIP Issuer Name Coupon Acq Date Maturity Type S&P Par Value Book Value IDC Market Value
Gain/
Loss
Days to
Stated
Maturity
020080BL0 Alma Bank 1.75% 09/11/19 09/11/24 CD 0 98.66 245,000 241,707 (3,293) 804 02587CEM8 American Express
Federal Savings Bank
2.35% 05/03/17 05/03/22 CD 0 100.17 147,000 147,256 256 (58) 06406RBA4 Bank New York Mellon
(32.69%)
2.05% 01/26/22 01/26/27 CD A-96.35 245,000 236,221 (8,779) 1,671 13077CY32 California State
University Rev Bonds
(97.66%)
5.00% 05/07/20 11/01/23 Municipal Bond AA-105.10 245,000 225,812 (19,188) 489 13063CLW8 California State GO
Bonds (41.83%)
5.00% 05/08/20 10/01/24 Municipal Bond 0 107.50 245,000 224,826 (20,174) 824 13063CLW8 California State GO
Bonds (8.54%)
5.00% 05/08/20 10/01/24 Municipal Bond 0 107.50 50,000 45,900 (4,100) 824 14042RHM6 Capital One (47.75%)2.35% 08/23/17 08/23/22 CD AA-100.66 117,000 117,762 762 54 24951TAL9 Department of
Commerce FCU
(22.45%)
1.25% 01/07/22 01/07/27 CD 0 93.78 55,000 51,583 (3,417) 1,652 24951TAL9 Department of
Commerce FCU
(20.41%)
1.25% 01/07/22 01/07/27 CD 0 93.78 50,000 46,896 (3,104) 1,652 25460FCF1 Direct Federal Credit
Union
3.50% 12/10/18 09/11/23 CD 0 102.61 245,000 251,404 6,404 438 29367RLM6 Enterprise Bank
(63.27%)
0.85% 05/18/20 05/14/25 CD 0 94.91 155,000 147,123 (7,877) 1,049 3130ALYC2 FHLB (19.2%)1.14% 04/29/21 04/29/26 Agency AA+94.95 192,000 182,294 (9,706) 1,399 3130ALYC2 FHLB (5.3%)1.14% 04/29/21 04/29/26 Agency AA+94.95 53,000 50,321 (2,679) 1,399 3130AMCY6 FHLB (25.8%)1.00% 05/27/21 05/27/26 Agency AA+94.37 516,000 486,929 (29,071) 1,427 3130AMCY6 FHLB (2.5%)1.00% 05/27/21 05/27/26 Agency AA+94.37 50,000 47,183 (2,817) 1,427 3130APB87 FHLB 1.10% 10/13/21 10/13/26 Agency AA+94.42 500,000 472,115 (27,885) 1,566 3130AQAU7 FHLB (24.5%)1.45% 12/29/21 12/29/26 Agency AA+95.49 245,000 233,938 (11,062) 1,643 33847E3J4 Flagstar Bank 0.90% 05/15/20 05/15/25 CD 0 95.06 245,000 232,887 (12,113) 1,050 46632FRU1 JP Morgan Chase Bank 0.70% 01/22/21 01/22/26 Corporate Bond 0 89.93 500,000 449,635 (50,365) 1,302 499724AE2 Knoxville TVA Employees
Credit Union (20.4%)
3.30% 09/27/18 09/27/23 CD 0 102.35 50,000 51,152 1,152 454 57116APE2 Marlin Business Bank 2.20% 06/12/17 06/13/22 CD 0 100.36 245,000 245,880 880 (17) 59013KPN0 Merrick Bank 1.10% 11/09/21 11/09/26 CD N/A 93.36 245,000 228,742 (16,258) 1,593 62384RAB2 Mountain American FCU
(53.06%)
2.30% 10/12/17 10/12/22 CD 0 100.76 130,000 130,982 982 104 67054NAK9 Numerica Credit Union
(20%)
2.30% 06/21/17 06/21/22 CD 0 100.42 50,000 49,204 (796) (9) 6966674G6 Palm Springs USD GO
Bonds (95.66%)
0.85% 10/28/20 08/01/24 Municipal Bond 0 96.25 773,013 741,209 (31,804) 763 795450A70 Sallie Mae Bank 2.35% 06/21/17 06/21/22 CD 0 100.43 245,000 246,058 1,058 (9) 835104BZ2 Somerset Tr Co 1.00% 03/19/20 03/19/25 CD 0 95.61 245,000 234,247 (10,753) 993 89235MLC3 Toyota Financial Savings
Bank
0.95% 07/15/21 07/15/26 CD 0 93.28 245,000 228,534 (16,466) 1,476 3130AQZ55 FHLB 2.50% 03/10/22 03/10/27 Agency AA+98.60 500,000 492,975 (7,025) 1,714 3130ARF55 FHLB (51%)2.60% 03/30/22 03/01/27 Agency AA+98.95 255,000 252,333 (2,667) 1,705 3130ARF55 FHLB (49%)2.60% 03/30/22 03/01/27 Agency AA+98.95 245,000 242,437 (2,563) 1,705 Total $ 7,328,013 $ 7,035,544
9.E-9Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 2
City of Pismo Beach
March 31, 2022 QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT
Table 3: For City Pooled Funds A - Basic Data on Investments in Securities:
Government Agency Securities and Bank Certificates of Deposit CUSIP Issuer Name Coupon Acq Date Maturity Type S&P Par Value Book Value IDC Market Value
Gain/
Loss
Days to
Stated
Maturity
00257TBH8 Abacus Federal Savings
Bank
1.70% 09/18/19 09/18/24 Corporate Bond 0 98.51 245,000 241,342 (3,658) 811 01748DAX4 Allegiance Bank 2.15% 09/29/17 09/29/22 CD 0 100.64 245,000 246,566 1,566 91 02554BDA6 American Eagle Bank 1.10% 03/13/20 03/13/25 CD 0 95.94 245,000 235,048 (9,952) 987 02587DN38 American Express
Centurion (79.6%)
2.45% 04/05/17 04/05/22 CD 0 100.03 195,000 195,075 75 (86) 02587DN38 American Express
Centurion (20.4%)
2.45% 04/05/17 04/05/22 CD 0 100.03 50,000 49,994 (6) (86) 037833AZ3 Apple Inc 2.50% 03/05/20 02/09/25 Corporate Bond 0 99.76 1,062,000 997,560 (64,440) 955 06406RBA4 Bank New York Mellon
(67.31%)
2.05% 01/26/22 01/26/27 CD A-96.35 504,363 486,389 (17,974) 1,671 06048WS43 Bank of America Corp 2.00% 02/18/22 08/18/25 Corporate Bond AA+96.51 500,000 482,545 (17,455) 1,145 06740KKR7 Barclay's Bank 2.25% 07/26/17 07/26/22 CD A 100.54 245,000 246,330 1,330 26 13063DDF2 California State GO
Bonds
2.50% 05/07/20 10/01/22 Municipal Bond AA-100.65 103,506 100,652 (2,854) 93 13077CY32 California State
University Rev Bonds
(2.34%)
5.00% 05/07/20 11/01/23 Municipal Bond AA-105.10 5,862 5,411 (451) 489 13063CLW8 California State GO
Bonds (49.63%)
5.00% 05/08/20 10/01/24 Municipal Bond 0 107.50 290,655 266,749 (23,906) 824 14042RHM6 Capital One (52.25%)2.35% 08/23/17 08/23/22 CD AA-100.66 128,000 128,860 860 54 15118RUR6 Celtic Bank 1.35% 04/02/20 04/02/25 CD 0 96.53 245,000 236,501 (8,499) 1,007 15201QCJ4 Centerstate Bank 1.00% 03/30/20 03/31/25 CD 0 95.54 245,000 234,071 (10,929) 1,005 12556LBB1 CIT Bank 1.95% 08/23/19 08/23/22 CD 0 100.50 245,000 246,227 1,227 54 17286TAG0 Citadel Federal Credit
Union
1.65% 02/25/20 02/27/25 CD N/A 97.59 245,000 239,086 (5,914) 973 17312QJ67 Citibank 3.00% 04/24/18 04/24/23 CD 0 101.74 245,000 249,253 4,253 298 24951TAL9 Department of
Commerce FCU
(57.14%)
1.25% 01/07/22 01/07/27 CD 0 93.78 140,000 131,290 (8,710) 1,652 254673JF4 Discover Bank (59.18%)2.55% 12/20/17 12/20/22 CD 0 101.16 145,000 146,669 1,669 173 254673JF4 Discover Bank (40.82%)2.55% 12/20/17 12/20/22 CD 0 101.16 100,000 101,166 1,166 173 29367SJQ8 Enterprise Bank 1.80% 11/08/19 11/08/24 CD 0 98.53 245,000 241,396 (3,604) 862 29367RLM6 Enterprise Bank
(36.73%)
0.85% 05/18/20 05/14/25 CD 0 94.91 90,000 85,409 (4,591) 1,049 3130ALD76 FHLB 0.70% 02/25/21 02/25/26 Agency 0 93.72 500,000 468,595 (31,405) 1,336 3130ALYC2 FHLB (75.5%)1.14% 04/29/21 04/29/26 Agency AA+94.95 755,000 716,835 (38,165) 1,399 3130AMCY6 FHLB (25%)1.00% 05/27/21 05/27/26 Agency AA+94.37 500,000 471,830 (28,170) 1,427 3130AMCY6 FHLB (46.7%)1.00% 05/27/21 05/27/26 Agency AA+94.37 934,000 881,378 (52,622) 1,427 3130AMS37 FHLB (50%)1.00% 06/24/21 06/24/26 Agency AA+94.26 1,000,000 942,560 (57,440) 1,455 3130AMS37 FHLB (20%)1.00% 06/24/21 06/24/26 Agency AA+94.26 400,000 377,024 (22,976) 1,455 3130AMS37 FHLB (30%)1.00% 06/24/21 06/24/26 Agency AA+94.26 600,000 565,536 (34,464) 1,455 3130ANSB7 FHLB 1.00% 09/17/21 09/17/26 Agency AA+94.02 1,000,000 940,210 (59,790) 1,540 3130AQAU7 FHLB (61.5%)1.45% 12/29/21 12/29/26 Agency AA+95.49 615,000 587,233 (27,767) 1,643 3130AQAU7 FHLB (14%)1.45% 12/29/21 12/29/26 Agency AA+95.49 140,000 133,679 (6,321) 1,643
9.E-10Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 3
CUSIP Issuer Name Coupon Acq Date Maturity Type S&P Par Value Book Value IDC Market Value
Gain/
Loss
Days to
Stated
Maturity
32112UDJ7 First National Bank
McGregor
1.80% 12/30/19 12/30/24 CD AA+98.29 245,000 240,813 (4,187) 914 334342CD2 First National Bank
Syracuse
1.85% 08/30/19 08/30/24 CD 0 98.94 245,000 242,403 (2,597) 792 3136G4WV1 FNMA 0.75% 06/16/20 06/16/25 Agency AA+94.89 1,000,000 948,900 (51,100) 1,082 3136G4J61 FNMA 0.57% 08/26/20 08/26/25 Agency AA+93.61 750,000 702,090 (47,910) 1,153 3136G43L5 FNMA 0.55% 09/30/20 09/30/25 Agency AA+93.44 1,000,000 934,420 (65,580) 1,188 38149MAJ2 Goldman Sachs Bank 2.70% 05/22/19 05/22/24 CD 0 101.07 145,000 146,553 1,553 692 45581EAC5 Industrial & Commercial
Bank China
2.15% 04/12/17 04/12/22 CD 0 100.06 245,000 245,140 140 (79) 474067AF2 Jefferson Financial
Federal Credit Union
2.45% 11/10/17 11/10/22 CD A+100.94 245,000 247,303 2,303 133 499724AE2 Knoxville TVA Employees
Credit Union (79.6%)
3.30% 09/27/18 09/27/23 CD 0 102.35 195,000 199,593 4,593 454 50116CBD0 KS Statebank Manhattan 2.10% 07/31/17 07/29/22 CD 0 100.50 245,000 246,225 1,225 29 502516QY6 La Canada California
USD
1.75% 04/28/20 08/01/24 Municipal Bond 0 97.58 571,288 551,316 (19,973) 763 51210SSD0 Lakeside Bank 1.40% 03/30/20 03/31/25 CD N/A 96.68 245,000 236,871 (8,129) 1,005 538036CM4 Live Oak Bank (79.6%)2.25% 04/07/17 04/07/22 CD N/A 100.04 195,000 195,088 88 (84) 538036CM4 Live Oak Bank (20.4%)2.25% 04/07/17 04/07/22 CD N/A 100.04 50,000 49,997 (3) (84) 58404DCZ2 Medallion Bank Utah 3.30% 12/18/18 12/19/22 CD N/A 101.69 245,000 249,138 4,138 172 61747MF63 Morgan Stanley 2.65% 01/11/18 01/11/23 CD 0 101.28 245,000 248,126 3,126 195 61760ARS0 Morgan Stanley 3.55% 11/08/18 11/08/23 CD 0 102.64 245,000 251,470 6,470 496 62384RAB2 Mountain American FCU
(46.94%)
2.30% 10/12/17 10/12/22 CD 0 100.76 115,000 115,875 875 104 67054NAK9 Numerica Credit Union
(80%)
2.30% 06/21/17 06/21/22 CD 0 100.42 195,000 196,815 1,815 (9) 694231AF8 Pacific Enterprise Bank 1.35% 04/09/20 04/09/25 CD 0 96.51 245,000 236,442 (8,558) 1,014 69506YRG6 Pacific Western Bank 1.35% 04/16/20 04/16/25 CD N/A 96.50 245,000 236,425 (8,575) 1,021 6966674G6 Palm Springs USD GO
Bonds (4.34%)
0.85% 10/28/20 08/01/24 Municipal Bond 0 96.25 35,078 33,628 (1,450) 763 70962LAS1 Pentagon Federal Credit
Union
0.90% 09/29/21 09/29/26 CD AA 92.69 245,000 227,093 (17,907) 1,552 75472RAE1 Raymond James Bank 2.00% 08/23/19 08/23/24 CD 0 99.32 245,000 243,327 (1,673) 785 88241THJ2 Texas Exchange Bank 1.00% 06/10/20 06/13/25 CD 0 95.19 245,000 233,206 (11,794) 1,079 87270LAY9 TIAA Federal Savings
Bank
2.20% 11/22/17 11/22/22 CD 0 100.82 245,000 247,016 2,016 145 89236TFX8 Toyota Motor Corp 2.65% 04/12/19 04/12/22 Corporate Bond 0 100.03 499,685 500,165 480 (79) 89236TGT6 Toyota Motor Corp 1.80% 06/05/20 02/13/25 Corporate Bond A+97.08 257,893 242,690 (15,203) 959 90348JTH3 UBS Bank USA 1.25% 03/25/20 03/25/25 CD AA-96.29 245,000 235,901 (9,099) 999 91435LAB3 University Iowa
Community FCU
3.00% 04/30/18 04/28/23 CD N/A 101.75 245,000 249,288 4,288 302 90331HMS9 US Bank National 2.80% 05/29/20 01/27/25 Corporate Bond A+99.91 271,250 249,785 (21,465) 942 938828BN9 Washington Federal
Bank
1.95% 08/28/19 08/28/24 CD 0 99.18 245,000 242,996 (2,004) 790 856285K91 State Bank India 2.00% 03/23/22 03/23/27 CD 0 96.99 245,000 237,616 (7,384) 1,727 Total 22,143,579$ 21,342,180$
9.E-11Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 3
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.F
SUBJECT/TITLE:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
WATERSMART: TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECTS GRANT APPLICATION IN FY 2022 FOR CENTRAL COAST BLUE
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution approving the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant application in FY 2022 for Central Coast Blue.
BACKGROUND:
Central Coast Blue (the Project) is a regional, indirect potable reuse project that will provide a drought resistant, sustainable local water supply for south county cities, improve and protect water quality in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, and enhance the health of our critical water basin. Project stakeholders include the cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach, and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District.
As the cost for the Central Coast Blue is significant, (currently estimated at $92 million for both phases, or $56 million for phase 1 and $36 million for phase 2), staff is actively seeking various grants to offset the project’s costs. The City has been successful in these efforts and received $2,000,000 in California State Water Resources Control Board Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program (GWGP) funding and $2,496,000 from the WaterSMART Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant (FY 2018 & FY 2021).
WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant On March 15, 2022, staff applied for a U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant based on Funding Opportunity No. R22AS00115. This grant provides up to 25% of the total cost of planning, design, and/or construction that will be conducted before September 30, 2025. The City submitted this funding application on behalf of the Project partners.
Project costs that are eligible for funding under this funding opportunity begin July 26, 2018 when Central Coast Blue’s Title XVI Feasibility Study Approval Memo was signed by the Policy and Administration Director through September 30, 2025. These costs are estimated to total $56,495,408. As the grant would support 25% of these costs, the City requested $11,627,758 (not including the previously awarded $2,496,000) and plans to initially support the remaining 75%, with additional funding from the state of California along with funds from the Cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach stakeholders.
The three Cities recently developed and approved a cost sharing agreement to split the cost share based on the benefit to each agency which is currently calculated based on
9.F-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
their groundwater entitlement. The current allocation is 39% Pismo Beach, 25% Arroyo Grande, and 36% Grover Beach. For the City’s portion of the costs not funded by state and federal grants, the City has enacted recycled water development impact fees, has planned net revenues from the Water and Wastewater Enterprise Funds, and in-kind work from staff to support its share of the project.
Additionally, the City plans to pursue funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 GWGP totaling $27,234,500, or 50% of eligible costs, which would help fund implementation efforts related to protecting the groundwater basin. If the City is unable to secure funding through the GWGP, then project costs will need to be covered by the partner agencies.
Under the cost sharing agreement, the total estimated cost to the City ranges from $2,911,324 to $16,175,124 depending on grants received. The following table outlines the Project costs from July 26, 2018 through September 30, 2025 and the various funding sources and fiscal impact to the City of Pismo Beach.
Table 1: Title XVI Water Reclamation & Reuse Project Grant Request and Matching Funds
Funding Sources
Amount With
All Grant
Funding Award
Amount Without
Grant Funding
Awarded
Non-Federal Entities
1 SWRCB Prop 1 GWGP - Round 32 $27,234,500 $-
2 DWR Prop 1 IRWM Program Round 22 $1,000,000 $-
3 SWRCB CWSRF Loan2 $5,775,242 $-
4 Pismo Beach $2,911,324 $16,175,124
5 Grover Beach $2,687,376 $14,930,883
6 Arroyo Grande $1,866,234 $10,368,669
7 In Kind Contributions $896,880 $896,880
Non-Federal Subtotal $42,371,556 $42,371,556
Other Federal Entities
1 Grant Under the WIIN Act FY20181 $796,000 $796,000
2 Grant Under the WIIN Act FY20211 $1,700,000 $1,700,000 Requested Funding Under WIIN Act FY2022 $11,627,758 $11,627,758 1 Funding has been awarded
2 Funding is being pursued and has not been awarded at the time of this application Grant Requirement
The grant requires submission, no later than 60 days after the application is submitted, of an official resolution adopted by the applicant’s governing body verifying:
The identity of the official with legal authority to enter into an agreement The board of directors, governing body, or appropriate official who has reviewed and supports the application submitted
The capability of the applicant to provide the amount of funding and/or in-kind contributions specified in the funding plan
9.F-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
That the applicant will work with the Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into a grant or cooperative agreement.
As such, staff has prepared a Resolution confirming these items:
The City Manager, Public Works Director, and Administrative Services Director, or their designee(s), are authorized to enter into an agreement. The City Manager, Public Works Director, and Administrative Services Director have reviewed and support the application (Attachment 2). The City has the capability to provide the amount of funding and/or in-kind contributions specified in the funding plan as described in the “City Capacity to Provide Matching Funds” section.
City staff will work with the Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into a grant or cooperative agreement.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) supporting the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant in FY 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of approving the attached Resolution is a total grant request amount of $11,627,7528, including a $42,371,556 matching requirement. This amount is for Phase 1 of the Central Coast Blue project, to be allocated to each City based on the cost sharing agreement.
Additionally, the City plans to pursue funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 GWGP totaling $27,234,500, or 50% of eligible costs, which would help fund implementation efforts related to protecting the groundwater basin. If the City is unable to secure funding through the GWGP, then project costs will need to be covered by the partner agencies.
The City has approved a cost sharing agreement with the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach to split the cost share based on the benefit to each agency. The current allocation is 39% Pismo Beach, 25% Arroyo Grande, and 36% Grover Beach. The total cost to the City of Pismo Beach ranges from $2,911,324 to $16,175,124, depending on whether or not funding which is being pursued is awarded.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not approve the resolution. The City would need to withdraw its application in this case.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse project grant application (FY2022)
9.F-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Submitted by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
City Manager Approval:
9.F-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
RESOLUTION NO. R-2022-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WATERSMART: TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECTS GRANT APPLICATION IN FY 2022
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach is moving forward with the Central Coast Blue project, which is a regional, indirect potable water reuse project that will provide a drought resistant, sustainable local water supply for Central Coast Blue stakeholders while also improving and protecting the water quality in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, and enhances the health of the larger watershed on the Central Coast of California; and WHEREAS, the cost for Central Coast Blue is considerable and as such, staff is actively seeking various grants, financing sources, and partnering with the project’s stakeholders to offset the City’s costs; and
WHEREAS, the Central Coast Blue stakeholders include the City of Pismo Beach, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach, Oceano Community Services District, and South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District; and
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2022, City of Pismo Beach staff, working with Water Systems Consultants (WSC), applied for a U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant based on Funding Opportunity No. R22AS00115 for the Federal fiscal year 2022 program, which provides up to 25%, or $11,627,758 (not including the previously awarded $796,000 and preliminary awarded $1,700,000), of the total cost ($56,495,408) of planning, design, and/or construction that will be conducted between July 26, 2018 through September 30, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach, City of Arroyo Grande, and City of Grover Beach plan to support the matching requirement of 75%, or $42,371,556, by pursuing funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program totaling $27,234,500, or 50% of eligible costs, which would help fund implementation efforts related to protecting the groundwater basin. The total cost to the City of Pismo Beach assuming the cost is based on the benefit to each agency per the Cost-Sharing Agreement ranges from $2,911,324 to $16,175,124 over three fiscal years, depending on grants received; The City of Pismo Beach has recycled water development impact fees, net revenues from the Water and Wastewater Enterprise Funds, and in-kind work from the Public Works Director, Senior Engineer, and Administrative Secretary to support its share of the project.
The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach plan to support their share of the project with Water Enterprise Funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach as follows:
Attachment 1
9.F-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022
That the City Manager, Public Works Director, and/or Administrative Services Director, or their designee(s), are hereby authorized to enter into a grant agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation for the WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse project grant;
That the City Council, City Manager, Public Works Director, and/or Administrative Services Director have reviewed and support the application submitted, which by this reference is made a part hereof;
That the City of Pismo Beach is capable of providing the amount of funding and/or in-kind contributions specified in the funding plan; and That the applicant will work with the Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into a grant or cooperative agreement.
UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 3rd day of May 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 1
9.F-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022
WaterSMART
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects
Under the WIIN Act, FY 2022
R22AS00115
Central Coast Blue
City of Pismo Beach
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Project Manager:
Benjamin A. Fine
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
[email protected]
(805) 773-7037
Submitted to:
Bureau of Reclamation
Financial Assistance Operations
Attn: Title XVI WIIN NOFO
P.O. Box 25007, MS 84-27133
Denver, Colorado 80225
3/15/2022
Attachment 2
9.F-7Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Table of Contents
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ....................................................................................................................................ii List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................ii List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................. iii Technical Proposal .......................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1 Technical Project Description ...................................................................................................... 2 Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 12 Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance ........................................................................ 47 Required Permits or Approvals ..................................................................................................... 56 Permits and Approvals Obtained .............................................................................................. 5 6 Infrastructure Permits That Will Be Obtained .......................................................................... 56 Project Budget .............................................................................................................................. 58 Funding Plan & Letters of Commitment ................................................................................... 58 Budget Proposal ........................................................................................................................ 62 Budget Narrative ....................................................................................................................... 63 References .................................................................................................................................... 66 Letters of Project Support ............................................................................................................... A Official Resolution ........................................................................................................................... B Unique Entity Identifier .................................................................................................................. C Mandatory Federal Forms .............................................................................................................. D
Attachment 2
9.F-8Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach List of Tables
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits .................................................................... 10 Table 2. Estimated Construction Costs by Year ............................................................................ 23 Table 3. Total Estimated Eligible Costs for Planning and Design Activities .................................. 23 Table 4. Annual O&M for Project .................................................................................................. 23 Table 5. Replacement Costs by Year ............................................................................................. 24 Table 6. NCMA Agency Water Entitlements ................................................................................. 25 Table 7. Unit Cost Comparison – Regional Water Supply Alternatives ........................................ 30 Table 8. Central Coast Blue Qualitative Benefits .......................................................................... 34 Table 9. Central Coast Blue Unit Costs.......................................................................................... 36 Table 10. Annual Crop Value per Acre-Foot of Produced Water ................................................. 37 Table 11. Estimated Monetized Project Benefits ......................................................................... 38 Table 12. Quantified and Monetized Project Costs ...................................................................... 38 Table 13. Central Coast Blue Local, Regional, and State Benefits ................................................ 39 Table 14. Central Coast Blue Partner Population ......................................................................... 40 Table 15. Central Coast Blue Collaboration and Outreach ........................................................... 44 Table 16. Mitigation Measures Required for Central Coast Blue in Final EIR .............................. 47 Table 17. Assumed Install Decade Based on Pipe Material .......................................................... 52 Table 18. Summary of Tasks through FY2025 ............................................................................... 58 Table 19. Summary of Eligible Costs through FY2025 .................................................................. 60 Table 20. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources through FY2025 ........................................ 60 Table 21. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources for Entire Project ...................................... 61 Table 22. Total Project Budget Proposal ...................................................................................... 62 Table 23. Cost Estimates for Full Scale Project ............................................................................. 65
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location ............................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Boundaries .................................................................. 3 Figure 3. Seawater Intrusion Detection Locations .......................................................................... 5 Figure 4. NCMA Hydrograph of Deep Well Index Level (4) ............................................................ 6 Figure 5. Conceptual Layout for Central Coast Blue ....................................................................... 8 Figure 6. Phase 1 Project Schedule ............................................................................................... 11 Figure 7. Water Supplies with Project – Phase 1 (Left) & Phase 2 (Right) (Volumes in AFY) ....... 12 Figure 8. Total NCMA Water Use (Urban, Rural, Agricultural) By Source (4) ............................... 14 Figure 9. San Luis Obispo County Drought Status 2000 - 2022 .................................................... 18 Figure 10. Drought Status Map 2015-2022 .................................................................................. 19 Figure 11. NCMA Production Wells .............................................................................................. 27 Figure 12. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies without Recycled Water .............. 28 Figure 13. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies with Recycled Water ................... 29 Figure 14. Disadvantaged Community Map – 80% & 60% MHI ................................................... 42 Figure 15. Disadvantaged Community Map – 85% MHI ............................................................... 42 Attachment 2
9.F-9Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach List of Acronyms
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AF Acre Foot
AFY Acre Feet Per Year
APE Area of Potential Effect
ATF Advanced Treatment Facility
Basin Santa Maria Groundwater Basin
Bay Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Central Coast Blue
Partners
SSLOCSD, and Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CRA Cultural Resources Assessment
CRLF California Red-Legged Frog
CVP Central Valley Project
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DAC Disadvantaged Community
DWR Department of Water Resources
EIR Environmental Impact Report
FOA Funding Opportunity Announcement
FY Fiscal Year
GHG Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GWGP Groundwater Grant Program
IDE IDE Technologies
IRWM Integrated Regional Water Management
LF Linear Foot
LRRP Low Reservoir Response Plan
MGD Million Gallons per Day
mg/L Milligrams Per Liter
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NCMA Northern Cities Management Area
NCMA Agencies Oceano CSD and Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NMMA Nipomo Mesa Management Area
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
Oceano CSD Oceano Community Services District
O&M Operations and Maintenance
Pismo Beach City of Pismo Beach
Project Central Coast Blue
RFI Request for Information
RO Reverse Osmosis
SDAC Severely Disadvantaged Community
Attachment 2
9.F-10Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach List of Acronyms
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act iv
SLOCFC&WCD San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District SMVMA Santa Maria Valley Management Area
SSLOCSD South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District SWP State Water Project
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
SWRRF Satellite Water Resource Recovery Facility
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
U.S. United States
UF Ultrafiltration
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
UV Ultraviolet
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
Attachment 2
9.F-11Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 1 Technical Proposal
This funding application for Central Coast Blue prepared by the City of Pismo Beach (Pismo Beach), is submitted to the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR or Reclamation) under the Department of Interior in response to the WaterSMART Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) No. R22AS00115 for FY2022 for Projects Eligible Under the WIIN Act. Pismo Beach is submitting this funding application on behalf of the Central Cost Blue Partners, which includes the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD), City of Pismo Beach, City of Arroyo Grande, and City of Grover Beach.
Date: 03/15/2022
Applicant: City of Pismo Beach
City, County, State: Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California Executive Summary
Central Coast Blue is a regional, indirect potable reuse project developed in response to recent droughts that highlighted vulnerabilities in the Central Cost Blue stakeholders’ water supply portfolios and the seawater intrusion risks faced by the groundwater basin. The Project will improve the reliability of the community’s water supply portfolios by capturing wastewater flows from two local Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs), purifying the water, and injecting it into the Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA) of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin (Basin) that is an important component of the water supply portfolios for the Central Coast Blue Partners. The project is divided into two phases - Phase 1 will treat and inject flows from the Pismo Beach WWTP and Phase 2 will treat and inject flows from the SSLOCD WWTP. Central Coast Blue will provide a drought-resistant, sustainable local water supply for Central Coast Blue Partners while also improving and protecting the water quality in the Basin, therefore enhancing the health of the larger watershed.
Pismo Beach respectfully requests $11,627,758 from USBR to support roughly $56.5 million in project activities through September 2025 that include: permitting, preliminary design, final design, program management, value engineering, construction management, engineering during construction, and construction for Phase 1 of Central Coast Blue, which will be completed within the grant eligible cost period.
Pr
o
b
e
l
m
:
Lo
s
s
o
f
a
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
Seawater intrusion
impacts
groundwater
supplies of
Central Coast Blue
Partners
Ne
e
d
:
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
Recycled water
injection into the
basin will protect
and bolster regional
groundwater
supplies
So
l
u
t
i
o
n
:
Ce
n
t
r
a
l
C
o
a
s
t
B
l
u
e
Central Coast Blue
will ensure long-
term water
sustainability in the
Basin
Attachment 2
9.F-12Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 2 Technical Project Description
In an effort to protect local groundwater supplies, Central Coast Blue Partners and regional stakeholders are advancing Central Coast Blue—a regional recycled water project that will utilize a resource currently discharged into the ocean— to increase groundwater supplies, and secure a sustainable, drought-resistant local water supply. Central Coast Blue will be a critical component of the future drinking water supply portfolio for the Central Coast Blue Partners and will help protect against the threat of seawater intrusion into their groundwater supplies and future droughts. Central Coast Blue is an integral element of the regional water supply solutions to manage and protect water in the Basin for urban and agricultural users.
Location
Central Coast Blue (also referred to as the Project) is located within San Luis Obispo County, California, and is situated along the coast of California halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. The Project is located in southern San Luis Obispo County and includes the cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach, as shown in Figure 1. The Project overlies the NCMA portion of the Basin, which covers 288 square miles and provides water for 200,000 local residents, millions of visitors annually, and supports 57,000 acres of irrigated agriculture.
Figure 1. Project Location
Central Coast Blue is a regional
recycled water project that
will recover a resource that is
currently discharged into the
ocean, increase groundwater
supplies in the Basin, protect
against seawater intrusion,
and secure a sustainable,
drought-resistant local water
supply.
Attachment 2
9.F-13Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 3 The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) identifies the Basin as Basin Number 3-12 in DWR Bulletin No. 118 and defines its boundaries to include Santa Maria Valley, the Nipomo Mesa, Tri-Cities Mesas, Arroyo Grande Plain, and the Arroyo Grande and Pismo Creek Valleys.
According to the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Groundwater Basin Prioritization, the Basin is a high-priority basin. The Basin is an adjudicated basin and, through the adjudication, was separated into three Management Areas: the NCMA; the Nipomo Mesa Management Area (NMMA); and the Santa Maria Valley Management Area (SMVMA). The Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach along with the Oceano Community Services District Oceano CSD overlie the urban portion of the NCMA in the Basin and are collectively referred to as the “NCMA agencies.” The physical/legal/jurisdictional boundaries of the Basin, the Management Areas, and the NCMA agency service areas are shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Boundaries
Population
The total population of the NCMA is approximately 46,000. The total population that relies on groundwater from the Basin is over 200,000 and expected to increase to 250,000 by 2030 (1).
Economy
The local economy is primarily a mix of agriculture and tourism along with significant defense/space and energy sectors; these industries rely heavily on a sustainable water supply. A failure to sustain the water supply would have a devastating impact on the Central Coast Blue Partners, the region’s economy, and residents’ way of life. This is discussed further in Evaluation Criterion 3.
Attachment 2
9.F-14Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 4 Project Background and Development
The water supply portfolio for the NCMA agencies Partners, consists of groundwater and Lopez Reservoir (also referred to as Lopez Lake), a local surface water supply reservoir. The City of Pismo Beach’s supplies also include imported water from the State Water Project (SWP). Groundwater entitlements account for approximately 41% of the agencies’ water supply. However, due to the threat of seawater intrusion during the most recent drought, the NCMA agencies relied heavily on conservation and use of their surface water supplies to reduce groundwater pumping by over 80%. While this strategy was successful at avoiding seawater intrusion, Lopez Reservoir came within one year of reaching minimum pool, and many of the agencies came close to utilizing all their remaining entitlements.
Historically, elevated freshwater levels along the coastline and natural outflow to the ocean have prevented seawater from intruding into the Basin. However, with increased
demand in the NCMA, reduced underflow from the NMMA,
and changing climatic conditions, groundwater elevations along the coastline have been observed to drop during
periods of extended drought. These lower levels reduce the flow of freshwater to the ocean, which serves as a barrier to seawater intrusion. If conditions worsen, seawater will draw toward the freshwater zone of the aquifer,
contaminating it with elevated salt concentrations. The result is reduced freshwater storage and could potentially lead to the abandonment of supply wells.
If groundwater becomes contaminated by seawater, the
NCMA agencies would need to develop new water supplies, such as desalination. Climate change and ongoing drought conditions in San Luis Obispo County and throughout California have stressed available water supplies and forced agencies to identify additional creative solutions for developing more reliable and locally-controlled water resource portfolios. Without taking proactive efforts to protect groundwater supplies, it is anticipated that the NCMA will face the following problems:
1. Degradation of groundwater quality within the Basin from seawater intrusion.
2. Increased dependence on local surface water supplies that are susceptible to variable precipitation and drought.
3. Increased dependence on imported SWP water supplies, which make the NCMA vulnerable to SWP availability, reliability, catastrophic conveyance interruption, and increased costs of SWP supplies.
In addition, groundwater contamination from seawater intrusion has the potential to expand beyond the NCMA portion of the basin and impact greater areas within the Basin (e.g. NMMA, SMVMA). There are no known hydraulic barriers between the NCMA and the other management areas within the Basin to keep this from occurring. Additional information regarding the NCMA’s history of monitoring threats to groundwater supplies and the need for the Project is detailed below.
Increased demand and
extended drought have
decreased groundwater
elevations along the
coastline and led to the
potential for groundwater
contamination from
seawater intrusion. Central
Coast Blue is designed to
address these vulnerabilities
within the Basin.
Attachment 2
9.F-15Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 5 Seawater Intrusion
In the 1960s, evidence of seawater intrusion was detected and documented by DWR in Bulletin No. 63-3 Seawater Intrusion: Pismo-Guadalupe Area, Feb 1970. This report identified evidence of elevated chloride concentrations and a hydraulic potential for seawater encroachment to occur in the primary aquifers that the NCMA agencies rely upon for their groundwater supply (2).
The report recommended that the local water agencies establish a monitoring program to provide early warning of advancing seawater intrusion, but also recognized that the pending completion of the Lopez Project, a local surface water reservoir, would provide a supplemental water supply source that would offset much of the municipal pumping in the area. Prior to the construction of the Lopez Project, groundwater was the only significant source of water for the urban and agricultural users in the area. The threat of water quality contamination from seawater intrusion and nitrates were the drivers for the construction of the Lopez Dam, which was completed in 1969.
From 1970 to 2009, the NCMA agencies did not observe further evidence of seawater intrusion.
However, beginning in May 2009, elevated concentrations of total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, and sodium were detected in the Oceano area in monitoring wells 30N03 and 30N02, while elevated TDS and chloride levels were also detected in the MW-Blue well, indicating potential seawater intrusion, shown in Figure 3. In response to this detection, the NCMA member agencies began an aggressive campaign to reduce groundwater pumping through water conservation and the preferential use of surface water supplies over groundwater supplies. As a result of the groundwater conservation activities and higher use of surface water supplies, the NCMA agencies were able to decrease their total groundwater pumping by 80%. Conservation measures, coupled with increased rainfall, improved the groundwater gradient and reduced TDS and chloride to historical levels in the impacted wells by July 2010 (3).
Figure 3. Seawater Intrusion Detection Locations
Attachment 2
9.F-16Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 6 The NCMA regularly monitors for seawater intrusion by monitoring water elevations in clustered sentry wells along the coast. The average water level in three of the deep sentry wells (24B03, 30F03, and 30N02) comprises the Deep Well Index. The Deep Well Index is used for monitoring the threat of seawater intrusion as it reflects the net effect of the changing groundwater recharge and discharge conditions within the primary production aquifer. From previous studies, the NCMA Technical Group determined that a minimum Deep Well Index of 7.5 feet NAVD88 is required to protect against seawater intrusion. When the Deep Well Index drops below this threshold, the Basin is at risk for eastward migration of seawater. The Deep Well Index level from 1966 to the present is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. NCMA Hydrograph of Deep Well Index Level (4)
Since 2009, the NCMA member agencies have continued to utilize conservation and increased surface water supplies to reduce municipal groundwater pumping levels to approximately 20% of their safe annual yield, as determined in the 2002 Groundwater Management Agreement as part of the basin adjudication process. However, despite pumping far below their entitlements, the NCMA agencies have continued to observe declining groundwater levels, specifically along the coastline. Currently, reducing groundwater pumping is the only option available to the agencies to protect the basin from seawater intrusion. The recent drought indicates that this mitigation strategy is not effective at maintaining the required groundwater levels along the coastline to protect against seawater intrusion.
Detection of seawater intrusion
Attachment 2
9.F-17Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 7 Project Elements
Central Coast Blue will increase groundwater recharge and improve groundwater quality through the design, permitting, and construction of an Advanced Water Purification Facility (AWPF), conveyance infrastructure, monitoring wells, and injection wells to inject advanced purified water into the Basin to prevent groundwater contamination caused by seawater intrusion. The Project will provide communities with a new, locally-controlled and drought-resistant water supply by using a resource that is currently discharged into the ocean. Central Coast Blue was developed to achieve the Project stakeholder objectives detailed later in this section.
The Project will construct an AWPF that utilizes a process train consisting of ultrafiltration, reverse osmosis (RO), and ultraviolet advanced oxidation process to treat wastewater to the required level of quality for groundwater injection. The AWPF will be located in Grover Beach at the south end of Huber Street as shown in Figure 5 on page 8. This site is located between the Pismo Beach WWTP and the SSLOCSD WWTP, along the Pismo Beach outfall pipeline. Brine and other residuals generated during Project operations will be discharged to the existing ocean outfall.
A recycled water production potential for Central Coast Blue of 4,390 acre feet per year (AFY) was estimated by taking the average of the monthly flows and the estimated recovery rates through advanced treatment. Groundwater modeling indicates that the yield for this Project will have a 100–144% benefit from each acre feet (AF) of water injected into the Basin. The estimated annual recycled water yield for Central Coast Blue will be twice as much as the Central Coast Blue Partners’ existing groundwater entitlement. Additional groundwater modeling is being performed to update and improve estimates of water yield from the Project after injection.
Central Coast Blue Phase 1 requires up to five injection wells and Phase 2 will require up to an additional two injection wells for a total of up to seven wells. Groundwater will continue to be extracted by the NCMA agencies using their existing production wells.
Agricultural Irrigation
Project Partners are investigating the opportunity to use some of the Phase 2 flows to deliver recycled water for agricultural irrigation use.
Recycled water produced for irrigation would have
lower operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.
Alternative Treatment Technologies
The Project is considering an alternative RO
technology. Pismo Beach collaborated with
international partner IDE Technologies (IDE) to
provide a Pilot AWPF that assisted with process
optimization, regulatory compliance, public
outreach, and training. IDE’s Sustainable Advanced
Reuse Process is a new proprietary technology and
the first of its kind to be tested in the United
States. The pilot provided valuable information
that will be used to optimize the final design.
A Pilot Study was done using both
conventional advanced treatment
methods, and a new proprietary
technology that assisted with process
optimization, regulatory compliance,
public outreach, and training. Should
the technology be included in the
final design, the pilot study may
provide regulatory agencies with
sufficient documentation to permit
the technology.
Attachment 2
9.F-18Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 8 Figure 5. Conceptual Layout for Central Coast Blue
Attachment 2
9.F-19Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 9 Regional Collaboration
Historical and recent drought conditions in San Luis Obispo County have impacted the availability of local water supplies and forced agencies to develop solutions that provide a more reliable and locally controlled water resource. Collaboration efforts were first formalized in 1983, with a “Gentlemen’s Agreement” that was developed to cooperatively manage groundwater pumping in the NCMA. On June 30, 2005, the NCMA agencies and numerous other agencies agreed upon the Stipulation for the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Adjudication (Stipulation), which incorporated the 2002 Groundwater Management Agreement (made between the NCMA agencies, Northern Landowners, and other parties). On January 25, 2008, the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara adopted the approach of the Stipulation in its Judgement After Trial. The Sixth Appellate District upheld this decision on November 21, 2012. The history of regional collaboration involving the Central Coast Blue Partners is summarized below. x 1983 Gentlemen’s Agreement
x 2002 Groundwater Management Agreement
x 2005 Stipulation for the Santa Maria Groundwater
Basin Adjudication
x 2007 San Luis Obispo County Integrated Regional
Water Management (IRWM) Plan
x 2008 Judgement After Trial Support of Stipulation
x 2009 Formation of the NCMA Technical Group
x 2009 Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Management
Area Technical Subcommittee Forms
x 2014 NCMA Strategic Plan
x 2014 San Luis Obispo County Regional Recycled
Water Strategic Plan
x 2014 Update of the County IRWM Plan
x 2015 Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facility Planning Study x 2017 SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study x 2017 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Between Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD to Provide Cost Sharing for Environmental Review for Central Coast Blue x 2020 Update of the County IRWM Plan
x 2021 Operating Agreement Between the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach
x 2022 Cost Share Agreement Between the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach
The Project Partners recently took a Cost Share Agreement to their respective City Councils for approval in January, February, and March 2022. The agreement was unanimously approved by all three city councils. The Cost Share Agreement establishes a united approach to reduce their groundwater pumping and describes the cost sharing framework for design, construction, and operation of Central Coast Blue. Costs will be shared between Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande based on the proportion to their share of the benefits. As part of this agreement, the cities will eventually form a Joint Powers Authority to own and operate the Project.
Groundwater management
collaboration between the
partner agencies began with
a Gentlemen’s Agreement
to cooperatively manage
groundwater in 1983 and
continues in a legally
adopted management
agreement to this day.
Attachment 2
9.F-20Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 10 Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits
Central Coast Blue Partners seek to implement a project that meets the specific regional objectives shown in Table 1. The table shows how Central Coast Blue will fulfill the objectives created by stakeholders, which align with USBR’s priority missions.
Table 1. Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits
PROJECT
OBJECTIVE
PROJECT
BENEFIT
Create a sustainable,
drought-resistant, and
local water supply and
improve water supply
reliability for southern
San Luis Obispo County
x Promotes water independence and create a local and
sustainable drought-resistant water supply to support the communities, agriculture, and tourism.
x Expands the water portfolio for the region and reduces vulnerability to drought, climate change, disruptions from imported water, and potential groundwater contamination from seawater intrusion.
x Protects the community of Oceano, a severely disadvantaged community (SDAC), and Oceano CSD’s five production wells by allowing the agency to continue providing clean water to its 7,000 residents. Without Central Coast Blue, Oceano CSD’s wells would be contaminated by seawater intrusion before the other NCMA agencies due to their location and proximity to the ocean.
Provide a new source of
recharge to the Basin to
protect it from
degradation due to
seawater intrusion
x Recycles up to 3.9 MGD of water that is not currently utilized and discharged into the ocean.
x Provides NCMA agencies the ability to increase groundwater pumping and more fully utilize existing entitlements.
x Avoids remediation costs since the cost of preventing seawater intrusion with Central Coast Blue is less than the cost to mitigate groundwater contamination from salts once intrusion has occurred. Central Coast Blue eliminates the need to develop additional production facilities and
infrastructure to replace contaminated supplies.
Reduce wastewater
discharges to the ocean
and maximize utilization
of local water supplies
x Reduces ocean discharges by Central Coast Blue Partners by 74% and reroutes flows to an AWPF and injects purified
water into the groundwater basin.
Facilitate continued
water resources
collaboration in the
NCMA
x Sets framework for future sustainable management of the shared groundwater basin.
x Unites five agencies as they manage water collaboratively and holistically.
Attachment 2
9.F-21Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 11 PROJECT
OBJECTIVE
PROJECT
BENEFIT
Improve groundwater
quality through nitrate
removal and dilution
x Increased nitrate removal and reduction with increased groundwater extraction. Any nitrates that make it back to the City’s or the SSLOCD’s WWTP will be removed through
biological denitrification or through the AWPF and discharged to the ocean with the brine stream, removing them from the Basin. Dilution will be achieved through the injection of advanced purified water, which is higher quality than the water that is currently found in the Basin.
Reduce local and state
surface water diversions
to help benefit critical
environmental habitat
x Recharge the groundwater basin so Central Coast Blue
Partners can rely on more groundwater and reduce reliance on SWP and Lopez Lake.
Establish community
involvement and
education of recycled
water production
x Involve the public through council meetings, board meetings, pilot AWPF tours, press releases, and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process to educate and engage the public in building a sustainable and reliable water supply portfolio for themselves and future generations.
Improved energy
efficiency and use of
renewable energy for
potable water production
x Lowers energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG)
associated with importing SWP water to the region.
Schedule
Key past and future schedule milestones for Phase 1 of the Project are shown in Figure 6. 2022 2023 2024 2025
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
Preliminary
Engineering
Permitting
Final Design
Construction
Startup &
Closeout
Figure 6. Phase 1 Project Schedule
Attachment 2
9.F-22Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 12 Evaluation Criteria
Examination of the five evaluation criteria is provided below. Each criterion is fully addressed, and the analysis of the narrative indicates the Project meets all objectives of the Title XVI funding program.
Evaluation Criterion 1 – Water Supply
Subcriterion No. 1a – Stretching Water Supplies
1. How many acre-feet of water are expected to be made available each year upon completion of the Project? What percentage of the present and/or future annual demand in the project sponsor’s service area will the Project's reclaimed water provide upon Project completion? The percentage should be based on the total service area demand, not just recycled water demand. Use the total capacity of the entire Project upon completion, not just the water that will be produced by the activities that will be completed over the next 2 years.
Central Coast Blue Phase 1 will inject approximately 1,120 AFY of purified water and yield approximately 1,613 AFY of groundwater.Groundwater modeling demonstrated that creation of a seawater barrier with Phase 1 injection volumes (1,120 AFY) that would allow Central Coast Blue Partners to increase pumping by of 1,613 AFY. Phase 2 (which includes Phase 1) will inject approximately 4,390 AFY of purified water and yield approximately 4,390 AFY of groundwater.
Average historical groundwater pumping from 2011–2020 was 943 AFY, which is a more representative amount of available groundwater instead of the NCMA agencies’ groundwater entitlement under the Stipulation because of the threat of seawater intrusion. The NCMA agencies projected demand is 6,750AFY in 2035.Central Coast Blue Phase 1 will meet 24% of the projected demand and Phase 2 will meet 65% of projected demand. The Project will represent 44%of the Central Coast Blue Partners’ future water supply as shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7. Water Supplies with Project – Phase 1 (Left) & Phase 2 (Right) (Volumes in AFY) Attachment 2
9.F-23Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 13 2. Will the Project reduce, postpone, or eliminate the development of new or expanded non-recycled water supplies? Explain.
Central Coast Blue provides the first new source of water for the region in over 30 years. By capturing up to 3.9 MGD of wastewater that is currently being discharged into the ocean, the Project should eliminate the need to develop new or expanded non-recycled water supplies.
Utilizing this existing unused resource will provide the Project Partners with a reliable water supply portfolio and remove the need to implement supply alternatives, such as purchasing more SWP capacity, raising the Lopez Lake spillway to increase storage, or desalination.
As described in the Description of Current and Projected Water Demands section, on page 27, future water demands will be met with existing water supplies provided that the NCMA agencies are able to pump their full groundwater entitlements. Central Coast Blue enables the NCMA agencies to utilize existing groundwater entitlements and better manage their water supply portfolios to meet both near-term and future demands from urban and agricultural users in the area. Central Coast Blue will also protect existing production wells in the basin from seawater intrusion, low groundwater levels, and nitrates, eliminating the need to drill new wells.
3. Will the Project alleviate pressure on existing water supplies and/or facilities? If so, please describe the existing water supplies, identify the supplies and/or facilities that will be impacted and explain how they will be impacted by the Project, including quantifications where applicable.
Central Coast Blue will allow the NCMA agencies to
continue utilizing groundwater, which will alleviate
pressure on existing surface water supplies. Ongoing
drought conditions in San Luis Obispo County and
throughout California have stressed available water
supplies and forced agencies to identify additional
creative solutions for developing more reliable, locally controlled water resource portfolios.
Without taking proactive efforts to protect groundwater supplies and alleviate pressure on existing water sources, it is anticipated that the NCMA will face the following problems:
1. Degradation of groundwater quality within the Basin from seawater intrusion and nitrates from agricultural fertilizer application.
2. Increased dependence on local surface water supplies that are susceptible to variable precipitation and drought.
3. Increased dependence on imported SWP water supplies, which make the NCMA vulnerable to SWP availability, reliability, catastrophic conveyance interruption, and increased costs of SWP supplies.
Based on current entitlements, the projected supply of the NCMA agencies would be able to meet projected future water demands if NCMA agencies are able to pump their full groundwater entitlements. However, ongoing droughts that result in reduced recharge to the Basin, and concerns of lowering groundwater elevations to levels that put the Basin at risk from seawater Central Coast Blue would
maintain a barrier to
seawater intrusion, allowing
NCMA agencies to
sustainably use groundwater
and alleviate pressure on the
existing surface water supply.
Attachment 2
9.F-24Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 14 intrusion, restrict the NCMA agencies from pumping their full entitlements. Since there are no hydraulic boundaries in the Basin, if seawater intrusion occurs in the NCMA portion, it would impact the municipal and agricultural groundwater supplies of the entire Basin. As shown in Figure 8, the lowest volume of groundwater production from the NCMA portion of the Basin in at least the past 20 years was 3,511 AF in 2016, which represents about 37% of the entitlement yield of 9,500 AFY for the NCMA. Even with the relatively low volume of pumping, groundwater elevations throughout the area declined by several feet, with some areas exhibiting elevations below sea level. If groundwater becomes contaminated by seawater intrusion, there is a real possibility that the NCMA agencies could run out of water during the next extended drought.
Central Coast Blue will increase groundwater recharge and protect the Basin from seawater intrusion during these extended drought periods by utilizing a resource that is currently wasted to the ocean.
Figure 8. Total NCMA Water Use (Urban, Rural, Agricultural) By Source (4) Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of recycled water into the Basin to maintain a barrier to seawater intrusion. Central Coast Blue enables the NCMA agencies to utilize existing groundwater entitlements and better manage their water supply portfolios to meet both current and future demands, while also reducing stresses on existing production wells in the Basin from seawater intrusion, low groundwater levels, and nitrates.
Central Coast Blue also has the potential to reduce imported water demand by 1,850 AFY, which would directly benefit the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay-Delta) system flows, habitat, and Attachment 2
9.F-25Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 15 ecosystems. In the Bay-Delta, 300% more water is allocated to various uses than is actually available for use each year. There is no solution for correcting these allocation issues; however, every effort to reduce demand from these systems will have a beneficial impact and reduce pressure on these supplies. Because the Project will reduce imports from the Bay-Delta, it in turn will positively affect Federal Water Projects such as the Central Valley Project (CVP). Overseen by the USBR, the CVP has long-term agreements to supply water to more than 250 contractors in 29 California counties. CVP deliveries provide an average of 5 million AF of water for farms, 600,000 AF of water for municipal and industrial uses, and water for wildlife refuges and maintaining water quality in the Bay-Delta (5).
4. What performance measures will be used to quantify actual benefits upon completion of the Project?
There are multiple performance measures that will be used to quantify Central Coast Blue benefits. These measures are described below:
1. NCMA groundwater monitoring to track water level, water quality, subsidence, and signs of seawater intrusion. The data collected will be detailed in a Groundwater Monitoring Plan that will be developed with Phase 1.
2. Central Coast Blue Partners’ annual water supply by source to show a reduced volume of imported water while still meeting water demands.
3. Central Coast Blue Partners’ annual groundwater quality.
4. The quality and quantity of water produced at the AWPF.
Subcriterion No. 1b – Contributions to Water Supply Sustainability Points will be awarded for Projects that contribute to a more reliable water supply.
1. Will the Project make water available to address a specific concern? Consider the number of acre-feet of water and/or the percentage of overall water supply to be made available by the Project. Explain the specific concern and its severity. Also explain the role of the Project in addressing that concern and the extent to which the Project will address it.
Water Supply Shortages and Water Supply Reliability
Central Coast Blue will increase water supply reliability through recharging the groundwater basin and preventing seawater intrusion by injecting up to 4,390 AFY of purified water into the Basin. By providing a local, drought-resistant water supply, Central Coast Blue Partners will be able to reduce dependence on imported SWP water and local
surface water from Lopez Reservoir, which are subject to climate change and drought.
Groundwater Depletion
Currently, the Central Coast Blue Partners cannot pump
their full groundwater entitlements without the risk of depleting the groundwater supply and Central Coast Blue will
reliably recharge the
groundwater basin even
during droughts because
the wastewater supply is
minimally impacted by
drought or by local,
regional, and state-wide
hydrology.
Attachment 2
9.F-26Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 16 leaving the basin vulnerable to seawater intrusion. The Project will be able to consistently recharge the groundwater basin even during droughts, as the wastewater supply is not impacted by drought conditions. This will prevent groundwater depletion when the basin is not being recharged through seasonal rainfall.
Water Quality Issues
The Project protects water quality by preventing seawater intrusion. Furthermore, injection of advanced purified water will improve groundwater quality through nitrate removal and dilution.
Nitrates will be extracted through increased groundwater production and treatment, and dilution will occur with injection of higher-quality water than is currently found in the Basin.
Natural Disasters That May Impact Water Supply Infrastructure A catastrophic interruption to SWP and/or the Lopez Project conveyance infrastructure, such as an earthquake, could have serious impacts on the availability of imported and local surface water.
SWP water makes up 17% of the existing water supply, and Lopez Project water makes up 68% of the existing water supply portfolio for the Central Coast Blue Partners. A catastrophic interruption could cause the complete and sudden failure of the facilities used to import water into and within the region. Central Coast Blue could reliably supply 4,390 AFY—which represents over 55 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) for the participating agencies—as a local resource for each agency to produce water from while other sources are not available during an emergency.
A supply of 55 gpcd exceeds the California DWR indoor water use standard of 50 gpcd.
Heightened Competition for Water Supplies
There is a concern that SWP imported supplies could become scarce as reliability decreases due to multiple factors including increased demands for environmental uses and municipal demand increases with growing populations. The source wastewater for the Project is constantly being produced, even during droughts, as opposed to alternatives such as groundwater, imported SWP water, and local Lopez Project water that rely on local, regional, and state-wide hydrology.
Availability of Alternative Supplies
Without Central Coast Blue, the NCMA agencies will continue using local surface water, groundwater, and SWP water in accordance with existing entitlements and may have to develop additional supplies to ensure a reliable water supply. Current supply entitlements available to the NCMA agencies are sufficient to meet projected demands if full entitlements are assumed.
However, if Central Coast Blue Partners extract their full groundwater entitlement under drought conditions without increased recharge, it is expected that seawater intrusion will occur. Seawater intrusion could require drilling additional wells along with distribution piping in locations not impacted by seawater intrusion or constructing desalter facilities to produce potable water.
Even with recent reduced groundwater pumping, groundwater elevations throughout the area have declined by several feet due to drought conditions and reduced groundwater recharge.
Lower groundwater levels will eventually allow salts to contaminate the Basin when groundwater levels drop below the threshold of the Deep Well Index. Proactive measures to protect the existing groundwater basin are anticipated to be more feasible than required measures after the basin has been degraded.
Attachment 2
9.F-27Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 17 Without the Project, Central Coast Blue Partners will continue to manage resources in reaction to drought and unstable supply conditions. As the NCMA has experienced in the past, increased reliance on surface water supplies to reduce impacts to the groundwater basin has resulted in Lopez Reservoir coming within one year of reaching minimum pool, and many of the agencies came close to utilizing all their remaining entitlements. Implementation of Central Coast Blue will reduce existing and anticipated pressures on the NCMA water supply portfolios.
Increasing Cost of Water Supplies
The Central Coast Blue Partner agencies rely upon surface water from Lopez Reservoir as a key portion of their supply. In addition, the City of Pismo Beach relies on imported surface water from the SWP. Costs associated with the Lopez Project and SWP are anticipated to increase in future years and additional infrastructure (e.g. Delta Conveyance Project, etc.) and infrastructure repair and maintenance (e.g. improvements to Lopez Dam spillway, etc.) will further increase costs.
Central Coast Blue will provide local control over water costs and help alleviate the participating agencies reliance upon increasingly more expensive and less reliable water supplies.
2. Will the project address climate change? E.O. 14008: Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad focuses on increasing resilience to climate change and supporting climate resilient development. E.O. 14008 emphasizes the need to prioritize and take robust actions to reduce climate pollution; increase resilience to the impacts of climate change; protect public health; and conserve our lands, waters, oceans, and biodiversity. Please describe how the project will address climate change.
Pismo Beach’s Climate Action Plan (6) and the Project EIR (7) lists several effects of climate change that could occur near the Project. These effects include increased temperatures, changed precipitation, sea level rise, and storm surges. As sea levels rise, there is a risk of seawater intrusion into the Basin with drought conditions. By injecting advanced purified water into the Basin, Central Coast Blue will help prevent groundwater contamination by seawater intrusion.
This Project also expands the regions water portfolio and reduces vulnerability to droughts, by storing advance purified water in the Basin.
The project is consistent with the State’s long-term climate goals and strategies outlined in the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (8). The following goals from the 2017 Scoping Plan would be applicable to the proposed project:
x Develop and support more reliable water supplies for people, agriculture, and the environment, provided by a more resilient, diversified, sustainably managed water resources system with a focus on actions that provide direct GHG reductions. x Make conservation a California way of life by using and reusing water more efficiently through greater water conservation, drought tolerant landscaping, stormwater capture, water recycling, and reuse to help meet future water demands and adapt to climate change
x Reduce the carbon footprint of water systems and water uses for both surface and groundwater supplies through integrated strategies that reduce GHG emissions while meeting the needs of a growing population, improving public safety, fostering environmental stewardship, aiding in adaptation to climate change, and supporting a stable economy.
Attachment 2
9.F-28Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 18 In addition, the primary alternative to the Project is increased use of SWP, which would increase impacts related to energy and GHG emissions because the energy intensity of SWP water is greater than that of Project water and use of additional SWP water is not consistent with the goals of the 2017 Scoping Plan.
Finally, the Project EIR includes the following climate change mitigation measures: 1) the AWPF shall include a solar photovoltaic system; and 2) the AWPF shall include recycling receptacles.
3. Will the project help create additional flexibility to address drought? Will water made available by this Project continue to be available during periods of drought? To what extent is the water made available by this Project more drought resistant than alternative water supply options? Explain.
As mentioned in USBR’s 2021 Secure Water Act Report, the duration, severity, and frequency of droughts are projected to increase in the future compared to droughts of the distant past (9).
Central Coast Blue will produce adrought-resistantsupplyof4,390AFYfor groundwater injection using 5.4 MGD of flow that is currently discharged into the ocean. This will comprise up to 40% of the Central Coast Blue Partners’ available water supply. Unlike surface water or groundwater, the source wastewater for the Project is constantly being produced, even during droughts. The alternatives—groundwater, imported SWP water, and local Lopez Project water—rely upon local, regional, and state-wide hydrologyand are subject to drought impacts.In addition, the water will be stored underground for use as needed, which allows for flexible use of supplies by each agency based on supply availability. A drought-resistant supply is needed to deal with the severity and frequency of drought within the Project’s service area as shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9. San Luis Obispo County Drought Status 2000 - 2022
4. Has the area served by the Project been identified by the United States Drought Monitor as experiencing severe, extreme, or exceptional drought at any time in the last four years?
Yes, Figure 10 on page 19 shows that San Luis Obispo County has been in a state of “abnormally dry” to “exceptional drought” since 2015. In fact, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) declared San Luis Obispo County as a primary natural disaster area in February 2017 and in March Attachment 2
9.F-29Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 19 2021 due to losses and damages caused by drought. Governor Newsom most recently proclaimed a state of emergency for drought in San Luis Obispo County on July 8, 2021. Based on recent hydrology, it is likely the region is entering another severe drought.
Figure 10. Drought Status Map 2015-2022
As of March 8, 2022, the Project area is classified as D1 (moderate drought). However, the drought monitor does not capture the bleak status of available water supplies as the wet season concludes: 1) Groundwater levels are well below normal and have not recovered from the previous drought; 2) Lopez Lake is at 30% of capacity, is projected to fall below 20% by September 2022; and 3) SWP allocation is at 15%. The Central coast Blue Partners would be in a much better water supply position today if the Project had been implemented already.
Attachment 2
9.F-30Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 20 5. Has the area served by the Project been designated as a drought disaster area by the State in the last four years?
Yes, the USDA declared San Luis Obispo County as a primary natural disaster area in March 2019 and in March 2021 due to losses and damages caused by drought (10) (11). Governor Newsom most recently proclaimed a state of emergency for drought in San Luis Obispo County on July 8, 2021.
Evaluation Criterion 2 – Environment and Water Quality
1. Will the Project improve the quality of surface water or groundwater? If so, how?
2. Will the Project improve effluent quality beyond levels necessary to meet State or Federal discharge requirements?
Protecting water quality in the Basin is a primary objective of Central Coast Blue. Existing water quality concerns from seawater intrusion and nitrate contamination in the basin, along with the anticipated benefits of implementing Central Coast Blue, are discussed in prior sections of this application; however, they are restated here to address the evaluation criterion questions and reiterate this critical Project benefit.
Historically, elevated freshwater levels along the coastline and natural outflow to the ocean have prevented seawater from intruding onshore. However, with increased demand in the NCMA and changing climatic conditions, groundwater elevations along the coastline have been observed to drop during periods of extended drought. These lower levels reduce the flow of freshwater out toward the ocean, which serves as a barrier to seawater.
Elevated chloride concentrations and the hydraulic potential for seawater intrusion in the Basin has been documented since the 1960s. Based on these findings, monitoring efforts were initiated to provide an early warning of advancing seawater intrusion. From 1970 to 2009, the NCMA agencies did not observe further evidence of seawater intrusion, which is believed to be the result of constructing the Lopez Dam and increased use of local surface water supplies. However, beginning in May 2009, elevated concentrations of TDS, chloride, and sodium were detected in two Oceano-area monitoring wells, and elevated TDS and chloride levels were detected in another well, indicating potential seawater intrusion into the Basin. In response to this detection, the NCMA member agencies began an aggressive campaign
to reduce their groundwater pumping through water
conservation and the preferential utilization of surface water supplies over groundwater supplies. Despite reducing municipal groundwater pumping levels to approximately
20% of their safe annual yield, the NCMA agencies have
continued to observe declining groundwater levels,
specifically along the coastline. Since 2013, the water level signature of sentry well 30N02 looks similar to the signature the well had in 2007–2010, immediately before and during the time when the well experienced elevated TDS and
chloride levels. Thus, the NCMA agencies are concerned that after already reducing municipal pumping by 80%, the
Central Coast Blue will
adhere to all recycled water
regulations and achieve
standards established by
the SWRCB Division of
Drinking Water. The high-
quality recycled water
produced by the project will
improve the quality of
groundwater in the basin.
Attachment 2
9.F-31Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 21 threat of seawater intrusion is very present, and there are limited to no additional immediate measures (e.g. pumping reductions) that the agencies can take to reduce the risk. Currently, reducing groundwater pumping is the only option available to the agencies to protect the Basin from seawater intrusion. The recent drought has shown that this mitigation strategy is not effective at maintaining the required groundwater levels along the coastline to protect against seawater intrusion.
Groundwater modeling indicates that only 27% of NCMA groundwater entitlement can be pumped by municipal agencies without potentially inducing seawater intrusion (12). Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of advanced treated recycled water from the Pismo Beach WWTP and the SSLOCSD WWTP into the NCMA portion of the Basin each year. Groundwater modeling indicates that the injection of recycled water from the Pismo Beach WWTP alone (Phase 1) will be sufficient to develop a seawater intrusion barrier and protect the Basin from this occurrence. The injection of advanced treated recycled water from the SSLOCSD WWTP (Phase 2) will provide additional protection from seawater intrusion and allow the agencies to store the resource for extraction at a later time.
The injection of recycled water into the ground is anticipated to benefit not only the NCMA agencies, but all groundwater users in the Basin. Regional benefits are anticipated because there are no known hydraulic barriers between the NCMA and the other management areas within the Basin to limit seawater intrusion from advancing to the entire basin if left unaddressed.
Finally, recycled water produced by Central Coast Blue and extracted from the ground to meet NCMA demands will offset the use of local surface water from Lopez Lake and imported SWP water from the Bay-Delta, thus helping to protect surface water quality. Maintaining adequate surface water flows is important because habitats, species, and water quality suffer when flows are altered greatly from natural conditions (13). Reduced surface water demand will allow more water to remain in these natural surface water systems and protect water quality.
3. Will the Project improve flow conditions in a natural stream channel? Is so, how?
4. Will the Project restore or enhance habitat for non-listed species? If so, how? The NCMA agencies are entitled to a total of 4,530 AFY of surface water from Lopez Lake. Pismo Beach and Oceano CSD also have a total allotment of 1,850 AFY of imported SWP water from the Bay-Delta to meet
customer demands. Central Coast Blue will reduce
dependence on both local and imported surface water
supplies, which could allow more water to be kept in
streams. Reductions in surface water used by the NCMA will directly benefit in-stream flows and enhance habitat in Arroyo Grande Creek and the Bay-Delta ecosystems for non- listed species. The reduction in imported water also has the potential to reduce impacts to species and critical habitat impacts associated with Federal Water Projects, including the CVP, the Delta Conveyance Project, and CALFED.
The reduced dependence
on both local and imported
surface water supplies will
allow more water to be
kept in streams. The
reductions will directly
benefit in-stream flows and
enhance habitat for non-
listed species in Arroyo
Grande Creek and the Bay-
Delta ecosystems.
Attachment 2
9.F-32Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 22 In addition, Lopez Lake has an identified safe yield of 8,730 AFY, of which 4,200 AFY is allocated for downstream releases for groundwater recharge, environmental habitat, and agricultural irrigation. Due to successive dry years, a Low Reservoir Response Plan (LRRP) was adopted that results in a 10% decrease in municipal deliveries when the reservoir storage drops below 20,000 AF and 20% reduction when the reservoir drops below 10,000 AF (which is projected to occur in September 2022). Reduced surface water demand from the NCMA agencies will reduce the likelihood of the LRRP being implemented and impacting stream flows in Arroyo Grande Creek.
Finally, the Project will increase groundwater recharge through direct injection and by maintaining releases from Lopez Lake, which will also increase groundwater levels within the Basin. Higher groundwater levels will increase water levels in groundwater dependent ecosystems and ultimately improve flow conditions.
5. Will the Project provide water or habitat for federally listed threatened or endangered species? If so, how?
As discussed above, Central Coast Blue will provide 4,390 AFY of local groundwater that will be used to offset demands from imported SWP water supplies. Reduced water demand from the Bay-Delta will make this water available to support federally endangered and protected fish species in the Bay-Delta (Delta Smelt, Chinook Salmon). In the Bay-Delta, 300% more water is allocated to various uses than is actually available for use each year. Even small reductions in the amount of water withdrawn will have positive benefits to species in this system.
Additionally, Arroyo Grande Creek is designated as habitat for threatened South Central California Steelhead, Red-Legged Frogs, Tidewater Goby, and potentially other threatened/endangered species. Reduced demand for Lopez Reservoir water supplies will make additional water available for downstream releases, which will improve and enhance habitat for these species. Reducing pressure on existing water supplies and improving flexibility to return streams and rivers to their more natural patterns will more closely mimic natural conditions which will provide threatened native species a better chance of outcompeting invasive species.
Evaluation Criterion 3 – Economic Benefits
Subcriterion No. 3a – Cost Effectiveness
1. Reclamation will calculate the cost per acre-foot of water produced by the Project using information provided by Project sponsors. Please provide the following information for this calculation:
a. The total estimated construction costs, by year, for the Project (include all previous and planned work).
Responses to Evaluation Criterion 3 reflect the entire Project as described in the Technical Project Description. Central Coast Blue Phase 1 will include construction of an AWPF, treatment of secondary treated flows from the Pismo Beach WWTP, construction of up to five injection wells and associated transmission lines, and injection of treated flows to the Basin. Phase 2 will include expansion of the AWPF, treatment of secondary flows from the SSLOCSD WWTP, and construction of up to two additional injection wells and associated transmission lines.
Attachment 2
9.F-33Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 23 Table 2. Estimated Construction Costs by Year
Federal Fiscal Year CONSTRUCTION COST
FY 2024 $20,474,500
FY 2025 $20,474,500
FY 2026 $0
FY 2027 $13,278,500
FY 2028 $13,278,500
Total $67,506,000
Note: Construction costs are escalated to 2024
b. The total estimated or actual costs to plan and design the Project. Note: This should not include the cost to complete a feasibility study that meets the requirements of Reclamation’s Directives and Standards WTR 11-01, Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Feasibility Study Review Process, at www.usbr.gov/recman/wtr/wtr11-
01.pdf.
Table 3. Total Estimated Eligible Costs for Planning and Design Activities
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Planning $1,129,528 $-
Program Management $3,065,000 $1,914,000
Permitting $810,000 $533,000
Final Design $4,550,000 $3,043,000
Value Engineering $239,000 $160,000
Office Engineering During Construction $1,134,000 $736,000 Construction Management $3,722,000 $2,415,000
Total $14,649,528 $8,801,000
Note: Excludes cost to prepare USBR Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Feasibility Study, costs to prepare USBR Title XVI grant application, and costs incurred prior to USBR approval of the Project Feasibility Study. All values in 2022 dollars. c. The average annual operation and maintenance costs for the life of the Project. Please do not include periodic replacement costs in the operation and maintenance costs. Periodic replacement costs should be provided separately in response to (f) below. Note: This is an annual cost—not total cost.
O&M cost estimates include maintenance and power for the AWPF, pump stations, pipelines, wells, and equalization as well as the cost of staffing the facility.
Table 4. Annual O&M for Project
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Annual O&M $1,919,200 $4,805,000
Note: All values in 2022 dollars.
d. The year the Project will begin to deliver reclaimed water.
Attachment 2
9.F-34Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 24 Central Coast Blue will begin to deliver recycled water in 2025. e. The Projected life (in years) that the Project is expected to last. Note: this should be measured from the time the Project starts delivering water.
The facilities associated with Central Coast Blue have a projected life of 30 years (2025–2055). f. All estimated replacement costs by year. If there are multiple replacement costs in one (1) year, or at the same interval, please total them and put them on one line with the year or interval.
Table 5. Replacement Costs by Year
DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT
REQUIREMENT YEAR COST
TOTAL EACH
REPLACEMENT
INTERVAL
Cartridge Filter Replacement
Lamp Replacement
Annual
Annual
$15,900
$12,500 $28,400
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
5 5
5 $291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$456,300
UV Sensor Replacement
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
10 10
10 10
$10,200
$291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$466,500
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
15 15
15 $291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$456,300
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
UV Sensor Replacement
20 20
20 20
$291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$10,200
$466,500
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
25 25
25 $291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$456,300
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
UV Sensor Replacement
30 30
30 30
$291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$10,200
$466,500
Note: All values in 2022 dollars.
g. The maximum volume of water (in acre-feet) that will be produced upon completion of the Project. This volume of water must correspond to the costs provided above. If costs are only provided for a portion or phase of the project, then only the water produced by that same portion or phase of the project will be considered under this criterion.
The Project will produce a total of 48,390 AF in Phase 1 and an additional 88,350 AF in Phase 2 for a total of 131,740 AF.
Attachment 2
9.F-35Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 25 2. Reclamation will calculate the cost per acre-foot for the Title XVI Project using the information requested in question No. 1 and compare it to the non-reclaimed water alternative, and other water supply options that applicant identifies to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the Project. Please provide the following information for this comparison:
a. A description of the conditions that exist in the area and projections of the future with, and without, the Project.
Description of Current and Projected Water Supplies
A “No Project” scenario for the NCMA agencies results in the continued use of existing potable water supplies which are made up of groundwater and surface water from both local and imported supplies. Each of the water purveyors rely upon their own specific combination of these water sources. The supply for each NCMA agency and their baseline (full entitlement) amounts are summarized in Table 6. Note that “Other Supplies” include groundwater pumped from outside the NCMA boundaries (outside the Basin) and groundwater entitlement differs from estimates of actual available groundwater supply described above. Groundwater modeling indicates that only 27% of groundwater entitlement can be pumped by municipal agencies without potentially inducing seawater intrusion. Without the Project, the Central Coast Blue Partners will likely pursue additional SWP water or desalination.
Table 6. NCMA Agency Water Entitlements
URBAN AREA LOPEZ
LAKE
SWP
ALLOCATION
GROUNDWATER
ENTITLEMENT
OTHER
SUPPLIES TOTAL
Arroyo Grande 2,290 0 1,323 160 3,773
Grover Beach 800 0 1,407 0 2,207
Pismo Beach 892 1,140 700 0 2,732
Oceano CSD 303 750 900 0 1,953
Total 4,285 1,890 4,330 160 10,665
Note: All values in AFY.
Water sources that the NCMA agencies utilize are discussed in detail below, along with a summary of the concerns that exist with continuing to rely upon these resources in the absence of implementing Central Coast Blue.
Surface Water
The NCMA agencies have water supply contracts with the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (SLOCFC&WCD) for Lopez Project and SWP surface water supplies.
Lopez Project
The Lopez Reservoir total capacity is 51,990 AF and has an identified safe yield of 8,730 AFY. Of this safe yield, 4,530 AFY is allocated for diversion to municipal users (note 245 AFY is allocated outside the NCMA) and 4,200 AFY is allocated for downstream release to Arroyo Grande Creek for agricultural irrigation, groundwater recharge, and environmental habitat. Due to successive Attachment 2
9.F-36Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 26 dry years, a LRRP was enacted in April 2015 when the storage dropped below 20,000 AF. The enactment of the LRRP resulted in a 10% decrease in municipal diversions and downstream releases and 20% reduction when the reservoir drops below 10,000 AF (which is projected to occur in September 2022) (14). As of February 2022, the current storage volume in Lopez Reservoir is 14,700 AF (15) and it is likely that the LRRP will be considered as a tool to preserve water supplies which could again decrease downstream releases. Should the current dry weather continue it is likely that additional stages of the LRRP could be considered which could completely eliminate downstream releases.
During the most recent drought, the NCMA agencies relied heavily on their surface water supplies to reduce groundwater pumping to the lowest amount possible. During this time, Lopez Reservoir came within one year of reaching minimum pool and one agency came within one year of potentially not having enough water to serve its population. Ongoing drought conditions have triggered Lopez reductions through the LRRP, which have impacted the ability of the NCMA agencies to utilize surface water supplies to offset their groundwater pumping. Since 2014, storage levels in Lopez Reservoir have dropped to historically low levels and, if the drought continues, Lopez Water will likely be unavailable to the NCMA agencies, forcing them to further rely upon groundwater supplies.
State Water Project
Oceano CSD and Pismo Beach are the only NCMA agencies with SWP subcontracts with the SLOCFC&WCD. Pismo Beach’s current contract entitlement amount of SWP is 1,240 AFY; however, 100 AFY is allocated to specific entities so the supply available to Pismo Beach is 1,140 AFY. Oceano CSD’s SWP allocation is 750 AFY.
SWP allocation water deliveries have the potential to be impacted from year to year depending on available supply from rainfall, snowpack, runoff, reservoir storage, pumping capacity from the Delta, anthropogenic activities, and environmental constraints. In fact, two of the past eight years have had only 5% allocations. Furthermore, catastrophic interruption to supply conveyance infrastructure, such as an earthquake, could have serious impacts on the availability of imported water. A catastrophic interruption, such as the Oroville Dam spillway emergency in February 2017, could cause the complete and sudden failure of the facilities used to store and import water into the region.
Groundwater
The NCMA agencies extract groundwater based on the safe yield identified in the Management Agreement, which is 9,500 AFY. This safe yield is currently subdivided into 3 allotments as follows:
1. Applied irrigation (4,970 AFY)
2. Subsurface outflow to the ocean (200 AFY)
3. Urban Use (4,330 AFY)
Urban use entitlements are further allotted as follows: City of Arroyo Grande (1,323 AFY), City of Grover Beach (1,407 AFY), City of Pismo Beach (700 AFY), and Oceano CSD (900 AFY).
As previously noted, in response to monitoring results in 2009 that detected water quality constituents consistent with seawater intrusion in NCMA monitoring wells, NCMA agencies limited water consumption, increased surface water imports, and reduced groundwater Attachment 2
9.F-37Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 27 pumping. As a result, total groundwater pumping in the NCMA decreased from 8,982 AFY in 2007 to 6,126 AFY in 2020, a reduction of approximately 32% (4).
The primary groundwater production zone for the NCMA agencies is in the northern central portion of the NCMA. Currently, the NCMA agencies own and operate 21 individual municipal production wells that pump groundwater from the Basin. The locations of the existing production wells are shown in Figure 11. Pismo Beach and Oceano CSD production wells are the furthest west and likely at the highest risk for seawater intrusion due to their proximity to the ocean.
Figure 11. NCMA Production Wells
Description of Current and Projected Water Demands
Total estimated Basin pumpage (municipal and agricultural) in the NCMA in 2020 was 3,064 AF, which represents the lowest volume of groundwater production from the NCMA portion of the basin in at least the past 20 years. The estimated groundwater pumpage of 3,064 AFY represents about 32% of the calculated yield of 9,500 AFY for the NCMA portion of the Basin. However, even with the relatively low volume of pumping and a relatively wet rainfall year in 2019, the aquifer health is still fragile as illustrated by water elevations at just a few feet above sea level, coupled with the formation of a pumping depression in the alluvial aquifer within the Cienega Valley just west of the NCMA/NMMA boundary. The data indicate that the aquifer has very little ability to withstand any future droughts (4).
The 2020 water demand for the NCMA area of 8,577 AF is lower than the total available supply for all uses in 2020, which totaled 12,470 AF. However, the Central Coast Blue Partners pumped Attachment 2
9.F-38Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 28 only 14% of their groundwater entitlement, yet the change in groundwater storage in the basin was minimal since last year. It is clear that the NCMA agencies could not have used their entire groundwater entitlement in 2020 without significantly lowering water elevations below current conditions and potentially providing conditions conducive to seawater intrusion (4).
The supply scenarios and projected demand for the NCMA agencies is shown in Figure 12. The supply scenarios for the NCMA agencies include reduced availability that would be the result of dry years with little to no precipitation and critical drought. The actual pumping in 2020 is also included. As discussed earlier, the NCMA agencies cannot use their entire groundwater entitlement without the potential of lowering water elevations, which puts the groundwater basin at risk of seawater intrusion (4). Based on these scenarios, the agencies would require severe conservation and/or acquisition of expensive imported water on the open market if there are multiple dry years or a critical drought.
Figure 12. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies without Recycled Water Future Conditions with the Project
Implementation of Central Coast Blue allows the NCMA agencies to realize all the established Project objectives. Multiple Project benefits are discussed throughout this application; however, the impact the Project has on protecting and improving water quality in the Basin, reducing pressure on existing water supplies, and creating a sustainable, drought-resistant local water supply cannot be understated. By utilizing WWTP effluent that is currently underutilized and discharged to the ocean, Central Coast Blue will provide the NCMA agencies with a reliable water supply portfolio well into the future. Water supply and demand projections after implementation of Central Coast Blue are provided in Figure 13 on page 29. Without Central Coast Blue, NCMA agencies will continue to struggle to manage resources in reaction to drought, unstable supply conditions, and deteriorating water quality.
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Ac
r
e
-
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
A
F
Y
)
Supply - SWP
Supply - Lopez Water
Supply - Groundwater
Demand - 2020
Demand - 2035
Attachment 2
9.F-39Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 29 Figure 13. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies with Recycled Water
b. Provide the cost per acre-foot of other water supply alternatives that could be implemented by the non-Federal Project sponsor in lieu of the Project. This must include, but is not limited to, one non-reclaimed water alternative that would satisfy the same demand as the Project. Other water supply alternatives beyond one non-reclaimed water alternative are not required, but may be provided where available to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of the Project.
Central Coast Blue Partners have extensively investigated opportunities to improve the reliability of local water supplies and protect existing resources. Both non-recycled and recycled water projects have been analyzed. Non-recycled water alternatives include the Lopez Reservoir Spillway Raising, Supplemental SWP via the Coastal Branch and Lopez Pipelines, and desalination.
A discussion of the alternatives, along with an explanation regarding the feasibility of each alternative is provided in Table 7 on page 30.
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Ac
r
e
-
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
A
F
Y
)
Recycled Water
Supply - SWP
Supply - Lopez Water
Supply - Groundwater
Demand - 2020
Demand - 2035
Attachment 2
9.F-40Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 30 Table 7. Unit Cost Comparison – Regional Water Supply Alternatives
ALTERNATIVE
UNIT
COST
($/AF)
YIELD
(AFY) COMMENTS
RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES
Central Coast
Blue
(Phase 1 & 2)1
$1,910 4,390
The estimated unit cost of Central Coast Blue is in-line or superior to supply alternatives that satisfy the same
demand. This Project provides a new sustainable,
drought-resistant local water supply that protects water quality in the Basin. The Project provides a 60% increase in municipal groundwater supplies and will reduce ocean
discharge by 74%.
Satellite
Water
Resource
Recovery
Facility (16)
$6,900 1,006 The high unit cost and low yield associated with this project makes this alternative infeasible.
NON-RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES
Lopez Lake
Spillway
Raise Project
(17)
$1,700 565
The estimated unit cost of this project is low; however, the estimated yield of 565 AFY does not satisfy the same demand as Central Coast Blue. Also, the timeline
associated with the planning, permitting, design, and
implementation phases of the project do not address the Central Coast Blue Partner’s immediate needs. This
resource will remain impacted by local drought
conditions. At its current height, the spillway has not overflowed since 1997, meaning that no additional water would have been made available from this option.
Nacimiento
Pipeline
Extension
$3,000
to
$3,800
2,300
The lower unit cost is dependent on reusing a pipeline
currently associated oil and gas production. In addition, Nacimiento supplies have been fully allocated since the preparation of the original study in 2006.
Desalination
(18) $3,800 2,300
The high estimated unit cost, permitting concerns, and
estimated time to complete a desalination project makes this alternative currently infeasible.
SWP (19) $3,000 NA2
SWP is a viable alternative to Central Coast Blue; however, this supply is vulnerable to availability, reliability, catastrophic conveyance interruption s, and increased
costs.
1Central Coast Blue annual unit cost in 2022 dollars and include annual yield after injection 2SWP annual yields would be subject to obtaining new contracts or excess entitlements Note: All values are in 2022 dollars.
Attachment 2
9.F-41Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 31 Non-Recycled Water Project Alternatives
Lopez Reservoir Spillway Raising
In 2013, the Lopez Lake Spillway Raise Project Report was conducted to evaluate raising the spillway elevation of Lopez Reservoir as a means of increasing safe yield in the reservoir and thus increasing water supply entitlements to the contract agencies. The additional annual yield of the project was evaluated for a range of spillway gate heights ranging from 2 feet to 12 feet, which would increase lake storage capacity by 1,900 AF and 11,400 AF, respectively. Estimated costs were prepared for a 6-foot-high spillway gate to yield 600 AFY. The project unit cost was estimated at $1,255/AF (2013 dollars) (17). Using the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index, the unit cost escalated to January 2022 dollars is $1,700/AF.
The unit cost of water associated with the Lopez Reservoir Spillway Raising Project is lower than estimates for Central Coast Blue; however, the project does not satisfy the same demand as the Project. In addition, the timeline associated with the planning, permitting, design, and implementation phases of the project do not address the Central Coast Blue Partners’ immediate needs. This supply will also continue to be subject to climate change, local precipitation amounts and future droughts. The additional storage associated with raising the spillway would only be available if there was enough precipitation to fill the reservoir. At its current elevation, the spillway has not overflowed since 1997, meaning no additional water would have been made available by this project over that time, and it is likely based on current weather patterns that no additional water would be made available for the foreseeable future. Finally, this project does not protect the Basin and existing groundwater entitlements from seawater intrusion. Further evaluation of this project has been put on hold while the SLOCFC&WCD develops a Habit Conservation Plan for the Arroyo Grande Creek, which feeds Lopez Reservoir. Currently there is not a timeline for completion of the Habit Conservation Plan, which was initiated in 2004.
Supplemental SWP via the Coastal Branch and Lopez Pipelines SLOCFC&WCD completed a technical memorandum update in 2016 (19) to calculate potential costs of obtaining additional capacity in the Coastal Branch Pipeline and delivering the SLOCFC&WCD’s “Excess Allocation” Table A water to the Paso Basin. Expanding delivery options for the SLOCFC&WCD’s excess entitlement could provide an opportunity for the Central Coast Blue Partner agencies that are SWP subcontractors (i.e. Pismo Beach and Oceano CSD) to obtain supplemental SWP water. Estimated costs for treated water delivery scenarios for a new SWP subcontractor ranged from $2,292/AF to $2,503/AF (2016 dollars) to deliver water to the Paso Basin. Delivery of water to the Lopez Pipeline would require purchase of additional capacity in additional downstream portions of the Coastal Branch Pipeline. Additionally, these cost estimates for SWP water do not account for potential increases in SWP costs associated with the Delta Conveyance Project. Using the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index, the unit cost escalated to January 2022 dollars is $3,000/AF.
Attachment 2
9.F-42Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 32 The NCMA agencies could potentially obtain new SWP
contracts or obtain excess entitlements; however, the path and timeline for negotiating and securing any additional supply remains uncertain. In addition, this non-local supply source is still affected by multiple factors that impact reliability. Water supply imported from other areas of the state may be threatened by state-wide drought, effects of climate change in the SWP source area, management and
environmental protection issues in the Bay-Delta that affect the amount and reliability of SWP deliveries, and risk of seismic and other damage to the SWP system, such as the failure of the Oroville Dam Spillway. SWP does not have the ability to reliably satisfy the same demand as the Project.
Furthermore, this alternative does not protect the Basin and existing groundwater entitlements from seawater intrusion.
Despite the shortcomings associated with increasing or obtaining new SWP allocations, SWP water is likely the project alternative that would be pursued with the absence of the Project.
Nacimiento Pipeline Extension
The Nacimiento Water Supply Project delivers raw water from Nacimiento Reservoir to agencies in northern San Luis Obispo County, terminating at the City of San Luis Obispo’s Water Treatment Plant. The 2006 Supplemental Water Supply Study: Nacimiento Pipeline Extension prepared by the Wallace Group evaluated the viability of the Nacimiento Pipeline Project to supply approximately 2,300 AFY of potable water to meet future demands. The study evaluated two pipeline alignments and the project required improvements to the Lopez WTP for treatment of raw water such as the installation of chemical pretreatment, new membrane filtration system, and disinfection to meet state and federal water quality standards. The existing Lopez Project pipeline also would require pumping improvements to increase capacity and maintain adequate delivery rates and pressure to all users. Agencies would be required to sign the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract, which defines the operation and maintenance, delivery entitlement, and regulatory requirements for each agency. The estimated capital cost of the Orcutt Road alignment was $30,100,000 with estimated annual O&M cost of $5,960,000 and 20-year life cycle cost of $3,830/AF. The estimated capital cost of the Plains Pipeline alignment was $11,860,000 with an estimated $5,800,000 annual O&M cost and 20-year life cycle cost of approximately $3,010/AF. The cost for this alignment was lower since a water discharge pipeline constructed by Plains Exploration (PXP) would be reused for part of the project. The report concluded the project would require a minimum of 5 years to complete planning, permitting, design, and construction if the Orcutt Road alignment was selected. However, if the recommended Plains Pipeline alignment was selected, the timeline could increase by 10 years since the pipeline would be necessary for oil water production during that period. The report Water supply imported
from other areas of the
state may be threatened by
state-wide drought, effects
of climate change in the
SWP resource area,
management and
environmental protection
issues, and risk of seismic
damage to the delivery SWP
system.
Attachment 2
9.F-43Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 33 concluded that more information was required regarding the timeline for the Plains Pipeline due to the high uncertainty before a feasibility study is conducted.
Desalination
In 2008, the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach and the Oceano CSD completed a feasibility and funding study for desalination as an additional water supply option. Each agency identified their desired allocations from desalination, and the total capacity of the facility was selected at 2,300 AFY (18). The cities’ water supply needs were not considered during this analysis; however, estimated desalination production quantities align with the Project.
The study focused on utilizing the existing SSLOCSD WWTP site for construction of a desalination facility. It was determined that a series of 20 or more beach wells could be required to meet the seawater intake quantities needed (3,830 AFY of seawater) to produce 2,300 AFY of potable water. Brine generated from the RO process would be discharged through the existing ocean outfall; however, there is not sufficient capacity during periods of high flow from the Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD WWTPs. Therefore, brine storage would be required. Based on the study, the desalination project would require a minimum of 7 to 8 years to complete and possibly longer due to permitting and environmental variability. Cost for desalination was estimated to $2,450/AF in 2008 dollars. In 2022 dollars, the estimated cost associated with water produced from desalination is $3,800/AF. Desalination provides a reliable, drought-proof local water supply; however, due to estimated costs, permitting concerns, and estimated time to complete, the project was not considered to be a viable option (18).
The City of Pismo Beach also evaluated desalination in the 2015 Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facility Planning Study (16), estimating similar desalination costs as the 2008 study described above and ultimately recommending proceeding with Central Coast Blue due to the higher costs, environmental impacts, and permitting concerns associated with desalination.
Recycled Water Alternatives
Multiple recycled water alternatives were considered prior to advancing the Project. Alternative recycled water projects considered include “Secondary-23” recycled water for irrigation, disinfected tertiary for irrigation, groundwater recharge via surface spreading, and groundwater recharge using recycled water produced from a satellite facility. Initial cost estimates for these alternatives ranged from $5,700 to $15,900/AF (2015 dollars) of water produced (16). Secondary- 23 irrigation and tertiary irrigation alternatives had low annual yield and high estimated unit costs so they were not recommended.
The recycled water alternative that provided benefits closest to those achieved through the Project is the Satellite Water Resource Recovery Facility project (SWRRF). This was the original proposed concept for evaluation in the SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facility Planning Study (20). The SWRRF would be located along one of the trunk mains leading to the WWTP—outside of the flood plain and near potential recharge locations. However, after review of the initial financial analysis, the Project Partners determined that a SWRRF was not an effective option for developing a recycled water system in the region. This is due to the expected costs associated with developing the satellite facility, including new infrastructure for primary, secondary, tertiary, and advanced treatment. In addition, the SWRRF project would not yield quantities of water comparable to Central Coast Blue.
Attachment 2
9.F-44Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 34 c. If available, provide the cost per acre foot of one water supply project with similar characteristics to the Project. This information does not have to be provided if it is not available. It is intended to provide another possible comparison to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of the Project.
Three groundwater replenishment project that will use advanced water treatment to purify recycled water for recharging the groundwater basin via injection wells are similar to the project – two are in design phase and one is in operation. The Carpinteria Advanced Purification Project completed 50% design documents in 2019. The project will recharge roughly 1,120 AFY with construction costs of roughly $28 million and O&M estimates of $1.4 million per year. The latest cost estimates result in a unit cost of $2,300/AF (21). The Pure Water Soquel project is currently in the design-build phase with capital cost estimates of $208 million and O&M estimates of $4.8 million per year. The 3,340 AFY yield results in a unit cost of roughly $2,900/AF (22). The Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project by Monterey One Water started operations in 2020. The total project costs were not readily available; however, Monterey One Water is currently proposing to expand the project from 5 MGD to 7 MGD at a cost of roughly $2,300/AF (23).
Each of these project costs are in line with Project cost estimates. d. Discussion of the degree to which the Project is cost-effective. Where applicable, include a discussion of why the Project may be cost effective even if the overall Project cost appears to be high.
The unit cost for Central Coast Blue is in-line with the unit costs for alternative supplemental water supply projects but Central Coast Blue is clearly the superior alternative when considering the qualitative benefits. Central Coast Blue is the only alternative that achieves all of the objectives identified in Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits section on page 10, and detailed in Table 8.
Table 8. Central Coast Blue Qualitative Benefits
WATER SUPPLY
Increased
Resiliency
Expands the water portfolio for the region and reduces vulnerability to drought, climate change, disruptions from imported water, and potential worsening quality of groundwater from seawater intrusion.
Increased
Reliability
NCMA agencies will have the ability to increase groundwater pumping and more fully utilize existing entitlements. Wastewater being discharged into the ocean will be put to beneficial use. Wastewater will remain available through the life of the Project.
Increased
Recharge
Provide a new source of recharge to the Basin to protect the basin from degradation due to seawater intrusion and increase available water for extraction.
WATER QUALITY
Attachment 2
9.F-45Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 35 Seawater
Intrusion
The injection of recycled water will protect the Basin from seawater intrusion by maintaining offshore groundwater flows. The cost of preventing seawater intrusion into the Basin is less than costs to mitigate groundwater contamination from salts once it has occurred. Central Coast Blue eliminates the need to develop additional production facilities and infrastructure to replace contaminated supplies.
Nitrate
Removal and
Dilution
Improve groundwater quality through nitrate removal and dilution. Removal of nitrates will be increased with expanded groundwater extraction. Any nitrates that make it back to the Pismo Beach or SSLOCSD WWTP will be removed through biological denitrification or through the AWPF and discharged to the ocean with the brine stream, thus removing them from the basin. Dilution will be achieved through the injection of advanced purified water, which is of significantly higher quality than the water that is currently found in the basin.
ENVIRONMENT / OTHER
Watersheds
Reduce local and state surface water diversions to help benefit critical environmental habitat. Reducing SWP usage also reduces diversions from the upstream Bay-Delta.
GHG
Emissions
Lower energy demand and GHG emissions associated with reduced imported state water to the region.
Regional
Collaboration Facilitate continued water resource collaboration in the NCMA.
DAC Benefits
Oceano is a SDAC census designated place, and both the Cities of Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande contain DAC census designated block groups that will benefit from the Project (Figure 14 on page 42). Oceano CSD has five production wells that extract up to 900 AFY of groundwater from the Basin.
Protection of Oceano CSD’s five production wells will allow the agency to continue providing clean water to its 7,000 residents. Without Central Coast Blue, Oceano CSD’s wells could be contaminated by seawater intrusion before the other NCMA agencies due to their location and proximity to the ocean.
Public
Knowledge
Establishes community involvement and education of recycled water production through Project planning, design, construction, and operation.
As mentioned in the previous sections, the only other similar alternative is increasing SWP supply.
However, this was not pursued further due to state water supply vulnerability, reliability, potential catastrophic conveyance interruptions, and increased costs. This supply alternative also does not address the concern of seawater intrusion and potential contamination of the entire Basin from this occurrence.
Attachment 2
9.F-46Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 36 Subcriterion No. 3b – Economic Analysis and Project Benefits
1. Summarize the economic analysis performed for the Project including information on the Project’s estimated benefits and costs. Describe the methodologies used for the analysis that has been conducted. Points will be awarded based on a comparison of the benefits and costs of the Project. The information provided should include:
a. Quantified and monetized Project costs, including capital costs and operations and maintenance costs.
Capital and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs associated with the design, construction, and operation of Central Coast Blue Phase 1 and Phase 2 are provided in Table 9. The annualized capital estimates were based on borrowing 100% of the Project cost at a loan term of 30 years and a 1% interest rate. The loan terms are based on recent loans from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) loan program. The total annual cost was divided by the annual yield after injection to calculate the unit cost for Phase 1 and Phase 2, which is included in Table 9.
Table 9. Central Coast Blue Unit Costs
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Total Capital $56,495,408 $91,853,408
Annualized Capital $2,189,000 $3,559,000
Annualized O&M $1,919,200 $4,805,000
Total Annualized Cost $4,108,200 $8,464,000
Groundwater Yield (After Injection) 1,613 AFY 4,390 AFY Unit Cost (After Injection) $2,550/AF $1,910/AF
b. Quantified and monetized Project benefits. This includes benefits that can be quantified and expressed as a monetized benefit per acre-foot. These may include, but are not limited to, benefits related to water supply quantity and water supply reliability, recreational benefits, ecosystem benefits, water quality, energy efficiency, and environmental compliance and permitting. Benefits may also include the avoided costs of no action (i.e., the costs that would be incurred if the Project were not implemented), and the willingness of users or customers to pay for a benefit or to avoid a negative outcome (e.g., the willingness of households to pay for a water supply system that would reduce groundwater overdraft). If quantified and/or monetized information for these benefits is not available, they may be addressed in response to question two below.
A sustainable water supply will allow the Central Coast Blue Partners to support their tourism industry and local businesses. Local businesses in Pismo Beach brought in an overall revenue of $302 million in 2020 which includes income from hotels, RV parks, vacation rentals and other tourism services. Additionally, $243 million is generated by the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area. Central Coast Blue will produce an equivalent of 68% of the historical demand and based on this percentage will support approximately $233 million of local tourism by maintaining a sustainable water supply.
The agriculture industry in the NCMA portion of the Basin is a mix of rotational crops, strawberries, avocados, lemons, and potatoes that equate to approximately 1,447 acres of Attachment 2
9.F-47Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 37 agricultural land (24). These crops are rated sensitive to moderately sensitive to salt (measured by TDS) and boron (24). Most sensitive crops require a TDS concentration of 500 mg/L or less to maximize potential yield (24). As shown in Table 10, the potential yield of some of the dominant crops grown in the NCMA could already be subject to yield reduction based on location within the Basin. Although avocados do not have a specific yield number tied to salt concentrations, the study classifies avocados as a crop sensitive to soil salinity (24). Without the Project, the study area is at risk for seawater intrusion, therefore the agricultural industry is likely to be significantly impacted by high salt concentrations. The yield values at 100% yield represent the poorest quality water that, if used continuously, will produce maximum average soil salinity levels equal to the salinity thresholds. A monetized value per AF of irrigation water for key crops is listed in Table 10 and has the potential to significantly impact agriculture revenue if wells in the agricultural industry were to be impacted by seawater intrusion to the point where the produced groundwater would be unusable.
Because the water produced from Central Coast Blue will be of higher quality than groundwater, the Project will improve the existing groundwater quality as well as protect the agricultural growers from seawater intrusion. Improved water quality for agricultural growers would benefit crop productions, which represent a $446,205,000 industry in the Basin, of which $11,335,000 is revenue from the NCMA portion of the Basin (24). Based on the proportion of land used for agriculture in the NCMA portion of the Basin, there is approximately $8,000 of revenue produced per acre of cropland.
Table 10. Annual Crop Value per Acre-Foot of Produced Water
EXISTING
GROUNDWATER
TDS (MG/L)
NCMA
CROPS
TDS (MG/L) AGRICULTURE
REVENUE
PRODUCED/AF OF
IRRIGATION
WATER2
100%
Potential
Yield(1)
90%
Potential
Yield(1)
50%
Potential
Yield(1)
Range From 350
– 1,000 mg/L
Strawberries 448 576 1,088 $29,436
Lemons 640 960 2,304 $4,439
Avocados NA NA NA $3,458
1 Estimates based on the Irrigation Water Salinity and Crop Production Report (24). The yield values at 100% yield represent the poorest quality water that, if used continuously, will produce maximum average soil salinity levels equal to the salinity thresholds. 2 Estimates based on acre-inches per acre of crop produced from the University of California Davis Cost and Return Studies done on strawberries, lemons, celery, raspberries, and avocados (25).
Table 11 on page 38 compares the cost of the water produced by Central Coast Blue against an estimate of anticipated revenue that a reliable source of supply will provide. To quantify the estimates of revenue that Central Coast Blue would preserve, each category was multiplied by 68%, which corresponds to the percentage of the NCMA agencies water demand that will be provided by Central Coast Blue.
Attachment 2
9.F-48Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 38 Table 11. Estimated Monetized Project Benefits
PROJECT COSTS ESTIMATED BENEFITS
$1,910/AF
Local Businesses within City $205,360,000
Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area $165,240,000 1,447 acres of agricultural land in the NCMA $12,294,000 Total $382,894,000
Central Coast Blue Yield (AFY) 4,390
Central Coast Blue Yield Revenue $87,180/AF
Central Coast Blue will allow the NCMA agencies to rely more on the groundwater basin so they will be less dependent on water from Lopez Lake , which is a local surface water source. By diverting less flow from Lopez Lake, the Project will better support recreational activities associated with the lake and surrounding area. Lopez Lake Recreation Area has campsites, hiking trails, and boat ramps and generates over $2 million in revenue each year. c. A comparison of the Project’s quantified and monetized benefits and costs.
The quantified and monetized benefits of Central Coast Blue are summarized in Table 12. These estimates were developed by multiplying the revenue associated with each category by 68%, which corresponds to the percentage of the NCMA agencies’ water demand that will be provided by Central Coast Blue.
Table 12. Quantified and Monetized Project Costs
CENTRAL COAST
BLUE COSTS MONETARY BENEFIT FROM CENTRAL COAST BLUE
Capital
$93,811,900
Unit Cost
$1,910/AF
Tourism Local Businesses within City $205,360,000
Tourism Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area $165,240,000 Tourism Lopez Lake Recreation Area $1,360,000
Agriculture 1,447 Acres of Agricultural Land in the NCMA $12,294,000 Total: $384,254,000
2. Some Project benefits may be difficult to quantify and/or monetize. Describe any economic benefits of the Project that are difficult to quantify and/or monetize. Provide a qualitative discussion of the economic impact of these benefits. Points will be awarded based on the potential economic impact of the Project-related benefits. Some examples of benefits may include, but are not limited to, acres of land or stream miles that may be benefitted or not harmed, benefits to habitat or species, flood risk mitigation, local impacts on residents and/or businesses, job creation, and regional impacts. This may also include benefits listed in question one, if they have not been monetized.
Central Coast Blue will increase water supply reliability, benefit rural and disadvantaged communities, reduce reliance on imported water, improve groundwater quality, and engage the public, which will provide support for local economies, namely tourism and agriculture. Table 13 on page 39 includes a description of each benefit and its value to the local NCMA, regional Basin, and the state of California.
Attachment 2
9.F-49Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 39 Table 13. Central Coast Blue Local, Regional, and State Benefits Economic
Benefit Description Beneficiaries
Local Regional State
Increase
Water
Supply
Reliability
Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of
recycled water into the Basin to maintain a barrier to
seawater intrusion and recharge the groundwater
basin. Since there are no hydraulic boundaries in the
basin, should seawater intrusion occur in the NCMA
portion, it would affect the Basin as a whole and have
significant economic impacts for the region.
x x
Benefits
DACs
Approximately 32% of the Basin area is categorized as a Disadvantaged Community, and 25% of the Basin area is
a Severely Disadvantaged Community. By benefiting
Disadvantaged communities, the Project will support
the local communities and help meet regional and state
goals.
x x x
Reduce
Imported
Water
Reliance
In addition, Central Coast Blue has the potential to
reduce imported water demand by 1,850 AFY, which
will directly benefit the Bay-Delta system flows, habitat, and ecosystems. Because the Project will reduce
imports from the Bay-Delta, it in turn will positively
affect Federal Water Projects, such as the CVP.
Overseen by the USBR, the CVP has long-term
agreements to supply water to more than 250
contractors in 29 California counties. CVP deliveries
provide an average of 5 million AF of water for farms,
600,000 AF of water for municipal and industrial uses,
and water for wildlife refuges and maintaining water
quality in the Bay-Delta (5).
x x
Improve
Groundwater
Quality
Since 2007, the nitrate level in the NCMA portion of the groundwater basin has been at the maximum
contaminant level limit, prompting concern from the
Division of Drinking Water. Central Coast Blue has the
potential to reduce the nitrate levels in the basin
through groundwater recharge.
x x
Public
Outreach
and
Engagement
Public outreach is an important component of the
Project. The Project Partners keep the public involved
through council meetings, board meetings, pilot tours,
press releases, and the CEQA process. This educates the public and engages them in building a sustainable and
reliable water supply portfolio for themselves and
future generations. Central Coast Blue received two
prominent awards for exemplary education and
outreach efforts, the first at the 2019 WateReuse
California Annual Conference, and the second at the
2019 National WateReuse Symposium.
x x
Attachment 2
9.F-50Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 40 Evaluation Criterion 4 – Reclamation’s Obligations and Benefits to Rural or Economically Disadvantaged Communities
Subcriterion No. 4a – Legal and Contractual Water Supply Obligations Explain how the Project relates to Reclamation’s mission and/or serves a Federal interest. Does the Project help fulfill any of Reclamation’s legal or contractual obligations such as providing water for Indian Tribes, water right settlements, river restoration, minimum flows, legal court orders, or other obligations? If so, explain.
The Project directly aligns with the Department of Interior’s mission to protect natural resources, and USBR’s mission to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Previous sections of this application detail how the Project objectives align with both mission statements and how those objectives will be achieved. Additional information is provided here to specifically comment on how Central Coast Blue will help USBR fulfill its legal obligations regarding minimum flows. Central Coast Blue has the potential to reduce imported water demand by 1,850 AFY, which will directly benefit the Bay-Delta system flows, habitat, and ecosystems. Because the Project will reduce imports from the Bay-Delta, it in turn will positively affect Federal Water Projects such as the CVP. Overseen by the USBR, the CVP has long-term agreements to supply water to more than 250 contractors in 29 California counties. CVP deliveries provide an average of 5 million AF of water for farms, 600,000 AF of water for municipal and industrial uses, and water for wildlife refuge and maintaining water quality in the Bay Delta (5).
Subcriterion No. 4b – Benefits to Rural or Economically Disadvantaged Communities Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Project serves rural communities or economically disadvantaged communities in rural or urban areas.
1. Does the Project serve a rural community, or are there any rural communities within the Project sponsor’s service area? If so, provide supporting information. A rural community is defined as a community with fewer than 50,000 people.
The Project will directly benefit the Central Coast Blue Partners’ rural communities, which have a combined population of approximately 39,200, based on the 2020 Census. Table 14 summarizes the 2020 population for the Central Coast Blue Partners.
Table 14. Central Coast Blue Partner Population
2020 Population
Pismo Beach 8,072
Grover Beach 12,701
Arroyo Grande 18,441
Total 39,214
2. E.O. 14008 and E.O. 13985 affirm the advancement of environmental justice and equity for all through the development and funding of programs to invest in disadvantaged or underserved communities. Does the Project serve an economically disadvantaged community, or are there any economically disadvantaged communities within the Attachment 2
9.F-51Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 41 Project sponsor’s service area? If so, provide supporting information. This may include neighborhoods or census tracts within a larger service area that are economically disadvantaged.
A community may be considered disadvantaged based on a combination of variables that may include:
x Low income, high and/or persistent
poverty
x High unemployment and
underemployment
x Racial and ethnic residential
segregation, particularly where the
segregation stems from discrimination
by government entities
x Linguistic isolation
x High housing cost burden and
substandard housing
x Distressed neighborhoods
x High transportation cost burden and/or
low transportation access
x Disproportionate environmental
stressor burden and high cumulative
impacts
x Limited water and sanitation access
and affordability
x Disproportionate impacts from climate
change
x High energy cost burden and low
energy access
x Jobs lost through energy transition
x Access to healthcare
As shown in Figure 14 on page 42, there are three census block groups in the Project area designated as DAC (80% of state MHI) and one census block group designated as SDAC (60% of state MHI) – with a total population of 5,550 (14% of population). In addition, as shown in Figure 15 on page 42, three census tracts and four census block groups outside the tracts – with a population of 21,571 or over half the Project area – have an MHI less than 85% of the state.
The Project will indirectly provide a benefit to the overall Basin users, many of whom are classified as economically disadvantaged. In 2017, the Rural Community Assistance Corporation performed a Median Household Income Survey for Oceano CSD, an NCMA agency that will benefit from the Project by protecting their groundwater wells from seawater intrusion, that determined the area qualifies as an SDAC. The results of this survey indicate a median household income of $39,000. DWR criteria for a DAC/SDAC community utilizes the Census American Community Survey dataset for 2014–2018 and identifies a community where the Median Household Income is less than $56,982 as a DAC and less than $42,737 as a SDAC. Central Coast Blue will serve these communities by providing a sustainable and drought-resistant local water supply that is more cost effective than the alternatives.
Attachment 2
9.F-52Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 42 Source: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/dacs/
Figure 14. Disadvantaged Community Map – 80% & 60% MHI
Source: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/edas/
Figure 15. Disadvantaged Community Map – 85% MHI
Attachment 2
9.F-53Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 43 In addition, the California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision in 2018 approving Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s proposal to close the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant by 2025.
The plant is located immediately north of Pismo Beach. Based on an Economic Impact Assessment, the closure of the power plant will cause a decrease in economic output of $801 million annually, with a decrease of 2,908 jobs. Most losses occur as direct effects within the nuclear sector, with a $600 million reduction in output (26). Given that energy is the 5th largest industry cluster in San Luis Obispo County, the closure of Diablo will have a significant negative impact on the regional economy and is another factor causing the region to be a disadvantaged community due to jobs lost due to an energy transition.
Evaluation Criterion 5 – Watershed Perspective
1. Does the Project implement a regional or state water plan or an integrated resource management plan? Explain.
Central Coast Blue was selected as a High-Priority Project in the San Luis Obispo IRWM Plan, meaning it satisfies the criteria of a regionally beneficial project as defined in the IRWM Plan.
Being selected for this list allows the Project to be available for future rounds of IRWM funding.
The Project is included in the Central Coast Blue Partners’ 2020 Urban Water Management Plans as a potential recycled water project.
Finalized in July 2020, California’s Water Resilience Portfolio is a blueprint for equipping California to cope with more extreme droughts, floods, and rising temperatures, while addressing long- standing challenges that include declining fish populations, over-reliance on groundwater and lack of safe drinking water in many communities. State goals and actions are organized into four categories: 1) Maintain and diversify water supplies, 2) Protect and enhance natural ecosystems, 3) build connections, and 4) be prepared. Central Coast Blue aligns with these goals and actions and will help create a local resilience portfolio.
Central Coast Blue is also in line with the California Water Code Section 85021—a state-wide policy to reduce reliance on the Bay-Delta to meet California’s future water supply needs through a state-wide strategy of investing in improved regional supplies, conservation, and water use efficiency. Each region that depends on water from the Bay-Delta watershed shall improve its regional self-reliance for water through 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.
2. Does the Project help meet the water supply needs of a large geographic area, region, or watershed? Explain.
Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of advanced purified water into the Basin to maintain a barrier to seawater intrusion and recharge the groundwater basin. The Basin covers 288 square miles and provides drinking water for over 200,000 people, 57,000 acres of farmland, and is relied upon to produce 111,920 AFY of groundwater. Additionally, Central Coast Blue was selected as a High Priority Project in the San Luis Obispo Integrated IRWM Plan. The geographic area benefited by the Project is described in more detail in the Location section on page 2.
Attachment 2
9.F-54Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 44 3. Does the Project promote collaborative partnerships to address water-related issues? Explain.
Through collaboration and dedication to protecting the Basin, the Central Coast Blue Partners have selected a project that will bolster local water supplies in the face of climate change to feasibly meet future demands. After electing to pursue the Project, the Project Partners entered into a series of agreements to share costs associated with planning, design, and construction of the project. In 2021, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach approved an Operating Agreement that allocated shares of the project between the three cities - Arroyo Grande at 25%, Grover Beach at 36%, and Pismo Beach at 39%.
In early 2022, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach approved a Cost Sharing Agreement for the remaining planning, design and construction phases with a cost based on the project shares agreed to in 2021. An outcome of the 2022 Cost Sharing Agreement is plans for the cities to form a Joint Powers Authority that will ultimately own and operate the Project, as well as obtain financing for construction of the Project.
For more detail on regional collaboration promoted by Central Coast Blue, see the Regional Collaboration section on page 9.
Central Coast Blue is also promoting collaborative partnerships with international partnerships to address water related issues. Pismo Beach and IDE operated a pilot study to advance recycled water process optimization, regulatory compliance, public outreach, and training. Results from the Pilot Plant have the potential to benefit future recycled water production in the state of California, across the Country, and throughout the world. The Pilot AWPF became operational in February of 2018 and was operational until the end of 2020. The partnership with IDE will provide invaluable operation data to assist in determining the best technology for inclusion of the final Project design. Additionally, the pilot study will provide performance information for regulatory agencies to permit the use of this new technology for future projects throughout the state.
Coordination with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Division of Drinking Water is a key component to potentially advancing the widespread use of this technology for the benefit of all future reuse projects.
A comprehensive summary of Central Coast Blue collaboration is included in Table 15.
Table 15. Central Coast Blue Collaboration and Outreach
HISTORY OF COLLABORATION AND OUTREACH
Planning Preparation of planning documents helped initiate coordination with regional stakeholders and ultimately identify and select Central Coast Blue as the best solution for advancing regional recycled water efforts. Regional planning efforts include the San Luis Obispo County Regional Recycled Water Strategic Plan, Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facility Planning Study, SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study, and the 2007, 2014, and 2019 San Luis Obispo County IRWM Plan.
NCMA The NCMA stakeholders entered a MOA to share costs associated with preparing the environmental documents, groundwater modeling, and preliminary engineering. Central Coast Blue Partners approved the Operating Agreement in 2021 to define project cost/benefit allocations and approved the Attachment 2
9.F-55Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 45 HISTORY OF COLLABORATION AND OUTREACH
Cost Sharing Agreement in 2022 for the remaining planning, design and construction phases.
Public Central Coast Blue has been presented and discussed during numerous City Council and Board meetings regularly held by the stakeholder agencies and at various watershed meetings, which are open to the public. Stakeholders are fully committed to public engagement to ensure transparency and keep community members informed. Future opportunities for public engagement include WateReuse and California Water Environment Association Conferences, regular City Council meetings, and the public website, which will provide information and updates about events.
Pilot Study In 2018, the Pilot Plant became operational and served as a public outreach facility to demonstrate water reuse technology.
Agricultural
Industry
Agricultural landowners are important groundwater stakeholders within the Basin. Collaboration with agricultural landowners has been key to developing this regional strategy to protect beneficial uses in the basin. Central Cost Blue Phase 2 will also consider delivery of recycled water to 61 potential agricultural users. Dialogue has been established with potential users, and stakeholders continue to strengthen these relationships as the Project advances.
Tribes Communication with local and regional tribes has been initiated as part of CEQA AB 52 Consultation. Tribe contacts include: Chumash (northern, yak tityu tityu, and coastal), Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians, Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Mission Indians, Salinan Tribe (Monterey and Xolon)).
Non-Profits Surfrider Foundation has been an active supporter of the Project and have been invited to attend many of the public meetings and tours.
California
Natural
Resource
Offices
Lines of communication with the California SWRCB and USBR have been expanded. The Project received funding through the SWRCB Prop 1 Groundwater Grant Program to fund preliminary planning and groundwater analysis efforts. Through the USBR Feasibility Study approval process, the Project details and benefits have been discussed with USBR.
State
Officials
Representatives from Congressman Salud Carbajal’s Office and Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham’s Office were included in Project milestones such as tours, ribbon cuttings, and meetings at the State Capital.
4. Does the project include public outreach and opportunities for the public to learn about the project? Explain.
Central Coast Blue has been presented and discussed during numerous city council and board meetings regularly held by the Central Coast Blue Partners and at various watershed meetings that are open to the public. Most recently, the public was engaged in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certification for the CEQA process in early 2021. Stakeholders are fully committed to public engagement to ensure transparency and keep community members informed. Future opportunities for public engagement include WateReuse and California Water Environment Attachment 2
9.F-56Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 46 Association conferences, city council meetings, and the public website, which will provide information, updates, and updates regarding events.
The Project also includes a Communications and Outreach Plan to allow Pismo Beach and the Central Coast Blue Partners to develop a comprehensive, proactive, and successful outreach and communication strategy to inform the public, regulators, and stakeholders about the Project and create a lasting partnership between the community and the Project.
In addition, the Pilot Plant became operational in February 2018 and served as a public outreach facility to demonstrate water reuse technology. The Pilot Plant was a partnership between Pismo Beach, Water Systems Consulting, IDE, Carollo Engineers, Evoqua Water Technologies, and Pall Water. The Pilot Plant hosted tours for over 100 community members, city council members, politicians, regulators, and water reuse professionals. The educational materials developed for the pilot will be used as a public outreach tool throughout the design, construction, and implementation of Central Coast Blue. See Table 15 on page 44 in response above for a summary of Project outreach to date.
Central Coast Blue received two prominent awards for exemplary education and outreach efforts—the first at the 2019 WateReuse California Annual Conference, and the second at the 2019 National WateReuse Symposium. Both awards recognize Central Coast Blue’s significant success in advancing public acceptance of recycled water and building support of the project years ahead of implementation.
Attachment 2
9.F-57Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 47 Environmental & Cultural
Resources Compliance
The environmental impacts of the project (including impacts to soil, air, water, and animal habitat) were evaluated in the Final EIR (7), which was certified in March 2021, prepared for the project pursuant to the CEQA. Since funding is being pursued through USBR’s Title XVI WIIN Act Program and the SWRCB’s CWSRF, a CEQA-Plus document was prepared to help facilitate NEPA compliance. Pismo Beach initiated NEPA compliance efforts with USBR in January 2022. Project representatives are working with USBR representatives to meet NEPA documentation requirements.
Surrounding Environment
Will the proposed Project impact the surrounding environment (e.g., soil [dust], air, water [quality and quantity], animal habitat)? Please briefly describe all earth-disturbing work and any work that will affect the air, water, or animal habitat in the Project area. Please also explain the impacts of such work on the surrounding environment and any steps that could be taken to minimize the impacts.
Injection wells would be drilled up to a depth of approximately 600 feet. Construction methods for the proposed pipelines would predominantly involve open trenching, with augur boring or horizontal directional drilling methods used as needed. Trenches would be excavated to approximately six feet in depth and would be backfilled after pipeline installation. The location of the AWPF complex would likely need to be graded to provide a level base for the AWPF and appurtenant structures, to provide site access, and to provide appropriate stormwater drainage.
It is assumed a moderate amount of existing soil would be excavated and exported and a moderate amount of clean engineered fill or another suitable substrate would be imported to provide geotechnical stability for the AWPF complex. Soil export would also be required to accommodate the underground advanced purified water storage tank; the excavation depth for this project component is not anticipated to exceed 26 feet.
During construction, the Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials, noise, and traffic. During operation, the Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to biological resources, energy, GHG, hazardous materials, water quality, and noise. To avoid, minimize, rectify, and compensate for these construction-related impacts, the Final EIR requires implementation of a suite of mitigation measures, which are summarized in Table 16.
Table 16. Mitigation Measures Required for Central Coast Blue in Final EIR
ID MITIGATION MEASURE DESCRIPTION
CONSTRUCTION
AQ-2(a), AQ-
2(b)
Use of standard control measures and best available control technology for construction equipment to reduce air pollutant emissions Attachment 2
9.F-58Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 48 ID MITIGATION MEASURE DESCRIPTION
BIO-1(a) Avoidance of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii; CRLF) habitat BIO-1(b)
through BIO-
1(e), BIO-2
Implementation of avoidance and minimization measures for special status species (CRLF, southwestern pond turtle, monarch butterfly, and nesting birds) and riparian habitat
BIO-1(f)
through BIO-
1(j)
Preparation of a Biological Resources Assessment and implementation of appropriate surveys and additional mitigation measures for federally listed species for some components of Phase 2 (i.e., agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well) once specific location deta ils are available
BIO-3(a) Preparation of a jurisdictional delineation
BIO-3(b) Compensation of impacts to drainages and wetlands at a minimum 1:1 ratio BIO-3(c) Implementation of best management practices for construction activities near drainages and wetlands
BIO-5
Preparation of a Tree Preservation Plan for native trees that would be trimmed or removed by construction as well as replacement of native trees removed during construction
CR-2(a)
Implementation of a workers’ environmental awareness program training on archaeological sensitivity for all construction personnel prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities
CR-2(b) Archaeological and Native American monitoring during initial ground disturbance
CR-2(c)
Provisions to stop work in the event of an unanticipated discovery of cultural resources with evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist and implementation of additional studies and measures, as needed CR-2(d)
Preparation of archaeological resource studies and implementation of additional mitigation measures for some components of Phase 2 (i.e., agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well) once specific location details are available
HAZ-1(a) Preparation of a Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan
N-1 Construction noise reduction measures
T-1 Preparation of a Transportation Management Plan
OPERATION
E-1 Implementation of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures GHG-1 Implementation of GHG reduction measures
HAZ-1(b) Creation and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the AWPF
HWQ-1 Initial quarterly radioactive testing of reverse osmosis discharge and resolution of any exceedances of regulatory standards
N-2
Preparation of an acoustical analysis and implementation of necessary noise reduction measures upon completion of the site design, layout, and equipment selection for the AWPF complex
Attachment 2
9.F-59Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 49 Endangered Species and Critical Habitat
Are you aware of any species listed or proposed to be listed as a Federal threatened or endangered species, or designated critical habitat in the Project area? If so, would they be affected by any activities associated with the proposed Project?
The Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the project and Section 4.2, Biological Resources, of the Final EIR evaluated potential project impacts to federally listed species and critical habitat (7). Four federally listed animal species and no federally listed plant species have the potential to occur within the project area for Phase 1 and the additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines for Phase 2. The four federally listed animal species are CRLF (threatened), southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis; threatened); steelhead-south-central California coast distinct population segment (Oncorhynchus mykiss; threatened), and tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi; endangered). In addition, the California overwintering population of monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is a candidate species for listing under the Endangered Species Act, meaning that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) determined its listing is warranted but precluded by higher priority listing actions (27). No federally designated critical habitat is present within the project area for Phase 1 and the additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines for Phase 2. However, the locations of the agricultural irrigation pipelines and production well under Phase 2 are not known at this time; therefore, 11 federally listed plant species and 12 federally listed animal species (in addition to CRLF, tidewater goby, southern sea otter, and steelhead) could have the potential to occur at or within the vicinity of the yet-to-be defined locations of the agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well (see Appendix B of the Biological Resources Assessment for a full list). Arroyo Grande Creek, which the agricultural irrigation pipelines under Phase 2 would likely traverse, is federally designated critical habitat for steelhead and habitat for tidewater goby.
Construction and Maintenance Activities
CRLF has the potential to occur in and adjacent to Arroyo Grande Creek and has potential to be present within the limits of two injection wells (IW-5A and IW-5B), one monitoring well (MW- 5A/5B/5C), and portions of the water distribution pipelines adjacent to Arroyo Grande Creek. If CRLF individuals are present within the footprints of Project components, potential direct and indirect impacts may occur if harassment, injury, or mortality of CRLF individuals occurs or if general project-related disturbance and noise in the vicinity of these locations impacts normal breeding and dispersal patterns for the species in the area. The Project also has potential to result in direct impacts to CRLF upland habitat at the water distribution pipelines located within the Oceano County Airport through removal of riparian vegetation associated with Arroyo Grande Creek. Because of the potential for direct and indirect impacts to CRLF individuals as well as direct impacts to CRLF habitat, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(a) and to Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (b) (refer to Table 16 on page 47), which would reduce potential impacts to CRLF.
Southern sea otter and steelhead have a low potential to occur near the discharge point of the existing ocean outfall pipeline in the Pacific Ocean where reverse osmosis concentrate would be discharged. However, the ocean discharge would continue to be regulated by the SWRCB under the Pismo Beach and South San Luis Obispo County Wastewater Treatment Plant’s National Attachment 2
9.F-60Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 50 Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, which include effluent limitations for protection of marine aquatic life. Therefore, no direct or indirect impacts to southern sea otter or steelhead would occur.
Arroyo Grande Creek, located approximately 50 feet south of the nearest Phase 1 project components, contains suitable habitat for steelhead and tidewater goby. However, an earthen levee separates the project area from the creek. Meadow Creek and Oceano Lagoon, located more than 100 feet west and south of the project area, also contain suitable habitat for tidewater goby; however, these water features are isolated from the project area due to existing roadways and development. Therefore, given the distance and intervening topographical features between project components and suitable habitat, no impacts to steelhead or tidewater goby in freshwater environments would occur as a result of construction and maintenance activities for Phase 1 of the project.
The California overwintering population of monarch butterfly has the potential to occur within the eucalyptus grove directly south of the AWPF complex location. No impacts to the eucalyptus grove would occur because the grove is located outside the AWPF complex footprint, and no direct impacts to monarch butterfly related to their mobility or their overwintering habitat would occur. In addition, at this time, monarch overwintering has not been confirmed at this eucalyptus grove. Nevertheless, to minimize potential impacts to the monarch butterfly, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(d) (refer to Table 16 on page 47).
The new production well would have a low likelihood of impacting federally listed species habitats due to the high likelihood that it would be sited in a heavily-developed area with little to no native habitat. General direct and indirect impacts from ground-disturbing construction activities associated with the agricultural irrigation pipelines under Phase 2 could include mortality, injury, harassment, and reduction of reproductive success. There is the potential to impact undisturbed habitat in the Grover Beach city boundaries as well as along Arroyo Grande Creek and south for irrigation pipelines to farmland areas. Because the agricultural irrigation pipelines crossing Arroyo Grande Creek would be installed by augur boring or horizontal directional drilling methods under Arroyo Grande Creek, construction and operation of these pipelines would not cause direct loss or fragmentation of habitat or otherwise alter critical habitat for steelhead or loss of tidewater goby habitat. However, there is potential for hydrogeological fractures (frac-out) to occur during the drilling process. If this occurs, the release of contaminants into Arroyo Grande Creek could adversely affect steelhead and critical habitat as well as tidewater goby. Because of the potential for direct and indirect impacts to federally listed plant and animal species and federally designated critical habitat for steelhead, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(f) through BIO-1(j) for Phase 2 (refer to Table 16 on page 47), which would reduce potential impacts to federally-listed species and designated critical habitat in the project area.
Groundwater Extraction
An analysis prepared by Geoscience Support Services, Inc. determined that Phase 1 of the proposed Project (during which more groundwater may be extracted than injected) would result in a negligible impact to percolation rates of Arroyo Grande Creek such that stream flow would remain adequate for the federally listed amphibian and fish species and riparian habitat that Attachment 2
9.F-61Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 51 Arroyo Grande Creek supports. Under Phase 2 of the proposed project, more advanced purified water would be injected into the groundwater basin than extracted; therefore, this phase would not have an adverse impact on percolation rates and corresponding surface water levels of Arroyo Grande Creek. Thus, groundwater extraction facilitated by Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed Project would not substantially alter the hydrology of Arroyo Grande Creek, and no adverse impacts to federally listed aquatic species would occur.
Clean Water Act Jurisdiction
Are there wetlands or other surface waters inside the Project boundaries that potentially fall under Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction as “Waters of the United States”? If so, please describe and estimate any impacts the proposed Project may have.
As detailed in the Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the Project as well as Section
4.2, Biological Resources, of the Final EIR, Phase 1 and some components of Phase 2 (i.e., additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines) of the project would potentially result in direct impacts to one wetland feature that may potentially be under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (28) (7). In addition, Arroyo Grande Creek is located approximately 50 feet to the south of the nearest Phase 1 project component and may be indirectly impacted by runoff during construction activities. At this time, a formal jurisdictional delineation has not been conducted and the Section 404 permit application has not been initiated, which would determine whether the wetland feature is under the jurisdiction of the USACE. Depending on final design, one segment of the proposed water distribution pipelines may traverse this wetland feature, resulting in temporary impacts during construction. As a result, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) and BIO-3(b) (refer to Table 16 on page 47), in addition to implementation of additional conditions that may be required under the potential Section 404 permit from the USACE.
The new production well would be constructed on a parcel likely within the city limits of Grover Beach where full avoidance of jurisdictional features would be feasible, and impacts would likely be minimal, if any. However, agricultural irrigation pipelines between the AWPF complex and agricultural lands south of Oceano have the highest likelihood of impacting drainages and wetlands that may potentially be under the jurisdiction of the USACE because they would likely traverse Arroyo Grande Creek. The potential agricultural irrigation pipelines that would cross Arroyo Grande Creek would be installed by augur boring or horizontal directional drilling methods under the creek. Utilizing this method, potential frac-out could occur within Arroyo Grande Creek. Therefore, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) and BIO-3(c) (refer to Table 16 on page 47) to reduce project impacts under Phase 2.
Water Delivery System
When was the water delivery system constructed?
Table 17 on page 52 includes the assumed install decades for all pipe materials in the Pismo Beach’s service area. The estimated pipe install decade is based on the historic popular pipe materials and growth rates, although there are likely existing pipes in the distribution system installed before the 1950s and after the 1990s. Estimated useful lifetimes are adapted from accepted pipe lifetimes developed from water utility research and studies in North America (29).
Attachment 2
9.F-62Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 52 Table 17. Assumed Install Decade Based on Pipe Material
PIPE MATERIAL ASSUMED INSTALL DECADE(S)
Asbestos cement 1960–1970
Cast iron 1950
Ductile iron 1980
Galvanized iron 1950
PVC 1980–1990
Steel 1950–1960
The City of Arroyo Grande started developing its existing wells in the 1940s, the Grover City Water District (now the City of Grover Beach) was formed in 1949, and the Lopez Project was developed in the 1960s. The surrounding NCMA agencies developed water delivery systems approximately around the same time. The Coastal Branch Pipeline for the SWP was constructed in the 1990s.
Irrigation Systems
Will the proposed Project result in any modification of or effects to, individual features of an irrigation system (e.g., headgates, canals, or flumes)? If so, state when those features were constructed and describe the nature and timing of any extensive alterations or modifications to those features completed previously.
Phase 1 of Central Coast Blue will not include delivery to agricultural growers. The Central Coast Blue Partners are considering including irrigation deliveries in Phase 2 and will determine if there will need to be any modifications to individual features of existing irrigation systems during Phase 2 design. At this time, there are no anticipated modifications.
National Register of Historic Places
Are any buildings, structures, or features in the irrigation district listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places? A cultural resources specialist at your local Reclamation office or the State Historic Preservation Office can assist in answering this question.
A Cultural Resources Assessment (CRA) was prepared for Phases 1 and 2 of the Project (28) (30).
The CRA identified one historic resource within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) that appeared to be eligible for listing in the NRHP – the Oceano Southern Pacific Railroad Depot (P-40-040781).
The building itself is not located within the APE, but one of the proposed monitoring wells (MW- 5D/5E/5F) is proposed to be developed approximately 35 feet to the southwest of the building in its paved parking lot. This building is significant as a surviving example of early twentieth century railroad architecture and the modern origins of the Oceano community. Existing documentation does not include an evaluation addressing the building’s eligibility for NRHP listing; however, a review of the California State Built Environment Resource Directory indicates the property was previously found eligible for listing in the NRHP through survey evaluation. The proposed monitoring well that would be located in the parking lot of the Oceano Southern Pacific Railroad Depot would not have any major above-ground elements and would not result in the direct alteration of the building; therefore, it would not have any direct impacts to or change the Attachment 2
9.F-63Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 53 existing setting of the building in a negative manner. Furthermore, vibration levels associated with well drilling would be below the threshold for potential damage to historic structures.
Furthermore, as detailed in the CRA, demolition of structures to accommodate Phase 2 components with yet-to-be-determined locations (i.e., the agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well) is not anticipated to be necessary. In addition, it is anticipated that agricultural irrigation pipelines would be installed under Arroyo Grande Creek and would not be attached to or require alteration of existing bridges. As a result, the Project does not have potential to negatively affect the building through ground-disturbing construction activities. As a result, the CRA recommended a finding of no adverse effect to historic properties under Section 106 of the NHPA for Phases 1 and 2 (28).
Archeological Sites
Are there any known archeological sites in the proposed Project area? As discussed above, a CRA was prepared for Phases 1 and 2 of the Project. The CRA was prepared in conformance with the requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA for Phase 1 and some components of Phase 2 (i.e., the additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines).
However, because the locations of the new production well and agricultural irrigation pipelines are not known at this time, these components will require further evaluation under Section 106 of the NHPA at the time the locations of these components are defined. The Central California Information Center records search identified two known archaeological sites within the APE–a prehistoric lithic and shell scatter (P-40-000394) and a small prehistoric artifact scatter (P-40- 000396). As detailed in the CRA, the presence of P-40-000394 and P-40-000396 within the APE could not be assessed during the pedestrian survey due to dense vegetation and existing development. However, based on previous testing efforts at the site, known disturbances, and the presence of pavement blocking access to the site within the APE, the CRA determined excavation at P-40-000394 would be both unnecessary and infeasible for project impact analysis.
Environmental consultants conducted an Extended Phase 1 study of P-40-000396 to identify the presence or absence of the site within the APE. Based on the results of the Extended Phase 1 study, Rincon recommended that the portions of P-40-000396 within the current APE lack integrity and thus do not contribute to the overall site eligibility for the NRHP. Despite the lack of intact archaeological resources identified within the APE, the local area is highly sensitive for cultural resources, and the potential to encounter unknown archaeological deposits within the APE remains high. Therefore, the Final EIR includes mitigation measures to minimize potential impacts to archaeological resources under Phases 1 and 2, including Mitigation Measures CR- 2(a), CR-2(b), CR-2(c), and CR-2(d) (refer to Table 16 on page 47).
Low Income and Minority Populations
Will the proposed Project have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations?
Project components in Phases 1 and 2 would be located in the census-designed place of Oceano in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County and in the City of Grover Beach. As detailed in Section
4.5, Environmental Justice, of the Final EIR, Oceano and Grover Beach have significant minority populations (greater than 50%), and Oceano is a low-income community (7). Therefore, both Attachment 2
9.F-64Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 54 Oceano and Grover Beach are identified as environmental justice communities. As detailed in Section 4.5, Environmental Justice, of the Final EIR, construction and operation of Phases 1 and 2 would generate localized impacts on the populations of Oceano and Grover Beach related to air pollutant emissions, the use of hazardous materials, noise, and traffic. Project construction activities and associated impacts would be intermittent and/or temporary and would cease upon completion of work activities. The Project’s operational impacts, which are typical of industrial- type projects, are associated with the AWPF, which would be sited in an existing industrial area of Grover Beach. The Final EIR requires implementation of mitigation measures to address these impacts, including Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a), AQ-2(b), HAZ-1(a), HAZ-1(b), N-1, N-2, and T-1 (refer to Table 16 on page 47). Furthermore, the proposed project would have the long-term benefit of protecting the drinking water supply for all local customers served by the Cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande and the Oceano CSD regardless of race, ethnicity, or income level. As a result, not only would the project not result in adverse operational impacts to the environmental justice community in Grover Beach, but it would also benefit this environmental justice community as well as the environmental justice community of Oceano by increasing the stability, reliability, and resiliency of their drinking water supply.
However, due to the close proximity of residential land uses to well locations, implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 in all cases may not be feasible and therefore may not reduce construction noise impacts below the specified thresholds during 24-hour drilling of the injection and monitoring wells. This construction noise impact would adversely affect residents in Oceano and Grover Beach that live within 200 feet of several proposed monitoring wells. Nevertheless, the entire project area is located within the environmental justice communities of Oceano and Grover Beach, and the project’s construction noise impacts would be evenly distributed throughout the project area at 18 well locations, not focused on a single area. Therefore, this impact would not affect one area or population more than another. Furthermore, construction noise impacts would be short-term, temporary, and typical of construction projects occurring throughout the region, which often generate temporary increases in noise. Therefore, although this impact would occur in the environmental justice communities of Oceano and Grover Beach, this impact would not be disproportionately high and adverse. As such, with mitigation incorporated, construction and operation of Phases 1 and 2 proposed Project would not result in any disproportionately high impacts on minority, low income, or disadvantaged communities.
Tribal Lands
Will the proposed Project limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites or result in other impacts on tribal lands?
The APE for Phases 1 and 2 is not located within Tribal lands. As detailed in Section 4.3, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of the Final EIR prepared for the project, outreach to Native American Tribes was conducted as part of preparation of the CRA as well as to satisfy the tribal consultation requirements of AB 52 for projects subject to CEQA and the outreach requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA. As part of these outreach efforts, informal outreach letters and formal consultation letters were sent to nine local Native American contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. Pismo Beach conducted formal consultation with the three Tribes who requested consultation in June 2020. During informal outreach and formal consultation efforts, no Tribes identified sacred sites or other tribal cultural resources within the Attachment 2
9.F-65Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 55 APE for Phases 1 and 2. However, the Tribes indicated that the area is highly sensitive for cultural resources and requested a worker’s environmental awareness program training and archaeological and Native American monitoring for the project. Although no specific tribal cultural resources were identified in the APE for Phases 1 and 2, the Final EIR includes mitigation measures to minimize potential impacts to archaeological resources (including those of Native American origin) including Mitigation Measures CR-2(a) through CR-2(d) (refer to Table 16 on page 47). These measures are responsive to concerns expressed by the Tribes about the sensitivity of the area for cultural resources and requests for a worker’s environmental awareness program training and archaeological and Native American monitoring.
Invasive Species
Will the proposed Project contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area? There is low potential for construction activities under Phases 1 and 2 of the Project to result in the introduction or spread of invasive, non-native species or noxious weeds (28) (7). In addition, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which includes use of imported fill material known to be free of invasive plant species and removal of weed seeds and propagules from equipment and vehicles before they enter and leave the site during project activities that may disturb riparian habitat. Implementation of this mitigation measure would further minimize the potential for the project to introduce or spread invasive, non-native species or noxious weeds.
Attachment 2
9.F-66Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Required Permits or Approvals
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 56 Required Permits or Approvals
Applicants must state in the application whether any permits or approvals are required and explain the plan for obtaining such permits or approvals.
Permits and Approvals Obtained
Environmental Documentation Requirements (CEQA/NEPA)
In accordance with CEQA, Pismo Beach prepared an EIR which was certified in March 2021 (7).
Since funding is being pursued through USBR’s Title XVI WIIN Act Program and the SWRCB’s CWSRF, a CEQA-Plus document was prepared to help facilitate NEPA compliance. Pismo Beach initiated NEPA compliance efforts with USBR in January 2022. Project representatives are working with USBR representatives to meet NEPA documentation requirements. Potential actions that will be required by USBR include:
x Review Environmental Assessment
x Review the Cultural Resources Assessment and provide report and cover letter to State Historic Preservation Offices
x Review Biological Resources Assessment and initiate Section 7 consultation with USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (if potential take of federally listed species is identified)
x Consult with National Marine Fisheries Service regarding Essential Fish Habitat under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, if impacts are identified x Maintain an administrative record to support USBR’s NEPA findings x Website posting of Finding of No Significant Impact
Infrastructure Permits That Will Be Obtained
The following permits are likely needed for construction but will be confirmed during final design:
x Federal Agencies:
o Environmental Protection Agency – NPDES Construction General Permit o USACE – Clean Water Act 404
x State Agencies:
o Regional Water Quality Control Board – General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit, Clean Water Act 401, Water Reclamation Permit
o California Department of Drinking Water – amended water supply permit o California Coastal Commission – Coastal Development Permit o California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement for any stream crossings
o Caltrans – grading and encroachment permits
x Local Agencies:
o City of Grover Beach and San Luis Obispo County – grading, encroachment, and building permits
Attachment 2
9.F-67Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Required Permits or Approvals
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 57 o San Luis Obispo County Coastal Development Permit / Land Use Permit o San Luis Obispo County Building Permit
o San Luis Obispo County Well Permit
o San Luis Obispo County Air Quality Management District – authority to construct and permit to operate the WWTP upgrades
o Union Pacific Railroad – Utilities Installation crossing permit Salt and Nutrient Management Plan
A Salt and Nutrient Management Plan is intended to facilitate basin-wide or watershed-wide management of salts and nutrients from all sources in a manner that optimizes recycled water use while ensuring protection of groundwater supply and beneficial uses, agricultural beneficial uses, and human health. Currently, the NCMA agencies do not intend to develop a Salt and Nutrient Management Plan as a component of the Central Coast Blue permitting process due to the high quality of the water that will be produced by the project. A Groundwater Replenishment Reuse Project can typically move forward without the need for one because it meets potable water standards, and full advanced treatment effectively removes salts, constituents of emerging concern, and nutrients, thus protecting the groundwater basin. However, an anti-degradation analysis will likely be required to evaluate the potential impact of Central Coast Blue on groundwater quality within the basin.
Attachment 2
9.F-68Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 58 Project Budget
Funding Plan & Letters of Commitment
Pismo Beach and Central Coast Blue Partners are committed to designing, constructing, and operating the AWPF for at least 30 years to address seawater intrusion concerns in the Basin and to secure a reliable local potable water supply. In accordance with the NOFO requirements, information regarding the funding plan for Project component costs that will be completed under an award for this NOFO and for the entire Project are provided below.
Project Costs Under NOFO (R22AS00115)
Pismo Beach is requesting funding to support permitting, preliminary design, final design, program management, value engineering, construction management, engineering during construction, and construction activities for Central Coast Blue, as described in Table 18.
Table 18. Summary of Tasks through FY2025
TASK DESCRIPTION
Program
Management
Meetings, scheduling, budgeting, invoicing, consultant coordination, stakeholder outreach, procurement strategies, and management plan Planning
Groundwater modeling and update current EIR to include project level analysis for distributed infrastructure that currently is not addressed in certified EIR
CEQA/Permitting Includes development of a source control program, engineering report, report of waste discharge permitting, and regulatory meetings Final Design 60%, 90%, and final design for the AWPF and distributed infrastructure Value Engineering
Form a value engineering team to review 60% design documents, develop a report to identify changes recommended by the value engineering team
Office Engineering
During
Construction
Includes submittal review, RFI responses, change orders, site walks, punchlist development, and drawing management
Construction
Management
Includes oversight for the planning, design, and construction of the AWPF, injection wells, monitoring wells, and pipelines
Construction Includes costs for building the AWPF, injection wells, monitoring wells, and purified water pipelines
Attachment 2
9.F-69Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 59 Project costs that are eligible for funding under this NOFO begin July 26, 2018 when Central Coast Blue’s Title XVI Feasibility Study Approval Memo was signed by the Policy and Administration Director through September 30, 2025. Central Coast Blue’s Title XVI Feasibility Study has been reviewed and approved by USBR, and review findings were transmitted to Congress concurrently with project selections under the fiscal year (FY) 2018 FOA (BOR DO 18 F011) on July 27, 2018.
Construction for Central Coast Blue Phase 1 project is expected to be complete by September 30, 2025. Project costs incurred prior to July 26, 2018 are not included in this funding request because the Title XVI Feasibility Study review findings were not yet approved.
The total cost of tasks that have occurred and are planned to occur between July 26, 2018 through September 30, 2025 is $56,495,408. The Central Coast Blue Partners pursued funding from USBR through the FY 2018 WaterSMART Title XVI WIIN Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects program and received a notice of award in the amount of $796,094. In addition, Central Coast Blue was awarded $1,700,000 through FY 2021 WaterSMART Title XVI WIIN Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects program. The City is actively coordinating with USBR and execution of a financial assistance agreement is anticipated in 2022.
Central Coast Blue Partners are requesting $11,627,758 (25% of the total costs after removing $2,496,094 from FY2018 and FY2021 awards) under this NOFO and are committed to a cost share of $42,371,556 (balance of total costs under this NOFO). Anticipated annual costs by project task are summarized in Table 19 on page 60.
The Cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach have budgeted for the costs of Central Coast Blue for the next three fiscal years (FY 2022/2023, FY 2023/2024 and FY 2034/2025) and plan to fund work using income from their water rates. The cities developed a cost sharing agreement, to split the cost based on the benefit to each agency which is currently calculated based on their groundwater entitlement and is shown in Table 20 on page 60. In early 2022, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach approved a Cost Sharing Agreement for the remaining planning, design and construction phases with a cost based on the project shares agreed to in 2021. Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande will reimburse Pismo Beach for their respective shares of the costs of the Project, including all pre-construction and construction costs.
Ongoing pre-construction costs will continue to be split between Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach until each party reaches its total contribution amount for its share of pre-construction costs.
Additionally, Central Coast Blue Partners are pursuing funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program (GWGP) to help fund project implementation. Central Coast Blue is seeking $12,851,000 in funding through the GWGP, to assist with funding tasks under this NOFO as part of Pismo Beach’s cost share. If Pismo Beach is unable to secure funding through the GWGP program, project costs will be covered by the partner agencies. The Central Coast Blue Partners plan to utilize the SWRCB’s Water Recycling Funding Program through the CWSRF Program to finance construction of Central Coast Blue. The stakeholders submitted the CWSRF application in December 2021. The program would provide Central Coast Blue with low interest financing over a period not to exceed 30 years.
Please note that the costs for preparing and applying in response to this NOFO, including the development of data necessary to support the proposal, are not eligible costs and are not included in the Project budget.
Attachment 2
9.F-70Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 60 Table 19. Summary of Eligible Costs through FY2025
7/26/18 -
9/30/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 Total
Program Mgmt $559,747 $766,250 $766,250 $766,250 $766,250 $3,624,747 Planning $391,125 $391,125
CEQA/ Permitting $178,656 $810,000 $988,656
Final Design $2,394,500 $2,394,500 $4,789,000
Engineering During
Construction $567,000 $567,000 $1,134,000
Construction
Management $1,861,000 $1,861,000 $3,722,000
Construction $20,474,500 $20,474,500 $40,949,000
In-Kind $384,377 $128,126 $128,126 $128,126 $128,126 $896,880 Total $1,513,905 $4,098,876 $3,288,876 $23,796,876 $23,796,876 $56,495,408 Maximum Eligible WIIN Act Grant Request (25%) $14,123,852 Preliminarily Awarded Under the WIIN Act FY 2018 $796,094 Preliminarily Awarded Under the WIIN Act FY 2021 $1,700,000 Requested Funding Under the WIIN Act FY 2022 $11,627,758
Table 20. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources through FY2025
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
NON - FEDERAL ENTITIES
1. SWRCB Prop 1 Groundwater Planning Grant Program - Round 31 $12,850,000
2. DWR Prop 1 IRWM Program Round 21 $1,000,000
3. SWRCB CWSRF Loan1 $20,158,742
4. Pismo Beach $2,911,324
5. Grover Beach $2,687,376
6. Arroyo Grande $1,866,234
7. In Kind Contributions $896,880
Non - Federal Subtotal $42,371,556
RECLAMATION FUNDING
1. WIIN Act FY2018 Award2 $796,094
2. WIIN Act FY2021 Award2 $1,700,000
Requested Reclamation Funding Under the WIIN Act FY2022 $11,627,758 Total Requested from Reclamation through FY2025 $14,123,852 1 Funding is being pursued and has not been awarded at the time of this application. 2 Preliminarily Awarded Under previous WaterSMART Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant.
Project costs that have been incurred to date include program management, preliminary design, environmental documentation, initial permitting, data collection, in-kind services, and public outreach. These activities have set up the project to initiate final design and permitting phase in March 2022.
Attachment 2
9.F-71Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 61 Total Project Costs
As detailed below in the Budget Proposal and Budget Narrative Sections, the estimated total project cost for Central Coast Blue is $91,853,408. It is anticipated that the Project will be paid for through a combination of grants, low interest loans, and contributions from stakeholder agencies. Project Partners plan to utilize the SWRCB’s CWSRF Program to finance construction of Central Coast Blue. The program would provide Central Coast Blue with low interest financing over a period not to exceed 30 years. If a low-interest loan is not awarded then bond financing will be required at current market rates (approximately 4.5%). Additional funding may be pursued from several state and federal sources, including the SWRCB, DWR, USBR, USDA, California Energy Commission, California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to reduce total project costs incurred directly by the Central Coast Blue Partners and the financial impact to ratepayers.
Details regarding cost-sharing between Central Coast Blue Partners associated with the fixed and variable recycled water project costs are outlined in the Cost Sharing Agreement. The cost sharing is apportioned based on share of Project yield. Central Coast Blue Partners are committed to advancing the Project, and a significant investment in time, money, and effort is already being expended to implement the regional project. Anticipated funding sources for the entire Project are shown in Table 21.
Table 21. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources for Entire Project
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
NON - FEDERAL ENTITIES
1. SWRCB Prop 1 Groundwater Planning Grant Program - Round 31 $12.85 Million
2. DWR IRWM Grant1 $1.00 Million
3. CWSRF Financing1 $46.68 Million
4. Agency Contributions $7.46 Million
5. In Kind Contributions $0.90 Million
Non - Federal Subtotal $68.79 Million
RECLAMATION FUNDING
1. Preliminary Award WIIN Act FY20182 $0.80 Million
2. Preliminary Award WIIN Act FY2022 $1.70 Million
3. FY22 Requested Reclamation Funding $11.63 Million
Future Reclamation Funding Request $8.84 Million
Total Anticipated Reclamation Funding Request $22.96 Million 1 Funding is being pursued but has not been awarded at the time of this application 2 Awarded under WaterSMART Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant FY2018 and FY2021
Attachment 2
9.F-72Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 62 Budget Proposal
Table 22. Total Project Budget Proposal
BUDGET ITEM DESCRIPTION
COMPUTATION QUANTITY
TYPE TOTAL COST
$/Unit Quantity
SALARIES AND WAGES
Project Manager $87 4,160 hours $362,000
Senior Engineer $60 2,080 hours $125,000
Clerical Support $36 1,248 hours $45,000
FRINGE BENEFITS
Full-Time Employees $40 7,488 hours $300,000
CONTRACTUAL/CONSTRUCTION
Planning & Preliminary Design $1,129,528 1 contract $1,129,528 Phase 1 Program Management $3,065,000 1 contract $3,065,000 Phase 1 Permitting & CEQA/NEPA $810,000 1 contract $810,000 Phase 1 Final Design $4,789,000 1 contract $4,789,000
Phase 1 Engineering During
Construction $1,134,000 1 contract $1,134,000
Phase 1 Construction Management $3,722,000 1 contract $3,722,000 Phase 1 Construction $40,949,000 1 contract $40,949,000 Phase 2 Program Management $1,914,000 1 contract $1,914,000 Phase 2 Permitting & CEQA/NEPA $533,000 1 contract $533,000 Phase 2 Final Design $3,203,000 1 contract $3,203,000
Phase 2 Engineering During
Construction $736,000 1 contract $736,000
Phase 2 Construction Management $2,415,000 1 contract $2,415,000 Phase 2 Construction $26,557,000 1 contract $26,557,000 OTHER
Semiannual Financial Report $148 128 hours $19,000
Semiannual Performance Report $148 256 hours $38,000
Final Performance Report $148 60 hours $9,000
Total Estimated Project Costs $91,853,408
Attachment 2
9.F-73Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 63 Budget Narrative
Salaries and Wages
Compensation and wages are shown in Table 22 on page 62. The primary project manager is Pismo Beach’s Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The Project Manager responsibilities include preparing subcontracts, managing subcontractors, overseeing construction, stakeholder coordination, completing reports, and deliverables. Pismo Beach estimates 4,160 hours of project management for Central Coast Blue over the length of the Project at a rate of $87/hour or $134/hour with fringe benefits.
Pismo Beach’s Senior Engineer is responsible for supporting the project manager. It is estimated that the Senior Engineer will spend approximately 2,080 hours supporting Central Coast Blue over the length of the Project at a rate of $60/hour or $97/hour with fringe benefits.
The clerical support for the Project is Pismo Beach’s Management Analyst. Clerical support includes scheduling, invoicing, and email coordination. Pismo Beach estimates 1,248 hours of clerical support for Central Coast Blue at a rate of $36/hour or $73/hour with fringe benefits.
Fringe Benefits
Fringe benefits include health insurance which includes dental and vision, life insurance, retirement contributions which include social security and Medicare, and other benefits like workers’ compensation, state unemployment insurance, employee assistance program, and deferred contributions. Rates and calculations are provided in the budget proposal.
Travel
Expenses for traveling to the AWPF for project supervision is included in the program management and construction management contracts.
Equipment
The budget proposal assumes all equipment for the Project will be rented. Rental equipment costs will be included in the construction contractor bid, and therefore are not included in this line item.
Materials and Supplies
Similar to the Project equipment budget, all materials and supplies will be included in the construction contractor bid, and therefore are not included in this line item.
Contractual
Contract expenses include planning, permitting, environmental documentation, public outreach, preliminary design, final design, program management, construction management, office engineering during construction, and construction activities.
Planning and preliminary design activities includes stakeholder outreach and coordination, regulatory outreach, water rights support, groundwater modeling, conceptual layouts, and cost estimating. The planning and preliminary design costs are based on value of work currently under contract.
Attachment 2
9.F-74Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 64 Phase 1 and Phase 2 final design, program management, and construction management estimates are each based on 10% of the construction cost estimates for each phase. Office engineering during construction costs, permitting / environmental documentation, and value engineering estimates are based on 3%, 2%, and 0.5% of the construction cost estimates, respectively. Environmental documentation costs include potential costs incurred by Reclamation to prepare and/or review environmental compliance documents.
Pismo Beach will use a competitive public bid process to select a construction company to complete the Project. Minimum qualifications for contractors include being licensed to do business in the State of California. Project-specific criteria for contractors will be defined prior to the Project going out to bid. Construction bid will include labor, equipment, materials and supplies, and insurance. Construction estimates are based on cost estimates developed in the recent Central Coast Blue Preliminary Engineering Report (31) with projected market adjustments. The construction costs were based on the Class 4 Conceptual Report Classification of Opinion of Probable Construction Cost, as developed by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering Cost Estimate Classification System.
These cost estimates have been developed using a combination of data from RS Means CostWorks®, recent bids, experience with similar projects, current and foreseeable regulatory requirements, and an understanding of the necessary project components. As the Project progresses, the costs could vary from the estimates developed in the Preliminary Engineering Report.
For project components where applicable cost data is available in RS Means CostWorks® (e.g. pipeline installation), cost data released in Quarter 1 of 2020 and adjusted for San Luis Obispo, California is used. Material prices were adjusted in some cases to provide estimates that align closer with actual local bid results.
For project components where RS Means CostWorks® data is not available, cost opinions are generally derived from bid prices from similar projects, vendor quotes, material prices, and labor estimates, with adjustments for inflation, size, complexity, and location.
Cost opinions are “planning-level” and may not fully account for site-specific conditions that will affect the actual costs, such as soils conditions and utility conflicts. The cost estimates for construction are shown in Table 23 on page 65.
Attachment 2
9.F-75Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 65 Table 23. Cost Estimates for Full Scale Project
FULL SCALE PROJECT COST
AWPF Capacity 5.4 MGD
AWPF Effluent 3.9 MGD
CAPACITY/QUANTITY COST
Advanced Treatment 5.4 MGD $26,482,000
Purified Water Pump Station 2,700 gpm $4,226,000
Pipeline Totals 15,700 LF $4,143,000
Injection Wells 6 qty $4,331,000
Monitoring Wells 9 qty $3,740,000
Additional Monitoring Wells 2 qty $800,000
Purified Water Storage 80,000 gal $872,000
Construction Subtotal $44,594,000
Contingency $11,567,000
Total Capital Cost (2021 Dollars) $56,161,000
Total Capital Cost (2024 Dollars) $67,506,000
Implementation Costs $24,347,308
Total Capital Cost $91,853,308
Annual O&M Cost $4,805,000
Other Expenses
Other expenses associated with the Project include the following:
x Semiannual Financial Report
x Semiannual Performance Report
x Final Performance Report
Indirect Costs
Indirect cost rate has not been negotiated for the Project, and therefore not included in the Project budget.
Total Costs
The total eligible cost of the Project under this NOFO is $56,495,408. Of this, the Central Coast Blue Partners are committed to a cost share of $42,371,556 (75% of the total eligible project costs). Expenses will be covered directly by the Central Coast Blue Partners or from other non- federal funding sources secured for the project.
We respectfully request $11,627,758 from the USBR under this NOFO. This represents 25% of the eligible Federal cost share (after reducing the total eligible Federal cost share by $796,000 from FY2018 Award and $1,700,000 FY2021 Award). Please see Table 20 on page 60 for the Proportion of Non-Federal Funding.
Attachment 2
9.F-76Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach References
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 66 References
1. California Department of Water Resources. 2018 SGMA Basin Prioritization Process and Results. 2018.
2. —. Bulletin No. 63-3: Sea-Water Intrusion: Pismo-Guadalupe Area. 1970.
3. Fugro Consultants. Northern Cities Management Area 2015 Annual Monitoring Report. 2016.
4. GSI Water Solutions, Inc. . Northern Cities Management Area 2020 Annual Monitoring Report. 2021.
5. United States Bureau of Reclamation. Central Valley Project. USBR.gov. [Online] https://www.usbr.gov/projects/index.php?id=506 .
6. Rincon Consultants. City of Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan. 2014.
7. Rincon Consulting, Inc. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Central Coast Blue Project. 2021. SCH#2019120560.
8. California Air Resources Board. 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. 2017.
9. United States Bureau of Reclamation. Water Reliability in the West - 2021 SECURE Water Act Report. 2021.
10. United States Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency California. USDA Designates 14 California Counties as Primary Natural Disaster Areas. USDA. [Online] March 28, 2019. [Cited: April 16, 2021.] Release No. 0032.19. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-room/emergency- designations/2019/ed_2019_0328_rel_0032.
11. United States Department of Agriculture. https://www.sjgov.org/ . [Online] March 5, 2021. https://www.sjgov.org/uploadedfiles/sjc/departments/agcomm/news/annoucements/cadroug htdisaster03052021.pdf.
12. Geoscience. Central Coast Blue, Phase 1B Groundwater Model Update. 2021.
13. California Department of Water Resources. A Beginner's Guide to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. [Online] [Cited: July 9, 2018.] https://sacdeltaguide.atavist.com/ .
14. Water System Consulting. San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 3 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. 2021.
15. San Luis Obispo County. Lopez Dam. Slocountywater. [Online] https://wr.slocountywater.org/site/?site_id=16&site=ad5cdb23-3e46-41f0-98a9- b169a505c0f4.
16. Water Systems Consulting. Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study. 2015.
17. Stetson Engineers. Lopez Lake Spillway Raise Project Report. 2013.
18. Wallace Group. South San Luis Obispo County Desalination Study. 2008.
19. Carollo & Water Systems Consulting. Technical Memorandum No. 3 Potential Supply Options and Points of Delivery for State Water. 2016.
20. Water Systems Consulting. SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study. 2016.
21. Woodard & Curran. Carpinteria Advanced Purification Project Preliminary Design Report. 2019.
22. Schumacher, Melanie Mow. personal communication. Pure Water Soquel Costs for Title XVI Grant. March 7, 2022.
23. Monterey One Water. Pure Water Monterey Expansion Project Progress Report. 2018.
Attachment 2
9.F-77Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach References
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 67 24. Grattan, Stephen R. Irrigation Water Salinity and Crop Production. Oakland : University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2002. 978-1-60107-244-3.
25. UC Agricultural Issues Center. Current Cost and Return Studies. Agricultural & Resource Economics. [Online] UC Davis, September 28, 2017. [Cited: June 19, 2018.] https://coststudies.ucdavis.edu/en/current/ .
26. UC Berkeley Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Prospective Closure of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Economic Impact Assessment. 2019.
27. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Assessing the status of the monarch butterfly. [Online] January 2021. https://www.fws.gov/savethemonarch/ssa.html .
28. Rincon Consultants. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Central Coast Blue Project. 2020.
This report is not available online because it contains confidential information concerning archaeological sites.
29. American Water Works Association. Buried No Longer: Confronting America's Water Infrastructure Challenge. AWWA. [Online]
30. California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01). [Online]
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/environmental-analysis/noise-vibration/guidance-manuals .
31. Water Systems Consulting. Central Coast Blue Preliminary Engineering Report. 2021.
32. Wallace Group. South San Luis Obispo County Desalination Funding Study. 2008.
33. Carollo. Soquel Creek Water District Groundwater Replenishment Feasibility Study. 2016.
34. GSI Water Solutions. Northern Cities Management Area 2016 Annual Monitoring Report. 2017.
35. —. Northern Cities Management Area 2019 Annual Monitoring Report. 2020.
36. —. Northern Cities Management Area 2017 Annual Monitoring Report. 2018.
Attachment 2
9.F-78Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Letters of Project Support
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act A
Letters of Project Support
The following letters of support were submitted less than one year ago (in April 2021) for the Project’s FY21 application. To minimize Project-related requests from our supporters, we chose to submit letters of support from the previous application.
No. Categorized Letters of Support
LOCAL GOVERNMENT / AGENCIES
1 Ed Waage – City of Pismo Beach Mayor
2 Jim Lewis – City of Pismo Beach City Manager
3 Courtney Howard – County of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Division Manager 4 Linda Austin – Oceano Community Services District, President
AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY
5 Vard Ikeda – President, Ikeda Brothers
6 Tom Ikeda – Ikeda Brothers
7 Brian Talley – Talley Farms, Talley Vineyards, Zone 3 Agricultural Member 8 John Hayashi - Y. Hayashi & Sons
BUSINESS COMMUNITY
9 Jocelyn Brennan – South County Chambers of Commerce
NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION
10 Andrew Christie – The Sierra Club, San Lucia Chapter
In addition, we received new letters of support from the following representatives.
No. Categorized Letters of Support
STATE & FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
11 Dianne Feinstein – United States Senator
12 Salud O. Carbajal – Member of Congress 24th District 13 Alex Padilla – United States Senator
LOCAL GOVERNMENT / AGENCIES
14 Jeff Lee – City of Grover Beach Mayor
15 Whitney McDonald – City of Arroyo Grande City Manager
NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION
16 Melissa James – REACH, President/CEO
Attachment 2
9.F-79Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Unique Entity Identifier
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act B
Official Resolution
Due to the timing of the city council meetings, the Official Resolution will be provided to USBR prior to May 14, 2022 (60 days after the application deadline).
Attachment 2
9.F-80Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Unique Entity Identifier
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act C
Unique Entity Identifier
City of Pismo Beach’s Unique Entity Identifier
DUNS Number: 0779800010000
Attachment 2
9.F-81Council Agenda 5-3-2022
City of Pismo Beach Mandatory Federal Forms
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act D
Mandatory Federal Forms
The following mandatory Federal forms have been submitted separately via grants.gov.
1. SF-424 Application for Federal Assistance
2. SF-424A Budget Information
3. SF-424D Assurances
4. SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
Attachment 2
9.F-82Council Agenda 5-3-2022
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.G
SUBJECT/TITLE:
APPROVAL OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2022 PAVING PROJECT FOR PROPOSED ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION ACCOUNT FUNDING (SB1)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2023 Paving Project for proposed Senate Bill 1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account funding for Fiscal Year 2023.
BACKGROUND:
On April 28, 2017, the Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 1, which is known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. SB 1 increases fuel excise taxes, diesel fuel sales taxes, and vehicle registration fees to help address basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety needs for state highway and local streets and roads.
Beginning November 1, 2017, the State Controller began depositing these revenues into local governments’ newly created Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA).
So far, the City has received the $492,885 of RMRA funds through fiscal year (FY) 2021:
Fiscal Year RMRA Funds Received
FY 2018 $48,324
FY 2019 $150,978
FY 2020 $142,698
FY 2021 $150,885
Total $492,885
The City is projected to receive $167,937 in FY 2022 of RMRA funds. The City anticipates another $184,819 in FY 2023 per the CaliforniaCityFinance.com RMRA Estimates as of January 2022. These funds are deposited in the City’s Gas Tax Fund RMRA account to support a budgeted street maintenance project. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) requests that cities and counties submit a Council-approved project list identified for proposed RMRA funding no later than July 1, 2022 to receive these funds in FY 2023. This project list must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement.
Maintenance of Effort
The amount that each City receives is based on a portion of the average of General Fund and Half-Cent Sales Tax Fund costs spent on street repairs and maintenance as reported to the State Controller’s Office for FY 2010, FY 2011, and FY 2012. For the City of Pismo Beach, this amount has been calculated to be $558,874. This level of funding is the City’s Maintenance of Effort, or required annual funding, from discretionary funds for street
9.G-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
projects. Staff have reviewed the budgets for FY 2023 and project that the City will meet this requirement.
Proposed Project for Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Funding Staff has identified the 2022 Paving project as a proposed project for RMRA funding. The 2022 Paving project budget includes support from the RMRA funds. This project meets the eligibility requirements as described in State and Highways Code Section 2030(b)(1).
The 2022 Paving project (Project) is located on Mattie Road, Ocean Boulevard, Wadsworth Avenue, Price Street, and roadways in the neighborhood northeast of James Way feeding Ventana and Highland Drives and within the Las Ventanas del Mar development in Pismo Beach, California. The Project includes a maintenance and rehabilitation to existing roadways, accessibility improvements, striping reconfiguration, and improving pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Construction of the Project is expected to begin in the summer of 2022 and be completed by June 30, 2024. And finally, the Project has a useful life ranging from 20 to 50 years.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) identifying the FY 2022 Paving project for proposed RMRA funding.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of approving the attached Resolution is an additional $184,819 of funds to help offset the 2022 Paving project.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Modify the project list; adopt the Resolution.
2.Do not adopt the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
Submitted by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
City Manager Approval:
9.G-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
RESOLUTION NO. R-2022-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE 2022 PAVING PROJECT FOR PROPOSED SENATE BILL 1 ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION ACCOUNT FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2017, the Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 1, also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017), which increases fuel excise taxes, diesel fuel sales taxes, and vehicle registration fees to help address basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety needs for state highway and local streets and roads; and
WHEREAS, beginning November 1, 2017, the State Controller began depositing these revenues into local governments’ newly created Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Accounts (RMRA), including $492,885 from fiscal year (FY) 2018 through FY 2021, a projected $167,937 in FY 2022 and $184,819 in FY 2023 for the City of Pismo Beach; and
WHEREAS, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) requests that cities and counties submit a Council-approved project list identified for proposed RMRA funding no later than July 1, 2022 in order to receive these funds in FY 2023, and which the project list must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and
WHEREAS, staff has identified the 2022 Paving Project located on Mattie Road, Ocean Boulevard, Wadsworth Avenue, Price Street, and roadways in the neighborhood northeast of James Way feeding Ventana and Highland Drives and within the Las Ventanas del Mar development in Pismo Beach, California, as a proposed project for RMRA funding and this project meets the eligibility requirements as described in Streets and Highways Code Section 2030(b)(1); and
WHEREAS, the 2022 Paving Project includes maintenance and rehabilitation to existing roadways, accessibility improvements, striping reconfiguration, and improving pedestrian and bicyclist safety; and
WHEREAS, the 2022 Paving project is estimated to be completed by June 30, 2024 and has a useful life ranging from 20 to 50 years.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach as follows:
1.The City Council hereby approves the 2022 Paving Project (Project) for proposed RMRA funding for FY 2023;
9.G-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 1
2. The Project is located on Mattie Road, Ocean Boulevard, Wadsworth Avenue, Price Street, and roadways in the neighborhood northeast of James Way feeding Ventana and Highland Drives and within the Las Ventanas del Mar development in Pismo Beach, California;
3. The Project includes maintenance and rehabilitation to existing roadways, accessibility improvements, striping reconfiguration, and improving pedestrian and bicyclist safety;
3.Construction of the Project is expected to begin in the summer of 2022 and be completed by June 30, 2024; and
4.The Project has a useful life ranging from 20 to 50 years.
UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 3rd day of May 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
9.G-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Attachment 1
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.H
SUBJECT/TITLE:
AGREEMENT WITH WALKER CONSULTANTS TO COMPLETE AN UPDATE TO THE
PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Walker Consultants, Inc. to complete an update to the Parking Management Plan in the amount of $25,000, and appropriating related budget adjustments.
BACKGROUND:
Pismo Beach is one of the region’s most popular coastal destinations. It provides access to coastal areas and recreational opportunities, while also offering a unique blend of residential neighborhoods and local commercial districts around a vibrant downtown commercial core. Given the strong demand for visitation, one of the most challenging issues facing the City is how to effectively manage its parking supply and mitigate the impacts of parking demand.
In the fall of 2006, the City Council instructed staff to develop an overall Parking Management Plan (PMP) for the community. In March 2007, the City Council took action to form a Parking Advisory Committee (PAC), whose main responsibility is to act as an advisory committee to the Council with respect to implementation of the PMP. Phase One of the PMP was adopted on September 4, 2007. It was the first step in the City’s efforts to address parking challenges in Pismo Beach and summarized recommended strategies, based on accepted parking studies and best management practices, to improve and enhance overall parking management in downtown. It was intended to be used as an implementing guide to initiate modifications to parking management practices to fulfill both current and future needs for downtown parking. Recommendations in the PMP were established based on the premise that parking and transportation are not ends in themselves but means to achieve broader community goals. These recommendations sought to leverage existing City assets, respond to its current challenges, and further the overall vision for the Downtown Pismo Beach area.
The PAC has met over the years and developed the foundation of an update to the Plan using current plans and studies that impact parking in Downtown Pismo Beach. As a result of recent Council action on installation of meters on Price Street, authorizing variable parking rates, moving forward with acceptance of Highway 1 into the City’s street system, and making updates to the City’s Local Coastal Program, it is important to update the PMP to ensure it adequately reflects current practices and allows for the most effective management of demand in the paid parking zone.
Request for Proposals
Staff requested proposals from seven consultant firms consistent with the City’s Purchasing Policy for Professional Services less than $50,000. Three firms responded
9.H-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022
and two proposals were submitted. Staff evaluated the proposals received and determined the most responsible proposer was Walker Consultants (“Walker”) based on the proposed scope (Attachment 1.A). Walker, then known as Walker Parking Consultants, was previously selected to complete a parking study that informed the last update of the PMP. Walker has a well-rounded understanding of the parking challenges facing Pismo Beach and has access to a wide range of parking specialists to assist with the parking program. Staff therefore recommends that Walker be awarded a contract to update the City’s current PMP. Although the total contract price of $25,000 is below the threshold requiring the Council’s approval under the City’s purchasing policies, this item is being brought to the Council due to the need to appropriate the related funding, described below in the Fiscal Impact section.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Staff recommends the Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Walker to complete the Plan in an amount not to exceed $25,000 (Attachment 2) and appropriating related budget adjustments.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of approving the attached Resolution is an additional $35,000 in the Parking Enterprise Fund in fiscal year (FY) 2022. This amount would support the approximately $25,000 Walker Consultants agreement to update to the Parking Management Plan plus $10,000 for unanticipated efforts related to studying and completing the PMP. While the goal of the PMP update would be to not expend the additional funds, this would allow additional flexibility to ensure a quality PMP. If these funds are not expended, then the surplus remaining budget will be returned back to the Parking Enterprise Fund net income (fund balance).
Staff recommends that Council appropriate $35,000 in the Parking Enterprise Fund in the professional services account for this project in FY 2022. There is sufficient net income (fund balance) in the Parking Enterprise Fund available to support this cost.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Decline to award the contract as recommended; provide staff with alternative direction.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
1.A Exhibit A to Resolution: Scope of Services
2. Walker Consultants Contract
Prepared by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Megan Martin, Planning Manager
Submitted by: Matthew Downing, Community Development Director City Manager Approval:
9.H-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022
RESOLUTION NO. R-2022-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH,
CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH WALKER CONSULTANTS, INC. TO UPDATE THE PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000, AND APPROPRIATING
RELATED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
WHEREAS, in 2006, the City Council instructed staff to begin developing an overall Parking Management Program to provide reasonable available parking facilities that are necessary to serve all the visiting public who come to enjoy the natural resources of the community; and
WHEREAS, in March 2007, the City Council took action to form a Parking Advisory Committee to act as an advisory committee to the City Council with respect to implementation of the Parking Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2007, the City Council adopted the Phase One Parking Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Parking Advisory Committee has convened over the years and developed the foundation of an update to the Parking management Plan using current plans and studies that impact parking in Downtown Pismo Beach; and WHEREAS, staff solicited and evaluated requests for professional services, consistent with the City’s Purchasing Policy, to complete an update to the Parking Management Plan and determined Walker Consultants to be the most qualified proposer; and WHEREAS, there is sufficient available net income (fund balance) in the Parking Enterprise Fund to support this agreement and completing the Parking Management Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby authorizes the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Walker Consultants.
Inc. to complete an update to the Parking Management Plan in the amount of $25,000 (scope provided as Exhibit A).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby appropriates $35,000 in the Parking Enterprise Fund professional services account in fiscal year 2022 for purposes of executing the Walker Consultants, Inc. agreement and completing the Parking Management Plan.
UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 3rd day of May 2022, by the following vote:
Attachment 1
9.H-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 1
9.H-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022
c:\users\sturoff\onedrive - walker consultants\2021\city of pismo beach\walker proposal_pmp update_20211223.docx 707 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 3650
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Office: 213.488.4911
December 23, 2021
Megan Martin
Planning Manager
Community Development, City of Pismo Beach
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Re: Proposal for a Parking Management Plan Update
City of Pismo Beach, CA
Dear Megan:
Walker Consultants is pleased to submit for your review our proposal for parking consulting services for updating the Parking Management Plan originally drafted by the Pismo Beach Parking Advisory Committee.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The City of Pismo Beach is updating its Parking Management Plan to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of the downtown parking system, reflect current and future conditions in the downtown area, and develop and/or expand on current practices and systems to address the City’s parking challenges.
As a classic coastal California city, Pismo Beach experiences peak parking demand during the summer (particularly weekends), and dramatically lower demand during the winter. Spikes in parking demand may occur as well during events such as its iconic Car Show and Para Surfing events. Such fluctuations in demand present a challenge to crafting a reasonably consistent parking management approach that can be applied appropriately year-round. Adding to the complexities are recent policies intended to ameliorate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. One has been the addition of parklets throughout the downtown, the implications of which will be considered in the Plan update. The policies of the Parking Management Plan Update must also align with the needs of the City’s Local Coastal Plan and the City’s Circulation Element.
SCOPE OF SERVICES/WORK PLAN
1. PROJECT KICKOFF
1.1 Meet or teleconference with City staff to discuss project parameters and develop a further understanding of the specific needs for the Parking Management Plan update.
1.2 Confirm project geographical boundaries, expected to fall within the boundaries of the Downtown Parking District.
Attachment 1.A
9.H-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022
c:\users\sturoff\onedrive - walker consultants\2021\city of pismo beach\walker proposal_pmp update_20211223.docx 707 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 3650
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Office: 213.488.4911
December 23, 2021
Megan Martin
Planning Manager
Community Development, City of Pismo Beach
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Re: Proposal for a Parking Management Plan Update
City of Pismo Beach, CA
Dear Megan:
Walker Consultants is pleased to submit for your review our proposal for parking consulting services for updating the Parking Management Plan originally drafted by the Pismo Beach Parking Advisory Committee.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The City of Pismo Beach is updating its Parking Management Plan to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of the downtown parking system, reflect current and future conditions in the downtown area, and develop and/or expand on current practices and systems to address the City’s parking challenges.
As a classic coastal California city, Pismo Beach experiences peak parking demand during the summer (particularly weekends), and dramatically lower demand during the winter. Spikes in parking demand may occur as well during events such as its iconic Car Show and Para Surfing events. Such fluctuations in demand present a challenge to crafting a reasonably consistent parking management approach that can be applied appropriately year-round. Adding to the complexities are recent policies intended to ameliorate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. One has been the addition of parklets throughout the downtown, the implications of which will be considered in the Plan update. The policies of the Parking Management Plan Update must also align with the needs of the City’s Local Coastal Plan and the City’s Circulation Element.
SCOPE OF SERVICES/WORK PLAN
1. PROJECT KICKOFF
1.1 Meet or teleconference with City staff to discuss project parameters and develop a further understanding of the specific needs for the Parking Management Plan update.
1.2 Confirm project geographical boundaries, expected to fall within the boundaries of the Downtown Parking District.
Attachment 1.A
9.H-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022
Megan Martin
December 23, 2021