City Council Meeting Agenda: 05-23-2023 Page 1
Posted: Friday, May 19, 2023
NOTICE AND CALL OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
TRINIDAD CITY COUNCIL
The Trinidad City Council will hold a regular meeting on TUESDAY, MAY 23, 2023, at 6:00 PM
at the Trinidad Town Hall, 409 Trinity Street, Trinidad, CA.
CLOSED SESSION BEGINS AT 5:00PM
For your convenience, this meeting will also be held via videoconference, hosted on the Zoom platform. Learn more about Zoom here: https://zoom.us
PUBLIC COMMENT: Public comment may be submitted via email in advance of the meeting, or in an orderly process during the meeting. If you do not have access to email and you would like to provide a written statement, please deliver your comments to 409 Trinity Street, Trinidad CA, by 2:00pm on the meeting day, or email to [email protected] HOW TO PARTICIPATE: You are invited to participate in person at the Trinidad Town Hall, or by Zoom. The City will publish a direct link to the Zoom teleconference, along with the participant code, on the City Calendar page online at http://trinidad.ca.gov/calendar
To phone in, dial 1-888-278-0296, Conference Code: 685171 Meeting ID: 838 6109 5628 Passcode: 758722 PLEASE NOTE that live meeting logistics will be prioritized. The quality of the Zoom teleconference meeting cannot be guaranteed. Technical challenges experienced by either the participant or the City will not interrupt or halt progress of the meeting.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. CLOSED SESSION
1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Calif. Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)) (1 Case: City of Trinidad vs. Tsurai Ancestral Society, et. al, Humb. Co. Sup. Court Case No. 180684) IV. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – 04-11-2023 cc
VII. ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
At this time, members of the public may comment on items NOT appearing on the agenda. Individual comments will be limited to 3 minutes or less. Please direct your comments to the Council as a whole, maintain decorum and avoid personal attacks on staff, members of the Council and/or other members of the public. Council and staff responses will be minimal for non-agenda items.
VIII. CONSENT AGENDA All matters on the Consent Agenda are considered routine by the City Council and are enacted in one motion. There is no separate discussion of any of these items. If discussion is requested by any Council member, that item is removed from the Consent Calendar and considered separately. A single opportunity for public comment on the Consent Agenda is available to the public.
1. Distribution of Tourist Occupancy Tax Funds to Community Organizations
2. Encroachment Permit Application 2023-05; Needham, 833 Edwards Street, Remove and Improve Walkway Access within Edwards Street Right-of-Way.
City Council Meeting Agenda: 05-23-2023 Page 2
XII. DISCUSSION/ACTION AGENDA ITEMS
1. Discussion/Presentation regarding Draft Administrative Water Connection Policies and Criteria for Evaluating Connection Requests Outside City Limits.
2. Continued Discussion/Presentation regarding FY2023-2024 Budget.
XIII. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR:
APRIL 11, 2023 CC
Supporting Documentation follows with: 8 PAGES
04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TRINIDAD CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 2023 (LIVE/HYBRID)
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Kelly called the live-hybrid meeting to order at 6:00pm. Council members in attendance: Kelly, Ladwig, West, Tuttle, and Breckenridge. City Staff in attendance: City Manager Eli Naffah, City Clerk Gabriel Adams, Grant Director Becky Price-Hall, Grant Administrative Assistant Angela Cather, Deputy Clerk Anton Souza, Project Manager Jennifer Hakenen, and City Planner Trever Parker. Approximately (12) participants were present by video-conference at the beginning of the meeting.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. CLOSED SESSION – No closed session
IV. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
V. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Motion (Ladwig/West) to approve the agenda as written. Passed unanimously.
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – 03-14-2023 cc.
Motion (West/Ladwig) to approve as written. Passed unanimously.
VII. COUNCIL REPORTS/COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
Kelly: Private security scheduled to supplement law enforcement will begin service in May. Website update underway. 12-16 week project.
Ladwig: CoreHub purpose is to decarbonize Humboldt County. The organization is making their rounds to all the County agencies and JPA’s. HTA is a leader in the north State to limit carbon emissions.
West: Trail Committee meets next week.
VIII.STAFF REPORTS – City Manager & Law Enforcement
City Manager Naffah highlighted accomplishments summarized in the staff report included in the meeting packet. Introduced Angela Cather, returning to the City to assist with grant administration. Forest Moon Festival will occur in June to celebrate Return of the Jedi filming 40 years ago in the redwood forest.
Community Yard Sale will occur the same weekend. CalPoly Humboldt will be touring the water plant.
Stormwater monitoring well has been installed.
HCSO is fine tuning their stats to show in-city compared to outside city activity.
IX. ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
(Three (3) minute limit per Speaker unless Council approves request for extended time.) Janinie Volkmar – Trinidad Area Resident
Witnessed a known resident delivering household trash and recycling into the City receptacles next to the bus stop. Shouldn’t they have to pay for garbage service like the rest of us? Diane Stockness – Trinidad
Met a County Sheriff Deputy this past weekend, who said he would issue warnings and tickets to dog leash law violators. Provided the City Clerk with his contact information.
X. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Staff Activity Report – March 2023
2. Financial Statements – February 2023
3. Law Enforcement Report – March 2023
4. Encroachment Permit Application from the Trinidad Rancheria Requesting Permission to Utilize City Property near the Harbor for Material and Equipment Staging During their Stormwater Management Project.
5. Reject Claim for Damages Submitted by Nicholas Aikin that Occurred on State Highway 101 Outside the City of Trinidad Jurisdiction.
6. Authorize City Manager to Sign GHD Agreement Amendment No.2 to Provide Additional Stormwater Project Engineering Assistance.
04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2
7. Letter of Support for Assembly Bill 1256 per request from the County of Humboldt.
Motion (Ladwig/West) to approve consent agenda as submitted. Passed unanimously.
X. DISCUSSION/ACTION AGENDA ITEMS
1. Discussion/Update regarding recent Dog Attack Incident and Actions Taken by the City in Response.
City Manager Naffah explained that recent dog attacks in the City and Trinidad State Beach areas have necessitated a response. After an attack on Kathrin Burleson’s dog by the beach, the pack of Poodles is no longer welcomed to visit the City of Trinidad. After the attack on Ted Pease, his wife and dog, a county hearing was held last week and the dog and owner are no longer living in the city or county.
The City has taken the following actions:
- Sent the attached letter to all residents and water customers to inform them of the concerns re: dogs in the city. That dogs must be on leashes at all times within the city limits. If there are bad behaviors witnessed of dogs in the city, they should be reported to the city so the city can take proactive measures rather than waiting until after a vicious confrontation. Informed residents of neighboring beaches in the county where dogs are permitted off-leash so that those locations can be avoided by those that have sensitive dogs or smaller dogs. Also, noted that additional services in upcoming months of Pacific Coast Security and the Community Ambassadors can assist in informing the public, reporting incidents and enforcing our leash laws.
- Will have signs posted in pet-friendly STR’s informing them of the leash law and that dogs must be leashed at all times in public areas (including sidewalks, streets and beaches). - We have ordered Leash Law signs with our code section that will be posted around town at dog waste bag stations, trail heads and below existing road signs. Some of these signs can remain year-round and some can be posted during summer and fall for added coverage.
Public comment included:
Ted Pease – Trinidad Area Resident, Dog Bite Victim
Provided an update on the offending dog owner, Mark Brodell, who has been evicted from his Wagner Street residence and unresponsive. His dog was first quarantined at his residence, then later at the County Animal Shelter. It was returned to him at the conclusion of quarantine without anyone knowing. Due to lack of formal complaints by neighbors, there was no paper trail on its behavior but the formal hearing following the attack determined the dog to be vicious. This was a tragic event that could have been worse. This is not a leash law issue. This is a case of human negligence. Brenda and I are both sorry to see it come to this. There are many good dogs that play off-leash, and we hope this doesn’t penalize those owners. In the case of Mr. Brodell he’s clearly guilty, and should be held accountable. That’s why he left town. I’m covering all the bills with my credit card.
Steve Madrone – Fifth District County Supervisor
Very unfortunate. It all starts with responsibility. When people disregard rules, there are problems. We see this often on the Hammond Trail. Dog owners have many excuses when their pets roam off leash. I’m working with the Parks Department and Sheriff Honsal to look at the County Ordinance and find loop-holes that need strength.
Unleashed dogs make people uncomfortable for many reasons. We can do better with our ordinance. A vicious dog should not be released back to the owner unless victims and neighbors have been notified. If the neighbors on Wagner Street had filed complaints with the City, would that have helped with the accountability? I’m committed to getting County Department leaders together and work on the existing ordinance to provide better responses, and educate pet owners. Unfortunately, that often helps. A few bad dogs cause restraint on everyone else.
Ladwig: Is there a licensing process for everyone? Could we as a city ask residents to license their pets in multiple jurisdictions? Mayor Kelly explained that it’s based on the primary residence.
Breckenridge: Could our security officers be certified to write leash law violation tickets? 04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3
West: Regarding consistency across the County (City, County, State) is there a system that works for everyone? Madrone recognized that each jurisdiction has their own regulations.
City Manager Naffah explained that the City will work on developing a formal agreement establishing Animal Control responsibility with the County. We will also ask the security service to inform the public about the leash law, report incidents to the City, and enforce the leash law. Kelly added that increasing awareness is important, as well as reporting bad behavior. The City is committed to enforcement and hardening the Animal Ordinance in general.
Ted Pease – Trinidad Area Resident
Clarified that the offending dog had been licensed in McKinleyville, but the tag expired. Had there been better reporting on the dog’s behavior prior to the incident, Animal Control would have had more discretion. We volunteered at the Shelter for many years and understand how the system works. Discretion may or may not be good, but the City should at minimum formalize the agreement with County Animal Control to handle these situations without hesitation.
Steve Madrone – Fifth District County Supervisor
The vast majority of dog owners and pets are good. Dog parks are places where pet behavior is understood.
Perhaps the City should consider an option that
Janine Volkmar – Trinidad Area Resident
Received a letter from the City recently about the incident and reminding me about the leash law. It was a good start but needs more information. Westhaven residents needs to receive the letter as well. There is often several people living on the same property.
Diane Stockness – Trinidad
Thanked Madrone for all his hard work. Thanked the City for the additional signage and asked if the security service would be writing tickets. Also asked that security be assigned to various hot spots in town.
Council comments included:
Breckenridge: I’m sympathetic and angry this happened, and it cannot happen again. I’ve seen people walking through town carrying tasers. Vicious dogs must be restrained. The ordinance needs teeth and the licensing procedure needs to be improved. A public education program would be helpful too, similar to Septic Sue.
Tuttle: I’m also concerned with visitors unfamiliar with our process. Maybe we could consider establishing leash lending libraries, identifying possible dog park locations, establishing leash-free hours at the beach, or developing a local dog identifying system on the new website.
Ladwig: We should focus on the annual license renewal process to educate everyone. Landlords should be informing tenants with pets of their license obligation.
West: My concern is what happens after a dog attack. Dog owners should be aware of the consequences, and it would be nice if dog owners could be held financially accountable for any damages or medical bills.
Kelly: It is still unclear to the dog owner what the consequences are. The ordinances need hardening and be very clear.
Information item only. No decision was made.
2. Discussion regarding Lot Line Adjustment Application with Trinidad Rancheria to Exchange approximately 1200 sqft of Land with the City of Trinidad for Development of the Rancheria Interpretive Center at the Harbor.
City Planner Trever Parker explained that in August 2021 the Trinidad Planning Commission approved a grading permit and design review for an interpretive center proposed by the Trinidad Rancheria in the Harbor Area to be located where the current bait shop is. A small portion of the project would be located on the City’s Galindo Street right-of-way. This area of City property is already developed and maintained by the Rancheria as part of the harbor facilities. It currently contains a portion of the office shed and is used for storage of various items. As discussed during the Planning Commission hearing, the building could not be moved to avoid the right-of-way due to other existing improvements, including the boat launch and utilities. 04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4
Because of this, the Planning Commission approval included the following condition: “Prior to construction, the Rancheria will enter into an agreement with the City or obtain an easement, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, for the use of the Galindo Street right-of-way for a portion of the project.” Also in August 2021, the City Council approved a Permission Letter and Agreement between the City and Rancheria for the portion of the Rancheria’s stormwater improvement project that includes a portion of the Galindo right-of-way. Those improvements include adding permeable pavement to already paved areas. In this case, a new building is proposed, and the City Attorney felt that a similar agreement or easement would not adequately protect the City from liability. Therefore, staff began pursuing a lot line adjustment instead, which would give the Rancheria ownership of the area impacted by the interpretive center. The Rancheria conducted a survey and found that the top of the trail leading from the parking lot to the Trinidad Head access road is on Rancheria property. They have proposed an even exchange of 1,180 sq. ft. of land as shown on the attached map with the Rancheria gaining a portion of the Galindo right-of-way and the City gaining a portion of Rancheria property where the Trinidad Head trail is located.
The lot line adjustment will need to be approved by the Trinidad Planning Commission per §16.24.050 of the City’s subdivision ordinance. As the property owner, the City Council must agree to the lot line adjustment in order for the Planning Commission to take action on it. A lot line adjustment also requires a coastal development permit, which will be processed by the Coastal Commission as part of the Rancheria’s application for the interpretive center.
Public comment included:
Bryce Kenny – Trinidad
Resolving encroachments is a good idea.
Motion (Ladwig/Breckenridge) to authorize staff to process a lot line adjustment application by the Trinidad Rancheria as shown on the map included in the packet, and authorize recordation of the lot line adjustment once approved by the Trinidad Planning Commission and CA Coastal Commission. Passed unanimously.
3. Discussion/Decision regarding Draft Resolution 2023-01; Adopting New Fees and Charges for the OWTS Management Program.
City Planner Trever Parker explained that the Trinidad OWTS Ordinance (#2010-10) § 13.12.080 provides that:
“The City Council, in a manner prescribed by law, may by resolution establish and alter fees, deposits and/or charges for receiving applications, holding hearings thereon, reviewing plans and specifications, reviewing inspection reports, monitoring OWTS and water quality and issuing permits and for performing any other service for maintaining and administering the OWTS Management Program established pursuant to this ordinance.
Said fees shall be sufficient to offset the cost of implementing the Trinidad OWTS Program…” Much of the development of the program and some of the implementation thus far was paid for using grant funds. And the City elected to keep costs down for residents in implementing this new regulatory program. Fees were originally set via the Trinidad OWTS Ordinance Guidelines with the following fees:
• Building Permit Referral: $30
• Project Referral to Health Officer: $50
• Construction / Repair Permits: Current DEH Rates
• Standard Operating Permit: $100
• Nonstandard Operating Permit: $150
• Commercial / Vacation Dwelling Unit Operating Permit: $150 • New System Operating Permit: $50
• Renewal of Operating Permit: $75
• Change in Maintenance Schedule Request: $75
• Permit Transfer: $30
These fees have not changed over the last 13 years while the program was not fully implemented. Now that staff is implementing the program systematically city-wide, it is recommended that the City Council review and revise the fees. The current fees do not generally cover the costs of staff to issue the permit, let alone the time needed to administer the program. Therefore, staff is recommending the City Council approve an increase in fees adequate to cover the City’s costs.
04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5
Proposed Fees: One of the things that has become apparent in implementing this program is that some OWTS Operating Permits require more time than others. But even a simple permit renewal costs the City more in staff time than is recouped through the existing permit fees. The fee increases are based on the cost of staff time to administer the program and issue permits. This includes maintaining files, reviewing applications, sending letters, and other ancillary tasks. However, it does not include any of the “Septic Sue” educational mailing programs or signage that has been developed as part of the program, nor does it include water quality sampling, which the City has not done in a number of years. The County continues to monitor bacterial water quality in creeks and beaches around Trinidad, though.
Rather than charging a higher rate nonstandard systems and STRs, staff have found that other factors are more important in determining how much staff time it will take to issue or renew a permit. We have broken the permits and renewals into “simple” and “complex” categories. The complex category would include older systems with little to no file information, systems with several permit conditions, and properties with unusual circumstances (sensitive environments, multiple units, etc.). Further information on some of the additional fees is included below.
Table 1: Proposed OWTS Management Program Fees
Residential
New Permits
Simple $200
Complex $250
Renewals
Simple $175
Complex $225
Permit Transfer $100
Change in Schedule $150
Building Permit Referral $75
DEH Referral $150
Late Fee $10/month Discretionary
Commercial
New Permits
Simple NA
Complex $250-$600 Actual costs
Renewals
Simple $200
Complex $250
Permit Transfer $100
Change in Schedule $150
Change in Business $150
Building Permit/Business
License Referral
$75
DEH Referral $150
Late Fee $15/month Discretionary
A permit transfer is a change in ownership. A change in schedule would be in the case that someone makes some changes to their OWTS or how they are using the property (e.g. fewer people living onsite) and requests that their expiration date be extended. The business license or building permit referral would be to the OWTS Administer to determine if any upgrades to the OWTS or modification to the Operating Permit are needed. The DEH referral would be charged to planning permit application (e.g. coastal development permits) that are referred to the Humboldt County Division of Environmental Health, which serves as the City’s Health Officer; that is the fee they should be charging the City. The late fee would be discretionary and would cover the cost of sending additional letters reminding a property owner that their permit is expired.
Every resident in town has been offered the opportunity to integrate into the OWTS Management Program under the current fee structure in 2022. Those who have not responded are being offered one last opportunity prior to fees increasing (proposed to go into effect July 1st). 04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6
Cost Comparison: While the fee increase may seem significant, Trinidad will continue to have some of the lowest sewage/wastewater disposal prices of any incorporated City or district in Humboldt County, even when factoring in the routine recommended maintenance for a septic system.
An inspection is required at least every 5 years (3 years for nonstandard systems), and permit terms are generally 3-5 years for most systems. Pumping is needed on average (according to Steve’s Septic Service) every 5 to 6 years at an average cost of $595. With a 5-year pumping cycle and 4-year permit term, that equates to an average annual cost of $380. In addition to pumping, that cost includes the $295 inspection fee and proposed $150 OWTS Operating Permit renewal fee every 4 years as well as a $150 annually for cleaning the effluent filter (which you can do yourself for free). Table 2 shows a comparison of some of the local sewer fees in Humboldt County.
Table 2: Sewer Rates
City Annual Rate
Trinidad $381.00
Rio Dell $806.76
Blue Lake $1,080.00
Ferndale $876.24
Arcata $798.48
McKinleyville $428.28 - $878.40
Public comment included:
Bryce Kenny – Trinidad
Will the public be notified if their septic systems are considered complex? Parker explained that will be determined after inspection records are submitted.
There was no Council comment.
Motion (Ladwig/West) to Approve Resolution 2023-01; Adopting New Fees and Charges for the OWTS Management Program. Passed unanimously.
4. Discussion/Decision regarding purchase of GrantVantage Software Subscription to Support Grant Management and Tracking Processes.
City Grant Administration staff members Becky Price-Hall and Angela Cather explained that through the City’s program, the Grant Administrator and Grant Coordinator have assisted with the funding and administration of the City Council’s approved projects and programs, largely within the planning, public works and water system grant projects realms. Oversight of funding and administrative duties all require creating, managing, retrieving and archiving a huge amount of information associated with each project.
Due to the complexity and extensive requirements that each awarded project presents, grant staff has researched software to assist in the administration and management of the City’s 12 active grants spanning over multiple years. Specifically, we’ve sought out systems that specialize in creating a streamlined process for fund management, tracking and reporting. During our research and screening of an estimated 10 different grant management software, along with Quickbooks, we found that GrantVantage was the software that best met our criteria, as most software is geared toward grant funders rather than grant recipients. Not only did GrantVantage meet our criteria for tracking, management, reporting and compliance features, it met our criteria for cost.
Benefits of the Grant Program:
• Improve the City’s infrastructure
• Improve the City’s resilience to drought and other climate change impacts • Increased City’s sustainability
• Increased public engagement/outreach – environmental education • Increased protection of our ASBS
• Increase in relationship building with community-based organizations and partner communities Fiscal Impact: Staff anticipates that the cost of the GrantVantage, including the one-time start-up fee along with the annual subscription would be less than the estimated personnel costs. The projected savings 04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7
generated by the use of GrantVantage would be an estimated $6,600 and upward. The integrated software provides staff the ability to transfer information using minimal steps, instead of the current cumbersome method of transferring information across numerous spreadsheets and other documents for fund reconciliation, and invoicing. There would be additional time savings for other grant administration tasks but those are more difficult to estimate.
Cost of
Grant
Vantage
Average
Annual Grant
Income (past 8
years)
Start Up Cost
(One time fee)
Annual
Subscription
Cost Total Cost
% of Average
Annual Grant
Income
1st year $1,010,780 $1,500.00 $3,800.00 $5,300.00 0.52% Future
years
$1,010,780
$0.00 $3,800.00 $3,800.00 0.38%
Council questions included:
Ladwig: Does the software subscription provide support, and as someone who will inherit the grant program after Price-Hall retires, what does Cather think? Price-Hall responded yes and explained the support agreement.
Cather added that there were several attractive features that will be useful in the next phase of the City’s grant management program.
Breckenridge: Asked where staff found the software. Price-Hall explained that it was recommended to us after previewing several different options. This one ‘checked all the boxes’.
West: Asked if the City would be locked into this by contract. Price-Hall explained that it could be used on an annual basis and dropped at any time.
Motion (West/Tuttle) to approve purchase of the GrantVantage software subscription. Passed unanimously.
5. Discussion/Update regarding Temporary Closure of the Axel Lindgren Memorial and Parker Creek Trail Beach Access to Old Home Beach.
Mayor Kelly recused herself from the discussion due to the proximity of her home to the Parker Creek Trail.
Mayor Pro-Tem Ladwig explained there are several recommendations made by the Tsurai Management Team related to the significant winter storm erosion. The City is suggesting that the recommendations be brought back for discussion in May and start spending budgeted resources to improve the trail entrances and make them safe. Do we keep the trails closed for another month, or should we open the trails up? Short-term fix using people power and existing materials. Long-term solutions require much bigger discussions.
West: We want to have the trails open as soon as possible, at least by the beginning of the summer season.
What are the Tsurai’s feelings toward opening it up? I’d like to see the Parker Creek trail open first, then find out if there are any resources available to repair the Axel Lindgren Memorial Trail.
Ladwig responded, stating their primary objective is to protect the Village site.
Breckenridge: Can work be done to secure the site and make it safe with the resources we have? Bryce Kenny – Trinidad
Open the Parker Creek Trail tomorrow. There is no danger and there is no liability to the City. Parker Creek trail is in much better condition than most the State Park trails. That’s the nature of the erosion process. The land is always moving. The Management Plan is not the key to keeping the trails open. The focus is protection of the Village site and keeping the Axel Lindgren Memorial Trail’s traditional alignment. Parker Creek Trail closed signs should be taken down tomorrow. The beaches are irresistible. Part of the fun of walking on trails is the challenge getting through.
Tristan Cole - Trinidad
Support opening the trails and remove the temporary closure. People are using the trails anyway. The last few feet of the trail is always scary. The Land Trust is used to rebuilding that section every year. The solution, 04-11-2023 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8
pending Tsurai input, is not a big engineering scheme. The simpler the better. Rebuild every year(s). Most people walking the trails expect this.
Diane Stockness – Trinidad
Agree with residents Kenny and Cole.
Ron Sundberg – Trinidad Rancheria
The Rancheria requests the opportunity to provide input as well. Agree with residents that trails should be open, but support giving time to develop reasonable solutions to improve safety.
Council comments included:
West: How hard would it be to get the trail repaired? If there is a Management Team meeting tomorrow, it should be communicated that the goal is to have it open by late May.
Breckenridge: We can only delay opening the trails to a certain point. Waiting a month is one thing. Waiting until the trail is repaired is another thing.
Tuttle: People will use it whether it’s open or not. Hope to allow the Tsurai a chance to assist with solutions if they would like to participate.
Kelly: I’m in favor of working with the Tsurai Management Team, and hopeful they’d be ok with the City’s timing expectations.
Ladwig: Take this discussion to the Management Team tomorrow, with the intent to focus on the Parker Creek Trail opening. Bring back the discussion in May with projects to begin supporting.
City Manager Naffah explained that before the May meeting, he would like to begin working on improvements.
The trails repair budget is earmarked for this type of project. Focus on beach access through the Parker Creek Trail.
No formal decision made. City Manager will communicate information collected tonight to the Management Team meeting tomorrow, return to the May meeting with short and long-term plans, and begin the process to reopen Parker Creek Trail by the end of May.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
- Kelly: Dog Ordinance revisions, Community-wide Survey. - Ladwig: Revisit past decision to limit parking overnight on Edwards Street and areas in town. - Traffic Calming suggestions for Ocean & View Streets.
ADJOURNMENT: 8:35pm.
Submitted by: Approved by:
_____________________________ _____________________________ Gabriel Adams Cheryl Kelly
Trinidad City Clerk Mayor
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 1
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED
1. Distribution of Tourist Occupancy Tax Funds to Community Organizations
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
Tuesday, May 23, 2023
Item: Distribute allocation of TOT revenue to community organizations In 2013 the City Council agreed to allocate 10% of the total, annual audited Tourist Occupancy Tax revenue for community organizations. Each Council serving since then have confirmed their intent to continue this tradition.
The Chamber of Commerce, Museum, Library, and Trinidad Coastal Land Trust agreed among themselves to distribute that amount every year to each organization proportionately.
The total, audited Occupancy Tax revenue collected in FY 2021-2022 is $147,116. The City will be issuing 10% of the total revenue ($14,712) to each organization in the following payments:
30% $4,413.60 Greater Trinidad Chamber of Commerce
30% $4,413.60 Trinidad Museum
30% $4,413.30 Trinidad Coastal Land Trust
10% $1,471.20 Trinidad Library
Recommended Action: Consent approval is required to confirm budget expense for fiscal year 2022-2023.
Attachments: Email request/reminder received 05/08/2023.
Workspace Webmail :: Print 5/15/23, 6:21 PM
https://email16.secureserver.net/view_print_multi.php?uidArray=47822|INBOX&aEmlPart=0 Page 1 of 2 Print | Close Window
Subject: 2023 TOT allocations to community groups.
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, May 08, 2023 8:11 am
To: Trinidad City Manager <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], Jack West <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected] Cc: Gabe Adams <[email protected]>, Michelle Kunst <[email protected]>, Sherry Vanderpool <[email protected]>, "Kohl, Jan" <[email protected]> Dear City Manager Naffah, Mayor Kelly and Council Members Ladwig, West, Tuttle and Breckenridge, Since 2011, the City of Trinidad has kindly shared 12% of Transient Occupancy Tax revenue from visitor serving lodging income to visitor serving organizations Trinidad Chamber of Commerce, Trinidad Museum Society and Friends of the Trinidad Library (2013), adding Trinidad Coastal Land Trust in 2016 when their office/Simmons Gallery was completed next to the library.
Cooperation among these groups and with the City of Trinidad in providing positive experiences for visitors and residents alike is one of the finest aspects of Trinidad life. Over the years, the Chamber events, museum exhibits and lectures and the beautiful Native Plant Garden, TCLT natural history tours and stewardship programs, and a wide array of attractive learning experiences at the County free library, enhance the public serving elements so important to Trinidad's identity. Since 2006, both Trinidad Museum and Trinidad Coastal Land Trust have partnered, along with the City and other partners, with the Bureau of Land Management/California Coastal Monument to draw attention to and educate the public about preserving and protecting the Trinidad Gateway's incomparable natural environment. In cooperation with the Trinidad Rancheria and CCNM, since 2017, volunteer museum docents have served at the first Saturday open Trinidad Head lighthouse.
In the spirit of essential City support for its well established organizations (Trinidad Library established in cooperation with the Trinidad Civic Club and the County in 1915; the Trinidad Chamber of Commerce, founded in 1956; the Trinidad Coastal Land Trust established in 1978; and Trinidad Museum Society, founded in 1980), we hope that the City will continue its interest in and support with its annual TOT allocation. A list of last year's allocation percentages is shown below.
Best regards,
Patricia Fleschner, President
Trinidad Museum Society
P. O. Box 1126/400 Janis Court
Trinidad, CA 95570
cc: Greater Trinidad Chamber of Commerce, P. O. Box 356, Trinidad, CA 95570 Trinidad Coastal Land Trust, P. O. Box 457, Trinidad, CA 95570 Friends of the Trinidad Library, P. O. Box 856, Trinidad, CA 95570 Note on 2022 allocation:
30% to the Chamber
30% to the Museum
30% to the Land Trust
10% to the Library
Thanks,
Eli
Eli Naffah
Workspace Webmail :: Print 5/15/23, 6:21 PM
https://email16.secureserver.net/view_print_multi.php?uidArray=47822|INBOX&aEmlPart=0 Page 2 of 2 Copyright © 2003-2023. All rights reserved.
City Manager
City of Trinidad
707-677-3876
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 2
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED
2. Encroachment Permit Application from Tim and Susan Needham to Remove and Improve Walkway Access within Edwards Street Right-of-Way, at 833 Edwards Street.
DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEM
Tuesday, May 23, 2023
Item: Encroachment Permit Application from Tim and Susan Needham to Remove and Improve Walkway Access within Edwards Street Right-of-Way at 833 Edwards Street.
Background: The City received an application from Tim and Susan Needham to remove and improve the existing walk path consisting of a decomposed granite path and stairway, connecting the pavement along Edwards Street through the slope leading to their home entryway.
Approximately 17’ of the area to be improved is within the Edwards Street public right-of-way. The previous homeowner installed the walk path in the late 1990’s with non-permanent materials. At that time the City did not have plans to improve the right-of-way and the landscape materials proposed did not cause the City Public Works Department any concern.
Closure of the Van Wycke Trail in 2019, followed by re-routing of drinking and storm water infrastructure to Edwards Street has raised the City’s awareness of encroachments into the right-of-way. The Needham’s original application requested use of stamped concrete from the edge of the curb pavement along the entire project length.
After meeting with the Building Official on May 18, the Needham’s agreed to using pavers for the first 10’ abutting the Edwards Street curb.
The City ordinance on Encroachments (Chapter 12.04 of the Trinidad Municipal Code) categorizes and regulates various types of activities in the public right of way such as public utility or infrastructure repairs, improvements of alleys, and special events. Permanent structures proposed by residents (to be constructed in public right of ways) to improve the aesthetics or define their property boundaries are not clearly defined in table 12.04.070 of the Encroachment Ordinance, classified as “OTHER”, and therefore must first be approved by the City Council.
The Criteria of Approval, as defined in section 12.04.080 of the code lists 4 principal guidelines for reviewing such proposals, and all must be reviewed equally. The Ordinance states: “An encroachment permit may be issued when the proposed activity:
A: Is in the interest of the City and/or the health, safety, and welfare of the public; B. Does not result in conditions detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; C. Does not result in practical difficulty or liability risk to the City; D. Is not materially injurious to private or public property:
Typically it is Staff’s position to discourage or deny permanent improvements into the public right of way.
We do not make judgments on the merits of the projects, but simply review such projects only in terms of City Ordinances and general planning principals. This project is not clearly disallowed by any regulation, therefore, the Council has the discretion to approve or deny such a request based on a variety of standards outlined below.
- In 2016 the Council approved the decorative retaining wall built adjacent to the Beachcomber building on Trinity Street, subject to specific conditions as defined in the permit. - In 2018 the Council authorized a resident to remove encroaching vegetation and install a decorative stone border wall on Underwood/Parker Street since the project encroached slightly into the rightof-way but yielded a public parking space that was obstructed due to overgrown vegetation.
Staff believes that the property owner has submitted acceptable plans and addressed the primary concerns; 1) Front Property line identified showing the extent of the encroachment. 2) Use of pavers instead of concrete for the first 10’, as per Building Inspector recommendation. 3) Obtain building permit for relocating the propane tank. 4) Complete the Encroachment Permit application in full, including Indemnity clause.
Staff also believes that the attached Encroachment Permit document will mitigate future questions and/or issues that may arise from the construction, repair, or demolition of the improvements.
The attached draft Encroachment Permit includes a list of conditions, and if approved, the document may be notarized and recorded on the deed through the County Recorder’s office. Permit issuance will be subject to receiving signatures from Public Works, City Engineer, and City Planner, and the City Clerk’s office.
Action Requested: Review and approve Needham Encroachment Permit application as submitted on Consent, or remove from Consent for discussion if needed.
Attachments: - Chapter 12.04 Encroachments
- Encroachment Permit Application
Print Preview 5/19/23, 2:01 PM
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Trinidad/cgi/menuCompile.pl Page 1 of 4 Chapter 12.04
ENCROACHMENTS
Sections:
12.04.010 Purpose.
12.04.020 Definitions.
12.04.030 Permits – Requirements.
12.04.040 Applicability.
12.04.050 Regulated encroachment activities.
12.04.060 Encroachment permit – Procedure.
12.04.070 Delegation of review and approval.
12.04.080 Encroachment permits – Criteria of approval.
12.04.090 Encroachment permits – Terms and conditions.
12.04.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to entitle and regulate activities in the public right-of-way. The encroachment permit process is the city’s mechanism for guaranteeing that work in the public right-of-way is:
A. In the interest of the public health, safety and welfare; B. Is conducted in a manner that does not result in conditions detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare; C. Is not materially injurious to private or public property; D. Does not result in practical difficulty or liability risk to city; E. To be consistent and not in conflict with similar work by others or by the city itself. [Ord. 86-187 § 1.01, 1987].
12.04.020 Definitions.
“Encroachment permit” means a permit to conduct activity described in TMC 12.04.040 and 12.04.050. [Ord. 86-187 § 2.01, 1987].
12.04.030 Permits – Requirements.
All encroachment permits shall be reviewed according to the criteria set forth in this chapter and are subject to the terms and conditions therein. Additional terms and conditions may be prescribed by the department and/or decision-making body approving the encroachment permit, in order to ensure the purposes are carried out fully. [Ord. 86-187 § 2.02, 1987].
12.04.040 Applicability.
This chapter applies to all projects performed by private parties or their agents, or contractors of the city that take place within or involve alterations or improvements to the public right-of-way. [Ord. 86-187 § 3.01, 1987].
12.04.050 Regulated encroachment activities.
Activities in the public right-of-way include:
A. Sidewalk, curb, drop curb construction or repairs;
B. Sanitary sewers;
Print Preview 5/19/23, 2:01 PM
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Trinidad/cgi/menuCompile.pl Page 2 of 4 C. Water mains, services, etc.;
D. Storm drains;
E. Sidewalk or street closures;
F. Encroachment on sidewalks;
G. Non-city-owned utilities (gas, telephones, etc.);
H. Street improvements (grading, paving, etc.):
I. Alley improvements, use of alley;
J. Hydrant rental;
K. Subdivision improvements;
L. Banner permits;
M. Special event permits;
N. Other, as specified, including locating improvements (not falling in one of the categories above, such as signs) in the public right-of-way. [Ord. 86-187 § 3.01, 1987].
12.04.060 Encroachment permit – Procedure.
Applications for encroachment permits shall be reviewed as follows:
A. The applicant shall apply on a form prescribed by the city council; B. The city clerk shall direct the application to the appropriate department or decision-making body as set forth in TMC
12.04.070.
C. Upon approval by the appropriate department or body as indicated in TMC 12.04.070, the city clerk shall issue the encroachment permit;
D. Disapproval of a request for an encroachment permit shall be made in writing with reasons given for the disapproval; E. Disapprovals may be appealed to the city council within 10 days of the date that notification of the disapproval was mailed to the applicant;
F. Grievances regarding the issuance of an encroachment permit and/or the conduct of an activity regulated by this chapter may be addressed to the city council. [Ord. 86-187 § 4.01, 1987].
12.04.070 Delegation of review and approval.
Encroachment permits shall be reviewed and approved by the departments and/or governing body of the city as set forth in Table 12.04.070.
Table 12.04.070
Type of
Encroachment
Permit*
City Staff City Body
Public
Works Engineer Planner Police/Fire Commission Council
A. Sidewalk, curb, Approve
Print Preview 5/19/23, 2:01 PM
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Trinidad/cgi/menuCompile.pl Page 3 of 4 drop curb
B. Sanitary sewers Approve Recommend
C. Water mains,
water services,
etc.
Approve Recommend
D. Storm drains Approve Recommend
E. Sidewalks or street
closures
Approve Recommend
F. Encroachment on
sidewalks
Recommend Recommend Recommend Approve
G. Non-city-owned
utilities
Approve Recommend
H. Street
improvements
Approve Recommend
I. Alley
improvements,
alley use
Approve Recommend Recommend Recommend
J. Hydrant rental Approve
K. Install subdivision
improvements
Approve
L. Special event
permits
Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend
M. Other Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend Approve * Encroachment permit types correspond to TMC 12.04.040 and 12.04.050. [Ord. 86-187 § 5.01, 1987].
12.04.080 Encroachment permits – Criteria of approval.
An encroachment permit may be issued when the proposed activity:
A. Is in the interest of the city and/or the health, safety and welfare of the public; B. Does not result in conditions detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare; C. Does not result in practical difficulty or liability risk to the city; D. Is not materially injurious to private or public property. [Ord. 86-187 § 6.01, 1987].
12.04.090 Encroachment permits – Terms and conditions.
Encroachment permits are subject to the following conditions:
A. All work shall conform to the city standards and specifications.
B. Barricades must be kept on all trenches, excavations and obstructions. Warning lights must be maintained at night. All signs, flags, lights and safety devices involved in construction activities shall conform to the requirements set forth in the then current “Manual of Traffic Control Warning Signs, Lights and Other Devices for Use in Performance of Work Upon Highways,” issued by the State Department of Transportation.
C. Continuous vehicle and pedestrian access shall be maintained unless specifically otherwise permitted by the encroachment permit.
D. Unrestricted access to fire hydrants shall be maintained at all times.
Print Preview 5/19/23, 2:01 PM
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Trinidad/cgi/menuCompile.pl Page 4 of 4 E. No street shall be closed without first notifying the city and receiving approval from the city. Under normal circumstances, the city expects at least 24 hours’ advance notice of such closure. An estimate shall be given on how long the closure is expected to last. Notification shall be given to the city when the street is reopened.
F. All work shall be guaranteed for a period of not less than 90 days or more than one year from the date of acceptance by the city. Failure of the city to detect flaws in the work shall not relieve the applicant and/or contractor of this responsibility.
G. Failure to comply with these conditions and with this chapter shall result in direction from the city to stop work. The city reserves the right to perform the necessary correction and improvement work at the applicant’s expense.
H. Any long-term encroachment not properly or promptly maintained will be repaired or removed at the applicant’s expense.
I. No permit shall be issued to any individual, organization or contractor who has outstanding fees, charges or work not in compliance with terms of any encroachment permit previously issued. The council may waive or alter this provision in exceptional circumstances.
J. The applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the city, and its officers and agents, from all suits and actions of every name and description brought for, or on account of, any injuries or damages received or sustained by any person or persons, by or from the applicant, applicant’s employees or agents, in the construction of the work, or by or in consequence of any negligence in guarding the same, or for improper materials and/or methods used in construction.
K. Encroachment permit applications involving banners, signs or structures shall be approved by the design review committee prior to issuance of the encroachment permit. [Ord. 86-187 § 7.01, 1987].
First 10' from curb to be " pavers" as per City Building Inspector recommendation and homeowner acceptance per May 18, 2023 email reply. - GA
DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEM 1
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED
1. Discussion/Presentation regarding Draft Administrative Water Connection Policies and Criteria for Evaluating Connection Requests Outside City Limits.
AGENDA ITEM
May 23, 2023
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Item: Draft Administrative Water Connection Policies and Criteria for Evaluating Connection Requests Outside City Limits
At a specially scheduled meeting on April 1, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended the attached draft water policies to the City Council for consideration.
These are policies for evaluating water service requests for properties outside City limits.
However, the findings and application requirements were written so they could also be applied to policies for evaluating service requests inside City limits if and when those are developed at some point in the future. Staff and the Planning Commission generally agree that water service should be part of the review process for development applications inside City limits. Some of the background information included below may look familiar, because it includes some information provided at February 11, and April 14, 2020 City Council meetings. As part of their recommendation, the Planning Commission suggested that the City Attorney should review the policies before they are finalized.
At the April 14, 2020 meeting, the City Council tabled this item in favor of pursuing a drought/water shortage contingency plan before considering any new water connections outside City limits. That task has been accomplished and implemented, but this connection policy was never reconsidered. A recent water service request has prompted staff to bring the policy back to the City Council in order to provide a comprehensive basis for deciding on connection requests.
Some of the information below may seem to be unnecessary for consideration of these policies. But at the time this report was originally written, the City was deep into studies and considerations regarding the water system. And the City does not have the capacity to serve the entire service area, so some areas and/or uses had to be prioritized over others.
Much of it is focused on future water demand scenarios to show the City water service capacity in comparison to the priority service areas. I figured too much information is better than too little, so I left it in the report.
Rationale
Staff and the Planning Commission have taken a holistic approach to developing these policies and criteria, meaning they were written to accommodate a broad range of situations, without any one scenario in mind. Development of these policies and criteria were guided by a couple of key premises.
First, the City does not currently have the production capacity to serve the entire Service Area at full build-out (including reserving capacity to serve full build-out within City limits); therefore, certain areas and/or uses should be prioritized for service. The Planning Commission discussed several ways of prioritizing connection requests, primarily based on the relative benefits to the City.
Second, sound planning principles and practice dictate that provision of services outside a jurisdiction’s boundaries does not promote orderly growth and is generally undesirable.
Therefore, annexation should be a component of any decision to provide additional water service connections outside City limits. Annexation can provide several benefits to the City, including additional revenue, land use control, increased housing opportunities (this may be a good way for Trinidad to meet State housing requirements for example), and a higher population base to serve on councils, commissions and committees. However, a decision as to when and where to annex is complex and would require additional information and studies. The proposed policy is intended to address when and where future water service connections may be appropriate and when annexation should potentially occur in conjunction to the connection request.
Based on the above premises, the proposed criteria have prioritized service to (1) build-out within City limits, (2) an allowance for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in the City, (3) areas outside the City that the City has the capacity to serve and that would be appropriate for future annexation, and to a lesser degree, (4) health and safety. In addition, there are provisions for the City Council to allow exceptions to the above priorities if certain findings can be made. The policies are set up in tiers based on the priorities. The first tier is for requests from within the Priority Service Area. Within that tier, Areas A and B have somewhat different requirements from Area C, because Areas A and B already have water infrastructure and represent relatively small potential demand. Health and safety provisions are included in the tier for service requests from outside the Priority Service Area, but the approval process is easier than for an exception, which requires more scrutiny and analysis of costs and benefits.
Priorities
The City has a basic obligation to give priority to users and properties inside City limits.
Existing general plan policy 23a codifies this with the following language: “Users within city limits should be given preference for service connections.” The Water Demand Assessment (SHN August 2019) also provided an allowance for ADUs in addition to estimates for build-out under existing zoning within the City. The amount of water needed to serve build-out within City limits, including ADUs, has been “reserved” when considering how much of the remaining Service Area can be served (see Table 1). Other Trinidad water reports and studies can be found here.
Utilizing the areas identified in the Water Demand Assessment, Areas A and B (see Attachment 2) were prioritized in the policy for several reasons. They are the areas closest to the east side of the City (providing a logical expansion boundary), where City water infrastructure already exists, and many properties are already connected to the City’s water system. The potential increased water demand from serving these areas is small, particularly when considering the length of time it will take for build-out to occur (see Figure 1). In addition, these areas share strong social and economic ties with the City and could make sense for the City to annex in the future as they are already within the City’s designated “Sphere of Influence.”
Area C was prioritized because it contains Coastal Act priority uses and zoning. General Plan policy 27a states: “Water service extensions shall not remove water system capacity needed to serve Coastal Act priority uses within the North Trinidad Service Area described in policy 26.” In addition, Area C has high revenue-generating potential for the City if it were annexed. While residential areas, particularly those that are already developed (like Areas A and B), are likely to provide a net negative revenue to the City if annexed, at least for a period of time, (due to the property tax sharing agreement with the County), commercial areas are likely to generate revenue, because the City would not have to share the sales and TOT tax with the County. However, Area C currently contains no water lines. Also, it has a very high water demand potential, and the City may not be able to serve the entire area during times of peak usage. Therefore, more studies and information would be needed before the City could decide whether to serve this area and how much of it to serve.
Finally, health and safety water connection requests, regardless of what area they are in (as long as the property is in or near an area already serviced with City water) have also been given some priority. These would be situations where someone’s well has become contaminated or has stopped producing enough water to serve the existing use(s) on the property; this would not include water service for new or unpermitted development.
Pre-prioritizing the areas where the City knows it has the capacity to serve and where future annexation could be beneficial simplifies the procedures for responding to connection requests. In addition, staff would recommend that the new water model be used to test the build-out scenarios for these service areas to determine whether the existing infrastructure is adequate. If the water model shows that there would be negative impacts to the water system, financing any necessary improvements can be made a condition of water service connection approvals.
For service requests that do not fall under one of the priorities, a process for the City Council to grant an exception has been included in the policies/criteria if certain findings can be made. This is where the Rancheria’s water request for their hotel would fall.
Other Useful Data
Table 1 shows the water demand of the priority areas after full build-out in relation to the remaining treatment capacity of the water plant. Since this table was created, it was pointed out that the 48,000 gpd capacity at the water plant is raw water treatment that doesn’t account for potential losses in the system. I spoke with the City Engineer’s office about this issue, and the existing system loses are static and would not be expected to increase with increased volume. In addition, any new lines would be expected to have minimal loss. However, backflushing the filters and other processes that occur at the water plant could result in a loss of up to about 10%. Therefore, the plant capacity is likely closer to 43,200 gpd during peak usage.
Table 1: Remaining Water Production Capacity After Build-Out Area Additional
Total Build-out
Peak Demand
(GPD)
Remaining
Capacity
(GPD)
Water Plant Total NA 48,000
City Limits 20,269 27,731
ADUs (inside City) 4,968 22,763
Service Area A 3,382 19,381
Service Area B 6,682 12,699
*Option 1: Service Area C Vacant Parcels 12,500 199
-OR-
*Option 2: Service Area C North to
Anderson Lane
10,100 2,599
*These options have not been vetted and are for illustrative purposes only. The City should also explore the potential for sharing existing water sources or requiring storage and forbearance during the dry season to minimize the impacts to the City’s water system during peak usage.
Additional information can be found in the Planning Commission packets for the February 4, 2020, January 15, 2020, and December 18, 2019 meetings. Unfortunately, since the website crash, they are not available online at this time.
Build Out Scenarios and Timing
The Planning Commission felt that an important consideration was looking at data regarding the length of time to achieve build-out and estimates for water demand over the next several decades. Previous discussions had focused on total water demand after full build-out of the City and the Service Area outside City limits. However, based on current growth rates, build-out would not be expected to occur for several decades. In addition, policies and regulations can and should be reviewed periodically and revised as needed based on changing conditions. For example, a general plan planning horizon is generally 20 years, and it should be updated at least every five years. Planning for things like droughts and climate change may have longer planning horizons but should still be revisited periodically. The function and capacity of the water plant is likely to change over the next 20 to 30 years, as is our understanding of the capacity of Luffenholtz Creek and the effects of climate change on it. Figure 1 provides a better understanding of expected water demand over that time frame (and longer) rather than just talking about full buildout.
The annual growth rate over the past 10 years or so has been around 0.15% in Humboldt County, the Service Area, and Trinidad itself. Using a 0.15% or even a 0.25% annual growth rate, it would take more than 100 years for build out to occur within either the City or the Service Areas. Even at a 1% annual growth rate, build-out would take decades.
Therefore, agreeing to provide water to (or annexing) small portions of the City Service Area, with the exception of Area C, would not result in an immediate, significant increased water demand.
Figure 1: Expected increased water demand over time under various growth rate scenarios within the City and Service Areas A and B.
Notes about Figure 1
• The actual annual growth rate over the past 8-10 years in Trinidad, the City’s Service Area, and Humboldt County has been around 0.15% annually. For Humboldt County, that is based on population estimates. For Trinidad and the Service Area, this number is based on the number of new homes built, because the population estimates for such small areas are unreliable and have shown a decrease in population since 2010. • Although the graph starts at 0, because it represents increased demand, I used existing water use as the baseline for calculating the increased usage. Therefore, the increased water use volumes should be compared to the remaining capacity of the water plant determined in GHD’s May 1, 2019 memo.
• For Service Areas A and B, I added existing development not already served by City water to the baseline (the ‘annex’ part of “Annex & ADU”). That unserved existing development may already be experiencing problems with their water supply and so would request water if given that option. And if the City were to annex these areas, that development would be an immediate additional water demand. • I also added a factor to the baseline water use for ADUs, assuming there would be a small boom of ADU development should the City pass an ADU ordinance (the ‘ADU’ part of “Annex & ADU”).
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Current Annex & ADU 10 years 20 years 30 years
Peak (July) GPD
0.15% 0.30% 0.50% 1%
• I used the following website to calculate water use into the future based on the various growth rates: http://www.metamorphosisalpha.com/ias/population.php.
Table 2 shows the same data as Figure 1, but in terms of remaining water plan capacity over time given various growth rates.
Table 2: Remaining Water Production Capacity Over Time at Various Growth Rates Time Remaining
Capacity
(GPD) @
0.15% Growth
Rate
Remaining
Capacity
(GPD) @
0.3% Growth
Rate
Remaining
Capacity
(GPD) @
0.5% Growth
Rate
Remaining
Capacity
(GPD) @ 1%
Growth Rate
Current 43,200 43,200 43,200 43,200
Annex & ADUs 39,358 39,358 39,358 39,358
10 years 38,357 37,343 35,968 32,423
20 years 37,341 35,266 32,405 24,762
30 years 36,310 33,125 28,659 16,299
I did not include growth estimates for Area C, because it is much more complicated to estimate both demand and growth rates in that area. Growth would tend to happen episodically as each of the few remaining large parcels are developed. One of the reasons staff is recommending that the City not serve this area with water unless it is annexed, is so the City can exert land use control over the area in order to better control growth.
However, this area needs significantly more study and consideration before the City decides to serve it. It has been included as a priority area primarily because the Coastal Commission has essentially required it to be so. I did not include areas beyond A, B and C, because the City does not currently have the water production capacity to serve those areas at full build-out.
Area C
I have provided a little more detailed information regarding Area C for consideration, particularly as it may relate to compliance with Policy 27a, which states: “Water service connections shall not remove water system capacity needed to serve Coastal Act priority uses within the North Trinidad Service Area described in Policy 26.” Area C consists of 12.5 parcels (one parcel is split by the service area boundary to exclude the residentially zoned portion of the parcel). Five of the parcels are zoned CG (commercial general) and are located west of Patrick’s Point Drive. Eight of the parcels are zoned CR (commercial recreation), which is the priority coastal use zoning, and are located east of Patrick’s Point Drive.
The CG parcels range from 1.58 acres to 4.36 acres and contain the following uses/development: Ocean Grove, mini-storage, vacant hardware store, a residence and a mostly vacant parcel. The CR parcels range from 0.63 acres to 11.23 acres and include three RV Parks (Extended Stay, Emerald Forest, Sylvan Harbor), a church camp, two residences, and two vacant or mostly vacant parcels. The only Coastal Act priority uses currently existing in Area C are the three RV parks.
Estimated peak build-out water use from the Water Demand Assessment for Area C is as follows:
• 3 RV Parks: 14,500 gpd
• Vacant and mostly vacant CR parcels: 9,000 gpd
• Other CR parcels (residential and camp): 4,300 gpd
• All CG parcels (including vacant): 6,800 gpd
• Total: 34,600 gpd
As has been described before, the potential build-out demand for these parcels is difficult to estimate, because the allowable uses can vary significantly in their expected water use.
My estimates are primarily based on talking to the owners or operators of the existing developments who told me what their average daily and peak daily water use is.
However, the peak daily use was generally from the 4th of July weekend or other large holiday, and so would not be expected to occur over an entire month. So, the peak estimates are likely skewed high. Therefore, I wanted to look at some other ways to estimate the maximum demand.
Using the expected daily wastewater flows set forth by Humboldt County DEH (100 gpd for hook-up spaces and 50 gpd for non-hook-up spaces) to calculate water use results in an even higher estimate for water demand at the RV Parks (21,800 gpd). But these numbers are intended to predict the highest peak flows with a factor safety for sizing septic systems; they usually significantly over-estimate actual use.
For comparison, I looked at water use within the two RV parks in Trinidad, both of which now accommodate mostly long-term tenants (>30 days). Peak usage for both parks in 2018 and 2019 averaged about 35 to 45 gpd. A 2007 USFS study found that RVs averaged 30 gpd and recommended planning for 35 gpd for each RV camping space with hook-ups.
Using 45 gpd, the peak usage at the three RV Parks on Patrick’s Point Dr. would total 11,250 gpd, and at 35 gpd, the usage would total 8,750 gpd. That is 3,250 and 5,760 gpd less than estimated in the Water Demand Assessment respectively.
Another way to estimate water use in the CR zoned parcels is by area/density. RV parks are likely to be some of the highest water demanding uses that are allowed in the CR zone.
And there are likely environmental and other factors that would limit the density and intensity of any allowable use. The RV parks (two in the City and three in Service Area C) average 3,530 sq. ft. per RV space. If you add up all the acreage in the CR zone, divide by 3,530, and multiply the result by 45 gpd, that equates to 22,728 gpd, or 17,677 gpd at 35 gpd per RV space. That is 5,072 and 10,123 gpd less than the Water Demand Assessment estimated for all the CR parcels at 27,800 gpd.
All this is to show that the Water Demand Assessment intentionally skewed towards overestimating water demand in order to provide a factor of safety when planning for water service. This data provides justification that hooking up users within Service Areas A and B would not remove capacity needed to serve visitor serving uses within Area C, especially when considering a timeline of 20 to 30 years rather than full-build-out. In addition, as I have mentioned before, if the City were to serve and/or annex Area C, it may not have to provide all the needed water; a combination of City water and existing water sources may be used. Or, the City could require these properties to install enough storage to get them through the peak season in order to reduce the demand on the City’s water system during that critical time.
Future Tasks
Staff and the Planning Commission recognize that these criteria are just a piece of the water service planning in Trinidad. The Planning Commission circled back to the General Plan update to incorporate some of these policies into the general plan update, but they have yet to be adopted and certified. In addition, the City should also address criteria for evaluating hook-up requests and new/changed uses within the City. The Coastal Act definition of “development” includes a “change in the intensity of use of water, or of access thereto,” but the City has rarely evaluated water demand for individual projects in the City. Other important planning priorities should be to develop ways to encourage and/or require water conservation, and inventory and monitor water rights and diversions on Luffenholtz Creek.
Attachments
1. Draft Administrative Water Connection Policies and Criteria for Evaluating Connection Requests Outside City Limits
2. 2019 Service Area Map (Figure 1 from Water Demand Assessment)
3. 2022 Service Area Map (Figure 14 from the draft General Plan) Note that Attachment 2 was the figure that these draft connection policies were based on.
Attachment 3 is an updated figure that shows the new Sphere of Influence boundary for Trinidad that was recently adopted by LAFCo as well as updated service area and subarea boundaries proposed in the draft general plan update after further discussion.
Recommended Action
Review and discuss draft water policies/criteria and take public input and direct staff to provide additional information and/or make any desired changes to the document prior to adoption.
p. 1 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 City of Trinidad
Draft Administrative Water Connection Policies and Criteria for Evaluating Connection Requests Outside City Limits
Intent
The City of Trinidad has a limited water supply and must carefully allocate this important limited resource. In addition, the provision of water can encourage development. The City desires to limit and regulate water service connections outside City limits in order to ensure continued sufficient capacity to serve City needs and to encourage orderly development and growth of the Trinidad community. These policies are to be used within the context of existing regulations and adopted general plan policies. If anything herein conflicts with those adopted policies and regulations, the adopted policies and regulations shall take precedence.
Limitations
If the City determines that a water extension is warranted, such service will be permitted only on an individual contractual basis for a specific property, which contract or agreement will specify the terms and conditions of such service in detail, including any exceptions allowed and any conditions imposed which may be different from the statement of policy of this chapter. The City shall not have an express or implied obligation to provide water service to any property outside the City limits, regardless of that property’s location within a preferred service area, the health and safety concerns of the property’s current water supply, the property’s proximity to services, or the location in an area that is otherwise served by the City.
Findings and Statements of Facts
• The City’s water plant currently has a reliable excess capacity of 48,000 gpd during peak usage (July and August) in normal to dry years.
• There is limited data available for creek flow at the treatment plant and very limited data for extractions of water from the creek up- and downstream from the City’s diversion.
• Climate change over the coming decades is expected to change precipitation patterns resulting in more runoff and less percolation as well as higher average temperatures and less fog, which could further reduce dry period flows and may also change demand characteristics.
• Extracting water becomes increasingly more difficult with lower creek flows. • A conservative approach to allocating this limited but critical resource is warranted. p. 2 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 • The City does not currently have the production capacity to serve the entire Service Area at estimated build-out; therefore, certain areas and uses should be prioritized. • Build out is not expected to occur for several decades, even if growth rates increase. • Sound planning principles and practice dictate that provision of services outside a jurisdiction does not promote orderly growth and is generally undesirable. • Annexation should be a consideration in any decision to provide additional water service connections outside City limits.
• The City has prioritized service to (1) build-out within City limits, (2) an allowance for ADUs, (3) areas outside the City that the City has the capacity to serve and that would be appropriate for future annexation, (4) health and safety.
Requests for City Water
Definitions
City: City shall mean the City of Trinidad
Connection: Water service connection shall mean an individual service connection (lateral) to an existing main water line.
Extension: Water service extension includes a water connection, but also entails construction of additional main water line(s) in order to accommodate a connection.
Intensification of an Existing Use: The intensification of an existing use means an expansion or other change to the existing use(s) that will increase projected water demand (based on DEH expected daily wastewater flows or other methodology deemed appropriate by the City) by more than 50 gpd.
New Use: A new use shall mean an additional or modified use(s) that alters the project water demand of an existing connection.
Priority Service Area. Priority Service Area means a portion of the Service Area, as mapped on Figure # of the Trinidad General Plan, that the City has determined to be a good candidate for possible annexation into the City, and where the City has determined that it has adequate water capacity to serve that area.
Application Requirements
All requests for new water service or a new use or an intensification of an existing use on an existing connection outside City limits shall be subject to the following conditions and processes:
A. Application from persons of interest in property. The applicant and any other persons with an interest in the property to be connected to the water distribution system shall execute an application for conditional water use and connection permit formulated by the City; and
p. 3 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 B. Conditions on use. The City shall place conditions on the water use and connection permit, including on the allowable volume of water use, as needed to ensure compliance with applicable policies and regulations and equitable distribution of the limited water supply.
C. Responsibility for costs. The proponent of the connection is responsible for all costs of the connection, including physical infrastructure, application review costs, connection fees, capacity expansion, and annexation (as applicable); and D. Fees paid. The applicant has paid all fees required to be paid; and E. Comply with Trinidad Municipal Code. The applicant agrees in a form suitable for recordation to comply with all water service-related provisions of the Trinidad Municipal Code and requirements and/or conditions of the Public Works Department and the water use and connection permit; and
F. Adequacy of wastewater treatment system. The City shall ensure that the provision of water service will not negatively impact any onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS). The applicant shall demonstrate that their OWTS is adequate for the type and level of use that will be served.
G. Prohibition to transfer water. No applicant or person with an interest in the premises connected to the water distribution system shall sell, transfer, assign or otherwise separate the water use and connection permit from the premises for which it was originally granted, for the use of any other premises, without the express written consent of the City Council or its designee.
H. Valid building permit. The applicant shall provide evidence of one of the following:
1. A valid building permit that authorizes the erection or construction of a residential or nonresidential structure upon the property, or
2. An existing legal structure and use on the property, or
3. A valid permit for a change of use; and
I. Waive right to protest annexation. If not already within City limits, the owner of the property applying for water service shall execute the “waiver of the right to protest annexation” formulated by the City in a form suitable for recordation. To facilitate the waiver’s preparation, the applicant shall provide the City with all documents the public works department requires to ascertain the identity of all persons having an interest in the property and to ascertain the identity of the authorized representatives of any business entity having an interest in the property; and J. Environmental Review. The City shall determine the appropriate level of environmental review, subject to the requirements of CEQA, for each proposed connection. If needed, the applicant shall be required to complete such review prior to the appropriate decision-making body considering the application.
p. 4 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 K. City Discretion. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require the provision of water service outside of the City limits and the City’s decision to provide such service shall remain a discretionary authority of the City.
Outside City Limits, within Priority Service Area.
All persons or entities requesting a water service connection outside City limits may be granted a new water connection permit or a permit for a new use or the intensification of an existing use, pursuant to the Application Requirements, under the following standards:
A. Service Charge for Connections Outside the City within the Priority Service Area. Service charges for connection and monthly service shall be as provided under the current rate ordinances of the City, plus a 50 percent surcharge or as otherwise set by resolution of the City Council.
B. Priority Service Areas. To ensure orderly outward extension of public services, the City has prioritized water service to those properties that may be appropriate for future incorporation or may otherwise benefit the city and its residents. Trinidad may grant water connections outside City limits under the following circumstances:
1. Priority Service Areas A & B. The approving body, with recommendations from the Public Works Director, City Engineer, and City Clerk, shall have the discretion to execute a contract for, and issue a water connection to those premises located within Priority Service Areas A or B under the following circumstances:
a. Minor water user. If the location of service is within Priority Service Area A or B, and the requested connection is for use(s) requiring an annual average of less than 500 gpd with a peak usage of no more than 1,000 gpd as averaged over any one month, the City Manager may approve the connection if he/she issues a written determination that:
I. The connection’s primary use will support one or more of the following uses:
i. Visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation, or
ii. Coastal-dependent industry per California Coastal Act Section 30101, or iii. Private residential development, or
iv. Essential public services (i.e. Fire Dept., Schools, etc.), and; II. Water service provision is consistent with the water service policies of the City and other applicable jurisdictional agencies.
b. Major water user. If the location of service is within Priority Service Area A or B, and the requested connection is for use(s) requiring an annual average of more than 500 gpd or 1,000 gpd as averaged over any one month , the City Council may approve the connection if the following findings can be made:
I. The connection’s primary use will support one or more of the following uses:
p. 5 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 i. Visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation, or
ii. Coastal-dependent industry per California Coastal Act Section 30101, or iii. Private residential development, or
iv. Essential public services (i.e. Fire Dept., Schools, etc.), and; II. Water service provision is consistent with the water service policies of the City and other applicable jurisdictional agencies, and; III. The City has the excess capacity, beyond what is needed to serve existing customers and all anticipated development within the City, sufficient to serve to applicant connection.
IV. The new water service connection will not negatively impact other users or components of the City’s water system as determined by the City Engineer, or that improvements will be required as part of the connection, at the expense of the applicant, that will eliminate or minimize those negative impacts to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
c. Annexation. Annexation to the City may be required for any water service connections in Priority Service Areas A & B.
I. Timing of annexation proposals will be determined based on what is most beneficial to the citizens of the community. The annexation may be required prior to, concurrent with, or subsequent to the service connection.
II. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the annexation application, or a share of those costs. The applicant’s share of annexation costs, as determined by the City Manager, shall be due at the time of the water service connection, regardless of timing of the annexation application.
III. If the City Council determines that the timing for annexation is not ripe, the applicant shall record a Waiver of Right to Protest Annexation, in a form approved by the City attorney, on the property deed. Such waiver shall apply to all heirs, successors and others having an interest in the property.
IV. The City Council may waive the annexation requirement and issue a written finding that annexation of the affected property is infeasible.
2. Priority Service Area C. New connections in Priority Service Area C shall not be allowed until and unless the City Council makes a determination that the City has the capacity to serve all, or a designated portion of it. If and when that determination is made, the following policies shall apply. a. Annexation. Annexation to the City may be required for any water service extensions in Priority Service Area C.
p. 6 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 I. Timing of annexation proposals will be determined based on what is most beneficial to the citizens of Trinidad. The annexation may be required prior to, concurrent with, or subsequent to the service extension.
II. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the annexation application, or a share of those costs. The applicant’s share of annexation costs, as determined by the City Council, shall be due at the time of the water service extension, regardless of timing of the annexation application.
III. If the City Council determines that the timing for annexation is not ripe, the applicant shall record a Waiver of Right to Protest Annexation, in a form approved by the City Attorney, on the property deed. Such waiver shall apply to all heirs, successors and others having an interest in the property.
IV. The City Council may waive the annexation requirement and issue a written finding that annexation of the affected property is infeasible. b. In order to extend a water service connection prior to, or concurrent with an annexation application, the City Council shall issue a written determination that:
I. The connection’s primary use will support one or more of the following uses:
i. Visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation, or
ii. Coastal-dependent industry per California Coastal Act Section 30101, or iii. Private residential development, or
iv. Essential public services (i.e. Fire Dept., Schools, etc.), and; II. Water service provision is consistent with the water service policies of the City and other applicable jurisdictional agencies, and; III. The City has the excess capacity beyond what is needed to serve existing customers and all anticipated development within the city sufficient to serve to applicant connection.
IV. The new water service connection will not negatively impact other users or components of the City’s water system as determined by the City Engineer, or that improvements will be required as part of the connection, at the expense of the applicant, that will eliminate or minimize those negative impacts to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Outside City Limits, not in Priority Service Areas.
A. Service Charge for Connections Outside the City and Priority Service Area. Service charges for connection and monthly service shall be as provided under the current rate ordinances of the City, plus a 75 percent surcharge or as otherwise set by resolution of the City Council.
p. 7 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 B. Limitations. When City water service is sought for a connection that is not within a Priority Service Area, or that does not meet the criteria set forth above, then the request shall be denied, unless authorized by an exception from the City Council, for a “Health and Safety Concern” or per “City Council Exception” as outlined below.
C. Health and Safety Concern. The City Council may authorize a water service connection to any legally developed premises located outside the City jurisdictional boundary to respond to an existing or impending threat to health or safety, if the following requirements are met:
1. The premises are presently being served by a well that has been verified as being rendered unsafe from contamination. The applicant shall be responsible for providing documentation of a health and safety threat to the satisfaction of the City Manager;
OR
2. The premises was intended to be served by a water well that had adequate capacity at the time of entitlement, but now has an insufficient water flow to serve its needs
3. The connection meets the following criteria:
a. The provision of municipal water to the premises shall not promote the creation of a subdivision of the parcel proposed to receive water service, and b. There is no other feasible alternative water source to the premises, and c. The need for municipal water service is the result of unintentional and exceptional circumstances that are not the product of a non-permitted use of the property, or improper well design and maintenance or any failure to undertake diligent efforts to pursue the development of a well consistent with the state of the then-present technology. The applicant shall provide such evidence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, and
4. If the connection requires an annual average of more than 500 gpd or 1,000 gpd as averaged over any one month, the City Council shall make a written determination of excess capacity, beyond what is needed to serve existing customers and all anticipated development within the City, sufficient to serve to applicant connection.
5. The provision of municipal water service must not conflict with any California or Humboldt County adopted laws, regulations, policies or standards for the provision of municipal water services, and
6. The new water service connection shall not negatively impact other users or components of the City’s water system as determined by the City Engineer, or improvements shall be required as part of the connection, at the expense of the applicant, that will eliminate or minimize those negative impacts to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
7. The service lateral shall not exceed the length of five hundred feet. p. 8 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 D. City Council Exception. Upon approval by motion of the City Council, the City may, but is in no way obligated to, approve the connection to City water services outside of the City limits. The City Council may only approve such connections upon making the following findings:
1. When it is demonstrated that the connection would benefit the City, including a. There is a demonstrated equal or near equal return to the City based on the cost of such service, and
b. That the provision of such service outside the City benefits directly the health and safety of residents or the condition of municipal services of the City; and
2. The City has capacity to serve the proposed connection as well as all existing connections and future build-out within the City; and
3. The new connection will not remove water system capacity needed to serve Coastal Act priority uses within Area C.
4. The new water service connection will not negatively impact other users or components of the City’s water system as determined by the City Engineer, or improvements will be required as part of the connection, at the expense of the applicant, that will eliminate or minimize those negative impacts to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5. That the provision of such service will not induce additional growth and urban development outside the City that will negatively impact the City, coastal resources consistent with §30250(a) of the Coastal Act, or the rural character of the Trinidad area.
Appeals
A. Any person affected by an approval or denial of a water service connection outside city limits as authorized under this section by the City Manager may appeal to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal with the Clerk of the City within 30 working days of the action of the City Manager. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a filing fee set by resolution of the City Council of the City in an amount sufficient to cover costs. The appeal shall stay the effect of the action of the City Manager.
B. The appeal shall be in writing and addressed to the City Council. The applicant shall file the appeal with the City Clerk. The City Clerk shall forward copies of the appeal to the City Council, City Manager, and Public Works Director. In the notice of appeal, the appellant shall state in full the facts and circumstances which make the action of the service connection authorization unreasonable. It shall also state the date of the claimed unreasonable action of the City Manager.
C. The City Council shall cause the matter to be set for hearing not earlier than 20 days after the appeal has been filed with the Clerk of the City. The Clerk of the City shall p. 9 of 9
Outside City Water Connection Policy PC Approved DRAFT: April 1, 2020 cause notice to be mailed to all affected persons (within 100 feet of the property boundaries) at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
D. At the time and place set for the hearing, the City Council shall proceed to hear the testimony of the City Manager, the testimony of the owner or their representatives, and the testimony of other competent persons concerning conditions upon which the action of the City Manager is based and other matters which the City Council may deem pertinent. Any person affected may be present at such hearing, may be represented by counsel, may present testimony, and other witnesses. The hearing may be continued from time to time. The City Manager may be represented by counsel. At the request of the City Manager, the City Attorney shall represent the City Manager.
E. The City Council may upon the appeal either affirm the action of City Manager or modify the City Manager’s action in whole or in part. The decision of the City Council upon an appeal shall be based upon the facts presented to it.
T R I N I D A D
B A Y
P A C I F I C
O C E A N
CITY
WATER
PLANT
CITY
WATER
TANKS
HIGHWAY 101
Water Service
Trinidad General Plan (DRAFT)
SHN 018013.002
July 2019 Fig1_WaterServiceArea Figure 1
City of Trinidad
Water Service Area Demand Assessment
Trinidad, California
\\Arcata\Projects\2016\016105A-CityOfTrinidad\GIS\Projects\018013\ USER:jsousa DATE:8/9/2019 0 1,000'
1 " = 1,000 ' ±
EXPLANATION
CITY WATER SERVICE AREA
HAS EXISTING WATER
SERVICE A
B1
B2C
D1
D2
D3EF
EXCLUDED
VACANT
MINIMAL IMPROVEMENTS
TRINIDAD RANCHERIA
(PUBLIC WATER SERVICE)
WATERLINES
CITY BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY
CREEKS
N
T R I N I D A D
B A Y
P A C I F I C
O C E A N
CITY
WATER
PLANT
CITY
WATER
TANKS
HIGHWAY 101
\\Arcata\Projects\2016\016105A-CityOfTrinidad\GIS\Projects\GenPlanUpdate\2022\ USER:jsousa DATE:7/14/2022
EXPLANATION
HAS EXISTING CITY WATER SERVICE
WATERLINES
FIRE HYDRANT
CITY WATER SERVICE AREA
SUBAREAA
B1
B2C
D1
D2EF
PLANNING AREA PARCELS
CITY BOUNDARY
TRINIDAD RANCHERIA
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARIES
CREEKS
N
City of Trinidad
General Plan
Trinidad, California
Water System & Service Area
Trinidad General Plan (DRAFT)
July 2022 - 016105.006 14
Figure
0 1,000
1 " = 1,000 ' ±
DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEM 2
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED
2. Continued Discussion/Presentation regarding FY2023-2024 Budget.
DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEM
Tuesday, May 23, 2023.
Item: Continued Discussion/Presentation regarding FY 2023-2024 Budget.
Background: On May 09 staff introduced the FY2024 budget discussion by reflecting back on the current year, and setting goals leading to approval on June 13. A preliminary overview of how the City performed relative to the goals set for 2023 provided insight that will lay the ground work for identifying departments and programs that need focus in 2024.
State government oversight continues to increase and compete with local priorities. Coastal communities must be able to respond to the priorities established at the State level, and find resources to meet local needs.
Fortunately, Trinidad is become very skilled in finding grant funding to maintain and replace aging infrastructure, fund long-range planning, and as a result free up resources to invest in local issues such as public safety, tourism, recreation, and maintaining a transparent government.
The Trinidad community’s appetite for government been growing steadily over the last 2 decades. The natural resources and beauty the area has to offer, combined with major advances in technology have changed how locals relate to the City and how visitors enjoy it. Remote work and flexible schedules have extended the visitor season far beyond the Memorial Day to Labor Day period. Heat, smoke, and other environmental factors intensify the transient population base. Customizing government services that cater to the core tax base while managing the impacts of the transient population will require an adaptive approach in the years to come.
The past several years brought unprecedented challenges that have tested the City’s systems. Aligning the personnel structure to prioritize the city’s needs while investing in retention and recruitment will be a focus in both the General (Admin, Public Works, Public Safety) and Special Funds (Water) this year. Primary general revenue sources have been resilient, but the Water System will be overspending for a 5th consecutive year and at a faster rate than ever before. Rates will have to be updated to stabilize the fund and rebuild the reserves.
Key take-aways from 2022-2023 that will set the tone for 2024:
- 2022 audit report showed a net fund increase in the General Fund of approximately $200,000, bringing the total fund reserve to approximately $2,270,000. Of that amount, only $383,519 has been unassigned. The rest has been committed or assigned by Resolution to the following categories:
o Emergency Reserve: $669,000
o Budget Stabilization Reserve: $669,000
o Capital/Special Project Reserve: $431,473
o Self Insured Reserve: $15,000
o Fire Dept Capital Reserve: $50,700
o Public Works Capital Reserve: $10,000
o Town Hall Capital Reserve: $4,181
- If the budget forecast for 2023 is in line with projections, the general fund will add an additional $150,000 to the reserves thanks to various factors including sustained sales tax revenue, hold-over cell site revenue that finally ceased in October, employment delays, and optimal revenue recovery due to increase staff awareness and invoice management.
- 2022 audit report showed a net fund decrease in the Water Fund of approximately $273,000, representing a 25% decline in cash, leaving a total fund reserve of approximately $794,000. One year later (May 2023) it is expected that another 25% will be depleted, leaving an unaudited cash balance of approximately $500,000 to begin FY2024.
- Developing an effective hiring and retention strategy to stabilize the Water Fund will be a priority. The cost of staff retention disruption should be considered when evaluating what a healthy fund reserve should be.
- Water rates were last anyalzed in 2012, with 4 consecutive years of a 2.5% CPI increase built in. The rates have not changed since 2017 when the last CPI increase was included. Completing the water rate analysis and implementing the new rate as soon as legally possible is recommended. Building back the reserves to an acceptable level will take time and have to be structured within the new rates.
Updated resolutions determining the appropriate amount of reserve targeted should also be reviewed. - Institutional knowledge and systems have provided operational and financial stability since the 1990’s.
Loss of nearly 30 years of water plant knowledge has proven costly. Now the City faces a similar challenge with long time core Fire Department volunteers retiring. The 2024 budget will phase-in expenses that will be required to provide adequate coverage in the absence of a volunteer Chief. - The voter approved, 4-year .75% sales tax increase was approved in November 2020, implemented on April 01, 2021, and the City just passed the 2-year mark. This is a good time to take inventory of how those tax dollars are utilized, and remind the residents how they will continue to benefit them in the future.
BUDGET STRUCTURE
Trinidad’s revenue profile is made up of general (unrestricted) revenues, special (restricted) revenues, and grant income. The quality and quantity of services that the City provides are expressed through its spending plan. Expenditures are tracked and presented to the Council each month in the financial statements.
Primary general revenue sources are:
- Sales Tax - General
- Sales Tax – Add-on
- Occupancy Tax
- Property Tax
- Rent and Franchise Income (cell tower and harbor leases, utility franchise payments, Town Hall rental) - Miscellaneous (Business & STR Licenses, etc)
Supplemental (restricted) revenue source examples are:
- Measure Z Income
- COPS Funding
- Transportation and Gas Taxes
- Grant Funds
- Water Sales
- Cemetery Sales
General Fund expense categories include:
- Permanent and Consultant Staff members
- Public Safety Expenses (police and fire)
- General utilities and maintenance of public buildings, spaces, streets, infrastructure and associated costs (often referred to as “keeping the lights on” or “overhead”).
Special Revenue Funds
- Water Fund
- Cemetery Fund
BUDGET TOOLS
The City uses several tools and processes to draft, monitor, and control the budget:
- Monthly Financial Statements (Fund Categories, Revenue & Expense Accounts) - Annual Audit
- Investment Policy
- Reserve Policy (Adopted by Council Resolution).
The primary goals of this preliminary budget meeting discussion are; 1) Summary recap of how the city’s finances are structured. 2) Review the financial statements received through March 31, 2023. 3) Discuss how activity from the current year, combined with the dedicated reserves will impact budgeting for 2024.
4) Request that Council provide any general direction to staff, upon review of discretionary activity that was intended for the current fiscal year, on any future spending in those same categories. 5) Identify roadblocks or delays to spending plans to preserve assets (trail maintenance, for example). 6) Set the stage for any upcoming meeting in June to finalize the budget.
Proposed action:
Staff will take information received at this meeting, incorporate Council feedback into the analysis process, and return to the next meeting in June with a final draft.
Attachments: Resolutions Identifying Committed Reserve Targets March 31, 2023 Financial Statements
Staff will continue to work on the draft budget and present additional materials prior to and during the meeting.
Attachment A to City of Trinidad Resolution 201'7-10
CITY OF TRINIDAD
FISCAL RESERVES POLICY
POLICY PURPOIJE:
'fhe
purpose of this Policy is to protect lhe long term fiscal health of the City cf 'frinidad by establishirrg designated resenfe funds, setting target levels for those funds, and providing ck:aLr guidance on their use and maintenance.
BACKGROUND:
Reserves are a c^itical part of how cities plan for and respond to fiscal challengr:s, infrarstructure replacement, and cash flow management. Fiscal challenges can include natural disast,3rs other unexpected costs; or reductions in revenue, and economic downturns, Reserves also provide a framework to plan and save for the maintenance and replacement of the City's infrastructure and capital assets Reserves are critical to managing cash flow, Collectively, reserves provide the City with timr; and flexibility to respond to financial challenges without disrupting the pro'vision of essential City services Reserves fall into two general categories: Restricted and Designatecl. Restricteci reserves are alrea,ly committed to a specrfic purpose due to financial. accounting, or legal restrictions, and are not available for other use, Designated reserves are established by Council poLicy for an intendeld purpc'se and are available for use per Council djrection accordrng to that policy.
Our annual audit follows the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (Gi\Sl3) Statement 54 Fund Reporting and GovernmentalFund Type Definitions, which require thatallfund balancers b'e classifiel on the governmental funds balance sheet as follows:
Restrrcted Reseryes:
r Non-spendable: - amounts that cannot be spent bec;ause they are either (a) legally or contractirally required to be maintalned intact or (b) not in spendable fc'rnn sucl'r as long-term notes reoeivable.
r Restricted: -amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by constitutir:n, external resource providers, or through enabl ng legislation.
Designated Reserryes:
o Commiit,ad - amounts that can be used only for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the City Council, to establish, modify or rescind a fund balance commitment, . Assigneri - amounts that are constrained by the got'ernment's intent to be used for specific purpose{i but do not meet the criteria to be clirssified as restricted o'committed, as determined by a formal action or policy of the City Council or its appointed officiai. . Unassigned - the residual classification for the government's general fund and includes all spendable amounts not contained in the otlrer classifications.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES:
Fo lowing sound financial practices and adhering to the Government [rinance,Offir:ers' cf American (GFOA) recomm€rndations, the City's designated reserves include reserves for l<nown and unknown contingencies, wl"ich take into consideration the:
. Diversity rf revenue base
. Cyclical nature of revenue
. Changes in community priorities
. Frequency of budget surpluses/deficits
' Cash flovrr management practices
. Nature of financial risks to the City
. Budget size relative to potential risks.
POLICY:
Resgrve Funds
The City will set aside funds into designated reserves to address unloreseen erneugencies or disastels, significant changers in the economic environment, and key infrastructure and capital projects.
General Fund designated reserves shall include an Ernergency Reserve Furrd, Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund, arrd Capital and Special Projects Reserve Funcls.
Enterprise Resenie Funds shall include the Water Utilitv Reserve Fund and the C,emeterv Reserve Ftnd.
Kev General Furrd Desiqnated Reserves
Emergency Resrarve, Funds reserved under this cabgory shall be used to miligate ccsts associateri with unforeseen ()mergencies or fiscal crises, including natural disasters or catarstrophic; ev'ents. Othr;r uses of this fund i:ould include significant one{ime exf)enses due to litlgatiorr, or legal or insurance settlements.
In the case of a natural disaster or other emergency tftal requires the tmmediatt.' expenrliture of City resoLlrces beyond those provided for in the annual budget, the City Manager or designee shalt have authority to apprcve Emergency Reserve appropriations. The City Manager or designee shall notify tlre Council immediately upon such use, and then present to the City Council within hruo weeks of such arlion a budget amendrrent confirming the nature of the emc.rgency and authorizing trer appropriation of rer;erye funds.
Budget Stabilization Reserve. Funds reserved underr this category shall br: used to nritigate, shoul,l they occur, annual budget revenue shortfalls (actual revenues less than projected revenues) due to changes in the ec;onomic environment and/or one-time expenditures that will result in future efficiencies and/or budgetary savings. Examples of "economic triggers" and oncl-time us;es include, but are not limited tor
Significant decrease in property, sales, or transient occupancy lax, or c,ther economically sensitive revenues;
Loss of businesses considered to be significant sales tax generalors;; Reductions in revenue due to actions by the state/federal government; Workflovl/technical system improvements to rr3duce ongoing, personnel <;osts ernd enhance customef servtce:
One-time, maintonance of service levels due to significant er:onomic/budget constraints; ano Onetrmer transitional costs associated with organizational relstructuring to secure long{erm personn6)l cost savings
I
i
t
a
a
Capitaland Spe<;ial Projects Reserve. Funds reserved under this r:ategory are designated for key infrastructure and capital/special projects as identified in the current City Caprital lmprovement Plan, 'lhe City Council shall designate funds towards specific capital and special projec,ts in relation to their priority, expected cost, and date of replacement. These shall include a Fire Departrnent E:quipnlent Reserve, a Town Hall Reserl'e, a Streets and Roads Reserve, an ADA r:ompliance Re$ervr:, and other Reserves as designated by the, Council.
Reserye Tarqetl-evels
The target level for the Emergency Reserve and the Budget Stabilization Re,serve shall be based on a percentage of the current year General Fund annual operating expenditures (minus one-time expenditures).
e The Emergency Reserve target shall be set at 75o/o 'cf the current year GF operating expenditures.
r The BudSlet Stabilizatron Reserve target shall be set at 75% of the currr:nt year GF:operating expenditures.
The Genc'ral Fund Capltal and Special Project Reserves tarl3et shall be, set at er minimum of riO% of the curront year GF operating expencitures, with specific targets for inrlividual projects or assets to be adjusted in accordance wiilr the current Council approved Capital lmprovement Plan, The Wat<;r Fund Reserve target shall be set at a minimum of 5070 o1'the currert year Water l:und operating expenditures, and wil be rnanaged in ooordination with thr: City's current Capital lmprovenent Plan to provide for the long term maintenance and replacernent of the Water P ant and Water Distribution Svstem
The targets for Crapital and Special Project Reserves, and Water Furd reserves;, shall clepend on the specific priority, e,xpected cost, and date of replacement or implementation c,f the indivirlual projects irnd assets. Individuarl targets shall reflect the depreciated value of city assets so tha1, the reserve can furrd their replacemenl: when needed. For special projects, the target sherll be set sc that ther reserve fund equals the project cost at the planned implementation date This Rerserve, ernd specific targets, shall be managed in coordination with the City's current Capiterl lmprovement Plan Reserve Utilizatilon and Revisions to this Policv
The General Fund Reserve Policy and the status of Reserve Funds shall be re'riewed at least biannLalty by the City Council as part of the adoption of the annual audit, and the annuial operating budget review and adoption process.
Appropriations of Reserve Funds shall require formal Counc:il authorjzation, either through the adoptr:d annual budget or through separate approval, with the lirnited excepton of thr: Emergency Reserve Fund described above.
Replenishment ,of Unreserved Fund Balance
When any reserve fund falls below its target thresholds, the tlity Council will de'relop a 1 to 5 year res;erve replenishment plern to meet the minimum thresholds. 'Ihe Crapital lnrprovenir:nt Plan shall guide i i appropriate indivirJual targets for the Capital Assets Reserve Funds.
Excess Fund Balance
After the close of each fiscal year, the City reports on the au,lited year-end budlletary resuits and funl baiances, The ac;ceptance of the final audit sha I include a report on and discussion of current Designated Reserve funding levels Where all Emergr:ncy and Budget Stabilizatlon Reserve targets are met the General Fund balance exceoding the level required by the pollcy shall be allocated to the Cerpital and Special Proje cts Reserve Funds.
Surplus Water Funds at the close of each fiscal year shall be designated to the Water Funrl Reserve
BUDGET SESSION
MAY 23, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
BUDGET STRUCTURE
GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUES
• ADMINISTRATION COPS
• PUBLIC WORKS GAS TAX
• POLICE & FIRE TDA
PROPRIETARY FUNDS GRANT FUNDING
• WATER INFRASTRUCTURE
• CEMETERY LONG-RANGE PLANNING
REVENUE SOURCES - Overview
GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUES
• PROPERTY TAX COPS (Federal Funded)
• SALES TAX GAS TAX (State Funded)
• TOURIST OCCUPANCY TAX TDA (State Funded)
• RENT & FRANCHISE FEES
• FEES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED
PROPRIETARY FUNDS GRANT FUNDING
• WATER (Rate Payer Funded) INFRASTRUCTURE
• CEMETERY (Plot Sales) LONG-RANGE PLANNING
GENERAL FUND
GENERAL FUND REVENUE SOURCES - Detail
• PROPERTY TAX
• SALES TAX (8.50% Local Tax Rate)
• California State Retail Sales Tax Rate: 7.25%
• Humboldt County Tax Rate: 0.50%
• Trinidad District Tax Rate (Add-On): 0.75%
• Voter Approved for 4-years, beginning April 01, 2021. • Decide by March 2024 whether or not to proceed with a 2024 General Election ballot measure to extend this tax. 2023 HUMBOLDT COUNTY CITY TAX RATES
Eureka (9.50%) Blue Lake (8.75%) Rio Dell (8.75%)
Arcata (8.50%) Ferndale (8.50%) Fortuna (8.50%)
GENERAL FUND REVENUE SOURCES – Continued
• TOURIST OCCUPANCY TAX
• Voter Approved increase from 8% to 12% beginning April 01, 2023. • RENT & FRANCHISE FEES
• PG&E, Optimum, Humboldt Sanitation, Town Hall, Harbor, etc. • FEES CHARGED FOR SERVICE
• Planning (CDP & Use Permits requiring Planning Commission Approval) • Building Permits
• Applicant fee recovery to offset expenses incurred
• INTEREST EARNINGS
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE SOURCES
• MEASURE Z
• County grant funding to support public safety programs. • COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services
• Federal appropriation to States, distributed to Cities through County • Steady funding of approximately $150,000 each year
• Covers cost of HCSO contract for Police Services
• TRANSPORTATION
• Restricted for Streets, Roads, Circulation Expenses
• TDA, Gas Tax, SB1, HSIP, etc.
• GRANTS
• Primarily State funded programs to cover large infrastructure improvements, recreation enhancements, and long-range planning (coastal resources, resilience, etc.)
GENERAL FUND RESERVES
As of June 30, 2022
GENERAL FUND EXPENSE CATEGORIES
ADMINISTRATION
• Covers a significant portion of the City Manager, Clerk, Administrative Support salaries.
• Pays the bills that “keep the lights on”; public building utilities, office supplies, Municipal Code revisions, website hosting, etc.
• Covers the majority of contract staff services costs: Attorney, Accountant, Auditor, Planner, Building Inspector, and Technical Support.
• Funds majority of property, liability, and various other insurance coverages. • Contributes to local community service groups.
PUBLIC WORKS
• Covers the majority portion of public works staff salaries. • Funds street lighting, trail, and public building maintenance costs. • Pays for routine street related services provided by City Engineer. • Funds vehicle fuel maintenance, power equipment, street and trail signage, etc.
GENERAL FUND EXPENSE CATEGORIES (continued)
POLICE
• Funds a portion of the City Manager salary who oversees Public Safety operations. • Pays for annual Animal Control contract with the County Sheriff Dept. • Supplements public safety services that exceed the COPS revenue.
FIRE
• Cover honorarium for volunteer Chief and Assistant Chief. • Funds dispatch or cooperative services when required. • Pays for materials, supplies, and equipment.
• Fire & Rescue vehicle fuel and maintenance.
2023-2024 BUDGET GOALS & HIGHLIGHTS
GENERAL FUND
• Continue staff development, refine roles, and improve personnel structure. • New website development to enhance public engagement and access to documents, resources, and services.
• Refine Public Works staff structure and integrate with Water Department to support mutual tasks and projects.
• Continued Support of Library, Museum, Chamber, Land Trust. • Maintain Critical & General Services – Public Safety and Admin • Continued progress on the General Plan Update.
GOALS & HIGHLIGHTS (continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY
• Contract Renewal with HCSO for (1) Full-Time Deputy, majority paid with COPS funds. • Supplement HCSO services with security services provided by Pacific Coast Security or the Community Ambassador program.
• Applying for Measure Z funding to offset supplemental services. • Planning for Volunteer Fire Department mutual aid agreement.
PUBLIC WORKS
• Fund additional ½ time employee split with Water Department to begin reintegrating the Water and Public Works teams.
• Maintain commitment to fund trail system improvements with $10k budget to replenish funds depleted due to expenses related to winter 2023 closure of Old Home Beach. • Complete application to the State Recreation program to improve Tennis Court and Boardwalk. • Provide street maintenance support during summer 2023 HSIP construction projects. • Town Hall building improvements – paint, windows, etc.
STAFFING PLAN
ADMINISTRATIVE
• City Manager .75 FTE (Full-Time Equivalent)
• City Clerk 1.0 FTE
• Grant Director .75 FTE
• Grant Admin Asst. 1.0 FTE
• Administrative Analyst 1.0 FTE
• Assistant Clerk 1.0 FTE
Total Admin: 5.5 FTE
PUBLIC WORKS
• Maintenance Supervisor 1.0 FTE
• Maintenance 1 .5 FTE
• Maintenance 2 .5 FTE
• Maintenance 3 .5 FTE
Total TPW: 2.5 FTE
STAFFING PLAN (continued)
WATER
• Chief Plant Operator* 1.0 FTE Contractor provided until further notice • Operator 1 .5 FTE
• Operator 2 .5 FTE
Total Water: 2.0 FTE* 1.0 FTE likely through FY2024
Total Projected Staff Needs for FY2023-2024: 10.0 FTE*
Estimated payroll projection: $743,000
• Approximately $160,000 covered by grants
• Leaving $583,000 to be paid for with General and Special Revenue Funds Total Budgeted for FY2022: 8.75 FTE
• Payroll projected at approximately $612,000
• Approximately $80,000 covered by grants
WATER FUND
2022-2023 WATER FUND BUDGET MISSES
• Rate Analysis yet to be completed.
• Employee turnover lead to continued interim contract cost through the entire year.
• Valve replacement, backflow prevention test billing, and other maintenance tasks incomplete as a result of staff turnover. • Deficit spending continued for a second year, drawing down the fund reserve an additional 25%.
2023-2024 BUDGET GOALS & HIGHLIGHTS
• Maintained T-3 Licensed Treatment Plant Operator as per State Law and continue to supply safe and reliable drinking water to all 325 customers. • Develop a plan to recruit, train, and retain vested, licensed drinking water operators.
• Exit from costly contracted Plant Operation by finding reliable in-house operators.
• Continued Luffenholtz Creek Flow monitoring.
• Budget for valve replacement and distribution line leak monitoring. • Provide daily staff support to large scale grant funded infrastructure projects slated for construction in 2023-2024.
• Evaluate upstream source resiliency projects started in 2021 and receive regular updates.
WATER FUND RESERVES
As of June 30, 2022
STATE-LEVEL BUDGET INDICATORS
• For the past few years Governor Newsom had the luxury of calling his revised State budgets “unprecedented” and ”historic”. This year he struck a much different tone, repeatedly emphasizing the value of prudence and restraint as he unveiled his 2024 revised budget proposal.
• The State Legislature is trying to determine how to handle projected budget deficit with a slowing economic growth assumption.
• During the pandemic the State experienced unprecedented General Fund growth (similar to Trinidad). Despite weak personal income forecast, overall anticipated revenues – while down from their peak – remain higher than pre-pandemic level on an inflation-adjusted basis.
• The May Budget Revision does not forecast economic recession, but State officials note that the economy is at a heightened risk of recession. • Larger cities are concerned with drug abuse, mental health, housing, and homelessness crisis. Commitments to safe drinking water, climate preparedness, and transportation investments are set to remain, which is good for Trinidad as many programs currently in the planning phase have been ongoing priorites.
GRANTS IN
PROGRESS
FY2022
NEXT STEPS
• Staff to review April 30 Financial Statements (just prepared by bookkeeper on May 22) that include many significant revenue receipts and determine how the City performed in 2023.
• Receive Council input with priorities for discretionary spending. • Staff prepare a Final Draft of all funds revenues/expenditures with summary provided at the June 13, 2023 Council Meeting.