THE WATER HAS BEEN BROWN TO RED SINCE THE LATE 60′S TO MID 70′S. THE OLD PIPES IN CERTAIN PARTS OF TOWN HAVE NEVER BEEN REPLACED. EVERY NEW CITY MANAGER THAT CAME IN AND LEFT, DID NOTHING TO REMEDY THIS. . EXCERPT FROM A COMMENT BY KARMA ON “DIRTY SMELLY WATER ON TAP IN LIVINGSTON” – MERCED SUN STAR (EMPHASIS MINE)
(The)Public Works Superintendent… commented that when they started monitoring the wells in 2004 for (TCP),…City Council was notified of it, then every year after that the public was notified, is all in a Consumers Report…. health language was included in those notices….there is a public health goal which is .7 parts per trillion which the City exceeds in every well. Also there is no maximum contamination level yet, but the state anticipates having one fairly soon which according to state terms could mean anywhere from 1-10 years… unfortunately the City water system could be impacted. – AUGUST 02, 2011 Draft Minutes
‘’All of the wells have 123 TCP levels substantially above the public health goal and the highest levels of 123 TCP are from wells 8, 14 and 12. Well 15 has Manganese and Arsenic levels above the MCLs. Nitrate levels were above the MCL for wells 8 and 14. DBCP was detected above the reporting limit of 0.01 µg /l in wells 8, 9 and 14 and the remaining wells were non-detect for DBCP.” – RFP – PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES TO PREPARE A FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS REPORT FOR A CENTRALIZED WATER TREATMENT STRATEGY FOR THE CITY WATER SUPPLY
Mayor Samra commented that the Council received this information at the same time as everyone else. He added that no one likes a price increase, but it will take time for the Council to digest the information presented.” JUNE 19, 2007, City Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Espinoza stated the Council will have to make a tough decision, but some type of action needs to be taken.January 15, 2008 City Council Draft Meeting Minutes
Motion: M/S Varela/Vierra to authorize the City Manager to advertise and schedule Proposition 218 Public Hearing. The motion carried 5-0. – FEBRUARY 17, 2009 – City Council Draft Meeting Minutes
Council Member Samra stated the Council had made a commitment, therefore, needed to move forward with the rate studies. - March 1, 2011 City Council Draft Minutes
And so we ended the contract a couple of weeks ago, and we’re currently, we sent out an RFP and that RFP is going to come to council with a Recommendation of a new Rate Consultant as it relates to that. - Jose Antonio Ramirez: City Manager, City of Livingston: December 06, 2011 City Council Meeting
Round and Round and Round we go. Where it will stop, does anybody know?.
I’m going to invoke a bit of the Story Tellers License to tell you the tale of….
The City of Livingston and the 4 Utility Rate Consultants
Once upon a time, on JUNE 19, 2007, The City Council (which comprised of Mayor Gurpal Samra, Mayor Pro-Tem William Ingram, Council Member Frank Vierra, Council Member Rodrigo Espinoza, and Council Member Roy Soria) had a presentation by Dan Bergman about Utility Rates. (Consultant #1)
Council Member Espinoza commented that there have been many complaints about the water system and a rate increase is warranted to correct the problems.
Council Member Soria agreed with Council Member Espinoza; however, he would like comments from the community and will follow their guidance.
Mayor Pro-Tem Ingram complimented Mr. Bergmann on his presentation and commented that a rate increase is needed, but hopefully it will be a gradual increase.
Regarding Foster Farms, Mayor Pro-Tem Ingram commented that Foster Farms should install water meters to monitor water usage, so they would only be billed for the water used.
Mayor Samra commented that the Council received this information at the same time as everyone else. He added that no one likes a price increase, but it will take time for the Council to digest the information presented.” and also mentioned he hoped people would volunteer to be on a committee to study the rate increase proposals.
Then, there was the Public Hearing on January 15, 2008
City Manager Warne commented that this item was first presented for Council consideration in June 2007.
Acting City Attorney Roger Peters explained how the rate increases would take place unless there is written protest.
A slide presentation was given by Dan Bergmann, the consultant hired by the City to analyze the water rates.
There were quite a few Public Comments on the subject. Then
Council Member Soria commented that it is not easy to make a decision and that the rate increase will affect many senior citizens who live on fixed incomes. However, he pointed out that rates have not been raised in over 15 years and something needs to be done to pay for necessary improvements.
Council Member Vierra commented he doesn’t understand why it took 15 years before considering a rate increase, but he realizes that something needs to be done. He suggested tabling this item to the next meeting.
Council Member Espinoza stated the Council will have to make a tough decision, but some type of action needs to be taken.
Mayor Pro-Tem Ingram stated that everything is going up, gas, etc,: however, he feels the Council needs to raise rate in small/slow increments. He realizes there are many residents, who live on fixed incomes, but action needs to be taken; however at a slower pace.
Mayor Samra commented that making a decision is not easy for him and her agrees with all of his colleagues that something needs to happen. He said the Council will study this matter; however, not just the Council, but also the community at large needs to deal with the issue. Mayor Samra added that residents’’ concerns will be answered and he agrees that this item be continued.
Motion: M/S Ingram/Soria to continue the Public Hearing to the Council’s regular meeting of February 5, 2008.
At the February 5, 2008 City Council Meeting
City Manager Warne recommended that this item be continued to the Council meeting of March 4, 2008, for further analysis of the water rates and citizen comments.
Representatives from Carollo Engineers gave a slide presentation on the City’s water supply. The available water vs. demand and the master plan projects.
And there were a few questions and public comments, and then it was
Motion: MS Soria/Espinoza to continue the Public Hearing to the march 4, 2008, regular Council meeting. The motion carried 4-0-1.
And at the March 4, 2008 City Council Meeting it was reported
o Staff is still meeting with Foster Farms to come up with a solution for their water rates.
o Livingston Union School District and Merced Union High School District moving forward with water meter installation.
o Warren Urnberg suggests holding off on the rate increase until everyone is metered.
and the
o Public Hearing is continued to a future City Council meeting.
Well, after the 2008 General Election, there was a Brand New City Council (Mayor Daniel Varela, Sr., Mayor Pro-Tem Rodrigo Espinoza, Council Member Frank Vierra, Council Member Margarita Aguilar, Council Member Martha Nateras),
And “The City Attorney was directed to find someone she felt comfortable with their approach and methodology in order to comply with all federal, state laws and regulations relating to setting rates.”
On FEBRUARY 17, 2009 there was a Brand New Presentation by a Brand New Consultant (Consultant #2: Sudhir Pardiwala, from Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc.,)
Who gave a presentation on Water Rates
And also gave a presentation on Waste Water and Solid Waste Rates
And there were lots of comments, and lots of discussion
And the Council Voted 5-0 to Go TO Hearing
Now…Before the Hearing, there was an Information Meeting on March 26, 2009
And the presentations were given again.
And there were lots of comments and discussion
And it was announced the Public Hearing would be on April 21st
The APRIL 21, 2009 Meeting was a really, really long one.
And the presentations were given again.
And there were lots of comments and discussion
And some Council Members indicated that there probably never would have been a Prop 218 Hearing any way if only, someone had told them beforehand it would have taken 4 votes to pass the rates instead of 3 (I’m still trying to figure out that “logic” by the way)
And after that there was meeting after meeting after meeting after meeting, and the Lawyer was replaced, and the New Rates Were Adopted by a 3-2 vote, and the Lawsuits Happened, and there were appeals, and League of Cities actually joined in an appeal, and the Recall Happened, and the November Elections Happened, and the Rates Were Repealed, and the Appeal was Scrapped (while we were just waiting for the Ruling to come out)
And Rate Study 2 was scrapped and Consultant Number 2 was dumped.
And the Post Recal Council promised ever so ever much more “transparency”, and swore that everything, everything, EVERYTHING would be coming before them FIRST for approval: in Open Session of course)
So a Brand New Request for Proposals was put out (with the Councils blessing of course) and three replies were received
One from Dan Burgman
One from Bartel Wells
And one from the FCS Group
And the Brand New City Council (who swore everything would be coming before them first: so the people could see the “transparancy”) gave their blessing to the contract with Bartel Wells. (Consultant #3)
Then the Utility Rate Studies Committee was formed.
And a binder of information was prepared.
And a couple of “informational meetings” were held with Staff
Then a Brand New City Manager was hired
Who, lo and behold, ended the contract with Bartel Wells without disusing it first with the City Council (and getting their blessing) in Open Session. (Even though the City Council had sworn on multiple occasions that everything, everything everything, must go before them first so “the people” would have an opportunity to speak on the subject and see all the promised “transparency”: in Open Session of course)
And he had a new Request for Proposals sent out for a Brand New Consultant, to do a Brand New Utility Rate Study, and do a Brand new Series of Prop 218 Hearings.
So now we are up to Consultant #4 Now
And according to the RFP that was sent out, the City will
- Receive Proposals on January 10, 2012
- Select the Firm on January 24, 2012
- Complete Contract Negotiations by February 3, 2012
- The City Council will Award the Contract on February 7, 2012
- The Notice to Proceed will be issued on February 8, 2012
And New Rate Studies will take at least a couple of months. Say March? April?
And the Utility Rate Studies Committee will need to have their say too. Say April – May?
Then there is all that 45 Day Public Noticing that has to happen before an Official Proposition 218 Meeting can be held.
Which may put any Utility Rate Hearing Right around the time of the June 2012 Primaries, and the November 2012 Election Cycle.
Which Kinda Begs a Few Questions
What improvements to the infrastructure will be proposed now that that “fat” TCP Settlement Check has been Received?
Will there ever be a truly “finished” Utility Rate Study?
Will all the members of the City Council actually read the Study and Approve Rate Study Number 4?
When, if ever, will a “real” meeting of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee be held?
When, if ever, will the results of this FOURTH STUDY be presented in Open Session?
And will it be a 5-0 vote to go to Hearing?
Or will some members of the Council have such severe “problems” with the numbers that they will want to scrap it and start all over again?
Will anything get done before the June Primaries and November General Election Cycle?
and….
JUST HOW MUCH HAS THIS NEVER ENDING CYCLE OF STUDIES AND CONSULTANTS COST US ANYWAY!!!!!
About that “Illegal 42’ Sewer Pipeline”
If you look at the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Gallo Project, as prepared by PMC, and scan down until you hit the top of page 2.0-2, you will find this innocuous sounding quote”
Now…. that 42’ pipe was a part of the whole 2025 General Plan Update mess, resulted in a Grand Jury Investigation, was part of the driving force behind a Lawsuit by the Farm Bureau, and in a way was partially responsible for a Judge telling the City to Redo Parts of the General Plan and EIR
I’m not going to go into the whole thing right here, right now..
But for the moment, I’ll give “the short, short, short version” which goes something it like this…
That Contained a Special Planning Area
Which Pertained to a Developer
Who Put in the Sewer Pipe
Who went to the Farm Bureau
Who Sued the City of Livingston
And forced some “re-does”
In the General Plan Update..
Which is, as of now, not “done”…..
But Before We get to the Special Meeting Agenda, something to keep in the back of your mind
From the City of Livingston Municipal Code
LIVINGSTON PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
DECEMBER 29, 2011 7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1416 C STREET, LIVINGSTON
Members of the public are advised that all pagers, cellular telephones and any other communication devices be put on vibrate mode or turned off during the Planning Commission meeting.
Call to Order: 7:00 PM
Roll Call – Chairperson/Commissioners
Pledge of Allegiance
Item No. 1 – Consent Agenda
All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine by the Planning Commission and will be adopted by one action of the Commission unless any member of the Commission wishes to remove an item for separate consideration.
a. None.
Item No. 2 – City Council Update
a. Update of City Council items.
Item No. 3 – Public Comment
a. Members of the Audience – At this time, any person may comment on any item that is NOT on the Agenda. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. While the Planning Commission encourages participation from the audience, no more than five (5) minutes are allowed per discussion item. Topics not considered urgency matters may be referred to City Staff and/or placed on the next agenda for consideration and/or action by the Planning Commission.
Item No. 4 – Public Hearings
{Note From TheGardeningSnail. If you click on the link above, you will be able to review the complete agenda packet in PDF: which included the Staff Report, Resolution, and other attachments}
Item No. 5 – Reports
a. Planning Commission
b. City Staff
c. City Attorney
Item No. 6 – Adjournment to regular meeting on January 10, 2012.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development Department at (209) 394-8041, Ext. 112. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to this meeting.
Members of the public who have questions regarding any agenda item may comment on that item before and during consideration of that item when called upon by the Planning Commission Chairperson.
All actions of the Livingston Planning Commission can be appealed to the Livingston City Council by filing an appeal, in writing and paying the appropriate fees, with the City Clerk.
A Few Form 700’s About Who Owns What and Where in Livingston
2011 CITY COUNCIL Agendas and Meeting Minutes (I’ve got a few more things “linked up” since my last post. Might want to check and see if there is anything in the History that interests you.)
Police Chief Recruitment City of Livingston
The “Mission of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee” Series
- February 15, 2011 Discussion: Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee
- In Which the idea was first proposed for a Stakeholders Committee in which members would work with City Staff and Consultants
- April 05, 2011: Discussion of Utility Rate Stakeholder Committee Member Appointments
- In which the people who would be working with City Staff and Consultants were chosen
- June 07, 2011 Discussion of Utility Rate Committee Meeting
- In which it was revealed that the people who would be working with City Staff and Consultants already had their first “get together”. But the public was not invited.
Out with the “Consultant #3, In with Consultant #4”
And Don’t Forget There’s a Search on for this Additional Consultant too…
The “Brief History of How We Got Into This Mess” Series
- A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 1—1995 through 2002
- A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 2—2003 through 2007
- A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 3—January 2007 through February 2008
- A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 4— January 2008 through October 2008
- A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 5— October,2008 through June 2009
- A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 6— Some Background Information and a Brief Recap of What Happened Between 1995 and June 2009
- *A Brief History of Time (Spent on “Fixing” Water, Waste Water, and Garbage Rates-and other related issues) Part 7: Some Enterprise Funds Basics, Meeting Highlights: July 7, 2009 through December 01, and a City Council Agenda
A Few Letters, Sun-Star & and Mike McGuire Articles about Livingston Politics (and a few other things Worthy of Note) (The links here go all the way back to the 2008 Election Cycle)
The 1995 Water Rate Resolution (Do you see anything in there that says “Industrial”?)
California Department of Health Sept. 2010 Letter on Water System Funding
Well #15 Enforcement Letter & Staff Report
Well #15 Manganese Enforcement Letter Discussions
How They Voted in 2011 (Granted, it’s a Work in Process, but there are links to things there you might be interested in.)
City Council Draft Meeting Minutes for 2010
City Council Draft Meeting Minutes for 2009
City Council Draft Meeting Minutes for 2008
City Council Meeting Minutes for 2007
City Council Meeting Minutes for 2004
2010-2011 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report
2009-2010 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report
