Tag: Wastewater

A Brief History of Utility Rates Part 9: “Feasibility” Moves Forward, Rate Studies get Stalled, and What Ever Happened to Watering Days Anyway?

The majority of the City water system was constructed in the 1920’s, 1930’s, 1940’s and 1950’s. Water quality problems have developed because the old cast iron pipes are rusting, often leaving an odor and brown residue in the water. These sections of pipe have also been historically prone to leaks and breaks. In addition, system weaknesses have developed due to the rapid growth of the community in recent years. (Source: City of Livingston 2010-2011 Adopted Budget, pgs. 45 & 46)

‘’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

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

 

Watering Restrictions 1[16]Watering Restrictions 2[13]

It’s that time of year again and I’ve been bringing up every year about going to watering days… And I think again you need to look real hard to go back to watering days. It didn’t hurt us before and we still had green grass: but it’s not looking good. Excerpted from a Public Comment by Warren Urnberg, January 03 City Council Meeting.

Watering Days. Like Water Rates, “watering days” has been a topic batted back and forth by the City Council for years without any real resolve.  There would be lots of talk about how necessary they were, but when it came time to finally getting around to really having a “once and for all” vote on the issue, it would just disappear from view.

Then months, maybe years later, it would rear its head again and the whole process of Acknowledging It’s Importance, Discussing The Details, then Continuing It Into Political Purgatory, would start up all over again.

Which is why the “Brief History” of it all goes back to 1995: the last time Water Rates were raised.

In Part one of the “what are we going to do about water rates”  series we looked at some detailed records from 1995 (The last time Water Rates were Raised) through 2002

Part 2 covered  2003 through 2007 and touches on the deteriorating infrastructure, grants received, and warnings about deficits in the Enterprise Funds.

Part three covered January 2007 through February 2008 and looked at the “Gilton Mess”, the Rate Study by Dan Bergmann, and the release of the 2025 General Plan Update to the public

Part 4 covered January 2008 through October 2008 and how Rate Increases were postponed so the Council could Study-The-Issue some more, Foster Farms and the City settled the litigation over BackFlow Devices, and Public Hearings about the 2025 General Plan Update

Part 5 included October,2008 through June 2009 and A New Council, A New Rate Study by a Brand New Consultant, The High School Expansion, and more on the General Plan Update (among other things)

Part 6 contained Some Background Information about the Water Delivery System, Stakeholders, the Prop 13 Grant, some Planed Improvements, some Regulatory/Legal History, and a Brief Recap of What Happened Between 1995 and June 2009

Part 7 includes Some Enterprise Funds Basics and Meeting Highlights: July 7, 2009 through December 01 and notes the rise of the Recall Movement.

Part 8 picks up some time after the recall and focuses on yet another Change in Utility Rate Consultants

In Part Nine of this ever growing series, we will look at what came out of the very first meeting of the City Council appointed Utility Rate Stakeholder’s Committee: which took place on Jan. 24, 2012.

But First, let’s take a peek at what’s going on in Delta Bravo Sierra Land.

Techlology Strikes Again You Know - I Was Beginning to Wonder About That MyselfDepends on what the meaning of is - is

There’s strange, than there is “Army Strange” out inDelta Bravo Sierra Land: courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons

Before we get to the Main Event, a few Announcements:

Building Materials Sale at the Livingston VFW

The Livingston-Delhi Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 8327 will be holding a huge Building Materials Sale at the Veterans Memorial Hall, located at 9799 Stephens Street, Delhi California.

Wednesday, February 1st through Saturday February 4th. We will open at 9 am and close at 5 pm.

All new merchandise, priced twenty five cents on the dollar. We have electrical, plumbing, lawn & garden, flooring, windows, doors and many other items, too numerous to mention.

All Sales are Final with no Warranties. Contractors Welcome—No Credit Cards, cash or checks accepted.

All proceeds will go to the California Veterans Service Program.

For a list of the items available, go to www.vfwlivingston.com.

 

Blood Drive

Blood Drive At The Livingston VFW

Community Blood Drive to be held at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Hall,

1605 7th Street, Livingston, on

February 9, 2012 from 3-7 pm.

Donate a pint of blood and receive a coupon meal hosted by the Livingston/Delhi Veterans of Foreign Wars and Ladies Auxiliary and you will also be entered to win 2 FREE Airline tickets to Las Vegas and a $500 Hotel Gift Card.

For more information call Denis or Sue Wells at 394-2059 or visit our Website at

www.vfwlivingston.com.

Walk-ins are always welcome.

 

lasangna

Lasagna Dinner at the VFW

Treat your sweetheart to a Lasagna Dinner on February 11, 2012, at the Veterans Memorial Hall, located at 1605 7th Street in Livingston.

Eat in or take out from 5-7 pm.

The dinner will be lasagna, salad vegetable, roll & butter and a Valentine dessert.

The cost of the meal is $8.00 if you buy your ticket in advance or $10.00 at the door.

Proceeds go to VFW 8327 for their many programs, and will stay in the community.

If you need more information or if you need tickets, contact Denis or Sue Wells at (209) 394-2059 or Teresa Ourique at (209) 496-7310.

clip_image004[5]There’s Still Time to Help Give the Lil Guys and Gals and even better place to play!In 2006 the city purchased the storm drain basin (4 lots) next to the park and filled it in with the intent of making it a park to service the ball park participants and their families. Since then, Lil Guys and Gals field has been a ball park used for many years by the residents of Livingston…

The Recreation Commission determined in 2011 to take on the park as a project. The commission wanted to involve the community and let them help bring this project to reality. By purchasing a stepping stone the community not only provides the financing for the park, but in turn places a personal monument in the park for years to come.

Stones will be sold until there are enough sales to cover the completion of the park. The Commission’s goal is Summer of 2012.

Once you have purchased a stone you will be called by the Recreation Department for an appointment to make/create your stone.

If you are interested in creating a Memorial Stone and/or participating in one of the many work days that will take place to upgrade the park, call the Recreation Office at 394-8830 for more information.

On January 24, 2912, the Utility rate Stakeholders Committee met in the City Hall conference room to discuss the following:

    • (A) 5 Proposals received in response to the City’s Request for Proposals (RFP) for a “Feasibility Analysis for a Centralized Treatment Strategy for the City’s Water supply”.

    • (B) 3 Proposals received in response to the city’s request for Proposals (RFP) for “Water. Wastewater. & Solid Waste Rate Studies, community Outreach, and Proposition 218 Balloting Services.

    You can think of the purpose behind Part “A” (Feasibility Analysis) as coming up with answers to questions such as:

      • How much water will the City need to come up with over the next umpteen years or so?

      • Where will the City get the water it will need?

          • Groundwater only (wells)?

          • Groundwater (wells) + Surface water (from MID) and if so

            • How much will come from wells and

            • How much will come from MID?

                • If MID water will be used will it be

                    • Fairly “soon”?

                    • Phased in over the next few years or so?

                    • Phased in starting several years from now?

            • How will the city make sure the water is “clean enough” to meet State and Federal Clean Water Standards?

                • Will it be through well-head treatment only? (That’s assuming the water would only come from wells)

                • Will there be some kind of “centralized” treatment?

                    • One for the whole system?

                    • Two? Like maybe one on one side of the highway and another on the other side of the highway?

                    • More than two?

                • How will the City move the water from “the source” through “the treatment” and finally to “the consumer”

                    • How many pipes does the City have that still need replacing anyway?

                    • How many new pipes would the City have to install to accommodate a “new” Treatment System

                  • What solution would be the most Cost Efficient and how much would it cost?

                    No matter what proposed solution/s come out of a “Feasibility Study”, you can bet implementing the recommendations won’t come cheap, or easy. (Especially if a significant portion of Livingston’s population would expect the City’s General Fund to cover a good portions of the costs involved instead of paying for them through Rate Increases.)

                    So..I guess you could think of the Purpose behind Part “B” (Rate Studies) as – OK…come up with everyone’s “proportional fair share” of the costs involved in implementing “the plan” the “Feasibility Consultants” came up with. And try to make it as “palatable” to the Public as possible.

                    The Utility Rate Consultants Proposals set to be considered by the Committee on the 24th included:

                    The Feasibility Analysis for a Centralized Treatment Strategy for the City’s Water Supply – Consultants Proposals ready for consideration by the Committee that evening included:

                    Although all the Consultants proposals for “The Rate Study” and “The Feasibility Study” were presented to the Committee for consideration that evening, the Committee actually discussed only those Proposals for the “Feasibility Study”.

                    The decision was made to eliminate AECOM, Jacobs, and West Yost, from further consideration and to “call back” Carollo and Kennedy-Jenks for a more detailed presentation and “question and answer” session.

                    There was no discussion of Utility Rate Consultants Proposals. This discussion was postponed for a future meeting.

                    S0….What Are We Going To Do About Watering Days this time around?

                    Once upon a time, back in  December 2, 2008, the following item was on the City Council’s Agenda

                    15. Introduce and Waive First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Title 9, Chapter 5 of the Livingston Municipal Code Relating to Establishing Policies, Rules and Regulations Governing the Provision of Water Services in the City of Livingston.

                    And after some discussion, a decision was made.  It was as follows:

                    Motion: Vierra/Varela to introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No. 576, an Ordinance Amending Title 9, Chapter 5 of the Livingston Municipal Code Relating to Establishing Policies, Rules and Regulations Governing the Provision of Water Services in the City of Livingston. The motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:

                    AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Nateras, Varela, Vierra

                    NOES: Council Members: None

                    ABSENT: Council Members: None

                    (By the way…did you notice who was on the Council at the time? No…not the councilmembers who were recalled later: the ones that are STILL ON THE COUNCIL? Keep that thought in the back of your brains as we continue)

                    Now…if you If you go to Section 9-5-72 WATER RESTRICTIONS of the Municipal Code and look at paragraph (C), you will find the following:

                    Water Restrictions. When directed by the City Council, the following outside watering restrictions apply to residential, commercial and industrial customers of the City of Livingston:

                    1. All house numbers ending with an even number may water on Sunday, Tuesday, and Friday.

                    2. All house numbers ending with an odd number may water on Monday, Thursday, and Saturday.

                    3. No outside watering on Wednesday.

                    4. The washing of vehicles will be allowed on the designated watering day and on weekends (Saturdays and Sundays), regardless of house numbers, as long as a quick-acting positive shut-off nozzle is used.

                    (Did you also notice that ,"When directed by the City Council” part? Tuck that into your brain as well.)

                    Then, on December 16, 2008, the Second Reading of this Ordinance was on the CONSENT CALENDAR

                    8. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 576, an Ordinance of the CityCouncil of the City of Livingston Amending Title 9, Chapter 5 of the Livingston Municipal Code Relating to Establishing Policies, Rules and Regulations Governing the Provision of Water Services in the City of Livingston.

                    Which was also passed 5-0 (By Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Nateras, Varela, & Vierra) Right?

                    No yelling, no screaming, no major protests about anything in the Ordinance being “not fair”, or “unjust” or “wrong” or “picking on anyone” or any other major “picking apart/shredding of the Ordinance before the vote was taken.

                    (Otherwise, it would not have been passed with a 5 –0 vote. Right? If there were “issues” with the Ordinance at the time, you would expect it passing with a 3/2 or a 4/1.  Or maybe not even passing at all…..Tuck that into your brain too.)

                    Now…Flash Forward to the NOVEMBER 16, 2010 City Council Meeting,  that Post Recall Period of Time when Warren Urnberg was filling in as a Temporary Council person. On the Agenda was the following

                    12. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Authorizing Direction for Outside Watering Restrictions Per Title 9, Chapter 5, Section 72 of the City of Livingston Municipal Code.

                    At That Meeting

                    Council Member Urnberg commented that he wanted this item placed on the agenda even though we will be going back to water meters and getting charged. He said that even when there were restricted watering days, the lawns did not die, but the Council received some complaints and then allowed people to water whenever they wanted to. Mr. Urnberg noted that now is the time to bring up restricted watering days before summer and spring come around and people begin outside watering.

                    Mayor Espinoza agreed that restricted watering days was a better way to conserve water and he didn’t foresee a problem going back to the previous watering regulations.

                    Mayor Pro-Tem Aguilar was in agreement. She said the resolution was the first step as a Council to move forward. Ms. Aguilar read the resolution restricting watering days. She asked that the resolution be placed on Channel 2 and in the newspaper to reach citizens so that they know what the Council was proposing.

                    Council Member Samra felt the effective date was too soon and suggested making the effective date January 1, 2011, to give the citizens time to get used to the change.

                    Then they started talking about reviewing the Ordinance All-Over-Again. After that it was

                    Motion: M/S Espinoza/Samra to continue this item to the next meeting as a public hearing. The motion carried 4-0

                    At the DECEMBER 7, 2010 City Council Meeting it was again on the Agenda as Item #3

                    3. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Authorizing Implementation of Outside Watering Restrictions Per Title 9, Chapter 5, Section 72, of the City of Livingston Municipal Code.

                    There was a little discussion about when it should take effect again, and whether or not to lower fines

                    And Again, Mayor Espinoza and Council Member Samra asked that this item be continued….And it was continued into oblivion once more….

                    So, what is the Council going to do about Watering Days this year?

                    Well….what do you think? 

                    And for those of you who want to immerse yourself in even more Livingston’s Political History

                    A FEW FORM 700’S ABOUT WHO OWNS WHAT AND WHERE IN LIVINGSTON

                    2012 CITY COUNCIL Agendas and Meeting Minutes If you click on this link, you will be taken to a page where not only can you access the Agenda Packed, but also individual pages on each Agenda Item

                    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

                    2012-2012 City of Livingston Draft Budget

                    The “Mission of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee” Series

                    • 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.

                    • December 06, 2011 Change of Utility Rate Study Consultant Discussion In which it was revealed the City Manager ended the Contract with the “Council Approved” Consultant and sent out a Request for Proposal to look for a Brand New One.

                    • January 24, 2012 Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting – At which the Committee postponed the selection of a New Utility Rate Study Consultant.

                      • Out with the “Consultant #3, In with Consultant #4” Series

                      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 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 (It’s still a Work In Progress. But I’m Working on it!)

                      How They Voted in 2010

                      How They Voted in 2009

                      How They Voted in 2008

                      How They Voted in 2007

                      How They Voted in 2006.

                      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 2006

                      City Council Meeting Minutes for 2005

                      City Council Meeting Minutes for 2004

                      2010-2011 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      2009-2010 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      2008-2009 Interim Reports Merced County Civil Grand Jury Postscript to FY2007/2008 Grand Jury’s Report On The City of Livingston

                      2007 2008 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      2006-2007 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      An “Outrageous” Attorney’s Bill, A “Dead” Agency, and a City Council Agenda

                       

                      Thought he HATED that Anexation Proposal - Wonder What -or- Who Changed His MindFrom Livingston annexation appears on fast track

                      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)

                      Oh and the manager also favor’s gallo too much. He wants the rancho san miguel to come in along with a slave mart. Those to are way too expensive for the locals and will not bring any outside taxes to the city. Terrible decicions. Yep those two stores won’t be packed. Hope they go away too. – Comment by Karma – Wal-Mart drops plans for supercenter in Livingston

                      Have to admit…sometimes I really wonder how some people’s  minds work.

                      More on that a little later. But first: It’s been a while since we’ve peeked into Delta Bravo Sierra Land…….

                      I wasn't stationed in Germany - But I know someone who wasDon't you just hate traffic signs

                      There’s strange, than there is “Army Strange” out in Delta Bravo Sierra Land: courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons

                      Ding! Dong! “Redevelopment” is Dead

                      Redevelopment Agencies that is..

                      Redevelopment Agencies were supposed to be about Getting-Rid-of-Blight and Cleaning-up-the-Neighborhood and Making-Life-Better-For-Us-All. (If you want, you can click here for more information on Livingston’s Redevelopment Agency)

                      And the California Supreme Court just said the State of California can abolish those Agencies (and scarf up a bunch of tax money for itself – which is a whole ‘nuther issue)

                      Now..for purposes of discussion here, I am not focusing on the “legal technicalities” or “financial technicalities” or “tax/revenue consequences to the City”, or  on which City Council member owns property within the confines of Livingston’s Redevelopment Agency.

                      I’m just focus on what the actions of a Redevelopment Agency might “look like” to the average person.

                      Say, for example, there are some “Old Run Down Buildings” on a Main Street.

                      The Redevelopment Agency “buys” the land and buildings from the Property Owner than sells it to a New Owner who is supposed to build something Bright, Shiny, and New.

                      Like a Rite Aide.

                      Or…let’s say you own a House in the area of town zoned “Downtown Commercial”. You’re living in it (or renting it to someone who is living in it) and the City thinks it’s time for that house to turn into something “better, bright, shiny, and businessy”: like a Dentist Office, or…a Coffee Bar, or an Organic Bistro….or whatever…

                      The Redevelopment could “buy” your house, than sell it to the Business Person who wanted to turn it into a Commercial Operation, Business, whatever…

                      But…notice how I put “buys” in quotation marks?

                      That’s cuz there was an “ugly underside” to the whole Redevelopment biz.

                      That being…not everyone wanted to sell when Redevelopment Agencies came around looking to buy.

                      And some Redevelopment Agencies had no problem with declaring even nice homes and parts of town as “blight” and using the power of  Eminent Domain to make that sale happen.

                      Which earned Redevelopment Agencies the wrath of Property Rights Groups like The Castle Coalition. :Who argued that under California’s vaguely written Redevelopment Law, virtually any Property could be declared “Blighted”

                      So, while City Governments may be bemoaning the demise of  Redevelopment Agencies, those property owners in the paths of Redevelopment Projects(ie: the ones that DON”T want to sell) are probably sighing in relief.

                      I Thought Those “Outrageous” Attorney’s Fees Were All Supposed to Go Away after the recall.

                      I was looking through the December 28, 2011 Warrant Register when I noticed the following……

                      See That Line Item for Sperry Legal for 11-11 plng

                      See that line Item of 11/11 plng? The one for “Sperry legal services”?

                      In the amount of  $12,274.20? Yep…that one..

                      At the November 08, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting, Mike Sperry gave a Presentation Concerning a Parking Plan  for  444 Main Street (The Tequila Club). What the presentation ended up amounting to was a request to waive all parking requirements, for the club, for at least 3 years.

                      At the end of this meeting The Planning Commission agreed, by consensus, to bring back CUP 2001-16 (Mr. Sperry’s application) to their next meeting of Tuesday, December 13, 2011, for discussion and action.

                      This was the Agenda Item for that meeting on December 13th 

                       Review of CUP 2001-16,.444 Main Street. The bar at 444 Main Street has been closed for approximately seven years. The bar retains Conditional Use Permit 2001-16 for the sale of alcohol-by-the-glass in the 5,488 square foot building. Michael Sperry desires to open a bar at this site pursuant to his presentation to the Planning Commission on November 8, 2011. Pursuant to LMC Sections 5-6-1(D)(3) and 5-6-1(D)(5) the Planning Commission will consider whether to modify, revoke, or reapprove the CUP.

                      There was also supposed to be a “field trip” to the building. But…lo and behold…it was announced that evening that that item was being postponed until (at least) the next Planning Commission Meeting.

                      Now I did a little Math and calculated that the  $12,274.20 of Attorney’s Fees for the Sperry Application works out to about 56 “billable hours” of Attorney Time for an Agenda Item that was postponed at the last minute.

                      And I can’t help but wonder if the people who were so incensed about “high attorney’s fees” before the recall will be even half  as angry now

                      While I am still somewhat in the subject of “Pre Recal vs. Post Recal Logic and Reasoning”

                      Back when the Recall Effort was in full swing, folks like Karma bashed the (then) City Manager (and certain Council Members) for just about anything and everything. If the Certain People at the time  were for something it, they were against it. And visa versa.

                      BEFORE the Recall, Karma said "the (City) manager also favor’s gallo too much”.

                      NOW there is a New Council and New City Manager, he calls Gallo’s project  a Visionary annexation.

                      Makes me wonder if he, and those like him, really have their own opinions about Projects Like These, or if they are only Political Toys to be used to enhance their own Political Agendas.

                      Now, I want to be clear about my point: each and every project that comes before the Public, the Planning Commission, and the City Council deserves to be heard and discussed upon it’s own individual merit.

                      It’s when they become Political Clubs used to beat up upon Political Opponents, that  it just creates a Great Big Mess

                      And we, the taxpayers, end up footing a Big Part of The Bill.

                      Now, on to the

                       

                      clip_image002[3]

                      CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

                      JANUARY 3, 2012

                      CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.

                      OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

                      Notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a Regular Meeting on January 3, 2012, at the City Council Chambers, 1416 C Street, Livingston, California. Persons with disabilities who may need assistance should contact the Deputy City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to this meeting at (209) 394-8041, Ext. 121. Any writings or documents pertaining to an Open Session item provided to a majority of the members of the legislative body less than 72 hours prior to the meeting shall be made available for public inspection at Livingston City Hall, 1416 C Street. The Open Session will begin at 7:00 p.m. The Closed Session will be held in accordance with state law prior to the Open Session beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Closed Session will be held in the City of Livingston City Hall Conference Room located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

                      Closed Session

                      1. Call to Order.

                      2. Roll Call.

                      CLOSED SESSION“Closed” or “Executive” Session of the City Council or the Livingston Redevelopment Agency may be held in accordance with state law which may include, but is not limited to, the following types of items: personnel matters, labor negotiations, security matters, providing instructions to real property negotiators, conference with legal counsel regarding pending litigation. The Closed Session will be held in the City Hall Conference Room located at 1416 C Street, Livingston, California. Any public comment on Closed Session items will be taken before the Closed Session. Any required announcements or discussion of Closed Session items or actions following the Closed Session will be made in the City Council Chambers, 1416 C Street, Livingston, California

                      A.

                      1. Public Employee Appointment

                      (Government Code Section 54957)

                      Title: Chief of Police

                      2. Conference with Legal Counsel—Potential Litigation

                      [(Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1)]

                      Number of Cases: 1

                      3. Conference with Labor Negotiator

                      (Government Code Section 54957.6)

                      Agency Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

                      Employee Organizations: All Represented and Unrepresented City Employees

                      Regular Meeting

                      CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2012-1

                      Next Ordinance Number: 598

                      Pledge of Allegiance.

                      Roll Call.

                      Closed Session Announcements.

                      Changes to the Agenda.

                      AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

                      GRANT ANNOUNCEMENTS

                      ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS

                      Supervisor John Pedrozo Announcements and Reports.

                      City Staff Announcements and Reports.

                      City Manager Announcements and Reports.

                      City Council Members’ Announcements and Reports.

                      Mayor’s Announcements and Reports.

                      PUBLIC HEARINGS

                      1. Resolution Conditionally Approving Site Plan/Design Review 2011-01 for the Taco Bell Project.

                      2. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) 5-3 Setbacks, Setback Exceptions, Maximum Site Coverage and Maximum Floor Area Ratio Concerning Residential Rear Yards.

                      CITIZEN COMMENTS

                      This section of the agenda allows members of the public to address the City Council on any item NOT otherwise on the agenda. Members of the public, when recognized by the Mayor, should come forward to the lectern, and identify themselves. Comments are normally limited to three (3) minutes. In accordance with State Open Meeting Laws, no action will be taken by the City Council this evening. For items which are on the agenda this evening members of the public will be provided an opportunity to address the City Council as each item is brought up for discussion.

                      CONSENT CALENDAR

                      Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine or non-controversial and will be enacted by one vote, unless separate action is requested by the City Manager or City Council Member. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the City Council or City Manager request that specific items be removed.

                      3. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on December 5, 2011.

                      4. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on December 6, 2011.

                      5. Approval of Warrant Register Dated December 14, 2011.

                      6. Approval of Warrant Register Dated December 28, 2011.

                      DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

                      7. Resolution Reappointing Luis Enrique Flores to the Planning Commission.

                      ADJOURNMENT

                      And for those of you who want to immerse yourself in Livingston’s Political History

                      A FEW FORM 700’S ABOUT WHO OWNS WHAT AND WHERE IN LIVINGSTON

                      2012 CITY COUNCIL Agendas and Meeting Minutes If you click on this link, you will be taken to a page where not only can you access the Agenda Packed, but also individual pages on each Agenda Item

                      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

                      2012-2012 City of Livingston Draft Budget

                      The “Mission of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee” Series

                      Out with the “Consultant #3, In with Consultant #4” Series

                      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 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 (It’s still a Work In Progress. But I’m Working on it!)

                      How They Voted in 2010

                      How They Voted in 2009

                      How They Voted in 2008

                      How They Voted in 2007

                      How They Voted in 2006.

                      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 2006

                      City Council Meeting Minutes for 2005

                      City Council Meeting Minutes for 2004

                      2010-2011 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      2009-2010 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      2008-2009 Interim Reports Merced County Civil Grand Jury Postscript to FY2007/2008 Grand Jury’s Report On The City of Livingston

                      2007 2008 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report

                      2006-2007 Merced County Grand Jury Final Report