Arsenic, TCP and Salmonella; Lawsuits and Politics; A Look Back at 2014 and A City Council Agenda

LIVINGSTON CALIFORNIA – 2/01/2015

A Livingston public works employees union recently questioned the mayor’s friendly relationship with Mendoza, in addition to accusing Mendoza of harassment.– Espinoza, however, said his friendship with Mendoza had nothing to do with him getting invited to China. “We’ve been friends, and we talk once in a while, but that didn’t play a part,” the mayor said. from Livingston council questioned over China trip – Ramona – Merced Sun Star – 12/03/2014

“There is an urgent need to have Well 16 back on-line in the near future to meet the City’s water demands that will likely increase in the Spring and Summer.” From STAFF REPORT -  Resolution Approving an Agreement with Shannon Pump for Sampling and Repairs to Well 16, Making Findings Supporting that Award of Such Agreement is Exempt from Competitive Bidding Requirements and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement. MEETING DATE: February 18, 2014

Approximately 18,267 sq. ft of land is needed to locate the treatment facilities at the existing Well No. 8. The adjacent property (APN 024-020-023 and 029) is owned by Foster Farms.  From  STAFF REPORT  AGENDA ITEM: Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of Land Needed for the Installation of Water Treatment Facilities at the City Water Supply Well No. 8, Approval of the Appraisal Report Prepared by The Thomas Wilkins Company, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement with Foster Farms for the Purchase of the Land.  MEETING DATE: May 21, 2013

One of the city’s largest water wells previously plagued by a major contaminant now runs with a new filtration system, city officials announced this week…….The upgraded well, located on Livingston Cressey Road, near the Foster Farms plant, was chosen because water drawn from it contains high levels of TCP contamination, said Livingston Mayor Pro Tem Gurpal Samra…. The well pumps 1,200 gallons of water per minute to the city, with the majority used by Foster Farms. Livingston water well receives $2.3 million filter system – Ramona Giwargis – The Merced Sun Star – 12/30/2014

Without Livingston, there is no Foster Farms, and without Foster Farms, there is no Livingston. Those were the words of Mayor Pro Tem Gurpal Samra as he explained the company’s impact on the city. Samra joined Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza and Councilman Arturo Sicairos in presenting Foster Farms CEO Ron Foster with a commemorative key to the city Tuesday night. From Livingston city officials present Foster Farms with key to city – Ramona Giwargis – Modesto Bee -07/16/2014

This is not an all inclusive discussion of everything that happened in Livingston during 2014. It is only a brief look at what I consider some of the more significant historical and political happenings in the City of Livingston.

COURT THEATER IS DEMOLISHED – Another sad chapter in Livingston’s History has ended with the destruction of the Court Theater.  In 2001, the City had purchased the Court Theater with the high hopes of restoring the Theater and transforming it into a Cultural Arts Center . In 2005, the City received a Community Development Block Grant: which it used to complete Architectural Drawings in 2008.

But between trouble getting enough additional financing, accusations in 2010 that Police and Fire Department budgets were cut to finance the project, and the deterioration of the relationship between City Council Members, the Court Theater Committee in 2011, it became pretty clear the Court Theater Project was doomed.

The City was able to salvage some of the Grant Money it had received by getting permission from the State to use these funds for improvements at Gallo Park.

The City also made attempts to save the Theater’s Marquee, Ticket Booth, and Sign.

WITHOUT LIVINGSTON, THERE IS NO FOSTER FARMS, AND WITHOUT FOSTER, THERE IS NO LIVINGSTON – In a previous post, I talked about the Symbiotic and Sometimes Dysfunctional Relationship between Foster Farms and the City of Livingston. Since Foster Farms is the largest consumer of water in Livingston: using at up to 66% of the water produced from Livingston’s wells, it can’t help but have a large influence on the size and condition of Livingston’s Water Delivery System.

Most of you remember that 2013 ended with Foster Farms coming under intense scrutiny due to an outbreak of antibiotic resistant Salmonella. This continued into 2014 as Livingston braced for fallout from an idled Foster Farms .  Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro reacted to the closing of the plant due to roaches as “long overdue.”: pushing for action against the company. Three days after federal inspectors shut it down Foster Farms got the OK to reopen plant only to shut it down again a day after reopening in order to expand safety procedures.

As the number sickened by salmonella outbreak rose to 430, according to government reports Foster Farms reopened the plant after a 10-day closure. And while Salmonella cases continued to grow, Foster Farms noted progress with it’s safety and prevention efforts

By April salmonella cases linked to Foster Farms, were reported to have grown to 524 people in 25 states and Puerto Rico.

May 2014 brought a couple of interesting developments. In Virginia, Foster Farms, in conjunction with Marketing & Planning Specialists LP, filed a federal lawsuit claiming the EPA improperly applied the Clean Water Act on land they wish to develop. In California, Foster Farms blamed and sued its exterminator for cockroaches.

The Months of June saw Foster Farms celebrating its 75th anniversary.  Meanwhile, in Congress, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.) introduced a bill called the Pathogens Reduction and Testing Reform Act: which would require the USDA to recall meat, poultry and egg products contaminated by pathogens that cause serious illnesses or death and that are also resistant to two or more classes of antibiotics commonly used to treat human illnesses

In July, Foster Farms received the Key To The City of Livingston from Livingston’s Officials;  issued its first voluntary chicken recall since 2013 salmonella outbreak ; updated the recall to include additional "use or freeze by" and "best by" dates; and sued its insurance companies for recall reimbursement in ‘cockroach infestation’ “arguing that the forced closure of a plant earlier this year by the government and subsequent destruction of chicken amounted to a recall”.

By July 31, The Center for Disease Control said the salmonella outbreak appeared to be over. In September Foster Farms recalled chicken from Louisiana due to possible contamination by Listeria.

In October Ron Foster announced he would step down as Foster Farms President and CEO.

In November, a billboard scrutinizing Foster Farms was set up: an indication that Foster Farms still has a ways to go before things settle down to “business as usual.”

WITHOUT LIVINGSTON’S WATER, WHAT WOULD BECOME OF FOSTER FARMS?

Without the “low cost” water coming from Livingston’s wells, there would be no Foster Farms as we know it today. I’ve already mentioned the Symbiotic and Sometimes Dysfunctional Relationship between Foster Farms and the City of Livingston and how Foster Farms is the largest consumer of Livingston’s water.

In 2014, The City of Livingston purchased land from Foster Farms, in order to have enough room to install a TCP Filtration system on a well that sends most of it’s water to Foster Farms. 

I have also noted that, in the long run, Foster Farms would need to address an issue much larger than cockroaches and salmonella: that of having enough water that meets State and Federal Drinking Water Standards.

It is no secret, to those who have been paying attention, that Livingston’s Water Delivery system has been degrading over time. Arsenic levels have been rising and Foster Farms had to shut down at least 1 shift in February 2013 due to problems with water quality

In December, 2013, California River Watch served the City of Livingston with a 60-Day Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suit alleging various violations of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. This was followed up with a Complaint against the City in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 1:14-CV-00437-AWI-MJS. In June 12, 2014, this was followed by a 90-Day Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suit alleging various violations of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

A Settlement Agreement and Release was signed in September 2014. Some of the agreed upon actions to be taken by the City include:

• Install and operate wellhead treatment for Arsenic at Well No. 13 no later than June 1, 2016.

• Continue monitoring for Arsenic at Well No. 13 consistent with federal Safe Drinking Water Act and California Safe Drinking Water Act requirements.

• (b) Install and operate wellhead treatment for 1,2,3 Trichloropropane (“TCP”) at Well No. 8 no later than January 1, 2015.

• Within six (6) months after the Effective Date of the Agreement, post on its website information regarding the City’s efforts to address TCP in drinking water.

• on a semi-annual basis, provide inserts in its utility bills that provide information on efforts to address TCP.

• update its website and the utility bill inserts, as needed, to reflect current
  information.

In January, Governor Brown had declared a drought emergency, and urged residents to reduce water consumption by 20 percent

Shortly thereafter, the Livingston City Council voted to ban outside watering on certain days of the week. “City leaders said the plan has been in the works the past few years, but was given a new sense of urgency after the governor declared a drought on Friday.”

In February, the Livingston council approved an urgent contract for repairs at Well #16 

In April, the City Council voted to begin the Proposition 218 Process for Water rate increase. Notices about Livingston rate increases went out the following Friday .  Meetings were held at which the new Rate Structure was discussed

In June the Livingston council approved utility rate increases and also approved a contract for emergency repairs to a damaged main pipe at the wastewater treatment plant . It should be noted that the Water Rate Increases adopted by the City of Livingston assume that Grants and Low/No Interest Loans from the State Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund will fund the majority of Repairs/Upgrades to Livingston’s Wells and Water Delivery System over the next 5 years: any loans to be paid back over the next 20 to 30 years.

In September, the City received a Notice of Violation from the Water Board regarding the Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant for not meeting certain testing and reporting requirements.

In November, there was discussion about wells #11 and #9 having been taken offline because of sand causing problems with Foster Farms: overwhelming their filters.

By the end of December, the TCP Filtration System on Well #8 was up and running; and the City Council approved the purchase of Arsenic Filtration equipment to be eventually installed on Well #13. As I mentioned earlier, installing filtration on both of these wells was covered in the Settlement Agreement between the City of Livingston and California River Watch.

BUDGETS,  CONCESSIONS, AND DEFICITS

Although the 2013/2014 Fiscal Year began back in JULY 2013, the Budget for that year wasn’t adopted until March 2014. This budget included salary reductions and other concessions from employees. 

The 2014/2015 Fiscal Year was barely over in June before the Budget for the Next Year Fiscal year was predicted to be $146,000 in the hole. Employees were again asked for a 7 percent pay cut: which was rejected.

In JULY a Memorandum of Understanding and a Side Letter Concessions Agreement between the City of Livingston and the City of Livingston Management and Confidential Employees Association was adopted. Terms included:

• One furlough day per month

• 1% pay decrease effective July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015

• $100 per month medical contribution per member

• freezing 40 hours of vacation cash outs.

In August, the City Council adopted a budget which included a deficit of $44,000. The Council also considered the topic of planning fee increases. The leader of the Public Works Employees union expressed frustration over the way labor negotiations were being handled

A Resolution Approving a Successor Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Livingston and the Livingston Police Officers’ Association (LPOA) OE3 Unit for the Period of January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015 was approved in December of 2014.

A Memorandum of Understanding for the AFSCME Public Works and Parks Employees Unit for the period July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015 was not approved until January 2015 and included one (l) furlough per month, freezing 20 hours of vacation cash­ outs effective July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015 and contributions of $75 per month towards medical insurance premiums.

MAYOR’S TERMS, “POLITICS”, FIREWORKS, AND “FAVORITISM”

IN JANUARY, the Livingston City Council approved a ballot measure which would EXTEND THE MAYOR’S TERM of office from two years to four: in order to maintain “institutional knowledge” on the council according to Mayor Pro Tem Gurpal Samra, who had placed this item on the Agenda.

A previous ballot measure in 2006, Measure C, had asked Livingston voters if they wanted their mayors to have a two year or a four-year term. By about 66 of the vote, the term for mayor was limited to two-years. In 2006, voters said “no” to a 4-year term for mayor. Voters said “no” again in 2014. Voters said “no” again in 2014

IN JANUARY, The Council also discussed changing the way Fireworks Booth Permits were distributed by the city. Directions given to Staff was to include language in an Ordinance that would allow the City Council the ability to award the “COUNCIL’S CHOICE” to the Livingston Youth Football Organization for (2) CONSECUTIVE YEARS.  According to Youth Football Coach and City Council member Jim Soria, he had placed the Item on the January 21, City Council Agenda. According to Council Member Soria, the recent death of Mike Coronado created a Special Circumstance which justified giving Youth Football priority other non-profit organizations.

There was another discussion of the proposed Ordinance on February 18, and March 04: along with a fair share of criticism, replete with allegations of favoritism.

The actual Issuance of Permits to Sell Safe and Sane Fireworks took place on April 15th. Although Mayor Pro-Tem Samra made a motion to put all applications in a lottery,  Council Member Jim Soria’s “push to award a fireworks stand to a nonprofit for which he volunteers proved successful” by a 2-1 vote.

Allegations of “favoritism” was not limited out to just the handing out of Fireworks Booth Permits.  One of Livingston’s unions alleged acts  sexual harassment were committed by the City’s Public Works Supervisor.   “the union began receiving numerous complaints about his leadership, leading to a vote of no confidence signed by 11 employees in May” in addition to (allegations that) “Mendoza has an inappropriate relationship with Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza, allowing the mayor to have preferential treatment on projects related to his property.”

And although Mayor Espinoza claimed favoritism was not a factor when he picked who would travel with him to China , it couldn’t prevent questions from being raised. Public Works Supervisor Ruben Mendoza also went on the trip: in addition to Council Member Jim Soria, and City Manager Jose Ramirez. According to the Mayor Espinoza “I got invited through a friend and former mayor of Lathrop,” and was asked to invite 10 other people.

2014 WAS AN ELECTION YEAR with two seats “up for grabs” on the City Council, and also had it’s fair share of controversy.  A photograph circulated by Mayor Pro-Temp Gurpal Samra elicited claims of “dirty politics” and slander by by his opponent: Planning Commissioner Mario Mendoza. 

THE CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCED HIS INTENTION TO RESIGN during a Special City Council Meeting in DECEMBER. According to the City Attorney, the Report out of Closed Session, as stated by the City Attorney, was as follows:

Tonight in Closed Session, the City Manager informed the City Council that he is resigning from his employment with the City.  Mr. Ramirez has elected to resign to pursue personal and professional opportunities outside of the region.

The City Council on a vote of 4-0-1 (Council Member Mendoza was not present) has accepted the City Manager’s resignation and has agreed to waive the 60 days’ notice provision in the City Manager’s contract. 

The City Manager’s last day of employment with the City will be January 31^st. 

Mr. Ramirez has expressed his willingness to continue to assist the City with current projects and to assist in the City’s transition to a new City Manager.  The City will be working with Mr. Ramirez to accomplish this

And now, on to the

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

FEBRUARY 3, 2015

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 February 3, 2015, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.

CLOSED SESSION

A “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 Council Chambers 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.

3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

((Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2))

Number of Cases: 2

4. Public Employee Appointment

(Government Code Section 54957)

Title: City Manager

City Manager Recruitment

5. Conference with Labor Negotiator(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: Interim City Manager Odi Ortiz Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2015-3

Next Ordinance Number: 623

Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call.

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza – Presentation of Key to the City plaques to members of Grupo Musical Los Kinos for their continuous contributions to the Livingston community.

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.

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.

2. Report on United Front Security and Patrol Security Company Seeking a Business License.

3. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on December 16, 2014.

4. Approval of Warrant Register Dated January 29, 2015.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

5. Resolution Appointing Odilon Ortiz as Interim City Manager and Approving a Second Amendment to the Employment Agreement between the City of Livingston and Odilon Ortiz.

6. Resolution Approving the First Amendment and Restatement to Agreement for Employment between the City of Livingston and Ruben Chavez for the Position of Police Chief.

7. Vacancies and Appointments to the Livingston Planning Commission.

8. Council Accept and Authorize Temporary Outsourcing of City’s Street Sweeping Services with Gilton Solid Waste.

9. Discussion Regarding Changes to the DTC Zone.

10. Discussion Item: Consideration of Changing the City Logo Slogan from “The Last Stop” to “Sweet Potato Capital of the World.”

11. Discussion Item: Twelve Acres of Industrial Land at the Max Foster Sports Complex.

ADJOURNMENT

Arsenic and Lawsuits, Workshops and Hearings; A Clean Up/Abatement Order from the Water Board, and a City Council Agenda

LIVINGSTON, CALIFORNIA 05/19/2014

Water quality monitoring conducted by the City since January 2008 revealed that the arsenic levels in the water produced by the City’s wells has increased. the city must develop a contingency plan to be used in the event that the water produced by the City’s wells exceeds the arsenic MCL. – California Department of Public Health, 2011 Water System Inspection Report. 

Well No. 16 has been offline since September 2011 because the media in the arsenic removal treatment system has been exhausted . Well No. 13 is also offline due to arsenic at elevated levels but below the MCL. The City is currently flushing the well to waste and collecting a bacteriological cycle test and hopes to bring the well online by mid-April if the cycle test results are coliform negative. – California Department of Health: City of Livingston 2013 Water System Inspection Report

The City is currently conducting a Feasibility Study to examine adding additional source capacity, adding additional storage capacity , and adding localized or centralized treatment to provide water that complies with all primary and secondary drinking water standards. Several of the City’s wells produce water with 1,2,3-TCP above the Notification Level. Many of the same wells produce water with arsenic approaching the MCL (Well No. 12), at the MCL (Wells Nos. 13 & 15), and over the MCL (Well No. 16). Thirdly , Well No. 15 produces water with excessive manganese levels. The City has opted to provide treatment for the latter rather than applying for a waiver from the Department. The Feasibility Study is expected to be completed by the end of April 2013 – Ibid

Council Member Espinoza commented that there have been many complaints about the water system and a rate increase is warranted to correct the problems June 19, 2007 Draft Meeting Minutes (Re -Bergman Rate Study)

“Mayor Samra commented that making a decision is not easy for him and he 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 (Water Rate Increases) be continued” January 15, 2008, Draft Meeting Minutes (Bergman Rate Study)

“[t]he City operates a community water system under California Water Permit No. 03-11-98P001. The City’s source of water supply is exclusively groundwater. The City currently has eight (8) active wells. The quality of the water produced by most of the City’s wells is marginal and in some cases it exceeds the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for constituents like arsenic or manganese. Well No. 13 has [except in 2010 and 2011 when Well No. 13 was not operated] been exceeding the arsenic MCL of 10 μg/l since 2010.”  – California River Watch v. City of Livingston 

The City of Livingston has been sued.

Because of the Arsenic Levels in our Groundwater.

More on that a little later. But First:

A FEW DEFINITIONS

Before we get started, I must state that I am neither a Scientist, Engineer, nor Chemistry Nerd. But I have been following Livingston’s Water Quality Woes for quite some time. And after attending meeting after meeting over the course of the past few years while watching City Council after City Council punt this issue down the road time after time, I think I have managed to pick up a bit of knowledge by osmosis.

I have also amassed a fair amount of documentation over the years, and I’ve done additional research online: some of which I will be referencing as we go along. (click the links for even more detail)

Please forgive me, documentation purists, if some of my links are to Wikepedia, Yahoo Answers and/or other “Non Scientific” type websites. This is not a University Level Discussion in “The Chemistry and Related Issues in Municipal Drinking Water”.  I  just want to get across a few basic ideas before the Proposition 218 Hearing that’s coming up on Tuesday.

PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS address health concerns. (Things in the water that can make you sick or kill you if you drank enough of it over time)

SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS – (things that make the water look and smell yucky, but might not necessarily make you sick or kill you) established to address issues of aesthetics (discoloration), not health concerns. In California secondary MCLs (Maximum Contaminant Levels) are enforceable.

UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS –
Chemicals and stuff which do not yet have a Maximum Contaminant Level. (emphasis on “yet”) There is ongoing testing So the The Environmental Protection Agency can decide whether or not these contaminants occur often enough and at high enough levels to warrant further attention and/or regulation. (In other words, the Government is still debating the science about how much of that stuff will make you sick or kill you over time.)

ARSENIC – : a semi-metal element in the periodic table. It is odorless and tasteless. It enters drinking water supplies from natural deposits in the earth or from agricultural and industrial practices. 

CHROMIUM – 3 An Essential Trace Mineral, not to be confused with it’s deadlier cousin: Chromium – 6.

CHROMIUM – 6:  Chromium-6, or hexavalent chromium, is a naturally occurring metal. It is also used in several industrial processes. Chromium-6 has been known to cause cancer in humans when inhaled. In scientific studies in laboratory animals, chromium-6 has also been linked to cancer when ingested (Think “Erin Brokovich”)

MANGANESE: Manganese is a pinkish-gray, chemically active element. it is one out of three toxic essential trace elements, which means that it is not only necessary for humans to survive, but it is also toxic when too high concentrations are present in a human body. When people do not live up to the recommended daily allowances their health will decrease. But when the uptake is too high health problems will also occur. (Not getting enough? You get sick. Getting “too much”? You get sick)

TCP – 1,2,3:  TCP-containing fumigants were used extensively by farmers in the production of a large variety of crops from the 1950s through the mid-1980s. In California, these fumigants (known by the trade names D-D and Telone) were among the most widely used pesticides in the history of the State, second only to sulfur…. In 1999, 1,2,3-TCP was added to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer (Livingston sued Dow Chemical and netted about $9.5 million dollars to put towards removing the TCP from our Drinking Water)

mg/L: Milligrams per liter or Parts Per Million. 

ug/L: Micrograms per liter or Parts Per Billion, (ppb). 

Parts per Billion, (ppb) – Imagine 13 drops of ink in one of the largest tanker trucks used to haul gasoline. That would be 13 Parts Per Billion of ink.

• The Arsenic Warning that the City sent out in May showed the Arsenic number reported as 0.013 Milligrams per liter. If we move the decimal 3 placed to the right, we get 13 Parts Per Billion

MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level – The highest level of a toxic substance allowed in Drinking Water. The Health & Safety Code §116365(a) requires California Department of Public Health to establish a contaminant’s MCL at a level as close to its PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL (PHG) as is technologically and economically feasible, placing primary emphasis on the protection of public health

• If a toxic substance is higher than the Maximum Contaminant Level using a 4 QUARTER AVERAGE, a water purveyor has to figure out a way of reducing that number down to below the MCL, and/or come up with another source of water to deliver to it’s customers.

• The Maximum Contaminant Level for Arsenic currently stands at 10 Parts Per Billion 

• We have at least 2 wells that are over the limit of 10 Parts Per Billion and others that are really close to going over that limit.

4 QUARTER AVERAGE: As is this example.

• If quarterly testing for arsenic at Well A produced the following results in Parts Per Billion: 8.5, 9.9 , 10, 11

• The 4 Quarter Average would be 9.85 Parts Per Billion.

RANGE: The Lowest and the Highest. Using the Above as our example,

• The Range would be 8.5 – 11 Parts Per Billion

NOTIFICATION LEVEL – The level at which the State of California says the public needs to be notified about a contaminant in the Drinking Water.

• The Notification Level for TCP – 1,2,3 is 0.005 ug/L ( 0.005 Parts per Billion)

• I’m not to crazy about decimals. So to “get rid” of the decimal, we move the decimal 3 places to the right and get 5 Parts per Trillion.

• According to the Report by Kennedy Jenks, a significant number of Livingston’s wells produce water with TCP ABOVE the Notification Level.

Parts per Trillion (ppt):– Imagine 5 drops of detergent in enough dishwater to fill a string of railroad tank cars ten miles long. That would be 5 Parts Per Trillion of detergent.

RESPONSE LEVEL – The level of contamination at which the State of California says a well “should” be removed from service because of a potential threat to Public Health.

• The RESPONSE LEVEL for TCP – 1,2,3 is 100x the Notification Level (therefore 500 Parts per Trillion).

• According to the Report by Kennedy Jenks, some of Livingston’s wells produce water with TCP levels ABOVE the Response Level.

PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL –  Concentrations of drinking water contaminants that pose no significant health risk if consumed for a lifetime, based on current risk assessment principles, practices, and methods. (Translation: levels low enough that you should die of old age before any of that stuff would make you really sick or kill you)

• In September 2007, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) released a draft Public Health Goal of 0.0007 µg/L (0.7 Parts per Trillion) for TCP – 1,2,3 

• The Public Health Goal for Arsenic is 0.004 µg/L, (4 Parts per Trillion) based on lung and urinary bladder cancer risk.

Having a basic understanding of these terms will comes in handy every now and then: like when open your “Water Bill” and find another in an ever growing series of “its not an emergency but we have to tell you about the Arsenic in the Drinking Water” notices.  (Or when you go to a Meeting, Hearing or Workshop about “What’s In Our Water and What We Plan To Do About It” and the Consultants and Engineers go on and on in what sounds like a Foreign Language to those of us who are not Math/Science Nerds.)

SO NOW, LET’S TALK A LITTLE ABOUT ARSENIC and that Lawsuit I mentioned earlier.

To start with, we’ve been getting “Warnings About Arsenic” in the Water Bills since at least July of last year: after Well #13 was brought back on line and it was discovered, oops, that it was testing just a little over the Maximum Contaminant Level for Arsenic.

According to the 2011 California Department of Public Health Water System Inspection Report (page 9), Well #13 “was offline because the motor had burned up and needed to be replaced” and “the well has been offline for approximately two years due to construction”.

The 2013 California Department of Public Health Water System Inspection Report (page 15) talked about City Wells that “produce water with arsenic approaching the MCL (Well No. 12), at the MCL (Well Nos. 13 & 15), and over the MCL (Well No. 16).

At the May 20, 2013 meeting of the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee Meeting, members were notified that Well #13 was running a little high on Arsenic and would likely need to have an Arsenic Filtration System installed.

At the June 03, 2013 meeting of the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee, members were informed that the California Department of Public Health had issued a Compliance Order For Violation of the Arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level. 

About December 10, 2013, California River Watch notified the City of Livingston of their intention to file suit under the Safe Drinking Water Act. At the very next City Council Meeting, the number of Cases of Potential Litigation to be discussed in Closed Session increased from 3 (as on November 19th) to 4. 

That Livingston finally ended up with a Compliance Order for Violating the Arsenic Maximum Contaminant level should be no real surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to Livingston’s Water Quality Woes.

Arsenic, and the need for filtration was a Topic of Discussion in the 2007/2008 Bergman Rate Study.  It was also a component in the 2009 Rate Study done by Raftelis Financial Consultants.

Maybe it is just coincidence that California River Watch decided to sue the City of Livingston about Violating the Arsenic Standard right around the same time we are getting ready for our THIRD round of Water Rate Studies and Proposition 218 Hearings in 6 years or so…..But

According to the Merced Sun Star, David Weinsoff, an attorney retained by California River Watch, stated

“There are senior citizens and children who are drinking this water, those that have compromised health systems that are drinking this water,” he said. “I frankly don’t see why the city doesn’t figure out who is most affected by the arsenic and provide water bottles or another alternative water source.”

And

Weinsoff said the goal of the lawsuit is to order the city to address the problem sooner than the deadline issued by the state and to notify at-risk residents, such as children and the elderly, when the city is out of compliance with maximum contaminant levels.

Maybe, just maybe, considering Livingston’s long history of Cycling through Hearing after Hearing, Consultant after Consultant, and Study after Study, California River Watch decided to invoke a “Higher Power” to make sure something actually gets done this time around.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MISSED THE “WATER RATE” WORKSHOPS last month, and would like to see a copy of the Power Point Presentations, you can click on the following.

Water And Sewer Rate Study Community Workshop #1 April 8th, 2014: English

Water And Sewer Rate Study Community Workshop #2 April 10th, 2014: Spanish

Water And Sewer Rate Study Community Workshop #3 April 22nd, 2014: Punjabi

TO READ A COPY OF THE RATE STUDY in English, Spanish and/or Punjabi, you can go to:

2014 Water And Waste-Water Rate Studies

FOR EVEN MORE ON THE HISTORY OF LIVINGSTON’S WATER QUALITY WOES, I offer the following:

Salmonella, Arsenic, TCP and Manganese, A Timeline About Water Issues, and a City Council Agenda 

California Water Board Clean Up and Abatement Order – July 21, 2012 – Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility

2 Rate Studies, 4 Rate Consultants, 1 Recall Election, 3 Rate Rollbacks, 1 Rate Committee, 1 New City Manager, 1 New Public Works Director, 1 Public Relations Firm and 1 Report by Kennedy Jenks (And a City Council Agenda) (I should probably mention at this point that the City of Livingston is now looking for Yet Another Public Works Director..anyone want to take bets about how long this one will last? )

2008 City of Livingston Water Rate Study Presentation: Dan Bergmann, Interstate Gas Services, Inc.

2009 City of Livingston Wastewater and Solid Waste (Garbage) Rate Study: Raftelis Financial Consultants

2009 City of Livingston Water Rate Study: Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. 

California Department of Health – Compliance Order For Violation of the Arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level: May 16, 2013

California Department of Health Sept. 2010 Letter on Water System Funding

California Department of Health: City of Livingston 2011 Water System Inspection Report

California Department of Health: City of Livingston 2013 Water System Inspection Report

Feasibility Analysis For A Sustainable Water Treatment Strategy–Kennedy Jenks Consultants

• Summary and Recommendations

• Cover and Letter of Introduction

• Table of Contents

• Executive Summary

• Project Background and Benefits

• Water Demand and Growth Projections

• Existing Water Supply Facilities

• Groundwater Quality and Treatment

• Groundwater Supply Alternatives

• Surface Water Treatment Evaluation

• Recycled Water Evaluation

• References

• Appendix A: Well Data Sheets

• Appendix B: Probable Groundwater Treatment Cost Estimates

• 
  

  Appendix C: Recycled Water Evaluation

 

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

MAY 20, 2014

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 April 15, 2014, 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 Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call

CLOSED SESSION

A “Closed” or “Executive” Session of the City Council or the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston 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 Council Chambers 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.

3. Public Employee Performance Evaluation

(Government Code Section 54957(b)(1))

Title: City Manager

4. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: Jose M. Sanchez, City Attorney

Unrepresented Employee: City Manager

5. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 2

6. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER

Roll Call. Next Resolution No. 2014-22

Next Ordinance No. 619

Pledge of Allegiance.

Closed Session Announcements

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez: 20 Year Service Pins to Danna Rasmussen, Senior Administrative Analyst, and Debbie Parrott, Senior Account Clerk.

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

2. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Adopting a New Rate Schedule for Water Service – Proposition 18 Hearing.

3. Resolution and Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Adopting a New Rate Schedule for Domestic Wastewater Service (Sewer Service) – Proposition 218 Hearing.

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.

4. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 613 of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending the Livingston Municipal Code Title 4, “Building Regulations,” to Add Chapter 4-7 Establishing a Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF).

5. Approval of Warrant Register Dated May 1, 2014.

6. Approval of Warrant Register Dated May 15, 2014.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

7. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No. 616 of the City Council of the City of Livingston Adopting Amendments to Title 4, Chapter 1 of the Livingston Municipal Code Pertaining to the Livingston Building Code, and Ordinance No. 617 Adopting Amendments to Title 7, Chapters 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the Livingston Municipal Code Pertaining to the Livingston Fire Code and Related Changes.

8. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No. 618 of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending the Livingston Municipal Code to Repeal Title 9, Chapter 7, Entitled “CATV Franchise” in its Entirety.

9. Direct City Engineer to Design and Prepare Plans of Scope of Work for Water Line Improvement Project Phase III.

ADJOURNMENT

Salmonella, Arsenic, TCP and Manganese, A Timeline About Water Issues, and a City Council Agenda

 Foster Farms has placed full-page ads in major newspapers throughout the West and is improving its food safety handling practices as it continues to try to win back consumers…Foster Farms — one of the nation’s largest chicken processors — has acknowledged that since the outbreak in early October, sales of its chicken have dropped 25% – October 29, 2013, Robert Rodriguez,The Fresno Bee,  Foster Farms reaches out to consumers in full-page ads October 29, 2013, October 29, 2013,

The salmonella outbreak in Foster Farms chicken has cut sales by 25 percent, company leaders said Thursday while vowing to win back consumers with improved sanitation and other measures that far exceed industry standards. John Holland, Merced Sun Star/Modesto Bee, Foster Farms working to win back customers after chicken sales dip amid salmonella outbreak October 17, 2013 (Note from TheGardeningSnail. The link to this article has either expired, has been moved, or the page taken down)

Tainted water disrupted poultry production at Foster Farms last week, and city officials are trying to find out what caused it. Mike North, Merced Sun Star –Discolored water disrupts production at Foster Farms,  February 27, 2013

If the city loses one of its existing wells, Samra said, it would have to implement severe conservation efforts, such as restricting residents from watering their lawns or asking Foster Farms to alter its production, Ramona Giwargis, Merced Sun Star Livingston gets water project grant amid struggle to pass balanced budget – September 16, 2013,

…some people who drink water containing arsenic in excess of the MCL over many years may experience skin damage or circulatory system problems, and may have an increased risk to getting cancer. City of Livingston, Notice of Violation of a Drinking Water Standard for Arsenic insert included with “water bill”. Distribution Date: October 24, 2013

Foster Farms has placed full-page ads in major newspapers throughout the West and is improving its food safety handling practices as it continues to try to win back consumers. Foster Farms reaches out to consumers in full page ads  Robert Rodriguez — The Fresno Bee/Merced Sun Star October 31, 2013

Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it. –Anonymous

Foster Farms is working on regaining consumer confidence with improved sanitation and other methods and has embarked on an Apology and Marketing Campaign to win back customers.

While the consequences of an outbreak of Salmonella is something Foster Farms can address “in house”, the next issue it will have to address, in the long run, will require cooperation with the City of Livingston: that being having enough water for use within the plant that meets State and Federal Water Quality Standards.

Livingston already has at least one well that fails the Secondary Drinking Water Standard for Manganese and Foster Farms has already had to shut down at least one shift due to manganese in the water.

Tightening Drinking Water Standards, coupled with the City of Livingston’s budgetary woes could well mean that, some time in the future, (unless there are some drastic changes) the water Foster Farms depends upon for Production and Sanitation will fail State/Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels for Arsenic and/or TCP 1-2-3 as well.

More on that a little later. But first, its been a while since we’ve checked in on Delta Bravo Land.

Yep…There’s Strange and then there is Army Strange. Courtesy of Damon Shackelford and the gang at Delta Bravo Sierra: furious scribblers of military cartoons.

LIVINGSTON VETERANS DAY EVENTS…The Livingston-Delhi Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 8327 and their Ladies Auxiliary will be sponsoring the Livingston Veterans Day Parade on November 11 starting at 11am.

The parade will start at the corner of C and Main Streets, proceeding down Main Street to Park Street where it will disband.

If any Veteran wishes to ride in the vintage Jeep truck, they are asked to be at the starting area of the parade no later than 10:30 am.

The award ceremony will immediately follow the parade at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Hall (1605 7^th Street) where a homemade soup lunch will be served, for a donation of $5.00.

For more information or parade entry forms contact Denis Wells at 394-2059.

YOU CAN’T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON without factoring in the sometimes turbulent, sometimes antagonistic Symbiotic Relationship between The City of Livingston and the City’s largest employer: Foster Farms.

Many Residents get their paychecks by working for Foster Farms and Foster Farms gets it’s water for Sanitation and Production purposes from the City of Livingston: 65%-66% of the water produced by Livingston’s well goes to Foster Farms.

Yep. It takes a lot of water to process those chickens into a variety of food products AND keep the plant Tidy, Clean, and Sanitary.

So it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise. that when the Symbiotic Relationship of Livingston and Foster Farms “strains”, its most likely over Water Related Issues: Things like Backflow Devices, and Water Meters, and Regulatory Compliance, and how much Foster Farms should pay for the water it uses.

Stuff like that

And since we are getting ready (Again) for another round (someday) of Proposition 218 Hearings about Water Rate Increases, AND Foster Farms is obviously a Major Player when it comes to discussing things like Water Rates, lets look back at some of the History about Water Rates and that Symbiotic Relationship of Foster Farms and the City of Livingston.

Although the following is not a complete list, there should be enough there to give you and idea of where we’ve been, and where we may be headed.

1995 The City of Livingston Raises Water Rates for the 1st time in many, many years

1999-2006 Notices of Violation and the Beginnings of Litigation

November 15, 1999-August 04, 2000 The California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) staff inspected the industrial wastewater treatment and conducted sampling of existing groundwater monitoring wells…As a result of this assessment, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to Foster Farms and the City of Livingston with an inspection report on January 12, 2000…..On August 4, 2000, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a Notice of Violation of Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) Order No. 79-209. (City of Livingston 2010-2011 Adopted Budget pg. 588)

April, 2004..The City of Livingston begins colleting data about TCP-1,2,3 levels in it’s groundwater.

2005….The City of Livingston initiates Livingston vs. Dow Chemical: a lawsuit against Dow Chemical Company re: TCP-1,2,3 Levels in groundwater. (copy of the Original Complaint upon request)

July 2006, The City of Livingston and Foster Farms head to court in dispute over backflow devices. “The city wants the poultry processor to install air gap assemblies, which (Public Works Director) Creighton said are "fool-proof."…Waste from the factory — including chemicals and salmonella — could contaminate drinking water pipes if a water main breaks or pressure falls, Creighton said. The reduce pressure assembly could fail. An air gap assembly can’t, he said”

October 26, 2006, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) No. R5-2006-0112 containing findings that waste constituents discharged from the existing industrial wastewater treatment plant had caused nitrate levels in shallow groundwater to exceed applicable Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) contained in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins in violation of Order 79-209 (City of Livingston 2010-2011 Adopted Budget pg. 592)

2007-2008

Water Meters, Backflow Devices and Litigation Settlements

June 19, 2007  Presentation by Dan Bergmann. City losing money monthly—rates need to be increased

November 13, 2007, a comprehensive settlement agreement between the City of Livingston and Foster Farms became effective. The settlement agreement requires Foster Farms to assume responsibility for constructing the new wastewater treatment plant…. The City will continue to operate its existing industrial wastewater treatment plant until Foster Farms initiates the operation of their plant. Foster Farms will clean up the current industrial wastewater treatment plant when decommissioned, including the current groundwater contamination and sludge at the existing wastewater treatment plant to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). …..Once the existing plant site is cleaned up, the land will revert back to public use for the citizens of Livingston. …The agreement also required Foster Farms to install water meters at its property line to ensure that all water going on the property is accounted for and billed. These meters were installed in May 2008…. A 1997 option agreement permitting Foster Farms to acquire the City’s property for $1,000 per acre has also been voided. (City of Livingston 2010-2011 Adopted Budget pg. 592)

November 20, 2007, Introduced of new City Attorney Malathay Subramanian from the firm of Best Best & Krieger

January 15, 2008 Slide Presentation by Dan Bergman. Mayor Samra …said the Council will study this matter; however, not just the Council, but also the community at large needs to deal with the issue.

February 5, 2008 Motion: MS Soria/Espinoza to continue the Public Hearing (About Water Rates) to the March 4, 2008, regular Council meeting. The motion carried 4-0-1.

March 04 2008, The Public Hearing About Water Rates (Bergman Study) is continued to a future Council Meeting

April 1, 2008. Settlement with Foster Farms Reported at Council Meeting Three water meters will be installed at Foster Farms. Foster Farms will install their own backflow devices. There will be a building permit fee. The City will have returned to it, 120 acres estimated at $200,000 an acre. An option agreement that allowed Foster Farms to purchase this land at $1,000/acre was terminated. Foster Farms will cleanout the wastewater ponds that are contaminated with sludge. The City agrees to grandfather in buildings constructed without permits over the years and not inspect the facilities.

2009

Another New Rate Consultant Another New Rate Study and Another Round of Litigation over Water Rates

February 17, 2009 Water Rate Study Presentation by Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. and Authorization for Public Hearing – City Council Votes 5-0 to go forward with Proposition 218 Hearing.

April 21, 2009 Proposition 218 Hearing. City Attorney (Best, Best, and Krieger) states rates must by passed by at least a 4-1 vote.

May 28, 2009 California Department of Public Health Enforcement Letter for Failure to Comply with Secondary Drinking Water Standard for Manganese for Well #15.

June 16, 2009 Best, Best, and Krieger Attorney replaced with an Attorney from Kronick,Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard

July 07, 2009 Rates adopted by Resolution – Run Up to the Recall Begins – Recall organizers, officers, proponents and supporters include Gurpal Samra, Rodrigo Espinoza (Candidate for Mayor), Mario Mendoza , Luis Flores, Francisco Castillanos, Teresa Land, and Warren Urnberg.

July 14, 2009 Foster Farms sues Livingston over water rate increase, (Foster Farms I)stating “The city of Livingston broke state law and health codes when it adopted a resolution that will increase water rates by an initial 40 percent, (and that) the company will be negatively impacted by the city’s July 7 resolution and demand(ed) that the court order the city to rescind the increase.”

November 30, 2009 Livingston city rate increase sued for 2nd time The Central California Legal Services claims that the City violated State Law by passing Rates by Resolution and that “the revenues generated from the rate hikes far exceed what is needed to run the sewer and water systems”

2010 The Year of the Recall

January 10, 2010 Foster Farms files (Second) suit against Livingston Regarding Water Rates alleging that in order to fill deficits in Enterprise Funds (ex. Water), the City Manager used monies from Restricted Funds.

Feb 27, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Judge: Livingston’s water rate hikes unconstitutional (Foster Farms I)

Mar 2, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Recall effort under way in Livingston

Mar 2, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Livingston to hold special council meeting at 7 p.m. Thursday–water rates on agenda

March 5, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Livingston appeals water ruling (Foster Farms I)

Jun 18, 2010 The Merced Sun Star reports Livingston water fee increase stays in effect  The Central California Legal Services lawsuit fails)

August 05, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Organizations lend legal help to Livingston in Foster Farms lawsuit (Foster Farms I)

Aug 27, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Judge: no evidence city of Livingston violated laws in Foster Farms fraud case  (Foster Farms II)Foster Farms plans on filing an amended complaint by Sept. 8 2010

September 22, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports After recall election, new leadership takes reins in Livingston 

September 23, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Appeal on Foster Farms lawsuit dismissed; city attorney resigns (Foster Farms I) Despite most of the work being done, money spent and recent support from The League of California Cities, California State Association of Counties and the Association of California Water Agencies, the new council still directed the city attorney to drop the appeal.

September 24, 2010 Livingston takes back utility rate hike ……Warren Urnberg, a leading voice of the Recall Movement is appointed as a Temporary City Member. One of his first actions was to second a motion by Margarita Aguilar to roll Water Rates back to 1995 levels.

September 28, 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Questions raised about Livingston’s ability to provide safe water, The California Department of Public Health issues a letter to the City of Livingston stating (in part):…."It is important for the city to understand that if the city violates any of the drinking water regulations as a result of having insufficient funds to properly operate and maintain the water system, our department will take the appropriate enforcement actions,"

November 2010 Espinoza, Livingston’s mayor for two months, wins re-election

November 2010 A Livingston Resident makes a complaint about Dirty, smelly water on tap in Livingston

December 2010 The Merced Sun Star Reports Livingston eyes cheap way to deal with arsenic contamination in water supply: The City Hopes “Well Profiling” will lead to cheaper, easier fixes.

December 07, 2010 The City Council votes to send out a Request For Proposals for a New Rate Study Consultant.

2011 – Cleaning Up the Water Won’t be As Cheap as Some Had Hoped

March 01, 2011….Bartle Wells chosen as the 3rd Consulting firm since 2007, to provide Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Rate Studies, Community Outreach and Proposition 18 Balloting Services.

April 5, 2011…Richie King from Foster Farms, Kathy Berkeley from Livingston Union School District, Michael Belluomini from Merced Union High School District and Livingston residents Claire Gehrman and Warren Urnberg appointed by the City Council to a Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee 

April 2011 Foster Farms Drops Second Lawsuit against the City.(“without prejudice”)(Foster Farms II)

June 17, 2011 Jose Antonio Ramirez appointed to be the New City Manager

August, 2011 Livingston well tests bring disappointment, No easy fix for wells in Livingston, Inexpensive treatment of broadly distributed contaminants not an option The Merced Sun Star Reports. “The results from Livingston’s water-well profiling are in — and they aren’t what city officials were hoping for. …..Despite $22,500 to study wells 8 and 15, not much can be done with them to reduce contaminants without costly filtration systems. Impurities include high levels of arsenic, manganese and 1,2,3 Trichloropropane (TCP)”.

Sep 19, 2011 The Merced Sun Star reports the City of Livingston receives a Settlement from Dow Chemical to compensate for 1,2,3-trichloropropane pollution…..

November, 2011  Request For Proposal – PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES TO PREPARE A FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS REPORT FOR A CENTRALIZED WATER TREATMENT STRATEGY FOR THE CITY WATER SUPPLY is sent out.

Dec. 28, 2011 The Merced Sun Reports Bartle Wells (Rate Study Consultant #3) fired by City Manager.

2012-2013 The City Hires More Consultants and a Public Relations Firm

Water Quality Problems Affect Production at Foster Farms

Warning Letters about Violating the Maximum Contaminant Level for Arsenic are Sent Out

February 21, 2012 Kennedy/Jenks Consultants of Portland, Oregon selected to prepare a Feasibility Analysis Report for a Centralized Water Treatment Strategy for the City’s Water Supply

APRIL 17, 2012 Hansford Economic Consultants chosen to Provide Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Utility Rate Studies, Community Outreach and Proposition 218 Balloting Services (Rate Consultant #4)

September 4, 2012, Humberto Molina hired as the New Public Works Director…..

October 2, 2012, a Professional Services Contract for Providing Community Outreach and Proposition 218 Balloting Services is awarded to GoodStanding Outreach of Reno, Nevada .(The Public Relations Firm)

December 11, 2012 The Merced Sun Star reports Atwater votes 3-2 to raise water rate

February 27, 2013  The Merced Sun Star reports "Discolored water disrupts production at Foster Farms"

May 16, 2013 The  California Department of Health issues a Compliance Order For Violation of the Arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level.

August 19,2013 The Feasibility Analysis For A Sustainable Water Treatment Strategy by Kennedy Jenks Consultants is released. Copies are distributed to members of the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee.

September 16, 2013 The Merced Sun Star reports. If the city loses one of its existing wells, Samra said, it would have to implement severe conservation efforts, such as restricting residents from watering their lawns or asking Foster Farms to alter its production, Ramona Giwargis, Livingston gets water project grant amid struggle to pass balanced budget

October 2013 The Merced Sun Star Reports USDA threatens to close 3 Foster Farms plants in salmonella outbreak

October 24, 2013 The City of Livingston distributes yet another Notice of Violating The Drinking Water Standard for Arsenic

November 01, 2013 and We are still waiting for the Water Rate Consultant to come up with Preliminary Water Rate Increase Numbers…

If you have been following Livingston’s water quality and growing Budgetary Woes over the years, you already know that the City does not have the money needed for essential upgrades to the Water Delivery System. The Water Enterprise Fund has a huge deficit and the City is borrowing from the TCP Settlement funds for Day-to Day Well Operations and Maintenance expenses.

Although Foster Farms has control over its Operations and Sanitation Procedures within its plants and can tighten them as necessary, maintaining the Water Delivery System that provides water to Foster Farms (and others within the City Limits) is under the Control of the City.

But whether or not the City of Livingston, (because of its Budgetary Woes), will be able to continue delivering water that meets State and Federal Drinking Water Standards is something all water users within the City of Livingston, including Foster Farms will need to cooperate and address.

For, in the long run, that may prove an even larger problem to solve than an outbreak of Salmonella at the plant.

One last thing, a question for the audience.

Did the City of Atwater do something illegal when it passed its Water Rate Increases by a 3/2 vote? (Or Did you even catch that bit of Political Irony?)

I mean really..if you look back at the record, one of the main contentions in the lawsuits against the City of Livingston, and the Rhetoric of the Recall Movemt, was that Livingston Raised it’s Water Rates The “Wrong Way”: by a 3/2 vote instead of a 4/1 or 5/0 vote.

So if Livingston did an “Illegal Thing” by passing Water Rates by Resolution and a 3/2 vote, doesn’t that mean that Atwater illegally passed its water rates as well? 

Just sayin

And Now On to the

CONCURRENT JOINT MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE

CITY OF LIVINGSTON

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

NOVEMBRER 5, 2013

CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.

OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston will hold a Regular Meeting on November 5, 2013, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

CLOSED SESSION

A “Closed” or “Executive” Session of the City Council or the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston 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 Council Chambers 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.

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.

3. Successor Agency

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation

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

City of Livingston and Successor Agency to the Livingston Community Redevelopment Agency v. Ana Matosantos, et al Superior Court of the State of California – County of Sacramento

Case No. 34-2013-80001460

4. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 3

5. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2013-52

Next Ordinance Number: 608

Roll Call.

Pledge of Allegiance.

Closed Session Announcements

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza and Planning Commissioner Mario Mendoza: Certificate of Appreciation to Juan Avila and Ben Penfield, McClure Enterprises for their donation of concrete to help raise funds for the Livingston Middle School band and wrestling programs.

2. Presentation by Police Chief Ruben Chavez and Officer Richard Mocchia: Introduction of Police Explorers.

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.

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. Direct Staff to Advertise the Request for Qualifications for Project Engineering Services and the Request for Proposals for Administrative Grant Services.

4. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on July 23, 2013.

5. Approval of Warrant Register Dated October 10, 2013.

6. Approval of Warrant Register Dated October 30, 2013.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

7. City Council to Give Staff Direction and to Review and Approve Proposed New Bus Stops and the Elimination of Two Parking Stalls to be Used as a Bus Stop on Main Street.

8. Resolution Approving a Utility Bill Auditing Service Agreement and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement with Utility Cost Management (UCM) in a Form Approved by the City Attorney.

9. Resolution Approving a One (1) Year Memorandum of Understanding and a Side Letter Concessions Agreement between the City of Livingston and the City of Livingston Management and Confidential Employees Association.

ADJOURNMENT

2 Rate Studies, 4 Rate Consultants, 1 Recall Election, 3 Rate Rollbacks, 1 Rate Committee, 1 New City Manager, 1 New Public Works Director, 1 Public Relations Firm and 1 Report by Kennedy Jenks (And a City Council Agenda)

Livingston, California – 9/27/2013

“Always speak the truth-think before you speak-and write it down afterward.” – The Red Queen to Alice in Through the Looking Glass & What Alice Found There

If the city loses one of its existing wells, Samra said, it would have to implement severe conservation efforts, such as restricting residents from watering their lawns or asking Foster Farms to alter its production   Ramona Giwargis – Merced Sun Star, September 16, 2013 – Livingston gets water project grant amid struggle to pass balanced budget

In July 2004, the State of California Department of Health Services (CDHS) sent a letter to the City of Livingston notifying the City that the levels of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) exceeded public health goals and required action by the City. In response to that letter, the City aggressively pursued potential solutions to effectively address the 1,2,3-TCP contamination issue. Staff Report, October 01, 2013 City Council Meeting Agenda Packet

Council Member Espinoza commented that there have been many complaints about the water system and a rate increase is warranted to correct the problems June 19, 2007 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Bergman Rate Study- Consultant #1)

“Mayor Samra commented that making a decision is not easy for him and he 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 (Water Rate Increases) be continued” January 15, 2008, Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Bergman Rate Study)

Motion: MS Soria/Espinoza to continue the Public Hearing to the march 4, 2008, regular Council meeting. The motion carried 4-0-1 February 05, 2008 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Bergman Rate Study: Rate Consultant #1)

Gurpal Samra, a former Livingston mayor and one of the recall organizers, said he was pleased with the outcome but a little disappointed that the petition against Vierra failed. He suggested the group may try again to recall Vierra Two Livingston leaders face recall vote,  April 10, 2010 Amy Starns, Merced Sun Star.

The water rate hike is the root of the recall election that’s costing the city between $40,000 and $50,000. …But the recall effort goes beyond the water rates, (Rodrigo) Espinoza said. …Espinoza has accused Varela and Nateras of a wide range of inept or inappropriate behavior, including trying to keep business out of Livingston, which Varela adamantly denied. – Livingston: Now it’s up to voters to decide who stays, goes – August 31, 2010, Mike North, Merced Sun Star

The California Department of Public Health recently aired concerns about Livingston’s recall election and its ability to provide safe drinking water to residents…After the 2009 rate increases were abolished during Friday’s special meeting, some of the organization’s concerns have come to fruition. …In a letter from Carl Carlucci, a supervising sanitary engineer of the California Department of Public Health, to the city dated Sept. 15, concerns were raised about the recall and the utility rate increases that prompted it…."It is important for the city to understand that if the city violates any of the drinking water regulations as a result of having insufficient funds to properly operate and maintain the water system, our department will take the appropriate enforcement actions," the letter declared. Questions raised about Livingston’s ability to provide safe water, September 28, 2010, Mike North, Merced Sun Star

The combination of challenges leaves the City exposed to water rationing if existing demands repeat the 2010 and 2011 water use levels. Loss of Wells 12 and 14 would be catastrophic and without Well 16 operating the City would be unable to meet existing water commitments without implementation of water conservation measures. “City of Livingston Feasibility Analysis for a Sustainable Water Treatment Strategy”, Executive Summary, Page V, Kennedy Jenks Consultants, July 12, 2013

This post is different than others in that I’ll be quoting what others have said over the years, then wrap up with a comment or two about what it all seems to mean to me. There will also be the occasional “parenthetical comment”. You’ll be able to identify them by the TGS-included in the parentheses.

Some of you out there may think I might not be “fair” to those Council members I quote, or feel I am taking quotes out of context. That’s OK. I am loading up this post with plenty of links so you can research for yourself and make up your own minds about things like “context” and “fairness”. 

With that in mind. We will continue with

Mayor Pro Tem Vierra noted that the Council has not been able to get four votes since the year 2000, and going for another scenario is not going to get four votes. The only thing that it would accomplish is spending more money after spending $100,000.  Mr. Vierra suggested that the only other option would be to make cuts like other cities in California have done or ultimately go bankrupt like the City of Vallejo.  He stated that the City could not continue to spend money it does not have. May 05, 2009 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Raftelis Rate Study – Consultant #2)

If the City Council decides to attempt to get a waiver they will have to have 50% or more of the water customers to actually vote for the waiver. In other words the water customers would have to vote to have higher levels of manganese in the water than the state water drinking standard or you have to do treatment. The preliminary cost of treatment is $1 million. There is no money in the Water Enterprise Fund to do this. June 16, 2009 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Discussion of the California Department of Public Health Enforcement Letter: Manganese)

Council Member Espinoza commented that Livingston’s General Fund has already paid the Water Enterprise Fund deficit of $1.3 to $1.5 million. Therefore, the Water Enterprise Fund does not have a deficit. He thought that it was illegal for the Water Enterprise Fund to pay back the General Fund. July 07, 2009 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Discussion of the Raftelis Rate Study)

Motion: M/S Varela/Vierra to adopt Resolution No. 2009-32 increasing water service rates with the selection of scenario #3 and reducing the first step of the rate increase by 15% effective August 1, 2009, and revisit the rate increases before February 1, 2010. The motion carried 3-2 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members: Nateras, Varela, Vierra NOES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza –Ibid (TGS-The Raftelis Rate Study – The Rate Increase that lead to the Recall)

Motion: M/S Vierra/Nateras to move forward with well-head filtering treatment for manganese in Well #15, inform the State of the City’s decision, and authorize the City Engineer to begin to work with the State to determine the most appropriate treatment process. The motion carried 4-1, with Council Member Espinoza voting no., Ibid (TGS-Enforcement Letter: Manganese – Note: as part of the aftermath of the Recall, the City did not go forward with filtering for Manganese)

Overall, the budget numbers differ little compared with last year, but the general fund — the city’s main pot of cash without strings tied to it — took a fairly substantial hit compared to last year…….The more than $15 million budget is sizably smaller than last year’s. The general fund, budgeted at more than $4 million this year was more than $5 million last fiscal year. That means the city’s general fund was budgeted down $577,000 compared to last year. Livingston avoids cuts with ‘bare bones’ budget Wednesday Aug 19, 2009 – Merced Sun Star

Ms. Herrera commented that we should not point fingers at one or two Council Members. She said at the last protest, there was a City Council Member that said we should not be listening to the other side…This is not being impartial. She said that if a City Council Member is going to be at a protest they should be impartial. She told the audience that people are using you….People in the audience shouted and yelled at Ms. Herrera and shouted her down . October 20, 2009 Meeting Minutes

Mr. Mendoza said he was here to say that our committee is finalizing the paperwork for the recall. He said the next time that we invite you guys for a meeting is because we are going to need your signature to kick these people out. November 17, 2009 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Note: Mr. Mendoza: Treasure of the Recall Committee, is now a member of the Planning Commission. His brother, David, is currently on the City Council and is one of the current Council Liaisons to the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee)

We are paying a lot for water. The money you are collecting from us is being used to pay for a new police chief who used to make less money where he lived before than what he is now making here. He is making $10,000 more here than where he lived before. Escalon is bigger than Livingston. You shouldn’t charge us more for our water use so that you can pay the new chief of police $10,000 more. Public comment from the APRIL 20, 2010 Draft Minutes

Council Member Espinoza (in Spanish) stated, “Like Council Member Aguilar just said, Mayor Varela and Council Member Martha Nateras were asked to please resign to their seat. If they resign to their seat, we are going to avoid spending money in the election coming up in two to three months and that money could be used to pay for our 4^th of July event. Ibid (TGS-Rodrigo Espinoza: Candidate for Mayor: Recall Election)

Katherine Schell Rodriquez…. commented that because of State election laws and the recall committee’s choice of timing the recall cannot be combined with the June primaries or the November General Election. She said it is not Mayor Varela’s nor Council Member Nateras’ doing that is forcing this recall to be held in August. It is not Mayor Varela’s fault that there will be a mayoral election in August and again in November…. If the purpose of this recall is really only about saving money then a person would want to do everything humanly possible to get it combined with the November General Election. After all that is when we would be doing our electing anyway. She does not know who was the legal advisor for the recall committee, but she thought he or she or they or whoever missed a point on the saving the City money deal.  MAY 4, 2010 Draft Minutes

Mayor Pro-Tem Frank Vierra…Pointed out that there was a bill for $57,218.75 for the replacement of the motor and the rehabilitation of a water well. In addition, Well #15 near Starbucks had to be shut down for repairs. This caused Starbucks to close. He said that the City must have the financial resources to pay to maintain the water system and to provide continuous service to businesses in the community. JULY 6, 2010 Draft Minutes

Theresa Land…said that there will be a recall election on August 31 for Mayor Varela and Council Member Nateras. She said that she is running for City Council in the event Council Member Nateras is recalled. Ibid

Theresa Land…said she wanted to remind the citizens of the upcoming recall election on August 31. She said go to the polls and cast your vote to recall or not recall Mayor Varela and Councilwoman Nateras. Ms. Land said if you vote to recall them, then you would be asked to pick a candidate to replace them. Currently the choice for Mayor would be Councilman Rodrigo Espinoza and for Councilwoman it would be herself.  August 03, 2010 Draft Minutes

Mario Mendoza…stated he supports the recall and he is a member of the recall committee. He added that if people want to know how the recall was financed to contact him. Ibid

Council Member Aguilar congratulated those who voted. She noted it was the right of everyone to vote. Although the special recall election votes have not been certified, Ms. Aguilar congratulated Theresa Land. In addition, Ms. Aguilar noted we need to celebrate, take care of our community, and get citizens involved. September 07, 2010 Draft Minutes

Council Member Rodrigo Espinoza Thanked the community for their support of the recall. He stated he didn’t win by himself, the community helped. He said hopefully the community will come together and work together. Council Member Espinoza noted the County will certify the votes by the next meeting date. Ibid

September 15, 2010 California Department of Health Letter on Water System Funding

Mayor Espinoza made the following statement, “It has been an uphill battle. The citizens made a decision August 31 and asked for a real change and with the direction of our City. I would like to thank all of the citizens…. It doesn’t matter what the paper says about the City going bankrupt. It won’t. The City will survive. September 21, 2010 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-as of the Date of posting, 9/27/2013, not only has the City “reorganized” and laid off staff, it is currently struggling with the passage of an Unbalanced Budget)

City Attorney Hobbs reported that on the case: Foster Poultry Farms, Inc. v. City of Livingston, et al, California Superior Court, County of Merced, Case No. CV000752., the Council voted 3-0 with 1 absence to dismiss the appeal. Ibid

Motion: M/S Aguilar/Land to adopt Resolution No. 2010-54, filling the vacancy on the City Council by the appointment of Warren Urnberg. The motion carried 3-1 September 24, 2010 Draft Special Meeting Minutes (TGS-Warren Urnberg, a leading voice of the Recall, was later appointed to be a “voting member” of the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee. He was also eventually appointed to the Planning Commission)

Motion: M/S Aguilar/Urnberg to adopt Resolution No. 2010-56, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Repealing Resolution No. 2009-32 (Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Establishing Water Service Rates). The motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Urnberg – NOES: Council Members: Vierra – ABSENT: Council Members: None – Ibid (TGS-Rolling back the Water Rates)

 M/S Land/Urnberg to adopt Resolution No. 2010-57, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Repealing Resolution No. 2009-33 (Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Establishing Domestic Wastewater Service Rates). The motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Urnberg – NOES: Council Members: Vierra – ABSENT: Council Members: None – Ibid (TGS-Rolling back the Sewer Rates)

M/S Land/Aguilar to adopt Resolution No. 2010-58, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Repealing Resolution No. 2009-15 (Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Establishing Rates for Solid Waste Service Fees). The motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Urnberg – NOES: Council Members: Vierra – ABSENT: Council Members: None – Ibid (TGS-Rolling Back the Garbage Rates)

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 – M/S Espinoza/Samra to continue this item to the next meeting as a public hearing. The motion carried 4-0 November 16, 2010 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Discussion about Watering Days is put off for another day)

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 – Mayor Espinoza and Council Member Samra asked that this item be continued. December 07, 2010 Draft Meeting Minutes(TGS-Discussion about Watering Days is put off for yet another day-month-year-whatever)

M/S Aguilar/Espinoza to adopt Resolution No. 2010-66, Authorizing the Acting City Manager to Prepare and Distribute a Request for Proposals (RFP) to Initiate Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Rate Studies Pursuant to Proposition 218. The motion carried 4-0 – Ibid (TGS-To Hire a New Rate Study Consultant)

Council Person Samra: What I’m asking the Council, and 3 of us can do this, this time. We’re not appointing any people to sit on there right now, is to basically do an advertisement for the Business Community, for the Educational Community, the School Districts because they’re also one of the large users too, and Citizens at large that would want to participate in the early process to work with the city Staff and with our Consultant, to hear the issues, find the solutions, and have different ideas that we may not think of. That way, we all work on this together. So I’m asking that we give the direction to the Staff to put this out on Channel 2, on the City Web-Site so if interested persons can submit their names to be considered on the Stakeholders Committee. – February 15, 2011 Discussion: Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee (TGS-Wouldn’t that mean that there would be no excuses when the Final Numbers Finally Came out. You would think. We’ll see.)

M/S Samra/Espinoza to adopt Resolution No. 2011-17, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Awarding a Professional Services Contract to Provide Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Rate Studies, Community Outreach and Proposition 18 Balloting Services to Bartle Wells Associates, Inc. of Berkeley, California and Authorizing the Acting City Manager to Execute the Agreement. The motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Samra – NOES: Council Members: Vierra – ABSENT: Council Members: None  – March 10, 2011 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Rate Consultant #3)

14. City Council to Provide Staff Direction for Appointments to the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee. — Interim City Manager Lewis noted this item is being brought back to Council for further direction…there were a total of eight individuals that submitted letters of interest. There is representation from Foster Farms, Livingston Union School District, Merced Union High School District and five members from the community……Interim City Manager Lewis noted that the representatives from those named industries would be representing their respective employer. April 05, 2011 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-1 Rate Committee)

M/S Aguilar/Samra to adopt Resolution No. 2011-25, appointing the representatives from the three sectors and Claire Gerhman and Warren Urnberg to the committee and continue to recruit for representation from the commercial side. The motion carried 5-0 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Samra, Vierra  – NOES: Council Members: None – ABSENT: Council Members: None – Ibid

M/S Aguilar/Samra Appointing Albert Arias to the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee. The motion carried 5-0 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Samra, Vierra – NOES: Council Members: None – ABSENT: Council Members: None – May 03, 2011 Draft Meeting Minutes

9. Resolution Awarding Construction Contract to Shannon Pump Company, Merced, California, Approving the Expenditure of Construction Funds for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) – Replacement of Motors at Water Wells 8,9,11 and 13 – Grant No. CBG- 09-093 and Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute a Construction Contract and Any Change Orders Thereto with Shannon Pump Company – This item was pulled from the agenda and continued to the next regular meeting. – MAY 17, 2011 Draft Minutes

5. Resolution Awarding Construction Contract to Shannon Pump Company, Merced, California, Approving the Expenditure of Construction Funds for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) – Replacement of Motors at Water Wells 8,9,11 and 13 – Grant No. CBG-09-093 and Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute a Construction Contract and Any Change Orders Thereto with Shannon Pump Company.–This item was continued to the next regular meeting – June 07, 2011 Draft Minutes (TGS-Continued?)

Motion: M/S Land/Aguilar to approve the Agreement for Employment and Appointment of Jose Antonio Ramirez as the City Manager and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. The motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote: – AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Samra  – NOES: Council Members: Vierra – ABSENT: Council Members: None. – June 17, 2011 Draft Minutes 

5. Resolution No. 2011-50 Awarding Construction Contract to Shannon Pump Company, Merced, California, Approving the Expenditure of Construction Funds for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) – Replacement of Motors at Water Wells 8,9,11 and 13 – Grant No. CBG-09-093 and Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute a Construction Contract and Any Change Orders Thereto with Shannon Pump Company – Motion: M/S Vierra/Aguilar to approve consent agenda items 4, 5, and 7. The motion carried 5-0 – July 19, 2011 Draft Minutes (TGS-finally passed as part of the Consent Calendar)

6. Resolution No. 2011-53, Awarding a Professional Engineering Services Contract for Water Treatment at the City Water Supply Well No. 8 to AECOM, Fresno, California, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement –Public Works Superintendent Kathryn Reyes stated that she mailed out the notices on July 1, 2011. She commented that when they started monitoring the wells in 2004 for this contamination, when City Council was notified of it, then every year after that the public was notified, is all in a Consumers Report. She added that health language was included in those notices.-City Manager Ramirez asked do you see anything actually happening on the horizon——-Superintendent Reyes noted that at this time, 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. She added that unfortunately the City water system could be impacted.——-City Manager Ramirez commented that AECOM is a very big company that has acquired a lot of smaller engineering companies, so they have the expertise.——–Council Member Samra commented that one of the first steps was to deal with the many water issues and this firm is reputable. Therefore, he suggested that the City move forward so that the citizens could see that the City was going to clean up their water quality.——–Motion: M/S Samra/Vierra to approve consent agenda item No. 6. The motion carried 5-0 by the following roll call vote: –AYES: Council Members: Espinoza, Aguilar, Land, Samra, Vierra–NOES: Council Members: None–ABSENT: Council Members: None – August 02, 2011 Draft Minutes (TGS-TCP Filtration System)

‘’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 – November 28, 2011

Katherine Schell Rodriquez… stated that in March of this year the Council voted 4-1 to hire Bartels to provide water, wastewater and solid waste rate studies, community outreach and Proposition 218 balloting services… and according to the project schedule and timeline provided by the consultant we should have had public meetings on this already. …did someone decide to cancel the whole darn thing without putting it on the agenda and what is coming next.——-City Manager Ramirez responded that he came on board August 1 of this year and there have been three different meetings with the consultants. He said as they met there was some information that staff was not comfortable with and they felt it was prudent for us to end the contract. Mr. Ramirez added that staff recently sent out an RFP and that will come to Council with a recommendation of a new rate consultant and in addition the $9 million dollars that the City received is being analyzed. He noted that as soon as there is a new consultant on board the stakeholders meetings will resume so that we can have solid information and we are expecting to move quickly.—December 06, 2011 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Dismissal of Rate Consultant #3 and the search begins for Rate Consultant #4)

Warren Urnberg… commented that we need to go back to restricted watering days – Mayor Espinoza stated that we would probably see that item on an upcoming agenda. – Council Member Samra said he didn’t recall rescinding the watering days. – Mayor Espinoza added that we would do more research and put it on an agenda in the future – January 03, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Yep. After putting this discussion off a time or two already, We need to do even more research)

Public Works Superintendent Reyes gave an update on Well 16; it is a permitted well. The City does have a current permit to produce water and the state has not threatened to intervene. There is an arsenic removal system on that well and Public Works will be spending the next few months changing out the filter media. She stated the well is in good standing. January 17, 2012 Draft Minutes

City Engineer Gottiparthy explained that the developer was required to install the well and also install the required treatment equipment for arsenic. Ibid

Motion: M/S Samra/Espinoza to adopt Resolution No. 2012-7 Accepting the Dedication of Lot “C” and Water Well Improvements (Well No. 16) on Lot “C” of Country Lane Subdivision as Shown on the Final Map for Country Lane Subdivision and Authorizing the City Manager to Release the Surety Bonds for Water Well Improvements by Livingston Country Lane, L.L.P., a California Corporation.–AYES: Council Members: Espinoza, Land, Aguilar, Vierra and Samra–NOES: Council Members: None–ABSENT: Council Members: None—Ibid (TGS-You would think that, by having voted on this item, all involved would understand that this well has an Arsenic Issue that will have to be addressed on a regular basis. You would think.)

City Manager Ramirez (stated) that the City received three proposals for the rate consultants and the decision has yet to be made. City staff is taking the three proposals in addition to the feasibility proposals to the Stakeholders Committee and sharing that information with them.—Ibid (Mayor Pro-Temp Margarita Aguilar and Councilmember Gurpal Samra are both Council Liaisons to the the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee at this time. This means any information presented to the Committee is also presented to them. Whatever the Committee knows – they also know. Right?)

City Engineer Nanda Gottiparthy reported on the Utility Stakeholders Committee which was also attended by Council Member Samra and Mayor Pro-Tem Aguilar. The Committee met and discussed the five consultant proposals that were received. Two finalists were invited to come back and make presentations. After the presentations, there was a question and answer session and after further discussion, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants was selected by the Committee and they recommended that their selection be presented to the City Council for their approval. February 07, 2012 Draft Minutes

Mayor Espinoza commented that with the selection of the consultant, the Committee will be looking at the water rate structure and possibly raising water rates. Ibid (Possibly?!?)

4. Resolution No. 2012-14, Awarding a Professional Engineering Services Contract to Prepare a Feasibility Analysis Report for a Centralized Water Treatment Strategy for the City’s Water Supply to Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Portland, Oregon and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement, February 21, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes. (TGS-passed 5-0 on the Consent Calendar)

3. Resolution No. 2012-30 Awarding a Professional Services Contract to Provide Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Utility Rate Studies, Community Outreach and Proposition 218 Balloting Services to Hansford Economic Consulting (HEC) Truckee, California and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement, APRIL 17, 2012 Draft Minutes, Passed 4-0 on the Consent Calendar (TGS-Rate Consultant #4)

City Engineer Gottiparthy gave an update…. Regarding Well #16, he said the pilot study is completed and we have the report and have notified the media that it is likely to be more cost effective. Also, in regards to Well #8 the preliminary design report comments have been sent back to the consultant. There is a delay in the design process and he has talked to the consultant to identify the cause for the delay. So far the site layout has been completed, right of way maps prepared, the appraisal report for the project has been completed and we have secured approval from Foster Farms for the land area. MAY 15, 2012 Draft Minutes

Mayor Espinoza…requested to put the restricted watering days on an agenda in the future for discussion. Ibid (TGS-When, in the future, will this actually happen? Should I be taking bets?)

Council Member Samra suggested to maybe having a Plan B. Talk to a neighboring city to borrow their employee. Maybe Atwater has someone doing this.–City Manager Ramirez said that was a good suggestion. On the wastewater side Foster Farms mentioned that we could ask them for assistance. –Motion: M/S Espinoza/Land to approve the Director of Public Works job description with modifications and to advertise for 30 days. –The motion carried 3-1 by the following roll call vote:–AYES: Council Members: Espinoza, Land, and Samra–NOES: Council Members: Vierra–ABSENT: Council Members: Aguilar May 22, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes

1. City Council to Approve a Sixth Month Interim Solid Waste Contract with Sunset Waste Systems.——–City Manager Ramirez tabled this item. He also introduced representatives with Sunset Waste.–Mayor Espinoza shared that Gilton Solid Waste contacted the City at the last minute and decided to go with a month to month contract until the City went out for Requests for Proposals (RFPs). JUNE 12, 2012 Draft Minutes

Motion: M/S Espinoza/Land to approve a Six Month Interim Extension for Solid Waste Contract with Gilton Solid Waste Management, Inc. and Authorize the City Manager to Solicit a Request for Proposals.—The motion carried 3-0 by the following roll call vote:—AYES: Council Members: Espinoza, Land, and Samra—NOES: Council Members: None—ABSENT: Council Members: Aguilar, Vierra JUNE 19, 2012 Draft Minutes

City Engineer Gottiparthy gave an update on Well No.16. They had a meeting with two bidders on the media. They evaluated 5 media for arsenic and sent those to UC Davis and there are two types of media. Also a cost analysis was done for the life of the media. The analysis looks good and they will bring that back to the City Council after taking it to the Stakeholders Committee. They have asked all bidders to go back and look at their capital costs. July 3, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes

5. Resolution No. 2012-52 for the Acceptance of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) – Grant No. CBG-09-093- “Replacement of Motors at Water Wells 8,9,11 and 13”, and “Citywide Streetlight Retrofit Project”, Authorizing the City Clerk to Record Notices of Completion with Merced County and Authorizing the City Manager to Release Performance and Material Bonds and to Make Final Payment of Retention Monies to Shannon Pump Company and to Tennyson Electric, Inc. JULY 17, 2012 Draft Minutes (TGS-passed 4-0 on the Consent Calendar)

Warren Urnberg…….asked if the watering days were being worked on and getting set-up – August 7, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-You do know that if the Mayor REALLY wanted that on the Agenda, it would be on the Agenda. Right?)

5. Resolution to Award a Professional Services Contract for Providing Community Outreach and Proposition 218 Balloting Services to GoodStanding Outreach, Reno, Nevada and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement Motion: M/S Aguilar/Espinoza to move Item No. 5 to the next meeting. The motion carried 5-0 August 21, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes. (TGS-Public Relations Firm) (TGS-Continue-Move-Postpone-Just different ways to say the Same thing)

Motion: M/S Espinoza/Aguilar to adopt Resolution No. 2012-63 approving the Employment Agreement between the City of Livingston and Humberto Molina for the Position of Public Works Director. The motion carried 4-0 September 4, 201 Draft Meeting Minutes..(TGS-This means A New City Manager, AND a New Public Works Director hired by the Post Recall City Council)

Mayor Pro-Tem Aguilar commented that on the second paragraph of the staff report where it refers to background information, it says this was part of the Stakeholders Committee proposal. Ms. Handsford recommended GoodStanding being that she had worked with them. She brought them forward to the Stakeholders Committee and they listened to the presentation and asked questions and the committee members came to the conclusion that it should go to the City Council for them to decide if they wanted to support Ms. Handsford’s recommendation. October 2, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes

Mayor’s Report He wants to make sure the public knows that the quality of the drinking water in Livingston is safe to drink. There have been several articles in the newspaper stating the contrary, but that is just people trying to push politically attempting to make the City and the City Council look bad. The City Manager and Public Works Director met with the State Water Quality Control Board and they stated the water is safe to drink. Ibid

(Mayor Espinoza) elucidated on the $9 Million settlement the City received as a result of the TCP class action lawsuit filed in 2005-2006. In the early 30’s and 40’s Dow Chemical and Shell Oil sold chemicals as fumigants to farmers and these chemicals went into our drinking water. All throughout the United States, there are issues with TCP and other contaminants in the drinking water and that is one of the reasons that the City joined a class action lawsuit. Eventually, the City prevailed and received a $9 Million settlement. This money is now being used to fix the City’s water wells and for water treatment in the community. Ibid (TGS-So if the water is safe to drink, then why was the City worried about chemicals going into the drinking water and why did the City sue Dow? And why would we need that money for water treatment. Just sayin.)

M/S Samra/Aguilar to adopt Resolution No. 2012-67 to Award the Professional Services Contract for Providing Community Outreach and Proposition 218 Balloting Services to GoodStanding Outreach of Reno, Nevada and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement. The Motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote:…AYES Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, and Samra…NOES: Council Members: Vierra…ABSENT: Council Members: None. Ibid (TGS-1 Public Relations Firm hired. If there are no problems with the Water System, why is the City even thinking about needing a Public Relations firm?)

8. Resolution to Award a Contract to Filtronics, Inc. of Anaheim, California for Goods and Services Provided to Change Out the Arsenic Removal Media for the Well 16 Arsenic Removal Treatment Systems and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement. Continued to next regularly scheduled meeting October 16, 2012 Draft Meeting Minutes.  (TGS-There’s that word “continued” again. You do know, that without a working filtration system, that well can’t be used.)

Council Member Samra: The Stakeholders Committee discussed this in great length on more than one occasion and in the end they made the same recommendation as staff based on cost and the fact that this media is widely available where in the past they were limited to one particular manufacturer. Those were the only concerns they had. If Council wants to bring all vendors onboard and listen to them, they are welcome to, but he doesn’t think that is necessary because the Stakeholders Committee spent more than one meeting on this. OCTOBER 30, 2012 Special Meeting Draft Minutes (TGS-Keep in mind that Both Mayor Pro-Temp Aguilar and Council Member Samra were also at, or should have been at, those meetings and although they were not “voting members” of the committee, they would not just sit there silently. They made their fair share of comments and suggestions.)

Mike Torres, 1616 Eighth Street asked what would happen if the 50 plus one is a protest vote for the resolution and what the timeline is if the City moves forward and approves this. January 15, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes

City Attorney Sanchez responded that at this point staff would look at all the documents again. He said usually this doesn’t happen, but if it did they would start working on it right away to see if we could put something before the property owners. The biggest issue is the rate increases because they just elect the cost. If increased rates are not approved then there would be a reduction in service and that is our biggest concern. Ibid  (TGS-s0 the New City Attorney is talking about possible reductions in service. Interesting.)

Motion: M/S Sicairos/Soria to adopt Resolution No. 2013-2 of the City Council of the City of Livingston Adopting Guidelines for the Submission and Tabulation of Protests Pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution (Proposition 218). The motion carried 4-0 by the following roll call vote:….AYES: Council Members: Samra, Soria, Mendoza, and Sicairos …..NOES: Council Members: None…..ABSENT: Council Members: Espinoza Ibid

City Manager Ramirez:…Again in the last six weeks we have had some issues with microorganisms in the water. This means it does not affect you health wise, but aesthetically you get brown or red water, so this builds up in areas where you have lines that are not used. There was a particular line that was shut off years ago and when we found that it was closed we turned it on and there was some buildup of manganese and iron. We are working closely with Foster Farms and are trying to address this problem when Foster Farms is not in production, so it is going to require a lot of team work. February 05, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Water Quality Problems. Oops!)

City Manager Ramirez stated that he has been working with Foster Farms as they have been experiencing more manganese in the water that shut down an entire shift; there is a meeting scheduled for tomorrow morning. February 19, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes

(In response to a question about applying for a grant to bring Well #17 online) City Manager Ramirez responded that we have chosen this well that has not been constructed because we need the additional capacity. He added that even if we were to have future development and we were to pay for it up front that doesn’t take away from any future developers actually contributing. So rather than waiting for someone to come in we are being proactive and trying to bring another well online. April 2, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-So…we need the additional capacity? What’s wrong with the capacity we have?)

(In Response to some water quality related questions, City Manager Ramirez responded)In regards to the feasibility study, basically a draft has been out. There has been several questions that MID, the City Engineer and California Department of Public Health has had, so Kennedy Jenks is basically addressing all of those issues so that we can have a revised draft that we can send out again to the Stakeholders Committee and the City Council and then have the final draft hopefully by mid-May or sooner…..· With regards to Well #8 TCP, 90% of the design has already been approved and moved forward on Well #8. Staff has received comments from the California Department of Health. There is an issue with actual disposal of water with some of the nitrates, so that’s also some of the State issues they are addressing. April 16, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes

(City Manager Ramirez Reported) The one million gallon water tank in the City needs painting. They are analyzing that further to see if it can be done further down the road or needs to be addressed this next year. We are looking at fire protection and some other things. Ibid

City Manager Ramirez added that the City recently received a letter regarding Well #13, discussing the arsenic levels (10). The City is working hard to compile this information by June 30^th. May 21, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Uh-Oh. Does this count as a “problem”)

Public Works Director: Well #13 was out of commission for several years for different reasons…We brought it back online recently in April and unfortunately it came up with some high numbers for Arsenic. After looking back at the history of that well it actually has had problems going back to 2009..one of our sample results was 12.9 and the other was 11.9: which puts us over the top. We can’t exceed 10……Even if we got a sample below 10 for the next 3 quarters, there’s no way we’re going to get below 10…We’re going to have to look at what we’re going to do about the well. Eventually, if it keeps going like this, than there’s probably a different order that’s going to be coming down. Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee Meeting. June 03, 2013 

City Manager Ramirez: States that the compliance order came from California’s Department of Public Health. In this order there is a list of 20 items that need to be corrected. However, there are four items that deserve extra attention and that includes; 1) Creating a 5 year capital improvement plan, 2) Enacting a water conservation plan which would require Council passing a resolution and community outreach, 3) Cleaning a tank that has been afflicted by corrosion, and 4) adjusting EPA’s well testing frequencies from every 3 years to every 3 months……Moreover, Well #15 is going over the maximum contaminant level by one tenth, thus currently at a state of 9.9. Quoted received for Well #13 indicated that it will cost over $200,000.00 to address the media. These wells are needed for production purposes; it is because of this that the Department of Public Health is willing to work with Livingston. The standard for arsenic levels in 2008 was 15 parts per billion now it has dropped to 10 parts per billion. Because of this Livingston will have to create another well, Well #17 as a back up well. Nevertheless, Well #8 is seeing progress along with Well # 16. The City must take strategic steps to address water quality issues and that includes creating short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals. The City continues looking for resources. In particular the City is currently looking for grant opportunities via the National Rural Association. To make Livingston a more competitive applicant for grants and loans, the City must first address the budget deficit. JUNE 04, 2013 Draft Minutes (TGS-Address the Deficit? What Deficit? Weren’t we told there WAS no Deficit?)

…I think…the community deserves to be informed… every city around the valley has this issue with wells and we’re no different than that. And, of course, we’re trying to address all these issues with the stakeholders and the future water rates we’re gonna be addressing, and doing wellhead treatments on all the wells…But, of course, this information was already sent out to the public as to the compliance issue: the wells, with the water…I know that the city manager will do the best that he can to address those issues. Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza (TGS–Excerpted from June 04, 2013 City Council Meeting Video. Excerpted from June 04, 2013 City Council Meeting Video. You can check it out for yourself by going to the City’s Website.)

Mayor Espinoza announced that the Council is thinking about implementing watering days. In the past Livingston would restrict residents to watering their lawn every other day. The days that residents watered their lawn depended on the last digit of their address, whether it was an odd or even number.June 18, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-Seems like the Council has been doing several years worth of thinking about this already.)

City Manager Ramirez added that the City is looking at addressing its water quality issues. Improving water quality is a very expensive process and one thing that the City can do to alleviate this burden to taxpayers is to apply for grants or state revolving loans that could help fund necessary improvements. July 16, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes (TGS-But to better qualify for the Big Ones, we first have to address that non-existing Deficit. Right?)

"The Council is not told ‘You know, what? If we can spend a little bit more, it’ll be a good reliable system that will last a long time. And sometimes, the manager does not agree with us. Sometimes, I think that you should come in to the Council sometimes so that way we can talk, you know, with us in Open Session to discuss that. Because we want to make sure that we’re getting the best thing that we have, what will last, a system that will last a while. You don’t want to cut costs on a few things, for something that’s not going to last." Mayor Espinoza to City Engineer Nanda Gottiparthy regarding Well #16. September 03, City Council Meeting Video (TGS – The Draft Meeting Minutes for this Meeting are not out yet. Go to the City’s Website, click on the link for Archived Meeting Videos and watch the video from about 8 minutes in.)

OK. SO ONCE UPON A TIME, BACK IN 2004

In July 2004, the State of California Department of Health Services (CDHS) sent a letter to the City of Livingston notifying the City that the levels of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) exceeded public health goals and required action by the City.

AND

In response to that letter, the City aggressively pursued potential solutions to effectively address the 1,2,3-TCP contamination issue. Staff Report, October 01, 2013 City Council Meeting Agenda Packet (TGS-Which included Suing Dow Chemical Corp in 2005 BTW)

THEN IN 2007

Council Member Espinoza commented that there have been many complaints about the water system and a rate increase is warranted to correct the problems June 19, 2007 Draft Meeting Minutes

THEN IN 2008

“Mayor Samra commented that making a decision is not easy for him and he 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 (Water Rate Increases) be continued” January 15, 2008, Draft Meeting Minutes

THEN IN 2009,

AFTER YET ANOTHER RATE STUDY, Rate Increases were passed, which lead to lawsuits, and a recall, and a New Council, a New City Manager, A New City Attorney, a New Public Works Director, a Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee, and a New Set of Consultants.

AND AS TIME CONTINUED TO PASS

THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH issued an Enforcement Letter about Manganese, a Warning Letter about Water System Funding,  a Compliance order for Failing the Arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level Standards, and a Water System Inspection Report with a long list of things it wants addressed.

AND

KENNEDY-JENKS, THE CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDED BY THE UTILITY RATES STAKEHOLDERS COMMITTEE has issued its report: which says, among other things:

• The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) has identified TCP as a contaminant of concern and is in the process of developing a MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level)….It is expected that an MCL…may be in place as soon as 2016 with enforcement required by 2018.

• All of the City wells have TCP levels substantially about the estimated MCL…and remain some of the highest in the state. Two of the wells (12 and 14) produce water with TCP Levels exceeding the response level, the level at which CDPH recommends that the source be removed from service.

• All City wells contain manganese with Well 15 above the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL)…and the future Well 17 is just over the SMCL…The City has been advised that a short-term waiver process may be pursued to allow for additional time to implement improvements and that this waiver process includes demonstration of public support of continued delivery of water with manganese above the SMCL.

• The combination of challenges leaves the City exposed to water rationing if existing demands repeat the 2010 and 2011 water use levels. Loss of Wells 12 and 14 would be catastrophic and without Well 16 operating the City would be unable to meet existing water commitments without implementation of water conservation measures.

•  

SO WHERE AM I GOING WITH THIS? I’m going to go out on a limb just a tad and offer this opinion. I think we have, and have had, two different “camps” of people who have managed to get themselves elected to City Council over the years.

• Those who did not believe our Water System has some real issues which would only get worse with time.

• Those that understood/understand quite well that there are Real Issues to be addressed, but were unwilling to take the Political Hit for making it clear to the public just what those issues are, and how expensive those issues are to fix.

Because the message put out during the Run Up To The Recall went along the lines of “These Rates are Unwarranted and Unnecessary. The water isn’t that bad. The System isn’t that broken. Once we get in, we will get rid of everyone who was telling us all those lies about having to spend a lot of money to get our System Fixed. Once we get rid of “them” and get in people of our choosing, we will find out once and for all that the problem really isn’t that big, that bad, and that expensive after all.”

Well..what is actually happening is this: the New City Manager, and the New Public Works Director and the New Consultants are NOT saying “The problems with the System aren’t really that expensive to fix”. In fact, what they are saying is something quite the opposite.

And they are also saying that in order to qualify for the Grants and Low Interest Loans the City would need to do most of the work, it would have to pass rates that not only pay back the Deficit in the Water Enterprise Fund, but also starts building up a few months worth of cash as an Operating Reserve.

But we have at least 1 member of the Council who does not believe in paying  back the Deficit.

Add to that the fact that the Post Recall City Council has made it quite clear that it will take at least a 4-1 vote to pass any kind of Water Rate Increase.

Rate Consultant #4 has not yet supplied numbers for the next round of Proposition 218 Water Rate Hearings. These numbers should be going before the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee in the next few weeks or so. First, The Committee will have its chance to shred (I mean “approve”) everything before passing its recommendations along to the City Council.

This is what: The end of September 2013? In November 2014 it will be time to elect a Mayor and at least one Councilperson. With the way things are dragging on (again) I can’t help but wonder if either the Rate Increase Issue will be put off until after the elections (again).

Or if some members of the council will go on a serious hunt (again), to find someone else upon which to pin the blame for Unreasonable Rate Increases.

And Now On to the

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING /

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

OCTOBER 1, 2013

SPECIAL MEETING: 5:30 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a Special Meeting / Regular Meeting on October 1, 2013, 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 Special Meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. and the Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. The agenda shall be as follows:

Special Meeting

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call

CLOSED SESSION

A “Closed” or “Executive” Session of the City Council or the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston 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 Council Chambers 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.

3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 3

4. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIONAL ACTION ITEM

5. City Engineer Interview – Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group.

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER

Pledge of Allegiance. Next Resolution Number: 2013-48

Next Ordinance Number: 608

Roll Call.

Closed Session Announcements

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. John Bidwell, Program Manager, Quantum Energy Services and Technologies (QUEST): California Wastewater Process Optimization Program (CALPOP).

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.

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.

2. Resolution Awarding Construction Contract to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., Livermore, CA, Approving the Expenditure of Construction Funds for the CMAQ Pedestrian Improvement Sidewalk Installation Project – Project No. CML-5256 (012) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Construction Contract and Any Change Orders Thereto with FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc.

3. Resolution Awarding Construction Contract to Conco West, Inc. of Manteca, CA; Approving the Expenditure of Construction Funds for the Well No. 8 Wellhead Treatment System and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Construction Contract and Any Change Orders Thereto with Conco West, Inc.

4. Approval of Warrant Register Dated September 26, 2013.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

5. Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement to Provide Contract Engineering Staff Support Services for the City of Livingston and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement in a Form Acceptable to the City Attorney.

6. Resolution Approving a Land Lease Agreement Between the City of Livingston and Gerald Martin for Property Known as 15036 Vinewood Avenue, APN Numbers 047-140-006 and 047-140-0017.

ADJOURNMENT

A Contract to Demolish The Court Theater, A Feasibility Analysis for a Sustainable Water Treatment Strategy, and a City Council Agenda

During the latter phase of this study, it became apparent that the existing groundwater production capacity was becoming severely challenged by physical limitations of the existing assets and that groundwater quality was declining further at several sites.

During this study a number of changes in the operation of the City wells occurred and it is expected that due to a number of water quality issues, operational strategies of the City wells will continue to change as the City works with the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to provide a safe water supply.

For example, during the course of this study it was found that the City did not have sufficient firm water supply to meet the maximum day demand.

Working with CDPH the City may continue to operate the previously inactive Well 13 with arsenic concentrations exceeding the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) CDPH has also provided the City with Guidelines for requesting a waiver for manganese that could allow the City to operate Well 13 for up to nine (9) years while a treatment solution is completed. Excerpts Above from: “City of Livingston Feasibility Analysis for a Sustainable Water Treatment Strategy”, Executive Summary, Page I, Kennedy Jenks Consultants, July 12, 2013

In 2008, we had a Water Rate Study prepared that included  $19.84  Million in Filtration Systems and Upgrades to the Water System. But that one was Heard, and Tabled, and Tabled Again until the…

2009  Water Rate Study that included  $8.178 Million  in Filtration Systems and Repairs to the Water System, was eventually adopted by the City Council, and resulted in the Recall Election of 2010.

Now we have the Feasibility Study by Kennedy Jenks which includes details for at least $30 Million in Capital Projects for Treatment Systems and Upgrades to the Water System to address our growing Water Quality Issues and relies heavily on borrowing from the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving (Loan) Fund.

More on that a little later.

But first –

A CONTRACT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE COURT THEATER is an Item on this Tuesday’s City Council Meeting Agenda. The Staff Report tells the story this way:

The "Court" Theater was designed in August 1945 and built soon thereafter by the Court Family to replace a 200-seat theater that had burned to the ground…. It was used extensively over the subsequent years and used primarily for movie viewing. The theater is reported to have closed in 1977 and has remained vacant since then.

The property was purchased by David and Judith Theodore in November 1987.

On February 5, 2002, the Livingston City Council approved a motion to buy the theater for $115,000.

In April 2002, the City purchased the property from the Theodore family in hopes of restoring it to its former glory.

On January 15, 2002, the City Council established the Livingston Court Theater Committee and appointed Committee members on February 5, 2002.

In 2004, the building was evaluated by a structural engineer (Pelton Engineering) which determined, at that time, that the building structure was in general good condition, but the interior needed "proper rehabilitation."

The planned renovation efforts involved six phases: 1) roof repair, 2) clean up, 3) interior demolition, 4) refurbishment, 5) new construction and expansion of north side 6) new construction and expansion of south side. The architects estimated costs totaled $2,350,000.00.

In 2004, the City applied for four grant applications (CDBG Planning and Technical Assistance Grant, California Cultural and Historical Endowment, and Roberti-Z’Berg­ Harris Nonurbanized Open Space and Recreation Grant Program) to assist the City with design and renovation costs associated with the Court Theater Renovation Project.

In July 2005, the City was awarded a Community Development Block Grant in the amount of $500,000.00 from the State of California Housing and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) General/Native American Allocation Program.

I’m going to interrupt the Staff Report at this point to add a few more details.

In Fiscal Year 2008, the City used its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)  to complete the architectural drawings for the Court Theater renovation. It also applied for another $1 million Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and a low-interest loan from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to help provide funds for the Court Theater Restoration Project. Total cost of the Court Theater restoration was estimated at that time to be $7,652,672. (2008-2009 Budget p. 344)

By February, 2010, the Court Theater Project had become caught up in the turbulent politics of “Run Up to the Recall About Water Rates”: with the accusation being that $1 million dollars had been cut from the Police and Fire Department Budget in order to finance the Project.

(After the Recall, the person who leveled this charge was appointed to the Planning Commission by the Post Recall City Council. Go Figure)

By May of 2011, the Court Theater Committee did not feel that they had the Council’s support for the project when they went out to do fundraisers and they  just wanted to know if this project was something the Council wished to continue and asked for an official Resolution of Support. During the City Council discussions, the Committee was taken to task by Mayor Pro-Temp Margarita Aguilar for the “perks” the Committee was receiving: Thing like, being referenced on the City’s Web Page. Having Published Agendas and meetings in the City conference Chamber. Things of that sort.

In contrast, Council Member Samra stated the intent of this resolution was to give moral support. He went on to state the Council needed to make a decision on what to do with the project and not place the blame on the committee and suggested that if the Council’s desire was to eliminate the project, then they should deny the resolution and bring back the project for a decision on what to do with the building.

A Motion to Deny Approval of the Resolution of Support was made by Council Members Land and Aguilar: and failed by a 2-3 vote. A Motion to Approve the Resolution of Support was made by Council Members Samra and Vierra: and passed 3-2.

By December 2011 there were discussions about changing the scope of the project, because finding sources of funding was becoming increasingly difficult. 

On January 17, 2012, the City Council unanimously adopted a Resolution Accepting Submittal of a Proposition 84 Grant Application to Construct the New Court Theater, Office Buildings and Downtown Parking Structure; Prepare a Downtown Master Plan and Form-Based Zoning Code; and Provide Passive Recreation Activities at the Merced River. 

I also remember the City hiring a Professional crews to clean up the Pigeon droppings and cover the roof with a tarp in an effort to stave off more damage. (I don’t remember exactly when. I just remember seeing the workers dressed up in white Hazmat type suits)

Returning to the Staff Report, we find

The City spent some of this money on permits and design work but was unable to start the work.

The State has since asked for reimbursement of grant proceeds. The City entered into a repayment plan to pay back $147,000 per year for three consecutive years.

The Livingston Court Theater is in a state of disrepair and is no longer structurally sound. The building appears to be in imminent threat of falling and is considered unsafe. The building now serves as a nesting area for pigeons and has now accumulated a significant amount of pigeon waste.

In the City’s efforts to look ahead and examine downtown revitalization efforts, it is considering various options to restoring a vibrant downtown. One option is deconstruct the theater to make room for other possible options, including a new theater project that preserves the integrity of the old architecture design and integrates new technologies available for a theater and auditorium use.

(How much you wanna bet it ends up a parking lot……. Just sayin)

THE FINAL DRAFT of the KENNEDY JENKS “City of Livingston Feasibility Analysis for a Sustainable Water Treatment Strategy” has been distributed to the members of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee. Members of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting Include:

• Richie King – Foster Farms – representing the “Industrial” Business Sector

• A representative from the Livingston Union School District

• A representative from the Merced Union High School District

• Albert Arias – representing Commercial Businesses

• Warren Urnberg (Planning Commissioner)– representing Livingston Residents

• (there was another person appointed to represent Livingston Residents. But she resigned and there is currently a vacancy in that position)

• City Council Liasons: Mayor Pro-Temp Gurpal Samra and Councilperson David Mendoza.

Meetings of the Utility Rates Stakeholders Committee are open to the public and a meeting to discuss the Kennedy Jenks report and other issues related to Livingston’s Groundwater and Water System has been set for August 19th.

I cannot emphasize enough how important it is for as many people as humanly possible attend this meeting. You need to hear for yourself exactly what is going on with our Water System, and what the Consultants are proposing Livingston do in order to comply with Clean Water Regulations and State Requirements: those on the books right now, and those expected to be imposed between 2014-2016.

There is quite a bit of detail in the report. (I am still working my way through my copy: page by page) In the meantime, here are a few more excerpts from the Executive Summary: pages III-VI

• The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) has identified TCP as a contaminant of concern and is in the process of developing a MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level)….It is expected that an MCL…may be in place as soon as 2016 with enforcement required by 2018.

• All of the City wells have TCP levels substantially about the estimated MCL…and remain some of the highest in the state. Two of the wells (12 and 14) produce water with TCP Levels exceeding the response level, the level at which CDPH recommends that the source be removed from service.

• All City wells contain manganese with Well 15 above the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL)…and the future Well 17 is just over the SMCL…The City has been advised that a short-term waiver process may be pursued to allow for additional time to implement improvements and that this waiver process includes demonstration of public support of continued delivery of water with manganese above the SMCL.

• The City wells also have arsenic levels at and above the MCL…Well 13 was recently reactivated and is delivering water in violation of the Arsenic MCL.

• The city groundwater supply is showing elevated nitrate with Well 10 shut down to an MCL violation and DBCP in Well 14 approaching the MCL.

• A Complete conversion to surface water is impractical due to the likely reduction of surface water availability during periods of drought as surface water would be curtailed and the City forced to rely substantially on groundwater as the primary supply on a cycle of a few years every decade.

• Groundwater treatment will require multiple processes to address the differing contaminants. Initial challenges include addressing potential arsenic treatment at Wells 12, 13, and 15 as well as the elevated manganese levels at wells 9, 11, 14, and 15.

• Well 17 has manganese levels above the SMCL and will require treatment before being permitted as a new water supply source.

• Wells 12 and 14 are at risk of CDPH directing the City to discontinue use due to TCP levels above the RL (response level)

• The combination of challenges leaves the City exposed to water rationing if existing demands repeat the 2010 and 2011 water use levels. Loss of Wells 12 and 14 would be catastrophic and without Well 16 operating the City would be unable to meet existing water commitments without implementation of water conservation measures.

• Use of MID water for irrigation at selected sites is feasible and would reduce system demand modestly…(at) a high cost per unit of water delivered.

• Recycled water is technically feasible but not economically feasible.

• Conversion of Caltrans right-of-way to MID supplied irrigation is possible…(at) a high cost per unit of water delivered.

• Development of a Surface Water Treatment Plant using MID water is feasible. Challenges as to supply reliability during drought need to be resolved and the resolution could result in the City still having to maintain significant potable groundwater production capacity to address drought periods.

• Any potable surface water solution will be subject to dry year reductions and require the City to maintain substantial groundwater capacity.

• Any potable surface water solution will require several years to resolve technical, permitting and economic challenges and reliance on surface water to resolve existing capacity and groundwater quality issues is infeasible.

• Centralized groundwater treatment…is feasible and the recommended alternative for groundwater treatment.

Those of you who would like to do more reading about Livingston’s Water Woes can find more information by clicking on the following:

2008 City of Livingston Water Rate Study Presentation: Dan Bergmann, Interstate Gas Services, Inc. 

2009 City of Livingston Water Rate Study: Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. 

California Department of Health Sept. 2010 Letter on Water System Funding

California Department of Health – Compliance Order For Violation of the Arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level: May 16, 2013

Arsenic Warning Insert

California Department of Health: City of Livingston 2011 Water System Inspection Report

California Department of Health: City of Livingston 2013 Water System Inspection Report

And Now On To The

CONCURRENT MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE

CITY OF LIVINGSTON

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

AUGUST 20, 2013

CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.

OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston will hold a Regular Meeting on August 20, 2013, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

CLOSED SESSION

A “Closed” or “Executive” Session of the City Council or the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston 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 Council Chambers 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.

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.

3. Successor Agency

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation

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

City of Livingston and Successor Agency to the Livingston Community Redevelopment Agency v. Ana Matosantos, et al

Superior Court of the State of California – County of Sacramento

Case No. 34-2013-80001460

4. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 3

6. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2013-38

Next Ordinance Number: 608

Pledge of Allegiance. Next Successor Agency

Resolution Number: 2013-4

Roll Call.

Closed Session Announcements

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by Public Works Director Humberto Molina: 25 Year Service Pin to Ruben Mendoza, Maintenance Worker II.

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

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.

2. Resolution Rejecting All Bids Received for CMAQ Pedestrian Improvement – Sidewalk Installation Project, Project No. CML-5256(012) and Authorizing the City Manager to Re-advertise Bids.

3. Resolution for the Acceptance of the Phase 2 Water Line Improvement Project, Authorizing the City Clerk to Record a Notice of Completion with Merced County and Authorizing the City Manager to Release Performance and Material Bonds and to Make Final Payment of Retention Monies to California Trenchless, Inc.

4. Resolution Supporting Boundary Expansion No. 4 of the Merced County Regional Enterprise Zone.

5. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to File a Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Estimate Exchange Fund Claim Form for Fiscal Year 2012/2013.

6. Consideration of Appointment to Utility Rates Stakeholders’ Committee.

7. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 606, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Acting in its Capacity as the Legislative Body of City of Livingston Community Facilities District No. 2013-1 (Livingston Family Apartments) and Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax Therein.

8. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 607, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Title 5, Chapter 5, Section 6 of the Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Relating to Second Residential Unit Development Standards in the R-2 Zoning District (Medium Density Residential).

9. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on June 18, 2013.

10. Approval of Warrant Register Dated August 15, 2013.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

11. Provide Staff Direction for Appointment to the Planning Commission.

12. Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement to Provide Contract Engineering Staff Support Services for the City of Livingston and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement in a Form Approved by the City Attorney.

13. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Demolition Agreement with Jim Brisco Enterprises, Inc. Relating to the Court Theater.

14. Fiscal Year 2013-2014 Budget Workshop #2: Questions & Answers Session.

ADJOURNMENT

A Blistering Tank, A Concern About Water Rates, A State Inspection Report, and a Planning Commission Agenda

LIVINGSTON CA / May 13, 2013 —

It appears that the City may not have enough staff under the Water Division to keep up with the operation of the system. The Water Division currently employs 3 certified operators who are responsible for all of the operation and maintenance of the well sites, investigating customer complaints , and providing any repairs to the system.

Well No. 16 has been offline since September 2011 because the media in the arsenic removal treatment system has been exhausted .

Well No. 13 is also offline due to arsenic at elevated levels but below the MCL. The City is currently flushing the well to waste and collecting a bacteriological cycle test and hopes to bring the well online by mid-April if the cycle test results are coliform negative.

• The interior coating (walls, floor , and interior support column) is in overall poor condition. There is a large amount of blistering, cracking, and pinholes in the coating. It is recommended to blast and recoat the interior of the tank .

The Department notified the City in an email dated March 15, 2013, of … deficiencies and requested that the City provide…:

• A plan and time schedule for bringing Wells Nos. 13 and 16 back online by April 5, 2013.

• A plan and time schedule for increasing the City’s source capacity by April 5, 2013.

• Provide monthly water consumption data for Foster Farms Processing Plant.

A Few Excerpts from the California Department of Health: City of Livingston 2013 Water System Inspection Report

So…there might not be enough staff to run the Water System, we’ve had not one, but TWO wells taken off-line for a time due to “Arsenic Issues” And the The State of  California Department of Public Health wants the City of Livingston to give an accounting of how much water Foster Farms uses each month.

Interesting.

The latest Water System Inspection report is just chalk full of “deficiencies” that the State wants the City to address.

More on that a little later. But First.

Yep…There’s Strange and then there is Army Strange. Courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons.

WITH APOLIGIES TO THE HOUSE THAT JACK BUILT

This is a Corner of B Street.

This is the Building

That housed a Club

and sits on a Corner of B Street.

This is the Land

Which was Owned by the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

Which was counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

This is the Pharmacy

That Bought the Land

Which was Owned by the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

Which was counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

These are the Changes

That were made to the Permit

That belonged to the Building

Across from the Pharmacy

That now owns the Land

Once Owned by the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

That had counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

This is the Appeal

Of the Changes That were made

to the Permit That belonged

To the Building Across

From the Pharmacy which owns

The Land purchased from the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

That had counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

This is the Mayor

(Who was in favor of the Changes

Before voting against them)

And Who filed the Appeal

of Changes That were made

to the Permit That belonged

To the Building now Across

From the Pharmacy which owns

The Land purchased from the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

That had counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

This is the Council

That conducted the Hearings

Along with the Mayor

(Who had first been favor

of the Changes to the Permit

Before voting against them)

Who had filed the Appeal

Of the Changes  That were made

to the Permit That belonged

To the Building Across

From the Pharmacy which owns

The Land purchased from the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

That had counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

This is the Decision

To Revoke the Permit

As was made by the Council

That conducted the Hearings

Along with the Mayor

(Who had first been favor

of the Changes to the Permit

Before voting against them)

Who had filed the Appeal

Of the Changes  That were made

to the Permit That belonged

To the Building Across

From the Pharmacy which owns

The Land purchased from the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

That had counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

 

This is the Issue

Emphasized as the Reason

For making the Decision

To Revoke the Permit

That was made by the Council

That conducted the Hearings

Along with the Mayor

(Who had first been favor

of the Changes to the Permit

Before voting against them)

Who had filed the Appeal

Of the Changes  That were made

to the Permit That belonged

To the Building Across

From the Pharmacy which owns

The Land purchased from the City

Where once was a Park

and a small Parking Lot

That had counted as parking

For use by the people

who went to the Club

That was housed in the Building

that sits on a Corner of B Street.

Round and Round and Round we go..where it all stops…nobody knows

(And if you doubt “parking” was the main reason/excuse/whatever given for The Council’s Revocation of that Conditional Use Permit, just click on over to the APRIL o3, 2012 Draft Minutes. Then do a search on the word “parking”.)

THE WATER SYSTEM INSPECTION REPORT By the California Department of Health is now available. And although the overall condition of the system is described as “good”, there were 20 items the California Department of Health stated “required action”.

Item #20 on the “required action” states as follows:

“The City must provide a plan and timeline for addressing the recommendations in the 2013 tank inspection report by April 30, 2013”

According to the Inspection Report

The City has a 1.0 MG welded steel storage tank in the southeast section of the City that was built in 1999…. primarily filled by Well No. 12 …(and) last inspected in January 2013 by Liquid Engineering Corporation.

This inspection found that

• The interior coating (walls, floor , and interior support column) is in overall poor condition. There is a large amount of blistering, cracking, and pinholes in the coating. It is recommended to blast and recoat the interior of the tank .

To which the Department of Health responded by stating in it’s Report:

The Department reviewed the tank inspection on March 21. 2013 . In an email to the City, dated March 21. 2013. the Department requested that the City provide a plan and timeline for addressing the inspection items by April 15. 2013.

Repairs like these don’t come cheap. At the most recent Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting, Public Works Director Humberto Molina explained it this way:

• Costs range from (on the low end) $60,000 to (on the high end) a quarter million dollars: depending on the damage.

• This project doesn’t seem to be in the quarter million range, but it’s probably not in the lower end either: it’s somewhere in the middle.

ABOUT LIVINGSTON’S WATER RATES the State Said.

It was also noted during the inspection that the City’s water rates are not sufficient. The City currently charges residential customers $9.90 per 47 hcf (hundred cubic feet) with no penalty fee for exceeding that amount. The City charges even less ($8.70 per 47 hcf) for commercial customers and $0.30 per 1,000 gallons for exceeding the 47 hcf.

In a letter dated September 15, 2010 , the Department expressed concern to the City about having sufficient water rates to generate enough revenue to cover all of the water system’s expenses including operation, maintenance and capital improvements.

To read the complete report from the State of California Department of Health: you can CLICK HERE

And now on to the

LIVINGSTON PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

TUESDAY, MAY 14 ,2013

7:00P.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: 7:00PM

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. Action Meeting Minutes from the March 12, 2013, Planning Commission Regular Meeting.

Item No.2- Election of Officers

a. Election of New Chair and Vice-Chair for 2013.

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 Hearing

a. Conditional Use Permit 2013-01. Fabian Maldonado has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to cultivate sweet potatoes on a 5.62-acre parcel located on the north side of F Street, between the northerly extension of Winton Parkway and Livingston Middle School on property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential (APN: 022-010-018).

b. Conditional Use Permit 2013-02. Zeke Nelson has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a 100-person capacity church use in the Downtown Commercial Zoning District (DTC) at 1471 B Street, Suite A in the Liberty Market shopping center at the former movie rental store (APN: 024-132-011).

c. Conditional Use Permit 2013-03. Carlos Vieira has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a private, non-profit, youth boxing sports club for up to 30 youth (ages 10 through 18) at 444 Main Street, Livingston on property zoned Downtown Commercial (DTC), APN 024-114-008.

d. Site Plan/Design Review 2013-01. Motel 6 has applied for a Site Plan/Design Review application to develop a 75-room, 3-story motel on a 1.04 -acre parcel located at 309 Joseph Gallo Drive, Livingston, generally located on the north side of Joseph Gallo Drive, west of Winton Parkway on property zoned Highway Service Commercial (C-3), APN 022-020-001.

Item No.5- Reports

a. Planning Commission

b. City Staff

Item No. 6- Adjournment to regular meeting on June 11, 2013.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if yon 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.

.

 

.

Fireworks Stands, Stray Dogs, Garbage Rate Increases, and a City Council Agenda

The proposed changes haven’t sparked any discontent from the community, (City Manager) Ramirez said. Residents have been open to it. Livingston set to decide on utility fee hike, Mike North, Merced Sun Star, Tuesday March 19, 2013

"We have to do what we have to do, but I still want a little more explanation from the city," he (Mayor Pro Temp Gurpal Samra) said. Ibid

Our underground utilities are as old as the town–Public Works Director Humberto Molina, Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting, March 18, 2013 (copy of audio available upon request)

You also have to take into consideration the life span of the wells, the life span of the treatment plant, and space. You know we have had to purchase some property from some of our neighbors as we are adding filtration systems……..But we want to give you all the data because one way or the other, its quite a bit of money. City Manager Jose Ramirez Ibid

What I want is that the Stakeholders become aware of is what our system is today, what the study is going to propose, and what needs to happen altogether,….  to bring it, from wherever it is, to the standard it needs to be brought up to. Public Works Director Humberto Molina , Ibid

We are going to be giving you the information.  You will be determining if we stay Status Quo…..We are taking information that’s important and sharing it and making sure that more than one person knows about it…City Manager Jose Ramirez, Ibid

When we first started this…We knew that pipes had to be replaced..there’s three different sections..and we knew we had manganese in the water. We knew that needed to be addressed: can’t have brown water coming out of the pipes…. Then you talk about SCADA systems. Then you talk about Lift Stations….Where does the list stop. Richie King, Foster Farms, Member: Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee – Livingston, Ibid

You can only put maintenance off for so long before it catches up to you, Humberto Molina, Director of Public Works, Livingston Ibid

So..The City Manager says residents are open to the Rate Increases for Garbage Pick Up while Mayor Pro Temp Gurpal Samra wants MORE explanations from City Staff about why there is still a Deficit in the Sanitation Fund.

Interesting…more on that later. But First

Yep…There’s Strange and then there is Army Strange. Courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons.

FAMILY HAMBURGER NIGHT AT THE VFW…..Join us for the VFW Hamburger Night, March 28, 2013, from 5-7 pm at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Building, 1605 7^th Street, in Livingston. The public is invited, and you do not have to be a member to attend.

You will be able to enjoy hamburgers, cheeseburgers, fish sandwiches, chicken sandwiches, hot dogs and chili. The sandwiches include your choice of homemade salads.

Price ranges from $2.00 to 4.00 per meal. All proceeds go to help support our community programs.

TAKE OUT DINNER!!!The Ladies Auxiliary and VFW will be having a Spanish Take Out Dinner on April 11, 2013. Presale tickets are $8.00 and $10.00 at the door.

The menu will be Mexican Casserole, Salad, Roll & Butter and Dessert. The dinner will be held at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Building, located at 1605 7^th Street in Livingston.

For tickets or more information contact Denis (209) 394-2059 or Teresa (209-) 496-7310, or contact us through the contact page on our website, www.vfwlivingston.com.

Proceeds will go to support our local programs

GIVE BLOOD, & RECEIVE A TICKET FOR A FREE MEAL FROM VFW 8327……Community Blood Drive to be held at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Hall, 1605 7^th Street, Livingston, on April 18, 2013 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.

For more information call Denis Wells at 394-2059 or visit our Website at www.vfwlivingston.com.

Walk-ins are always welcome.

AT THE MARCH 05, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING there were a few things that caught my attention.  The City Manager reported that the State Water board will be curtailing water flows by at least 35%. this will have an impact on groundwater quality due to additional pumping.

CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE ALLOWING THE SALE AND USE OF “SAFE AND SANE” FIREWORKS was, again, on the Agenda.  Part of the discussion revolved around whether or not to limit Livingston High School to only 1 Fireworks Stand per year. There had been complaints that Livingston High School has been getting the lion’s share of Fireworks Stands over the years and if the High School was limited to only 1 of the available 5 annual permits, more non profit organizations would be able to “have a turn” at having a Fireworks Stand.

Another part of the discussion was about whether or not to allow the sales and use of “safe and sane” fireworks after July 4th, and what to do about “illegal/dangerous” fireworks. According to David Bates, Volunteer Fire Chief, the City should do what it can to limit the hazards created by fireworks use: limiting the sale and use of legal fireworks to June 28 through July 4th and stepping up the enforcement against the use of illegal fireworks.

The Council decided it was too late in the year to make any changes to the Fireworks Stand Rotation (see above), except for granting a slot for the July 4th Committee.

The decision about “who should get booths the next time around” was continued to a Some Time In The Future Council Meeting.

HOW MUCH SHOULD IT COST to license cats and dogs in the City of Livingston?

There have been repeated complaints at Council Meetings over the years about dogs running loose and either “doing their business” on other peoples’ yards or harassing people as they walk or jog. 

But dealing with “stray dogs running at large” isn’t cheap: It costs $75 per animal to send them to the pound and Livingston has already racked up well over $18,000 in Animal Control related costs in just the first 6 months of the Fiscal Year. (See Below.)

It was suggested in the Staff Report, that dramatically raising Licensing Fees might help offset some of the costs the City is incurring for Animal Control.

However some members of the community who commented that night, said that if getting dogs licensed (and vaccinated against Rabies) and spayed/neutered (meaning fewer unwanted dogs/cats running at large) was really the reason for the Ordinance, then the City would be better off by keeping Licensing Fees low and raise the penalties on violations.

Council person Soria suggested that penalties for “Running at large ($150) and “Unlicensed" ($150) be waived if an “offending animal” was vaccinated and licensed within a set time period.

Final Action on this item was also continued  for Further Discussion at a Future Council Meeting.

OK. CALL ME CYNICAL BUT WHEN SOMEONE, ANYONE ON THE CITY COUNCIL ASKS “Why did the City end up with a Deficit in the Sanitation Fund despite recent improvements?”

ESPECIALLY someone who has either been on the council, or at Council Meetings FOR YEARS

It feels like one of those “Are.. You.. KIDDING.. me?” moments.

You mean to tell me that question wasn’t answered when you passed the Budget was last year????

Or during the Mid Year Budget Review that took place on March 5th of this year? Didn’t you read it? If you did, and you had questions, why didn’t you get them answered then????

Or how about during any Audit Report Presentations that have taken place over the last couple of years or so????

Or at all the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meetings that have taken place since around mid 2011?

Or, even more specifically, at the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting when the Consultants numbers were first presented?

After all, copies of the consultants calculations were made available to all the members of the Committee who were there. 

There was another meeting of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Monday, March 18, 2013.

But I don’t remember any questions about the deficit.

Isn’t part of the reason for having TWO City Council Members assigned to the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee is the opportunity to ask questions of staff and get those questions answered? Right there and then?

In a place where Administrative Staff, and Engineering Staff, and Consultants, etc are set to meet at a Specific Place and Time?

And where other members of the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee can have access to the same information too?

And where interested members of the Public who go to these meetings can have access to the same information too at the same time as the Committee Members?

Am I missing something here?

#facepalm

One last thing…

There may be no “discontent” when it comes to Garbage Rate Increases this time around….but when it finally comes time to confront the growing list of “issues” with our Water & Waste Water Systems…

Well..What do you think?

And now on to the

CONCURRENT MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE

CITY OF LIVINGSTON

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

MARCH 19, 2013

CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.

OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council and

Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston will hold a Regular Meeting on March 19, 2013, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows: Closed Session

CLOSED SESSION

A “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.

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.

3. Successor Agency

Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 1

4. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 3

5. Conference with Real Property Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54956.8)

APN Numbers 047-140-006 and 047-140-0017

Negotiating Parties: City Manager

6. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2013-8

Next Ordinance Number: 604

Pledge of Allegiance. Next Successor Agency

Resolution Number: 2013-3

Roll Call.

Closed Session Announcements

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Introduction by Police Chief Ruben Chavez of new Reserve Officers Javier Ramirez, Badge Number L20; Satveer Singh, Badge Number L21. Oaths of Office by City Clerk Tony Silva.

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

CITY COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS

PUBLIC HEARINGS

2. Resolution and Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Establishing Rates for Solid Waste Service Fees.

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. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 600, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Section 5-4-2(J)(1) Relating to Front Yard Setback Fence Heights.

4. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 601, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Section 5-6-2(B) Pertaining to Amendment or Rezoning Initiation.

5. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 602, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Section 5-3-15: Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, and Adding Section 5-5-12, Cultivation of Annual Crops.

6. Resolution Supporting State of California Senate Bill 391, the California Homes and Jobs Act of 2013.

7. Resolution Opposing the State Water Resources Control Board Substitute Environmental Document Regarding Potential Changes to the Water Control Board Plan for the San Francisco – Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta.

8. Resolution for the Acceptance of the “CMAQ – Purchase Four (4) Replacement Heavy Duty Vehicles for Construction Activities,” and Authorizing the City Manager to Release Performance and Material Bonds to N&S Tractor Company, Merced, CA; Holt of California, Turlock, CA; and Mission Valley Ford, San Jose, CA.

9. Resolution Ratifying Appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission.

10. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on February 5, 2013,

11. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on February 19, 2013.

12. Approval of Warrant Register Dated March 14, 2013.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT

TCP-1,2,3, Iron and Manganese and TCP, Oh My!

Tainted water disrupted poultry production at Foster Farms last week, and city officials are trying to find out what caused it. Discolored Water disrupts production at Foster Farms, Mike North, Merced Sun star, 02/27/2013

The city is working to identify the source of the iron and manganese, (City Manager Ramirez) said, adding that the problem could be one well, several wells or linked to a certain area of the city. – Ibid

Earlier this year the city was notified by the California Department of Public Health that one of its wells failed to comply with drinking water standards. Well 15’s water had a higher-than-allowed for level of manganese….In a notice letter, the state said the city must begin the process of buying a filter for the pump’s water or face fines of up to $1,000 a day….The estimated cost for a filter is $1 million, Livingston forced to pay for well filter , Jonah Owen Lamb, Merced Sun Star, 11/19/2009

Motion: M/S Vierra/Nateras to move forward with well-head filtering treatment for manganese in Well #15, inform the State of the City’s decision, and authorize the City Engineer to begin to work with the State to determine the most appropriate treatment process. The motion carried 4-1, with Council Member Espinoza voting no. – City of Livingston Draft Meeting Minutes, 07/07/2009

Council Member Espinoza commented that Livingston’s General Fund has already paid the Water Enterprise Fund deficit of $1.3 to $1.5 million. Therefore, the Water Enterprise Fund does not have a deficit.  – Ibid

The city of Livingston broke state law and health codes when it adopted a resolution that will increase water rates by an initial 40 percent.…The suit also claims the company will be negatively impacted by the city’s July 7 resolution and demands that the court order the city to rescind the increase. Foster Farms sues Livingston over water rate increase, Jonah Owen Lamb, Merced Sun Star, 07/29/2009

In numerous meetings Warne has said the city needed to raise utility rates since it was borrowing from the general fund, not restricted funds, to pay for the deficits in restricted utility funds, such as the water fund. Foster Farms Files Suit Against Livingston, Jonah Owen Lamb, Merced Sun Star, 01/27/2010

M/S Aguilar/Urnberg to adopt Resolution No. 2010-56, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Repealing Resolution No. 2009-32 (Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Establishing Water Service Rates). The motion carried 4-1 by the following roll call vote:

• AYES: Council Members: Aguilar, Espinoza, Land, Urnberg

• NOES: Council Members: Vierra

• ABSENT: Council Members: None, City of Livingston Draft Minutes, 09/24/2010 Special City Council Meeting

The city spent about $1 million on legal fees battling the lawsuit brought on by Foster Farms, which uses about 63 percent of the water in Livingston, Lewis said, Lawsuit against Livingston dropped, Mike North, Merced Sun Star 04/07/2011

Ramirez said the issue was a costly one for Foster Farms, as supervisors had to shut down a shift, but King said they kept most employees at work despite stopping processing in one of Foster Farms’ two processing plants. Discolored Water disrupts production at Foster Farms, Mike North, Merced Sun star, 02/27/2013

So the issue was a costly one for Foster Farms and the city is NOW “working to identify the source of the iron and manganese”?

Uh huh. Yeah. Right. Gotta get that water cleaned up pronto now.

More on that a little later. But first.

Ah me…even when it comes to matters of the heart, There’s Strange and then there is Army Strange. Courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons.

FROM THE JOINT HOMETOWN NEWS SERVICE, Fort Meade MD

Air Force Airman Fernando Ramirez graduated from basic military training at Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas…The airman completed an intensive, eight-week program that included training in military discipline and studies, Air Force core values, physical fitness, and basic warfare principles and skills.

Airmen who complete basic training earn four credits toward an associate in applied science degree through the Community College of the Air Force.

Ramirez is the son of Alfredo and Adelaida Ramirez of Black Pine Way, Livingston.

He is a 2011 graduate of Livingston High School.

KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FREE THROW CHAMPIONS

Three(3) girls from Livingston ages 10 to 14, were named Chapter Champions of the Knights of Columbus Council 9363 Free Throw Championship: held recently at the Livingston Middle School Gymnasium. The Chapter level included cities from Livingston to Hanford in the Central Valley and the Mountains.

Chapter Champions were 10-year-old Gursimar Sidhu , 11 year olds Grace Chavez and 14 year old girls champion and Gurpreet Sodhi.

Each contestant attempted 25 free throws in the contests. All ties were settled by successive rounds of five free throws per contestant until a winner emerged.

Each of these winners will compete in the STATE LEVEL. Contestants will have the opportunity to advance to National level.

The State Championship will be held on March 10 at in Paso Robles, California.

Pictured are winners from left to right Gursimar Sidhu, Gurpreet Sodhi, and Grace Chavez along with event organizer Joey Chavez.

For more information, Contact: Ramon Avila 209-250-6032

 

DOES ANYONE REALLY THINK THE “UGLY BROWN WATER” PROBLEM IS A NEW ONE?

Or is it more likely a symptom of a growing problem with Livingston’s deteriorating Water System?

As all the while certain members of the City Council insist publically that no such problems exist.

For example: Well #15 (the well by the Winton Parkway Exit) has been a source of high concentrates of Manganese for YEARS.

At the July 7, 2009 City Council meeting, a Staff Report about an Enforcement Letter from the State about Well #15 was included in Council Members’ Agenda Packets.

The Staff reported stated the State was giving the City two options:

1. Install a Treatment System on the well  (I’ll call this the “We don’t want Manganese in our water. Yes! Fix the well. Clean up the water!” Option.

2. Apply for a waiver from the State (I’ll Let’s call this the “Having Manganese in our water sucks. But we are willing to put up with it”)  Option

To make a long story short, the Council voted 4/1 to go forward with the “Fix the well! Clean up the water!” Option.

Those of us who have been following Livingston’s Water Quality Issues closely knows what happened over the next few months: a battle over “Unnecessary and Unwarranted Water Rate Increases”, a Recall, a New Council, the rollback 0f Rates to 1995 levels, and a new batch of consultants.

With even higher projections about how much it is going to cost to address all of Livingston’s Water Quality Issues now.

Seems to me that “identifying the source of the problem” is the least of Livingston’s worries.

It’s scrounging up enough money to fix everything that needs fixing that’s going to be the real problem to solve.

FOR MORE ABOUT WELL #15’S MANGANESE ISSUES

To read the Staff Report and Enforcement Letter from the State that was included in the July 7, 2009 City Council Agenda Packet CLICK HERE 

To read the Draft Minutes from the July 7, 2009 City Council Meeting and get a really good idea about how certain Council Members felt about Well #15’s “issues”, CLICK HERE

SINCE WE ARE ON THE TOPIC OF WATER QUALITY “ISSUES”

A memorandum sent from a consultant to City Engineer Nanda Gottiparthy last week notes that 1,2,3-trichloropropane, a highly toxic chemical that’s made its way into Livingston’s drinking water supply, has been detected in every city well……The contaminant can pose a serious threat to public health and is mainly concentrated in well No. 8…….Often used in the production of pesticides, TCP is a man-made chemical that can cause cancer, kidney failure and tumors, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. All Livingston Wells Contaminated, Mike North, Merced Sun Star

According to the article referenced above, most of the TCP is concentrated in well No. 8, which is by Foster Farms. (ouch!)

On Monday, March 03, 2013, the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee will meet in the City Hall Conference room at 5:30. Two of the Water Quality Issues that are “impacting” Foster Farms will be discussed: 

• The Icky Iron Manganese in the water Issue

• The TCP 1,2,3 in Well No. 8 Filtration Project

Given that Richie King, Vice President of Chicken Production at Foster Farms is a voting member of this committee, it could be quite the interesting discussion indeed.

Did I mention that these meetings are open to the public?

I’m going to that meeting. Wish you would too.

And now on to the

CONCURRENT MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE

CITY OF LIVINGSTON

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

MARCH 5, 2013

CLOSED SESSION: 6:30 P.M.

OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston will hold a Regular Meeting on March 5, 2013, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

CLOSED SESSION

A “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.

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.

3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 2

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2013-7

Next Ordinance Number: 600

Pledge of Allegiance. Next Successor Agency

Resolution Number: 2013-2

Roll Call.

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by Rich Green, Transit Manager, Merced County Association of Governments,

“Upcoming Bus Changes.”

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.

CITY COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

2. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Title 10, Chapter 3 of the Livingston Municipal Code Titled “Animal Control Regulations”; Resolution Updating Fees Associated with Animal Control Regulations.

3. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No.___, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Section 5-4-2(J)(1) Relating to Front Yard Setback Fence Heights.

4. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No.___, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Section 5-6-2(B): Pertaining to Amendment or Rezoning Initiation.

5. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No.___, of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Section 5-3-15: Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, and Addition of Section 5-5-12, Cultivation or Annual Crops.

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.

6. Approval of Warrant Register Dated February 28, 2013.

SUCCESSOR AGENCY CONSENT AGENDA

7. Resolution of the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston Approving the Recommended Mid-Year Budget Revisions for Fiscal Year 2012-2013.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

8. City Council Direction to Staff Regarding Appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission.

9. Resolution Approving a One (1) Year Concessions Agreement with Paul Maurer Shows (PMS) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement.

10. Resolution Approving Recommended Mid-Year Budget Revisions for Fiscal Year 2012-13.

11. Review and Discussion of Proposed Revisions to Fireworks Ordinance.

ADJOURNMENT

Planning for the Future, TCP, TCB, Flushing out the Gunk and A City Council Agenda

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."-Poet and philosopher George Santayana

“The truth points to itself”. – Kosh, Babylon 5, “In The Beginning”

"Belief can be manipulated. Knowledge is dangerous" Paul "Muad’Dib" Atreides of the Dune Series

“The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative”.-Saul Alinsky

I know Livingston has changed a lot and is still growing… I want to be part of that growth and possibly help with that growth towards a brighter future…. There is big growth in the future coming – Alicia Estrada, Candidate for Planning Commission, Interview Date: February 11, 2013

Our office is concerned that the city will not have adequate financial capability to provide for the ongoing operation, maintenance, and upgrading of the system if the water rate increase is eliminated and the rates are rolled back to 1995 levels. It is important for the City to understand that if the city violates any of the drinking water regulations as a result of having insufficient funds to properly operate and maintain the water system, out Department will take the appropriate enforcement actions. – Excerpted from a Letter to the City of Livingston by the California Department of Public Health, September 15, 2010.

Typical monthly bills would increase to $23.79 a month from $22.04 a month, according to the notices sent to residents. In 2014, the rates would jump to $26.49 a month…."I think it’s a fair increase," (Council member) Soria said. , Livingston utility bill increase could pay for recycling service,  Mike North, Merced Sun Star 

it is good for community, most families of 4 and up fill up a garbage can quickly. we are a family of 5 and i hardly ever have room due to greenery, boxes and misc paper. i applaud the new system. i hate not having enough room in my garbage can. hey garden snail can i leave my garbage at your house since you are complaining about the rates. keep in mind it cost money to maintain and upkeep the system. garden snail would probably complain when things break down. seems like someone who is never happy no matter what you do.  sshhhhhh Comment by bigpun – ibid

HUH?

 I need to “Keep in mind it cost money to maintain and upkeep the system. garden snail would probably complain when things break down”

YOU..ARE..KIDDING ME? RIGHT?

I’m wondering….Where was “bigpun” when all the fussing, fuedin,, fightin and accusin took place the last time the city tried to raise Water/Sewer/Garbage Rates?

Complete with marches on City Hall and Protest Signs equating Council Members with The Three Stooges. The way things are going, we many have another round of riled up folk protesting in the parking lot at City Hall a few months from now.

More on that a little later..but first   

It’s been such a long time since we checked up on how lucky Sgt. Lucky has been that maybe we need a little review before going forward.

            

Yep. There’s Strange and then there is Army Strange. Courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons.

FROM THE JOINT HOMETOWN NEWS SERVICE, Fort Meade MD

Air Force Airman Cristian E. Rosales graduated from basic military training at Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas… The airman completed an intensive, eight-week program that included training in military discipline and studies, Air Force core values, physical fitness, and basic warfare principles and skills.

Airmen who complete basic training earn four credits toward an associate in applied science degree through the Community College of the Air Force.

Rosales is the son of Lisette Garcia of F Street, Livingston.

He is a 2012 graduate of Livingston High School.

MARK YOUR CALANDAR… SUNDAY APRIL 14, 2013. IT’S KITE FESTIVAL TIME!

WE HAVE THREE NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS….On February 11, 2013 the City Council appointed Warren Urnberg, and Alicia Estrada, as Planning Commissioners and Michael Silva as the alternate to the Planning Commission. There had been seven candidates for the two Commissioner and one Alternate Commissioner positions open.

The Candidates were interviewed separately. They were each given opportunity to tell the Council “a little about themselves”, asked a series of pre-prepared questions, and then given a chance for a few closing comments.

Questions candidates were asked included:

1. What is your reason for wanting to serve on the Livingston Planning Commission. Why should this council appoint you?

2. What do you see as the important Planning Issues facing the City of Livingston?

3. Can you tell us about your skills, experience and knowledge that you believe would benefit the Livingston Planning Commission?

4. How would you handle a disagreement with another Planning Commissioner or members of the City Council?

5. When considering a Development Proposal, how would you rank these Considerations?

a. In adherence to established regulations

b. Protecting the environment

c. esthetics and design

d. social benefit

e. economic benefit

After the interviews were finished, the Council took a couple of minutes to decide who they wanted to appoint as Commissioners and Alternate Commissioner. That’s when things got, well, just a tad confusing.

First there was a motion to nominate Warren Urnberg

Then the Mayor asked if there were more motions

Then there was another separate motion to appoint Alicia Estrada (Gurpal Samra)

Then there was discussion as to whether these nominations were for Alternate or Full Commissioner

Then there was a motion to nominate Mike Silva for Alternate (Rodrigo Espinoza)

Then they were about to vote on each motion when they remembered that none of the motions had been seconded.

Then there was discussion about whether or not to second the motions individually or as a group.

Then there was a motion for Warren Urnberg, Alicia Estrada, and Michael Silva as the alternate.

Then to clarify things, everyone withdrew their original individual motions.

Then the Mayor repeated the motion for Warren Urnberg, Alicia Estrada and Michael Silva as Alternate and called for a Second.

Then, there was a new motion for Roy Soria, and Mike Torres as Commissioners, and Michael Silva as Alternate.

At which point Rodrigo Espinoza “seconded” the “first motion” and called for a second on the second motion.

After waiting 5 seconds Mayor Espinoza called for a Roll Call vote on the first motion

During the Roll Call Vote, there was more discussion and clarification about which motion they were actually voting on: the first, or the second.

With the First Motion ended up getting passed 3/2: Sicairos and Soria voting no.

NOW….ONE OF THE QUESTIONS CANDIDATES had been asked that evening was

“What do you see as the important Planning Issues facing the City of Livingston?”

Most of the Candidates talked about the need for new business and the jobs they bring. But only 1 of the candidates (Michael Silva) mentioned “our water” as an important issue affecting planning.

Think about that for a moment. With the current state of Livingston’s Groundwater and Distribution System, it could be difficult, if not impossible to accommodate the kinds of growth some Planning Commissioners (and Council Members) might like to see happen in the future.

There is Arsenic, TCP – 1,2,3 and Manganese in Livingston’s groundwater that has to be dealt with. (See the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting Recap Below)

And added to that is the fact that Livingston currently does not have the cash reserves necessary to address all it’s water quality issues.

Grants? Livingston has already missed out on grant monies because the State considered Livingston’s Water Rates too low.

Loans? Even if Livingston did quality for some kind of Low Interest Loan Program, loans do have to be paid back eventually. Don’t they? And that money has to come from somewhere: either through Rate Increases or cuts elsewhere in the City’s Budget.

But, if these water quality issues do not get addressed, and Livingston’s water fails to meet Title 22 Standards for Drinking Water, the State could slap a moratorium on new hook-ups until those issues are resolved. 

And it wouldn’t be the first time Livingston would have been hit with a moratorium to force it to fix something. Back in 1998, the Water Quality Control Board slapped Livingston with a two year building moratorium to force the City to expand and make improvements to the Domestic Wastewater Facility.

Think something similar couldn’t happen again?

And another moratorium would mean no new houses, no new businesses, no new industry, no new jobs.

Sounds like a major Planning issue to me.

BEFORE WE GET TO THE LATEST ACTIVITIES OF THE UTILITY RATE STAKEHOLDERS COMMITTEE, THOSE OF US WHO HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE WHOLE WATER RATE mess for the last couple of years or so remember back when some leading members of the Recall Movement suggested the “Water Bill” be increased by something “reasonable”:

Like maybe………… $5 a month.

For the majority of Livingston’s Residents (who currently have only one garbage can) the new 2 can system will come with a Rate increase of just over $5 for Garbage Pick up alone.  And folks may be willing to pay that: figuring that their “water bill” going up only $5 or so a month is “reasonable”. But a Rate Increase for Garbage Pick-up is not the only one coming down the pike.

Council Member Jimmy Soria may feel that the proposed Garbage Rate Increases are fair and will not result in “push back” from Livingston residents. And he might be right. For a time: at least about the proposed increases in Garbage Rates.

But when it finally comes time for Rate Increases in Sewer, and Rate Increases for Water, Councilmember Soria may very well end up surprised at the amount of “push back” that rears up.

SINCE WE’RE ON THE SUBJECT OF RATES, lets talk about some things that will affect the next round of Water Rate Increases, shall we?

On January 28, 2013, after a hiatus of several weeks, the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee met and discussed the following.

1. A recap of the upcoming Proposition 218 Process for Solid Waste (Garbage) Rates.

2. ·Kennedy Jenks report on Feasibility Analysis for Centralized Water Treatment

   1. The City’s groundwater has several issues: Arsenic, TCP – 1,2,3, Manganese, etc. It is expected that water quality will continue to decline as the pumping from wells continues. Therefore, the city is considering the possibility of moving away from Individual Wellhead Treatment to a more Centralized Water Treatment System in addition to acquiring Surface Water. The Feasibility Study is looking at Well Water Vs. Surface water Options and breaking down the costs per 1,000 gallons

3. ·AECOM Report on Status of Well #8 TCP Remediation Design Project

   1. Well #8 is one of the main wells on the City’s system. About 4 or 5 years ago, the City became aware of elevated levels of TCP and the City Council was notified. Although there is not currently a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)for TCP it is expected the State will adopt MCLs for TCP in the very near future. The State notified the city that some of the wells have a higher level than the expected future MCL that will be adopted. Therefore the state has asked to city to look into treatment options. 

4. ·Evaluation of Well 17 and Well 10

   1. 
      

      The City manager has directed staff to look at what it would cost to bring Wells #17 and #10 online: if addressing the issues at these wells would be cheaper than fixing the problems at some of the wells currently in use.

   2. For Example: the Maximum Contaminant level for Arsenic in 10 ppb. Well #15 is at about 9.9 ppb. Projected costs for wellhead treatment at Well #15 for Arsenic is about $2.5 million. 

5. ·Emerging issues with the Distribution System: microorganisms and manganese.

   1. A couple lines that cross the highway: one had been shut down 3 years ago and had had work done. Re-opening the lines stirred up organisms that had collected in the deadends of the system…The City is working with Kennedy Jenks to do a Hydrologic Model on the best way to do directional flushing of the system. The city may have to do an actual scrubbing of the lines: a process which is much more involved and costly

It was quite evident from the discussion, that Livingston’s ground water and distribution system have a few “issues” and that addressing these “issues” won’t come cheap.

To read a more complete recap of the January 28, 2013 Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee Meeting: click HERE

And now…on to the

CONCURRENT MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

FEBRUARY 19, 2013

CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.

OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston will hold a Regular Meeting on February 19, 2013, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.

CLOSED SESSION

A “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.

3. Successor Agency

Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 1

4. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 3

5. Conference with Real Property Negotiator

(Government Code Section 64956.8)

APN: 142-297-007

Negotiating Parties: City Manager

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2013-6

Next Ordinance Number: 600

Pledge of Allegiance. Next Successor Agency

Resolution Number: 2013-1

Roll Call.

Closed Session Announcements.

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by Mayor Espinoza of City Service Awards to Former Planning Commissioners Roy Soria, Harpreet Bains and Manoj Bains.

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.

CITY COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS

PUBLIC HEARINGS

2. 2013 CDBG Program Application.

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. Resolution for the Acceptance of the Pavement Rehabilitation-City Streets 2012 Project, Authorizing the City Clerk to Record a Notice of Completion with Merced County and Authorizing the City Manager to Release Performance and Material Bonds and to Make Final Payment of Retention Monies to Rolfe Construction.

4. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on January 15, 2013.

5. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on February 11, 2013.

6. Approval of Warrant Register Dated February 14, 2013.

SUCCESSOR AGENCY

7. Approve a Resolution of the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston Approving the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule IV (ROPS 13-14A) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34177 for Period July through December 31, 2013.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

8. Discussion Item: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston Amending Title 3, Chapter 10 of the Livingston Municipal Code Titled “Private Patrol,” Regarding the Business License Process for Private Patrol Services.

ADJOURNMENT

.

TCP, TCB, and a City Council Agenda

Often used in the production of pesticides, TCP is a man-made chemical that can cause cancer, kidney failure and tumors, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Livingston awarded $9 million settlement, Mike North, Merced Sun Star

"The good thing is the people of Livingston won’t pay for contaminant removal that is not their cause," he said. "If the result hadn’t been favorable to Livingston, our rate payers would have had to come up with $9 million." – Gurpal Samra, ibid

 

Livingston faces discrimination claim from former development director, Merced Sun Star, Comment Section 

Ah Karma, Karma, Karma, Why NOT?  Why not spend the TCP Settlement Money on other things and have the Rate Payers come up with the money for TCP Clean Up?

Are. You. KIDDING me?

More on that a little later, but first

 

Yep. There’s Strange and then there is Army Strange. Courtesy of Damon Shackelford: furious scribbler of military cartoons.

LOCAL LIVINGSTON KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS Council 9363 to Sponsor Youth Free Throw Championship

All boys and girls ages 10-14 are invited to participate in the local level of competition for the 2113 Knights of Columbus Free Throw Championship. The local competition will be held on January 27, 2013 at 1:00pm at The Livingston High School Gymnasium.

All boys and girls 10 to 14-years-old are eligible to participate and will compete in their respective age divisions.

All contestants on the local level are recognized for their participation in the event.  Participants are required to furnish proof of age and written parental consent. For entry forms or additional information contact: Ramon D. Avila 209-394-3169.

LIVINGSTON/DELHI VFW Breakfast in January      

The Livingston/Delhi Veterans of Foreign Wars and Ladies Auxiliary Breakfast will be served on January 27, 2013, at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Hall, located at 1605 7^th Street, in Livingston.

This will be our first Breakfast of 2013. Adults can eat for $7.00, and the children under 12 for eat for $5.00. Breakfast consists of Pancakes, French Toast or Biscuits and Gravy; served with Eggs cooked to order, Hash Browns, Sausage or Ham and Coffee and Juice. Breakfast will be served from 8 am to 11 am.

If you need more information on the Breakfast, Family Hamburger Night, or if you would like to become a member of the Post or Auxiliary, contact Denis or Sue Wells at (209) 394-2059.

FAMILY HAMBURGHER NIGHT AT THE LIVINGSTON VFW

Join us for the VFW Hamburger Night, January 31, 2013, from 5-7 pm at the Livingston Veterans Memorial Building, 1605 7^th Street, in Livingston.

The public is invited, and you do not have to be a member to attend.

This will be our first hamburger night of 2013.You will be able to enjoy hamburgers, cheeseburgers, fish sandwiches, chicken sandwiches, hot dogs and chili.  The sandwiches include your choice of homemade salads.

Price ranges from $2.00 to 4.00 per meal.

All proceeds go to help support our community programs.

If you need more information on any of our events, contact Denis or Sue Wells at  (209) 394-2059

or visit our website at http://www.vfwlivingston.com.

BUILDING MATERIALS SALE

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.

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.

Thursday, February 7^ththrough Saturday, February 9th. We will open at 9am and close at 5pm.

All Sales are Final with no Warranties. Contractors Welcome. We accept cash or checks only, no Credit Cards.

All proceeds will go to the California Veterans Service Program. If you have any questions call Denis Wells at 209-394-2059 or visit our website at www.vfwlivingston.com.

MARK YOUR CALANDAR!

And don’t forget to go “Like” their Facebook Page!

REMEMBER THAT TCP SETTLEMENT I mentioned earlier? The over $9 million the City received from Dow Chemical Company because of the TCP contamination in Livingston’s Groundwater? At the time, some members of the Council crowed about how helpful that money would be towards cleaning up Livingston’s Groundwater Contamination.

And how much the Water Rate Payers of Livingston would be helped out by this: because it would mean that much less to come out of their pockets in the future.

To refresh everyone’s memory, According to the Merced Sun Star,"…the settlement (Livingston Received in September 2011)totaled $13 million, with $3.5 million going to pay attorney fees and nearly $500,000 going toward litigation expenses”

Note: This Money was not placed into 1  single bank or investment labeled “TCP Money Account” This money was deposited into a series of Different Banks and Investments that are related to the Water Capital Account. We may talk more about that later in another post. But for now, the main Topic of Discussion is “How Should The TCP Settlement Money be spent?”

It would seem to me that if the groundwater contamination was serious enough to justify all the staff time, and Legal Expenses of suing Dow Chemical, than any settlement monies received should be used to clean up that TCP Contamination in the ground water.

But not everyone on the City Council seems to feel the same way about it now.

At the December 04, 2012 City Council meeting, it was actually suggested that the City use that Settlement Money for things other than TCP Cleanup: like…paying down other debt maybe.

SO WHY DOES THAT CONCERN ME Dear Karma? Dear Karma? As I wrote in my response to Karma’s comment in the Sun Star

Why not?

Because long term exposure to TCP 1,2,3 is considered by the State of California to be a human carcinogen. (cancer causing agent)

Because TCP has been detected in every well

Because the amount of TCP in all wells exceed the currently established Public Health Goal and "will require treatment when resources become available." (I would call $9 million dollars stuck in various Bank Accounts as "funds available)

Because the amount of TCP detected in the wells is as much as 100 times the Notification Level established by the State.

Because in 2005, the City Sued Dow Chemical because of the amount of TCP in the groundwater and how expensive it would be to remove.

Because one major company in the City of Livingston must have been concerned about the level TCP in (well #8 I believe)that it was willing to "lend" the City the money to get the Filtration Project started until other funding became available.

Because the Engineers and Consultants doing the City’s Water Feasibility Study are projecting costs between $20 million to $30 million dollars in order to address all of the Groundwater Issues Livingston faces.

Because Livingston has already failed to receive Grant Monies in the amount it has asked for Water System Upgrades because Livingston’s Water Rates were considered "to low" by the agency evaluating the Grant Request.

Because $9 million dollars used for Cleaning up the TCP is $9 million dollars LESS that would need to be factored into any Future Rate Increases.

References, including Newspaper Articles, Staff Reports, Water Quality Reports, Reports to the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee, and Water System Inspection Report upon request

And if that money is used “somewhere else”: like paying down other debt, doesn’t that mean that Rate Payers will eventually have to make up for that in Higher Water Rates?

Just something to think about

And yes, References, including Newspaper Articles, Staff Reports, Water Quality Reports, Reports to the Utility Rate Stakeholders Committee, and Water System Inspection Report are still available upon request for those of you who might want to see them.

ONE MORE THING, DEAR KARMA, while I am thinking about it. If I am a worm, I am THE GREAT WORM! Shai-Hulud! Get it right my dear Karma. Get it right.

Summon the Worms

And now on to the

 

CONCURRENT MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE

CITY OF LIVINGSTON

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

JANUARY 15, 2013

CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.

OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

Notice is hereby given that the City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will hold a Regular Meeting on January 15, 2013, 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 at the City Council Chambers located at 1416 C Street. The agenda shall be as follows:

Closed Session

1. Call to Order.

2. Roll Call.CLOSED SESSION

A “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.

3. Successor Agency

Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

4. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation

[(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)]

Number of Cases: 3

5. Conference with Labor Negotiator

(Government Code Section 54957.6)

Labor Negotiator: City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez

Employee Organizations: All Represented City Employees

Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER Next Resolution Number: 2013-1

Next Ordinance Number: 600

Pledge of Allegiance. Next Successor Agency

Resolution Number: 2013-1

Roll Call.

Closed Session Announcements.

Changes to the Agenda.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by Council Member Jim Soria – Introduction and Recognition of Junior Football All Star Team Members.

GRANT ANNOUNCEMENTSANNOUNCEMENTS 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.

CITY COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS

PUBLIC HEARINGS

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.

2. Resolution Authorizing Submittal of an Application to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s “Green Trees for the Golden State” Grant Program.

3. Minutes of Meeting Held on October 16, 2012.

4. Minutes of Meeting Held on November 8, 2012.

5. Minutes of Meeting Held on November 20, 2012.

6. Minutes of Meeting Held on December 11, 2012.

7. Approval of Warrant Register Dated January 9, 2013.

SUCCESSOR AGENCY DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

8. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Livingston Adopting Guidelines for the Submission and Tabulation of Protests Pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution (Proposition 218).

9. Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of a Security Surveillance Camera System That Implements High-End Video Analytics and a License Plate Recognition System.

10. Extend Deadline for Parks and Recreation Commission Applications.

ADJOURNMENT