Stormy Waters: Update on L.A. County Storm Water Funding Initiative - Ken Farfsing

641 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
641
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
134
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Stormy Waters: Update on L.A. County Storm Water Funding Initiative - Ken Farfsing

  1. 1. • NPDES Permit & TMDL Programs• Clean Water, Clean Beaches Measure• Protest Hearing Process• Board Direction• Parcel Tax vs. Parcel Fee/ Other Options• Future ActionsSummary
  2. 2. • New permit is complex• New water quality monitoring requirement• EWMP or WMP by June 28, 2013• Significant Funding Commitment• Non-compliance risk is realNPDES Permit and TMDL
  3. 3. Background• Original focus of enforcement of Clean Water Act was aimed at point-sources of water pollution (i.e. factories, sanitary sewer treatmentplants)• Since mid-1990’s enforcement focus has moved to urban runoff –through municipal NPDES Permits• Unique problems with urban runoff:• Sources of pollution are diverse• “Legacy” pollutants• No dedicated funding source/fees governed by Proposition 218• Federal and State funds are limited• Limited public awareness of pollution problems/solutions• Unresolved scientific, technical, and legal issues require solutions• Unprecedented level of involvement by the cities in new permit
  4. 4. Development of a Regional Funding Source• ASCE 2002• LA County sponsored AB 2554 to address Proposition 218issues• AB 2554 was based on “situs” parcel fee• Regional, local and FCD “return”• Clean Water Clean Beaches Initiative• Typical residential parcel fee $54 LACFCD10%Watershed Groups50%Cities40%Fee Distribution
  5. 5. Clean Water, Clean Beaches Measure• Board of Supervisors opened protest hearingfrom January 15 to March 12, 2013• Protesters included individuals, publicschools, businesses, and some cities• Supporters included individuals, some cities, andenvironmental organizations• 113,696 (5.16%) protests
  6. 6. Major Unresolved Issues• School exemption• Exemption for cities with existing fees• Religious & Non-profit exemption• Business concerns• Lack of Sunset Clause• Inadequate recognition of existing improvements• Many cities failed to provide specific projects• No hardship exemptions
  7. 7. Proposed Changes• School Education as “in-kind” services• “Sunset” and “Dusk” Clause alternatives• Credit Program
  8. 8. Board Direction• Additional outreach to stakeholders• Investigate Options• Report due in 90 days (June 2013)
  9. 9. Comments• Board understands the high cost of stormwater programs• Process needs to start from Cities• County is exploring all options• Cities need to be involved• City customization• Educate elected officialsand the community• Election issues/timing
  10. 10. Future Actions• Involvement of Government Stakeholders -Cities, Schools & Community Colleges• Involvement of Additional Stakeholders – BIZFed, Environmental Community, etc.• City Managers/Public Works Officials Meeting - ContractCities and LA Division of the League June 27 at 12 PM• Develop issues, form CM Task Force, with report &recommendations
  11. 11. LA County Website for Clean Water, Clean BeachesInitiative www.lacountycleanwater.org/Draft Ordinancewww.lacountycleanwater.org/files/managed/Document/727/Ordinance%20V3.5pdfDraft Implementation Manualwww.lacountycleanwater.org/files/managed/Document/728/Implementation%20Manual%20V3.5pdfResources
  12. 12. Engineer’s Report:www.lacountycleanwater.org/files/managed/Document/623/Fee%Methodology/pdfSample Projectswww.lacountycleanwater.org/pages/mapContacts:Phil Doudar, LA CountyDPW, PDOUDAR@dpw.lacounty.govKen Farfsing, City of Signal Hillkfarfsing@cityofsignalhill.orgResources

×