Four Noteworthy 1 May 2012 City Council Agenda Items

PUBLIC WORKSHOP: REVENUE RESOURCES

CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CITY COUNCIL

MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2012, 5:30 P.M. – 6:30 P.M.

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

EAST SIDE MONTE VERDE STREET BETWEEN OCEAN & 7^th AVENUES

ABSTRACT: Four Noteworthy 1 May 2012 City Council Agenda Items, namely Announcements from Closed Session, Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to amend an existing contract with Neill Engineering for services related to the City’s ASBS Dry Weather Diversion Grant, Provide direction regarding the placement of a 9/11 memorial on City property and Receive report and provide direction on future water supply, are presented.  Excerpts from Agenda Item Summaries and Staff Reports are provided; AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AND NEILL ENGINEERS FOR SERVICES is embedded. 

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET

Regular Meeting

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

4:30 p.m., Open Session

Live& Archived Video Streaming

City Hall

East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues

II. Roll Call

V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator.

A. Announcements from Closed Session.

1. Existing Litigation -- Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Conference with legal counsel regarding The Flanders Foundation, a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation, Petitioner v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Respondents – Monterey County Superior Court Case No. M99437/State of California Court of Appeals, Sixth District, Civil Case No. H035818.

2. Potential Litigation -- Government Code Section 54956.9(b).2 - Conference with legal counsel regarding potential litigation – one (1) matter.

3. Property Negotiations – Gov’t. Code Section 54956.8, Between City Administrator Jason Stilwell and Rick Stemple regarding the Flanders Property.

4. Labor Negotiations – Government Code Section 54957.6(a) Meet and confer with the Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, City Administrator Stilwell, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the two bargaining units.

VII. Consent Calendar

These matters include routine financial and administrative actions, which are usually approved by a single majority vote. Individual items may be removed from Consent by a member of the Council or the public for discussion and action.

E. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator  to amend an existing contract with Neill Engineering for services related to the City’s ASBS Dry Weather Diversion Grant.

Description: The proposed amendment would authorize Neill Engineering to provide engineering services consisting of field mapping, engineering design, preparation of project plans, specifications and bid documents for minor improvements to the City's storm drainage system as part of the ASBS Dry Weather Diversion Grant Program.

Overall Cost:

City Funds: N/ A

Grant Funds: Not to exceed $63,800

Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution

Important Considerations: The City received a grant from the State Water Resources Control Board to implement a storm water diversion program that would eliminate dry weather discharges to Carmel Beach.  The City has analyzed its dry weather flows and has identified feasible measures for eliminating those flows. The proposed project would assist the City in implementing its grant and complying with applicable state storm water requirements.

Neill Engineering City's ASBS Dry Weather Amendment

AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AND NEILL ENGINEERS FOR SERVICES

XI. Orders of Council

B. Provide direction regarding the placement of a 9/11 memorial on City property.

Description: The memorial consists of a piece of steel from the World Trade Center that would be mounted on a pedestal to create a small statue or monument in memory of all affected by the 9/11 tragedy.

Overall Cost:

City Funds: N/ A

Grant Funds: N/ A

Staff Recommendation: Provide policy direction.

Important Considerations: The Council should discuss whether it supports a 9/11 memorial statue on City property, and if so, potential locations for the memorial.

SUBJECT: PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING THE PLACEMENT OF A 9/11 MEMORIAL STATUE ON CITY PROPERTY

BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A group of Carmel citizens have obtained a piece of steel from the World Trade Center with the intention of displaying it as a 9/11 memorial in Carmel-by-the-Sea. The memorial is meant to be a tribute to the first responders, and all those affected by the tragedy of 9/11.

The steel was transported across the country from Carmel, NY to Carmel, CA. The steel was passed from first responder to first responder as it stopped in a number of large US cities to visit schools and firehouses along the way.

The purpose of this hearing is to determine if the Council supports placing the memorial on City property, and if so, to provide direction on potential locations. If the Council determines that a memorial is appropriate, and provides direction on a location, the matter could then be referred to the Planning Commission for the design review aspects of the project.

Some potential locations the Council could consider include, but are not limited to:

• In the gardens in front of the Police Station.

• Inside the Fire Station.

• Devendorf Park

• First Murphy Park (possibly on the viewing platform)

• Piccadilly Park

RECOMMENDATION

Provide direction.

Hello Sean,

Thank you for taking time to chat regarding the "Resolve & Remembrance" memorial for Carmel. I am looking forward to working with the city and it's new City Council members as well as moving into the new phase of the memorial, where to place it, the design and sculpture contest.

We have so many volunteers and anxious citizens that want to help on the project. I look forward to hearing how the city wishes to work together.

If you can follow through with my request to be placed on the May's agenda so we can begin a simple dialog on,

a. location (s)

b. design & review process

Thank you. Please do not hesitate to call me or have "anyone" contact me if they have questions -or are any questions as there was much written and spoken that were not my words. I happily look forward to the process with my city and engage any and all suggestions. I just have to keep my promise therefore, my focus to see this through until completion/ unveiling.

I will await your confirmation so that we can begin working on our presentation of materials you may require for said meeting in May.

Sincerely,

CarrieAnn

(831) 224-2246

C. Receive report and provide direction on future water supply.

ADDENDUM:

The next meetings of the City Council:

Special City Council Budget Meeting – 4:30 p.m.

Tuesday, May 17, 2012

Council Chambers

Special City Council Budget Meeting – 4:30 p.m.

Tuesday, May 24, 2012

Council Chambers

Council Workshop—5:30-6:30 p.m.

Monday, June 4, 2012

Council Chambers

Regular Council Meeting – 4:30 p.m.

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Council Chambers

‘MINUTES’ for Two Noteworthy 24 April 2012 Special City Council Agenda Items

“MINUTES”

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Archived Video Streaming

City Hall

East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues

II. Roll Call

PRESENT: Council Members Beach, Hazdovac, Talmage and Mayor Burnett

ABSENT: None

STAFF PRESENT (partial list): Jason Stilwell, City Administrator

Heidi Burch, Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk

Don Freeman, City Attorney

IV. Orders of Council

A. Consideration of the process to fill the vacancy on City Council.

Mayor Burnett stated the requirements to fill a vacant seat within 60 days or a special election.  He stated his principles include having a “fair” and “transparent” process and a need for a unanimous decision by council.  And he stated a need to identify questions all applications are to address.

Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk Heidi Burch reviewed legal requirements regarding a vacant seat on the city council.  Staff solicited input from other cities, including appoint next highest vote getter, solicit applications from general public with interview process and ranking system for applicants or special election (November 2012).

Council Member Hazdovac clarified issues including 60 days from April 17 and at least  a 3-1 vote of council for appointment.

Council Member Talmage ruled out a special election and encouraged “lots of talented people” to apply.

Mayor Burnett opened the meeting to public comment.

Rod Stofle stated the City has concluded an electoral process with campaigning and encouraged council to give strong consideration to the candidate with the next highest votes.

Kathy Bang echoed the aforementioned comments regarding the third highest voter-getter and advocated for Tom Leverone.

Margaret Hurley advocated for the third highest vote getter, namely Tom Leverone. 

Linda Anderson advocated for Mayor Burnett’s position of an open, transparent process for everyone to apply. 

Roberta Miller advocated for an appointment process and interview process with questions regarding the General Plan and Municipal Code.

Erl Langerholm asked the council members if any members of the public have contacted council members expressing interest in the vacancy and suggesting an individual for the vacancy.

Ken Hutchinson, firefighter, advocated for the appointment of the third-highest vote getter. 

Jean Grace, former mayor, stated that due to the “huge disparity” with regard to the election vote results, she advocated an open process and interviews conducted in closed sessions for everyone to apply.

Alison Shelling advocated for a process open to everybody. 

Monte Miller stated individuals considered for appointment should know the Municipal Code, General Plan, Design Guidelines, issues and should have been active at city council meetings. 

Richard Rugel advocated for a full council as soon as possible and advocated for the next highest vote getter.  And he stated that it would be difficult to accept a closed appointment process. 

Tom Leverone advocated for the third place vote getter and/or an individual with qualifications. 

Mayor Burnett closed the meeting to public comment.

City Attorney Don Freeman reviewed Brown Act requirements regarding closed sessions and therefore interviews with applicants would have to be conducted at a public meeting. 

Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk Heidi Burch stated that the City has received two emails and one phone call expressing support for Tom Leverone.  Michael LePage, Kristy Downing and Rich Pepe contacted the City or a council member.  

Mayor Burnett reviewed issues of timeline, process, qualifications and questions for applicants. 

Council Member Hazdovac advocated for appointment of Tom Leverone. 

Council Member Beach advocated for an open and transparent process.

Council Member Talmage advocated for a process for everyone who wants to apply. 

Mayor Burnett stated his preference that everyone eligible could apply for the vacant position and not limit consideration to only individuals who ran for office in the April 2012 election.  The process could entail applicants having 10 days to submit an application to the City, all applications then made public and then at the next council meeting, the council members would have top applicants, receive public comment and deliberate on applicants.  And he advocated for an agenda item added to city council meeting on May 17 with the goal of having a full council prior to adopting budget. 

Council Member Hazdovac stated her preference for the formation of a council subcommittee (mayor and another council member) and conduct interviews privately and subcommittee recommend one applicant to fill vacancy.

Council Member Talmage recommended applicants would submit a cover letter and resume demonstrating knowledge of General Plan, Municipal Code, Design Guidelines, budget goals and objectives and past public office record and volunteer efforts. 

Mayor Burnett advocated for a process involving the full council, but Ad Hoc Subcommittee a possibility for “balance” purposes. 

City Attorney Freeman stated that based on his past experience that interviewing applicants at a public meeting is “absolutely not a problem.” 

Council Member Talmage advocated that a subcommittee of the mayor and another council member bring back one name or two names and a recommendation. 

By consensus, application consists of a cover letter and resume due in to the City by Monday, April 30, at 5:00 P.M.  Applications will be available to the public at City Hall.  Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee (Mayor Burnett and Vice Mayor Hazdovac) charged with reviewing applications and narrowing applicants’ selection.  And schedule meeting for the week of May 7 for the Subcommittee members to present top three individuals and recommendation.  

B. Receive Fiscal Year 2012-2013 proposed budget and operating plan.

City Administrator Stilwell stated the requirement to submit a proposed operating plan and capital budget for upcoming year and adopt budget by July 1, 2012.  Budget Hearings scheduled for May 17 and May 24 and if necessary June 12 and June 19.  2012/13 “Status Quo” budget is $13.37 million with 72 full time employees.  Presently, of 42 budget inquires, 37 answered.  For further inquires, individuals should submit questions by May 10 with answers expected by next budget meeting on May 17.  Four main purposes, namely “communication devise, policy document, financial plan and operations guide.”  Book comprised of seven sections, including Executive Summary, Statistical Profile, Summary Schedules, Department Detail, Capital Expenditures, Financial and Budget Policies and Glossary. 

Mayor Burnett announced there would be no time for public comment due to the need of a council member having to depart.  There are plans for regular council workshops, including the first workshop scheduled on Monday, April 30 from 5:30 P.M. – 6:30 P.M. at City Hall, on revenue and public comments. 

Council Member Talmage stated that the budget draws from reserves over $600,000, including $150,000 to balance operating budget and $480,000 to balance capital budget, and represents 10% of “free reserves.”  

California American Water’s MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

UPDATE: Cal Am has new plan for desal

Monterey Peninsula: Public ownership rule challenged

By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 04/23/2012

Monterey Peninsula Water Project Timeline:

CPUC filing: April 2012

Public participation hearings: July 2012

Final decision: February 2013

Design and permitting: end of 2014

Construction begins: early 2015

Construction complete: late 2016

Source — California American Water

Monterey County Herald

Project Map April 2012

Project Map (April 23, 2012)

ABSTRACT:  California American Water filed its new application with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today to construct the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, the company’s proposed water solution solution to the region’s ongoing water supply crisis.  The Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project includes the development of a desalination plant in North Marina and expansion of the company’s current Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) program, conducted in cooperation with the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. In addition, the company proposes to purchase water from the Groundwater Replenishment Project (GWR) currently proposed by the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District.  Key features of the company’s new proposal, the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, include:

• A 5,500 acre-foot per year (5.4 million gallons per day) desalination plant located in North Marina that will employ Energy Recovery Devices to lower the plant’s power consumption and slant well technology. Slant wells, which will draw water from under the sea floor past the average high tide line, avoid the impacts to marine life posed by open ocean intakes. 
• As part of its application, California American Water proposes to permit the desalination facility for 9,000 acre-feet of water per year (9 million gallons per day) in case the GWR is delayed and unable to deliver water in time to meet state-ordered cutbacks. The company anticipates the decision of whether the desalination facility will be built to the 5,500 acre-foot per year or the 9,000 acre-foot per year level will be made in the last quarter of 2014 and will be based on how far the GWR has come in terms of its environmental review and other permitting work. Construction for the desalination and groundwater replenishment facilities would need to begin by the first quarter of 2015.
• The company plans to add two additional ASR wells, which would add an average capacity of 900 acre-feet per year. . 

Project Map (April 2012), Monterey Water Supply Project - California American Water video, Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Power Point Presentation, California American Water Press Release and APPLICATION OF CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY (U210W) FOR APPROVAL OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION TO RECOVER ALL PRESENT AND FUTURE COSTS IN RATES BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA are embedded.

Monterey Water Supply Project - California American Water
Presentation _1_

Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Power Point Presentation (April 23, 2012)

MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT PressRelease_04_23_12

California American Water Files Application for Monterey Peninsula Project

Company proposes to supply water from a combination of sources including desalination, groundwater replenishment and aquifer storage and recovery

CAW_Application_PDFA_ -

APPLICATION OF CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY (U210W) FOR APPROVAL OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION TO RECOVER ALL PRESENT AND FUTURE COSTS IN RATES

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

(Filed April 23, 2012)

FOREST THEATER RENOVATION PHASING AND CONCEPT COST PLAN prepared by William J. Camille and mack5: $8.7 million

ABSTRACT: The FOREST THEATER RENOVATION PHASING AND CONCEPT COST PLAN prepared by William J. Camille and mack5, dated September 8, 2009, is based on the schematic design documents prepared by R.F. McCann & Company, Architects. The “estimated total cost of the project including both construction costs and soft costs is $8.7 million, which is more than double the construction cost estimate provided by RF McCann & Company.”  The scope of the work includes: 1) demolition and reconstruction of all of the stage area except the existing under stage concrete structure which currently houses the Children's Experimental Theater, dressing rooms, storage space, etc.; 2) demolition and reconstruction of the audience seating area; 3) demolition and reconstruction of a show production booth with a new subterranean level; 4) demolition and reconstruction of the concession building, restrooms, box office, and pathways to the various buildings, audience seating, and stage so all are ADA compliant; and 5) demolition and reconstruction of the parking area.  The EXECUTIVE SUMMARY includes, as follows:

Construction Costs $6,893,000

Design, Planning and Management $1,178,000

Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment $2,000

Development Costs $44,000

Data, Telecommunications and Security $61,000

Project Contingency $503,000

TOTAL $8,680,000

Notably, the ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES section states, as follows:

“With a reasonably detailed conceptual estimate now available, the City and the architect can begin to assess adjustments to the project scope that might bring the project cost back to a more acceptable level. Modifications in scope may also allow for a different phasing approach.”

The  FOREST THEATER RENOVATION PHASING AND CONCEPT COST PLAN document is embedded. 

Forest Theater Renovation Phasing and Concept Cost Plan 2009 OCR Document

Forest Theater Renovation Phasing and Concept Cost Plan 2009

Two Noteworthy 24 April 2012 Special City Council Agenda Items

ABSTRACT:  Two Noteworthy 24 April 2012 Special City Council Agenda Items, namely Consideration of the process to fill the vacancy on City Council and Receive Fiscal Year 2012-2013 proposed budget and operating plan, are presented.  The Agenda Item Summary prepared by City Administrator Jason Stilwell for the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 proposed budget and operating plan is reproduced.  City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Proposed Budget, April 24, 2012, and Budget Questions and Answers FY 2012 and 2013, are embedded.

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Tuesday, April 24, 2012– 4:30 p.m.

Council Chambers

East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues

Live & Archived Video Streaming

City Hall

East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues

II. Roll Call

IV. Orders of Council

A. Consideration of the process to fill the vacancy on City Council.

B. Receive Fiscal Year 2012-2013 proposed budget and operating plan.

Agenda Item Summary

It is recommended that the City Council receive the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Proposed Operating Plan and Budget for the City of Cannel-by-the-Sea and hold scheduled hearings for the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Proposed Operating Plan and Budget to begin Thursday, May 17, 2012 and continue if necessary through Tuesday, June 19, 2012 with specific hearings scheduled for Thursday, May 24, 2012, Tuesday, June 12, 2012, and Tuesday, June 19, 2012.

Budget Hearings are scheduled to begin at 4:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 17, 2012. The City Administrator will begin with a presentation highlighting the major issues and funding allocations in the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Proposed Budget. Council discussion and departmental budget presentations are scheduled to follow on May 17, 2012. Final deliberations and adoption is scheduled for May 24, 2012. Consistent with past practice, Budget Hearings will be noticed for May 17 and May 24, 2012 and, if necessary, the June 12 and June 19, 2012 in the event additional time is needed.

The Proposed Budget will be will be posted on the City's website at http://ci.carmel.ca.us/carmel/index.cfm/government/ on Friday, April 19, 2012 and will be available for public review at Carmel City Hall, between 8:00a.m. and 5:00p.m., weekdays beginning April19, 2012. Additional copies of the 2011-2012 Proposed Budget will be available for public review at the Harrison Memorial Library during library operating hours.

Staff received and is completing 42 budget inquiries received from the public and Council members. Completed inquiries are included with this agenda item. Inquiries completed after this agenda distribution but before the City Council meeting of April 24, 2012 will be provided at the meeting of April 24, 2012. Staff will make every effort to complete the inquiries in a timely manner so the information can inform the City Council in its budget deliberations.

Carmel-by-the-Sea Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Proposed Budget

 City of Carmel-by-the-Sea

Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Proposed Budget

April 24, 2012

The Proposed Budget document is comprised of seven sections, as follows:

Executive Summary

Statistical Profile

Summary Schedules

Department Detail

Capital Expenditures

Financial and Budget Policies

Glossary

  

Excerpt from EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The proposed budget is a $13.37 million fiscal plan and is balanced. Operationally the budget is a status quo budget maintaining essentially the same levels of service in Fiscal Year 2012-13 as those provided in Fiscal Year 2011-12. Capital investment matches what was proposed in the Capital Improvement Plan and is a lower investment than in Fiscal Year 2011-12. Staffing essentially remains flat at a proposed 71.69 Full-time equivalent employees.

Budget Questions and Answers FY 2012 and 2013

 Budget Questions and Answers FY 2012 and 2013

The People’s Moss Landing Water Desal Project

ABSTRACT:  Links to information about The Peoples’ Moss Landing Water Desal Project are provided; THE PEOPLE’S MOSS LANDING WATER DESAL PROJECT A Green Sustainable Project Report, including New Information and Independent Consultant Review, is embedded.

INFORMATION ON THE PEOPLE’S MOSS LANDING WATER DESAL PROJECT

THE PEOPLE’S MOSS LANDING WATER DESAL PROJECT

The Project

Desal Benefits

Our Story

Team Experience

Frequently Asked Questions about The People's Moss LandingWater Desal Project

The People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project News

Contact

Costs

The People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project - Estimated Timeline

THE PEOPLE’S MOSS LANDING WATER DESAL PROJECT

THE PEOPLE’S MOSS LANDING WATER DESAL PROJECT (March 2012)

Desal America & City of Pacific Grove City Council

ABSTRACT:  CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, April 18, 2012 agenda item, namely Agreement establishing a relationship with Desal America in order to accelerate a water project for Pacific Grove and Monterey County, and AGENDA REPORT and INFORMATION ON DESAL AMERICA, are presented.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING AGENDAS

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

15.  NEW BUSINESS

C. Agreement establishing a relationship with Desal America in order to accelerate a water project for Pacific Grove and Monterey County

Reference:  Rudy Fischer, Councilmember and Dan Miller, Councilmember

Recommended Action:  Adopt a resolution establishing a Public Agency relationship between Nader Agha of Desal America and the City of Pacific Grove. This resolution establishes the guidelines for the financial and operational relationship between the parties

Action: Upon a motion and carried on a 6-1 vote with Councilmember Huitt voting no, Council approved resolution establishing a Public Agency relationship between Nader Agha of Desal America and the City of Pacific Grove.
Ayes: Council Members Alan Cohen, Ken Cuneo, Rudy Fischer, Daniel Miller, Bill Kampe - Mayor Pro Tempore, Carmelita Garcia - Mayor
No: Council Member Robert Huitt

Pacific Grove Agreement establishing a relationship with Desal America April 2012

Pacific Grove Agreement establishing a relationship with Desal America

AGENDA REPORT

Agreement establishing a relationship with Desal America in order to accelerate a water project for Pacific Grove and Monterey County

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt a resolution establishing a Public Agency relationship between Nader Agha of Desal America and the City of Pacific Grove. This resolution establishes the guidelines for the financial and operational relationship between the parties.

INFORMATION ON DESAL AMERICA

DeSal America  

About 

Benefits 

Specifications 

How it Works

Glossary

FACT SHEET

NEWS ARTICLES: Water Replacement Projects

ABSTRACT:  A compilation of noteworthy news articles on water replacement projects, namely the Moss Landing Commercial Park (formerly the People's Moss Landing Desal Project), Cal Am company's new Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) involving a smaller desal plant north of Marina owned by Cal Am, expanded aquifer storage and recovery in partnership with Monterey Peninsula Water Management District and new groundwater replenishment program in partnership with the District and the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, and DeepWater Desal in Moss Landing, is presented.  Also links and selected excerpts from news articles are provided.

RE:

6/6/12 10:00 a.m. ALJ Weatherford Comr Peevey

A.12-04-019 (PHC) - Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, Commission Courtroom, San Francisco

PUC judge predicts rough road ahead for Cal Am water project

At least a dozen parties now part of project review, JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 06/06/2012

"Early in the hearing, Weatherford suggested he would lean toward focusing the PUC review on the proposal as presented by Cal Am and not on a parallel track with alternatives. But he left the door open to the possibility that alternatives could be considered as part of environmental review or during evidentiary hearings later this year."

Judge: Proceed with Cal Am new watersupply project application, JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 06/01/2012

“In his ruling, Weatherford requested the parties to the proceeding submit briefs outlining their stance on critical legal issues, including the county's public desalination plant ownership ordinance, and the project backers' access to slant well intake water, groundwater replenishment product water, and the brine disposal outfall considered critical to the project's feasibility.”

“Weatherford gave the parties until July 11 to file their briefs on the legal issues, and until July 25 for replies.”

Committee seeks consultant to help evaluate desal projects

Members agree consultant needed to vet proposals

By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 05/23/2012 

"The committee has been charged with vetting desal projects proposed by California American Water north of Marina and by the backers of The People's Project and DeepWater Desal in Moss Landing."

Cal Am supply plan draws fire

Panelists say public input lacking, laws being ignored

By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 05/05/2012 

"I don't know what the (authority) will do, but I'm taking them at their word that they want to speak with one voice, and that means they need to hammer out some compromises," said Riley, a water activist. "So far it's just been public meetings and public comment, no decisions, no policy, no direction. We need a follow-up process leading toward a decision. We need more structure. There are too many problems adding up faster than the sense of progress."

(George Riley, member of the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority's technical advisory committee) 

Salt Solo

State PUC says Cal Am can ignore county and go it alone ondesal plant; county says, ‘What?’

Story by Kera Abraham Thursday, May 3, 2012

Desal plan draws opposition; water district asks PUC to reject Cal Am proposal

By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 05/01/2012 Updated:   05/02/2012 

Cal Am has new plan for desal

Monterey Peninsula: Public ownership rule challenged

By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 04/23/2012 Updated:   04/24/2012

P.G. council backs Agha desal plan

KELLY NIX, The Carmel Pine Cone, April 20, 2012

Agha's desal deal with Pacific Grove changes game, some say

By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 04/19/2012

Late Wednesday, the Pacific Grove City Council agreed to serve as the lead agency for local businessman Nader Agha's proposed People's Moss Landing Desal Project, which would include a $129 million desal plant on the former National Refractories site now called the Moss Landing Commercial Park.

Cal Am President Rob MacLean is scheduled to present the company's proposal to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority during a meeting at 6 p.m. Monday at Monterey City Hall.

Pacific Grove OKs desalination partnership with Agha

By KEVIN HOWE Herald Staff Writer, 04/19/2012

The council voted 6-1 Wednesday to approve "an agreement establishing a relationship with Desal America in order to accelerate a water project for Pacific Grove and Monterey County."

PIPELINE DREAMS

A single desal plant supplying the greater Monterey Bay area is a long shot.

By Kera Abraham, Thursday, April 19, 2012

Cities Annual Reports Fiscal Years 2000-01 through 2009-10: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

ABSTRACT:  The California State Controller’s Cities Annual Reports are reports which compile “the financial data pertinent to the operation of California’s city governments; it presents the costs of providing an array of valuable public services, as well as the means by which those services are financed.”  The Cities Annual Report Fiscal Year 2000-01 through the Cities Annual Report Fiscal Year 2009-10 are embedded is separate posts. SUMMARIES of data for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea are highlighted.   Tables of SUMMARY: CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA (FY 2000-01 through FY 2009-10) and COMPARISON OF CALIFORNIA CITIES: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, DEL MAR, CALISTOGA, MONTEREY & PACIFIC GROVE, FISCAL YEAR 2009-10 are presented.

SUMMARY: CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA (FY 2000-01 through FY 2009-10)

Fiscal Year (FY)	Population (Est.)	Total Revenues	Total Expenditures
2000-2001	4,089	$12,168,836	$10,932,850
2001-2002	4,084	$30,259,331	$18,774,288
2002-2003	4,094	$12,950,429	$23,683,064
2003-2004	4,078	$11,909,320	$11,741,118
2004-2005	4,078	$11,909,320	$11,741,118
2005-2006	4,038	$12,462,258	$11,482,357
2006-2007	4,053	$13,677,862	$11,777,151
2007-2008	4,049	$14,555,554	$13,842,441
2008-2009	4,037	$13,233,957	$14,059,781
2009-2010	4,053	$12,638,558	$12,858,766

COMPARISON OF CALIFORNIA CITIES: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, DEL MAR, CALISTOGA, MONTEREY & PACIFIC GROVE

FISCAL YEAR 2009-10

City	Population (est.)	Total Revenues	Total Expenditures
Carmel-by-the-Sea	4,053	$12,638,558	$12,858,766
Del Mar	4,660	$17,585,103	$16,205,205
Calistoga	5,370	$13,368,886	$16,459,554
Monterey	29,455	$83,905,702	$86,134,016
Pacific Grove	15,683	$23,223,154	$20,805,491

Per Capita Spending:

Carmel-by-the-Sea: $3,173.

Del Mar: $3,478.

Calistoga: $3,065.

Monterey: $2,924

Pacific Grove: $1,327.

Cities Annual Report Fiscal Year 2009-10: Focus on Carmel-by-the-Sea

ABSTRACT:  The California State Controller’s Cities Annual Report (100^th edition) is a report which compiles “the financial data pertinent to the operation of California’s city governments; it presents the costs of providing an array of valuable public services, as well as the means by which those services are financed.”  The Cities Annual Report Fiscal Year 2009-10 is embedded.  A SUMMARY of date for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is presented.

Cities Annual Report FY 2009-10

SUMMARY: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

Table 1. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2009-10

Carmel-By-The-Sea

Estimated Population June 30, 2010 4,053

2000 Federal Census 4,081

County Location Monterey

Class General Law

Table 3. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2009-10

Statement of Revenues

Functional Revenues $817,394

General Revenues $11,821,164

Total Revenues $12,638,558

Table 4. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2009-10

Statement of Expenditures

Operating Expenditures $12,802,535

Capital Outlay $56,231

Total Expenditures $12,858,766

Functional Revenues $817,394

Net Expenditures $12,041,372

Table 5. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2009-10

Statement of Long-Term Indebtedness

Amount Authorized $826,349

Amount Issued or Received $826,349

Current Year Redeemed or Repaid $77,776

Outstanding at End of Year $739,646

Total Future Lease Obligations $12,475,888

Table 6. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2009-10

Assessed Valuations and Property Taxes Allocated and Levied

Assessed Valuation

Locally Assessed $2,937,194,784

Exemptions $21,604,728

Net Assessed Valuation $2,915,590,056

Property Taxes Allocated

Secured and Unsecured $4,004,090

Homeowners $24,701

Total Property Taxes Allocated and Levied $4,028,791

Table 7. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2009-10

Appropriation Limit and Total Annual Appropriations Subject to the Limit

Carmel-By-The-Sea

Appropriation Limit $23,565,750

Total Annual Appropriations Subject to the Limit $12,864,088

 (Source: CitiesAnnual Report Fiscal Year 2009-10)

Cities Annual Report Fiscal Year 2008-09: Focus on Carmel-by-the-Sea

ABSTRACT:  The California State Controller’s Cities Annual Report (99^th edition) is a report which compiles “the financial data pertinent to the operation of California’s city governments; it presents the costs of providing an array of valuable public services, as well as the means by which those services are financed.”  The Cities Annual Report Fiscal Year 2007-08 is embedded.  A SUMMARY of date for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is presented.

Cities Annual Report FY 2008-09

SUMMARY: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

Table 1. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2008-09

Carmel-By-The-Sea

Estimated Population June 30, 2009 4,037

2000 Federal Census 4,081

County Location Monterey

Class General Law

Table 3. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2008-09

Statement of Revenues

Functional Revenues $1,150,492

General Revenues $12,083,465

Total Revenues $13,233,957

Table 4. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2008-09

Statement of Expenditures

Operating Expenditures $12,921,699

Capital Outlay $1,138,082

Total Expenditures $14,059,781

Functional Revenues $1,150,492

Net Expenditures $12,909,289

Table 5. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2008-09

Statement of Long-Term Indebtedness

Total Carmel-By-The-Sea Long-Term Indebtedness

Amount Authorized $444,909

Amount Issued or Received $444,909

Current Year Redeemed or Repaid $ 8,927

Outstanding at End of Year $435,982

Total Future Lease Obligations $13,065,428

Table 6. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2008-09

Assessed Valuations and Property Taxes Allocated and Levied

Assessed Valuation

Locally Assessed $2,986,491,019

Exemptions $21,711,254

Net Assessed Valuation $2,964,779,765

Property Taxes Allocated

Secured and Unsecured $4,075,789

Homeowners $24,086

Total Property Taxes Allocated and Levied $4,099,875

Table 7. Cities Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2008-09

Appropriation Limit and Total Annual Appropriations Subject to the Limit

Carmel-By-The-Sea

Appropriation Limit $23,951,177

Total Annual Appropriations Subject to the Limit $14,249,110

 (Source: CitiesAnnual Report Fiscal Year 2008-09)