A. Whether the finding or recommendation is accepted or will be implemented;
B. If a recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date;
C. A delineation of the constrains if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within a six-month period; and
D. The reason for not accepting or adopting a finding or recommendation.
FINDINGS
F1. Reserves have not been set aside for the replacement costs of the County flood control system.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
F2. Presently, there is little public support to fund the replacement costs of the County flood control system.
Response: The respondent neither agrees nor disagrees with the finding; however, based on presentations given to a wide variety of groups in Contra Costa County and the feedback received, there does not appear to be public support to raise revenue to fund replacement costs of Flood Control District facilities.
F3. There is little sense of urgency among elected officials towards financing the replacement costs of flood control in California.
Response: The respondent disagrees with the finding. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors understands the urgency to develop a funding source for replacement, however the solution includes modifying the California State Constitution. Senate Bill 231 by Hertzberg would define Sewer to include stormwater and flood control facilities and, therefore, be considered a utility and be allowed to raise rates similar to water and wastewater. The California State Association of Counties (CSAC) is committed to finding a funding solution for local stormwater programs. CSAC staff are working in coordination with county public works departments to build local political support with county Board of Supervisors and state legislators as well as to increase public awareness of this critical issue until a successful statewide solution is identified.
F4: The older sections of the County flood control system are approaching their design life of 70 years.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
F5: The current mechanism for funding flood control is not enough to maintain and eventually replace the system.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. None of the Flood Control Zones have adequate funding to maintain and eventually replace the systems. For example, the County receives no money to maintain and replace the existing infrastructure for Pinole Creek, Zone 9 because the tax rate was set at zero when Proposition 13 went into effect.
F6. The proposed California Water Conservation, Flood Control and Storm Water Management Act could provide revenues for County Flood Control to begin building financial reserves for full maintenance and eventual replacement of the system.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. The proposed legislation is an effort to modify the California Constitution to allow stormwater to be treated as a utility similar to water or sewer. This proposed modification would allow a rate structure for stormwater to be used for maintenance or replacement of facilities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
R1. The County Board of Supervisors, as the Governing Board of the Flood Control and Water Conservation District, should consider continuing to pursue efforts to educate elected officials about the urgency of passing the California Water Conservation, Flood Control and Storm Water Management Act.
Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The Board of Supervisors is working with the California State Association of Counties and the League of Cities to outreach to elected officials and the public in general in California on the importance of stormwater funding.
R2. The County Board of Supervisors, as the Governing Board of the Flood Control and Water Conservation District, should consider identifying funds to increase the Flood Control maintenance budget to begin reducing the deferred maintenance backlog, prior to January 2018.
Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The Board of Supervisors is very involved in the ongoing efforts to identify funding to increase the Flood Control maintenance budget and is working closely with CSAC and state Legislators to determine the best course of action to address stormwater funding. It is not anticipated that currently proposed legislation will pass before January 2018.
R3. The County Board of Supervisors, as the Governing Board of the Flood Control and Water Conservation District, should consider identifying funds to begin building reserves to fund the reconstruction of the County flood control system, prior to January 2018.
Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The Board of Supervisors has considered availability of funding and is closely following efforts in Sacramento to determine the best course of action to address stormwater funding. It is not anticipated that the proposed legislation would pass before January 2018.
R4. The County Board of Supervisors, as the Governing Board of the Flood Control and Water Conservation District,should consider instructing Flood Control staff to prepare plans for a County wide campaign to educate the public on the need to replace the infrastructure.
Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The Flood Control District is engaged in an ongoing outreach campaign to residents on the importance of stormwater infrastructure and the funding for installation, replacement and maintenance. District Staff regularly reports to the Board of Supervisors' Transportation Water and Infrastructure Committee on the outreach efforts and to the full Board of Supervisors annually and receives input and direction.
In order to comply with statutory requirements, the Board of Supervisors must provide a response to the Superior Court no later than August 29, 2017. The Board must take timely action in order to comply with the statutory deadline.