CC 2020-01-28_11b Central Coast Blue Memorandum of Agreement Framework
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JAMES A. BERGMAN, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF CENTRAL COAST BLUE DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF
AGREEMENT FRAMEWORK
DATE: JANUARY 28, 2020
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Review, discuss, and provide direction related to the draft Central Coast Blue Memorandum of
Agreement framework.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
There is no immediate fiscal impact from providing direction on the draft MOA framework.
However, participation in the Central Coast Blue project will require a substantial financial
commitment from the City along with other partner agencies.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Council review the draft Memorandum of Agreement cost-sharing
framework for Central Coast Blue and provide input to staff regarding next steps.
BACKGROUND:
The City relies on two sources of allotted water supply: groundwater (1,323 acre feet per year
(afy) from the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin and 200 afy from the Pismo Formation) and Lopez
Lake surface water (2,290 afy) for a total of 3,813 afy. During years of normal rainfall, the City
should have sufficient water supplies to adequately serve projected development and population
increases well into the future. However, during the most recent extended drought, municipal
groundwater users in the Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA) needed to reduce
groundwater pumping by approximately 80 percent in order to balance inflow and outflow from
the groundwater basin and protect against the threat of seawater intrusion. Multiple dry years or
extended droughts are a growing long-term risk of reduced water availability that can be avoided
by diversifying the City’s water portfolio with the Central Coast Blue project.
The City has considered a number of options to improve water supply reliability including
conservation, raising the Lopez Lake spillway, supplemental State water, cloud seeding,
desalinated water, and recycled wastewater. Of these options recycled wastewater has been
determined to be the most feasible and has the ability to produce the most reliable source of
supply. The City of Pismo Beach, the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District
(SSLOCSD), and the cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach have been participating in the
Item 11.b. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
REVIEW OF CENTRAL COAST BLUE DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FRAMEWORK
JANUARY 28, 2020
PAGE 2
preliminary phases of development of a project that would include a wastewater treatment facility
and recycled water distribution system known as the Central Coast Blue project. The Council
received an update on Central Coast Blue at the August 27, 2019 Council meeting. The project
could potentially provide up to 3,500 afy of additional water supply for groundwater recharge or
agriculture irrigation and help ensure the resiliency and security of the groundwater basin. The
agencies are currently completing environmental review and preliminary engineering for the
project and have developed a draft cost sharing Memorandum of Agreement for consideration by
each of the participating agencies to provide a policy commitment to continue this project and
allocate costs appropriately.
The City of Pismo Beach has served as the lead agency for the Central Coast Blue project since
its inception in 2016. The proposed project will purify wastewater effluent and inject it into the
groundwater basin at select sites in Grover Beach and Oceano. Phase I of the project will utilize
wastewater effluent from the Pismo Beach wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and will provide
supplemental groundwater to participating agencies. If determined necessary at some future time,
an additional phase of the project would allow Central Coast Blue to purify the effluent from the
SSLOCSD’s WWTP and inject it into the groundwater basin for a greater acre-foot yield. The
partner agencies, which consist of the cities of Grover Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Pismo Beach
along with SSLOCSD formed a cost and benefit sharing subcommittee at the staff level to draft a
framework which outlines how costs and benefits for the project will be distributed. The result of
these efforts is the draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) framework included as Attachment
1 to this report. The Oceano Community Services District participated in initial development of the
project, but their staff has recently indicated that Oceano Community Services District will not
benefit from the project as it does not need the additional water produced and thus does not intend
to continue participating.
The draft MOA proposes that participating agencies divide project costs and benefits based on
their current share of groundwater allocations and provides a mechanism for reimbursing the City
of Pismo Beach for excess funds that Pismo Beach advanced to begin the project. Under this
methodology, the City’s proposed cost allocation for the project would be 39% compared with an
allocation of 41% for Grover Beach and 20% for Pismo Beach. The MOA also provides a
mechanism for non-participating agencies to “buy” into the project at a later date in order to receive
benefits from the project and identifies how participating agencies will share in grant funds and
contributions from SSLOCSD.
In addition to outlining costs and benefits, the MOA indicates how non-participating agencies will
manage their groundwater resources without impacting the benefits from Central Coast Blue. In
particular, the MOA indicates that all NCMA agencies, whether participating in the project or not,
limit their groundwater pumping to an amount that maintains a barrier against seawater intrusion
without groundwater injection from the project. The MOA defines the amount of NCMA municipal
pumping that could be achieved year-over-year without violating the seawater intrusion criteria as
the “Natural Yield” and water produced solely by the project as “Project Water.” The MOA provides
a reimbursement method for any agency that pumps groundwater in excess of their allocation of
Natural Yield plus Project Water.
Item 11.b. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
REVIEW OF CENTRAL COAST BLUE DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FRAMEWORK
JANUARY 28, 2020
PAGE 3
Staff recommends that the Council review and provide feedback on the draft MOA framework.
The Pismo Beach City Council reviewed this draft on December 3, 2019 and the Grover Beach
City Council reviewed it on January 21, 2020. It is estimated that a final document would be
brought back to each respective Council for approval within the next 2-3 months in order to
maintain project eligibility for upcoming State and Federal grant opportunities for construction
which require application submittal in the summer of 2020. The City of Pismo Beach was awarded
a State Proposition 1 grant for the project in the amount of $2 million and a Federal Title XVI grant
in the amount of $800,000 both for planning and design work. The City of Pismo Beach and
participating agencies will continue to pursue additional grant funds that could fund a significant
portion of construction work.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES
Project Costs and Cost Sharing
There is no immediate fiscal impact from providing direction on the draft MOA framework.
However, participation in the Central Coast Blue project will require a substantial financial
commitment from the City along with other partner agencies. Each agency’s cost is based on the
proportionate share of benefits tied to the established groundwater allocation and if the project
were successful in receiving additional grant funding, each city’s cost share would be
proportionately reduced. Most of the costs beyond the pre-construction phase are expected to be
financed which would spread the cost burden out over a multi-year period. To date, the City of
Pismo Beach has funded a disproportionate share of the costs during the pre-construction phase.
To remedy this imbalance, the cost-sharing framework provides for reimbursement from the other
participating agencies until the costs are balanced based on participation and benefit levels. Water
Systems Consulting (WSC), the project design consultant, has provided estimates for the three
main categories of costs related to the project (pre-construction, construction and ongoing
operations and maintenance). Table 1 is a summary of these costs and the City’s projected share
prior to the project receiving additional grant funding:
Table 1: Total Project Costs and Arroyo Grande’s Estimated Share Cost Type Cost
Cost Type Cost Arroyo Grande Share
Pre-Construction (one-time) $ 6,183,445 $ 2,411,544
Construction (one-time) $ 35,432,845 $ 13,818,810
Operations and Maintenance (ongoing) $ 2,260,000 $ 881,400
The preconstruction costs include preliminary design work, program management, regulatory
agency permitting, grant applications, environmental compliance (CEQA) and final design work.
To date, the City of Pismo Beach has advanced $2,168,725 toward these efforts and has received
$680,955 from other agencies in reimbursement given the regional nature of this project (see
Table 2 below). An additional $4,014,720 is projected to be spent on pre-construction costs from
FY 2019-20 through FY 2021-22 for a total estimated pre-construction cost of $6,183,445.
Item 11.b. - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
REVIEW OF CENTRAL COAST BLUE DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FRAMEWORK
JANUARY 28, 2020
PAGE 4
Table 2. Agency Contributions
Other Agency Contributions Amount
South County Sanitation District SEP Funds $ 221,963
City of Arroyo Grande 144,811
SSLOCSD Cost Share EIR 110,656
City of Grover Beach 110,000
Zone 3 Grant from SLO County 59,214
SSLOCSD Planning Study 34,311
Total $ 680,955
In order to reimburse the City of Pismo Beach for funds advanced, the draft MOA provides that
the remaining pre-construction costs be shared evenly by the other participating cities (Grover
Beach and Arroyo Grande) until Pismo Beach is repaid up to each agency’s contribution amount.
Table 3 below shows the calculation of remaining reimbursement amounts from each city toward
the remaining estimated pre-construction costs. The City’s share of reimbursing these costs is
$700,992 which would be paid back over the next two years as work progresses.
Table 3. Agency Pre-Construction Cost Allocation and Reimbursements
Agency Allocation Allocated Cost
Less Previous
Contributions Remaining Contributions
Arroyo
Grande 39% $ 845,803 $ 110,000 $ 735,803
Grover
Beach 41% 889,177 144,811 744,366
Pismo Beach 20% 433,745 1,913,914 (1,480,169)
$ 2,168,725 $ 2,168,725 $ -
The estimated construction costs to complete Phase 1 include $31,356,500 for construction,
$3,135,650 for construction management and $940,695 for construction phase engineering for a
total of $35,432,845 with $13,818,810 (39%) being the Arroyo Grande share. Assuming the
partner agencies would finance construction costs, the estimated total annual debt service is $1.6
million per year based on a 30-year loan with $624,000 being the annual Arroyo Grande share.
Ongoing operation and maintenance costs are estimated to be $2,260,000 per year with $881,400
as the Arroyo Grande share. Construction is expected to begin in 2022 with annual debt service
payments not beginning until construction is completed in 2024 and ongoing operation and
maintenance costs also beginning at that point. Final costs will be established with the completed
project design and potential receipt of additional grant funding. Currently, the City has $1.1 million
in the Water Availability Fund (impact fees from new development to be used to develop new
water supplies) which could be considered to be used for costs already incurred or for future costs.
Item 11.b. - Page 4
CITY COUNCIL
REVIEW OF CENTRAL COAST BLUE DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FRAMEWORK
JANUARY 28, 2020
PAGE 5
Remaining funding for the project including pre-construction, construction and operations and
maintenance are part of a multi-year utility rate study which incorporates the City’s future costs
for Central Coast Blue pending potential Council future adoption of the cost-sharing MOA. Staff
will bring this rate study forward for consideration by the Council in February. Preliminary
estimates indicate that the cost of Central Coast Blue to the average water ratepayer will be $7.60
per month in FY 2024-25. This monthly cost does not include potential significant reductions if
addition State and Federal grants are received.
Next Steps
A policy decision to commit to or decline participating in the Central Coast Blue project will be
forthcoming in the next two to three months. Staff recommended next steps are:
1. Review the MOA and provide input to staff to be used in upcoming Central Coast Blue staff
level discussions (tonight’s item).
2. Review water rate increases necessary to implement Central Coast Blue and consider a
Proposition 218 rate process (February and March).
3. If rate increases are successful through the Propositions 218 process, Council can
consider signing the MOA and fully commit to the project.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for City Council consideration:
1. Review the draft Memorandum of Agreement cost-sharing framework for Central Coast
Blue; or
2. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Review of the draft Central Coast Blue Memorandum of Agreement framework will allow
discussion by the City Council, the public, and staff.
DISADVANTAGES:
There are no disadvantages in reviewing the draft Central Coast Blue framework Memorandum
of Agreement framework.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
No environmental review is required for this item.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government
Code Section 54954.2.
Attachment:
1. Draft Central Coast Blue Memorandum of Agreement
2. Minutes from Pismo Beach City Council of December 3, 20191
1 Minutes from Grover Beach City Council review of the MOA on January 21, 2020 was not available at time of
publication.
Item 11.b. - Page 5
Item 11.b. - Page 6
Attachment 1
Draft NCMA Agency and SSLOCSD Terms
[Publish Date]
[Keywords]
SUBJECT : CENTRAL COAST BLUE -GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT & COST SHARING TERMS
1. Purpose
a. The purpose of this MOA is to identify and agree upon the groundwater pumping and
cost sharing frameworks for Central Coast Blue, Phase 1 ("PROJECT").
2. Background
a. The NCMA agencies have worked co llaborati vely to manage groundwater pumping in
their portion of the SMGB since development of the 1983 Ge ntlem en's Agreement,
which allocated the estimated avai lable gr oundwater amongst the municipal and
agricultural pumpers in the NCMA.
b. The Gentlemen's Agreement was further formalized in the 2002 Management
Agreement and incorporated into the SMGB Adjudication in the 2005 Stipulation. The
NCMA Municipal Pumping Allocations from the Management Agreement are outlined in
Tab le 1.
Table 1. NCMA Municipal Pumping A/locations
NCMA Agencies Groundwater Ag Conversion Current Fraction of
Allocation (AFY) Credits (AFY) Groundwater Groundwater
Allocation (AFY) Allocation
Arroyo Grande 1,202 121 1,323 0.31
Grover Beach 1,198 209 1,407 0.32
OCSD 900 900 0.21 . -Pismo Beach 700 700 0.16
Total 4,000 330 4,330 1.00
c. Seawater intrusion was identified as a threat to SMGB in the 1960s and was one of the
driving factors for the construction of Lopez Dam and connection t o the St ate Water
Project.
d. Evidence of seawater intrusion was detected in 2009 in NCMA Sentry Well 32S/13E-
30N02 and the Oceana Blue Well {32S/13E-31 Hll).
e. In response to the detection of seawater intrusion, the NCMA agencies dramatically
reduced their groundwater pumping and began investigating supplemental supply
opportunities to improve water supply reliabi lity and groundwater protection .
f. Through numerous supplemental supply alternative studies, outlined be low, the
PROJECT was identified as the preferred alternative for protecting NCMA groundwater
and improving water supply re li ability for the region .
i. SSSLOCSD Desalination Feasibility Study-prepared by Arroyo Grande, Grover
Beach and OCSD
ii. Lopez Spillway Raise Project Report -NCMA Technical Group
iii. Regional Recycled Water Strategic Plan -San Luis Obispo County
iv. Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study-Pismo Beach
Item 11.b. - Page 7
Attachment 1
v. Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study -South San Luis Obispo County
Sanitation District
3. Central Coast Blue Overview
a. Regional, multi-phase groundwater protection project that will allow capture of water
currently discharged to the ocean and put it to beneficial use as a seawater intrusion
barrier.
i. Phase 1-advanced treatment and injection of Pismo Beach flows
a. The "PROJECT" refers to Phase 1
ii. Phase 2 -add advanced treatment and injection of SSLOCSD flows
b. Key Project Components
i. Advanced treatment facility (ATF)
ii. Recycled water distribution infrastruct u re
iii. Injection wells
iv. Monitoring wells
v . Potential new extraction wells
c. Values and Benefits
i. Provides protection from seawater intrusion
ii. Improves groundwater basi n quality
iii. Reduces ocean discharge of treated wastewater effluent
iv. Provides a new, local, sustainable water supply
v. Offsets demand fo r State and Lopez surface water supplies
d. Participating Agencies
i. City of Arroyo Grande (Arroyo Grande)
ii. City of Grover Beach {Grover Beach)
iii. Oceana Community Services District {OCSD)
iv. City of Pismo Beach (Pismo Beach)
v. South San Lu is County Sanitation District {SSLOCSD)
e. Contributing Agencies
i. Three Contributing Water Purveyors have financially committed to
implementing PROJECT: Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach , and Pismo Beach.
ii. OCSD has chosen not to contribute funds to the PROJECT.
iii. SSLOCSD has committed to funding Construction Costs associated with
expand i ng Central Coast Blue from Phase 1 to Phase 2.
4 . Groundwater Manageme nt without PROJECT
a. To protect the groundwater basin from seawater intrusion , the NCMA agencies agree to
manage municipal pumping to prevent seawater intrusion from occurring in the NCMA .
b. Using the NCMA Groundwater Model (GW Model), specific criteria , outlined below,
were developed to assist the NCMA agencies in identifying conditions that could induce
seawater intrusion.
i. Seawater Intrusion Criteria
Council Agenda 12-3-2019
a. Deep Well Index -Average water level in three NCMA
Sentry/Monitoring wells (i.e. 32S/12E-24B03, 32S/13E-30F03 and
32S13E30N02), screened in the lower Paso Robles and upper Careaga
formations, to represent the primary municipal production zones of the
municipal pumpers in the NCMA. Extended periods where the Deep
Well index falls below 7.5 ft have been identified as creating the
potential for seawater intrusion. Maintaining the Deep Well Index at or
12.C-6
Item 11.b. - Page 8
Attachment 1
above the historic Deep Well Index (1977 -2016) has been identified as
one of criteria for preventi ng seawater intrusion.
b . Onshore Flow -Analysis of hi stor ic observations of seawater intrusion
in the NCMA and comparison with GW Model estimates of groundwater
flow di r ection have identified a correlation between the detection of
seawater intrusion in 2009 (in 32513E30N02 and Oceana Blu e
Monitoring Wel ls) and the GW Model estimates of onshore flow into
the lower Paso Robles and upper Careaga formations . GW Model
predictions of onshore flow in the lower Paso Robles and upper Careaga
formations in the portion of the NCMA north of Arroyo Grande Cree k
have been identified as an additional criterion i nd icat i ng the potential
for seawater intrusion.
c. The NCMA agencies analyzed multiple predictive municipal pumping scenarios using the
GW Model to estimat e the amount of NCMA municipal pumping that could be achieved
year-over-year w ithout violating the seawater intrusion criteria identified above.
d. The modeling scenarios identified that only a portion of the NCMA Municipal A llocations
cou ld be pumped without exceeding the criteria for inducing seawater intrusion. The
amount of NCMA mun ici pal pumping that cou l d be achieved year-over-year without
v iolating the seawater intrusion criteria shal l be termed the "Natural Yie ld".
e. The current estimate of the Natural Yield for the NCMA is defined in the "NCMA Natural
Yield Management Agreement".
f. The Natura l Yield sha ll be divided amongst the NCMA agencies based on their
groun dwater allocation percentages, see Table 1.
g. Prior to the implementation of PROJECT, t he NCMA agencies ag ree t o limit thei r
groundwat er pumping to the Natural Yield.
h . As conditions change or as the NCMA agenc ies understanding of the groundwater bas in
changes, the NCMA agencies will re -evaluate the NCMA seawater intrusion criteria, the
amount of municipa l pumping allowable w ithout vio lating the seawater intrusion
criteria, and update the Natural Yield according to the current unde rstanding without
the PROJECT.
5. Groundwater Management w it h PROJECT
a. The GW Model shall be utili zed to estimate the additional amount of groundwater that
the NCMA Municipa l Agencies can pump without v iolating the seawater intrusion
criteria with implementation of PROJECT. This additional groundwater shall be termed
the "PRO JECT Yield".
b. The PROJECT Yield shall be allocated based on Water Purveyor Contribution
Percentages, which is based on their percentage cost share to PROJECT, see Cost Share
Terms section be low.
c. The Contributing Water Purveyors will be able to pump their portion of the PROJECT
Yield, in addi t ion to thei r po rt i on of the Natu ral Yield .
6. Excessive Groundwate r Pumping
a. If a NCMA Agency pumps more than their agreed upon portion of the Natural Yield in
any given year, then they will reimburse the other NCMA Agencies for the cost of
replacement water. The Replacement Water Cost shall be equivalent to the unit cost for
PROJECT water. The Replacement Water Cost shall be distributed to the NCMA Agencies
proportionally based on the NCMA Municipal Pumping Allocation percentages.
Item 11.b. - Page 9
Attachment 1
b. If a Contributing Water Purveyor pumps more than than the i r agreed upon portion of
the Natural Yie ld and PROJECT Yield in any given year, then they will reimburse the
other Contri buting Water Purveyors for the cost of replacement water. The
Replacement Water Cost shall be equivalent to the unit cost for PROJECT water. The
Replacement Water Cost shall be distributed to the other Contributing Water Purveyors
proportional ly based on the other Water Purveyor Contribution Percentages.
c. If a Contributing Water Agency reduces their pumping in response t o another agency
pumping more than their Natural Yie ld or PROJECT Yield, then that agency that reduced
pumping shall receive the Rep lacement Water Cost directly proportiona l to the volume
of groundwater that they pumped bel ow their Natural Yi el d or PROJECT Yield allocation.
7 . Cost Sharing Terms
a. PROJECT Yield Cost Sharing
i. The PROJECT Yield shal l be allocated to the Contributing Water Purveyors based
on the ir percentage of t he cost share for PROJECT. The Water Purveyor
Contr ibu tion Percentage is to be based on the Groundwater Allocation of the
Contr ibu ting Water Pu rve yors, see Table 2 be low.
Table 2. PROJECT Water Purveyor Contribution Percentages
PROJECT Contributing Water Current Fraction of Water Purveyor
Purveyors Groundwater Groundwater Contribution
Allocation (AFY) Allocation Percentages
Arroyo Grande 1,323 0.39 0.39
Grover Beach 1,407 0.41 0.41
Pismo Beach 700 0.20 0.20
Tot a l 3,4 3 0 1 .00 1.00
b. Pre-Construction Costs
i. PROJECT Pre-Construction Costs are those costs paid by each Contributing
Water Purveyor starting w ith the Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facilities
Planning Study through award of the first construction contract for the full-scale
PROJECT impl ementation.
ii. To-date, Pismo Beach ha s funded the majority of p re-construction costs. To
reconcile pre-construction cost al loca tion in line with Water Purveyor
Contr ibution Percentages, Arroyo Grande and Gro ver Beach shall split (Arroyo
Grande 50%, Grover Beach 50%) the rema ini ng pre-construction costs until the
cumu l ative contributions approximately match the Water Purveyor Contribution
Percentages.
i ii. Once pre-construction cost contributions approximate Water Purveyor
Contribution Percentages, the remaining pre-construction costs will be split at
the Water Purveyor Contribution Percentages.
iv . Reimbursement Structure
1. The Pismo Beach will maintain primary contracts for PROJECT pre-
construction activities. Pismo Beach will enter into cost share
agreements with Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach to cover their
portions of the pre-construction costs.
Item 11.b. - Page 10
Attachment 1
ii. SSLOCSD Contributions to pre-construction costs shall be credited toward its
Member Agencies' (i.e . Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach and OCSD) contributions
proportionally to their revenue contribution to SSLOCSD .
c. Construction Cost Sharing
i. PROJECT construction costs are those costs that start with the first construction
contract for the PROJECT through determination of construction Substantial
Completion.
ii. PROJECT construction cost sharing will be sp lit between the SSLOCSD and the
Contributing Water Purveyors.
a. SSLOCSD Contributions
a. To provide for the opportunity to divert water from its ocean
discharge in the future, SSLOCSD will contribute to the
incremental capital costs to expand facilities necessary for
PROJECT to accommodate Central Coast Blue Phase 2 in the
future.
b. The framework for calculating the Phase 2 incremental costs
will be developed through collaboration between SSLOCSD and
the Contributing Water Purveyors.
c. In the event that new regulatory or legal requirements compel
SSLOCSD to claim benefits in the PROJECT, SSLOCSD can "buy-
in" to the PROJECT at an equivalent cost to the Contributing
Water Purveyors to participate in the project. Equivalent costs
shall account for the time-value of money and the depreciated
value of the infrastructure at the time of purchase.
b . Contributing Water Purveyor Contributions
a. The Contributing Water Purveyors will pay for the remaining
Construction Costs based on the Water Purveyor Contribution
Percentages.
d. Operations Cost Sharing
i. PROJECT Operations Costs are those costs that start [after?] determination of
Substantial Completi on of PROJECT complet ion .
ii. PROJECT Operations Cost sharing w i ll be split between the Contributing Water
Purveyors based on Water Purveyor Contribution Percentages.
e. Buy-in Costs
i. Buy-in Agencies that want to "buy-in" to the project after project construction,
shall be r esponsible for paying an equivalent cost to the Contributing Water
Purveyors to participate in the project. Equivalent costs shall account for the
time-value of money and the depreciated value of the infrastructure at the time
of purchase.
ii. The Buy-in costs shall be negotiated between the Contributing Water Agencies
and the Buy-in Agency.
f. Grant Funding
i. Grant funds obta ined to offset PROJECT pre -construction or construction costs
wi ll reduce the total PROJECT pre-construction or construction costs to be
shared by each of the Contributing Water Purveyors.
8. Cost Sharing Modifications
Item 11.b. - Page 11
Attachment 1
a. Changes to cost sha ring of pre-construction, construction, and operations costs may be
re-considered if OCSD or SSLOCSD chooses to contribute more than determined he re in.
PROJECT Yield and/or benefits would be re-visited as well.
Item 11.b. - Page 12
Ci ty Council Meeti ng Minutes
Ca ll for publi c co mment: No comment.
ATTACHMENT 2
December 3, 2019
Action : Adopt a Resolution approving stop sig n publ ic art for the Shell
Beach Streetscape Project.
Motion: Reiss
Second: B lake
Vote : T h e motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 5 Reiss, Blake, Guthrie, Howell, Waage
Noes: 0
Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: o
Legislative Record: Resolution R -2019-094 ado pted.
Item 12.C : Ce ntral Coast Blue M emora ndum of Agre e me nt Fra m ework (Fine)
Recommendation : Review and provide feedback on the content of t he
Draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Framework for Central Coast
B lue .
Pre senting staff:
Be njam in Fine, Public Works Di rector/Ci ty Engineer
James R. Lewis, City Manager
Ca ll for public comm e nt: No comment.
Action: Consensus in support of the agreement framework as presented
w ith the fo ll owing additiona l direction :
1. In cl ude the fo ll owing language in MOA Framework Section 7 .b .ii:
In the event that the costs funded by Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and
Grover Beach do not match the cumula tive contributions in the Water
Purveyor Contribution Percentages prior to construction, the cities shall
structure the construction financing to achieve the contributions in the
Water Purveyor Contribution Percentages.
In suppo rt :
In opposition:
Absent:
Abstain :
Recused:
Approved December 17, 2019
5
0
0
0
0
Blake, Guth rie , Reiss, Howell , Waage
PAGE 10 OF 11
Item 11.b. - Page 13
City Cou ncil Meeting Minu tes Dece m ber 3, 20 19
2. Require the payment of in terest by other participating agencies on the
funding advanced by the City for the Central Coast Blue project, up to
its Water P urveyor Contrib ution Percentages.
In support:
In opposition:
Absent:
Abstain:
Recused:
3
2
0
0
0
Guthrie , Reiss, Waage
Bl ake, Howell
I 13. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
Consensus to agendize consid eration of potentia ll y designating a park or other area of
the city in wh ich to allow dogs off leash , for a fu t ure goal-setting session .
I 14. ADJOURNMENT
At 7 :56 p .m.
PAGE 11 O F 11
Approved December 1 7 , 2019
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 11.b. - Page 14