Meeting #25 OCTOBER 6, 2011

Allred Beckman Burcham Derivi Dougherty Escobar Jones Ornelas Sanguinetti Self White 1. Roll Call

2. Consent 2.01) Minutes of September 1, 2011

3.01) CDD Transition Update 3. Unfinished Business

4.01) Introduction to Management Partners 4.02) Delta Plan Overview 4. New Business

Delta Plan Overview for Development Oversight Commission October 6, 2011

Overview Delta Plan Key Concepts Impacts on City Planning and Land Use Decisions Impacts on City Utilities Potential Financial Impacts

Delta Plan Governance Governance Ecosystem Restoration Ecosystem Restoration Water Quality Water Quality Flood Risk Flood Risk Delta as a Place Delta as a Place Financing Plan Financing Plan

Key Concepts Delta Stewardship Council: Independent State Agency created in Delta Reform Act of 2009 Responsible for creating, adopting and implementing the Delta Plan Co-equal goals: Provide a more reliable water supply for the state; and Protect, restore, and enhance the Delta ecosystem Adaptive Management: Continuous reevaluation of the Plan, based upon the best available science Updated at least every five years Delta Plan/BDCP: Delta Plan expected to be in place before BDCP is approved – Delta Stewardship Council can weigh in on BDCP process BDCP is expected to be incorporated into the Delta Plan

Delta Plan Land Use Issues Coverage Coverage Primary Zone Primary Zone Secondary Zone Secondary Zone

Delta Plan Primary/Secondary Boundaries Stockton acreage: 41,521 Total 842 in Primary Zone 20,414 in Secondary Zone

GOVERNANCE CHANGES UNDER THE DELTA STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL’S (DSC) DELTA PLAN Delta Plan Consistency Determination Delta Plan Consistency Determination Covered Actions (Discretionary) Covered Actions (Discretionary) Significant Impact Determination Significant Impact Determination DSC Authority and Appeal Process DSC Authority and Appeal Process Loss of Local Land Use Authority Loss of Local Land Use Authority

Decision Tree for Possible Covered Actions

SPECIFIC CERTIFICATION AND APPEAL PROCEDURES Adopt Findings and Certificate of Consistency Adopt Findings and Certificate of Consistency Certification at End of Permitting Process Certification at End of Permitting Process Filed with DSC within 10 Days of an Appeal Filed with DSC within 10 Days of an Appeal Appeal Process Between 90 and 150 Days Appeal Process Between 90 and 150 Days

SPECIFIC CERTIFICATION AND APPEAL PROCEDURES (Continued) Appealed Action Not Implemented Unless: Appealed Action Not Implemented Unless: Appeal is Denied; Appeal is Denied; Revised Certificate Filed and Not Re-appealed; or Revised Certificate Filed and Not Re-appealed; or Dismissed for Other Reasons. Dismissed for Other Reasons.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS Usurps Local Land Use Authority Usurps Local Land Use Authority Complicates and Adds Bureaucracy to Permit Process Complicates and Adds Bureaucracy to Permit Process Adds Cost and Delays to Permit Process Adds Cost and Delays to Permit Process Creates Uncertainty to Discretionary Approval Process Creates Uncertainty to Discretionary Approval Process Hinders Economic Growth Hinders Economic Growth

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS (Continued) May Delay or Preclude Implementation of Land Use Plans/Developments, including: May Delay or Preclude Implementation of Land Use Plans/Developments, including: Development in Downtown, Other Infill Areas, and the Port Development in Downtown, Other Infill Areas, and the Port General Plan and Settlement Agreement with Sierra Club/Attorney General General Plan and Settlement Agreement with Sierra Club/Attorney General Upgrades to City’s Regional Wastewater Control Facility and Future Expansion of Delta Water Supply Project Upgrades to City’s Regional Wastewater Control Facility and Future Expansion of Delta Water Supply Project Future Entitlements for Approved Master Planned Communities in Secondary Zone (e.g., Grupe’s Sanctuary Project) Future Entitlements for Approved Master Planned Communities in Secondary Zone (e.g., Grupe’s Sanctuary Project)

Reliable Water Supply Urban Water Management Plan Water conservation (20 x 2020) Improve regional self-reliance Reduce dependence on Delta Water rate structure Delta Water Supply Pipeline Alignment

Delta Environment Flow criteria Habitat restoration New Melones Dam

Water Quality Pathogens Salinity Nutrients Other Pollutants Regional Wastewater Control Facility

Financial Issues Stressor/User Fees Legislation required to implement Legislation required to implement Could charge for water taken from or effluent discharged to the Delta – could begin by 2022 or sooner Could charge for water taken from or effluent discharged to the Delta – could begin by 2022 or sooner Public Goods Charge Legislation required to implement Legislation required to implement Could be a surcharge of water diversions Could be a surcharge of water diversions Costs of Appeal Could include fees, staff costs and consultant costs for the appeal and modification of designs and additional environmental work Could include fees, staff costs and consultant costs for the appeal and modification of designs and additional environmental work Indirect costs could include result from delays - rises in construction costs, rise in financing costs, loss of third-party funding, etc. Indirect costs could include result from delays - rises in construction costs, rise in financing costs, loss of third-party funding, etc.

Staff Activities Comments on Third Draft – May 6, 2011 Comments on Third Draft – May 6, 2011 Mayor Presentation on May 12 Mayor Presentation on May 12 Proposed Language Changes – May 31, 2011 Proposed Language Changes – May 31, 2011 Attendance at DSC Workshops – May – September 2011 Attendance at DSC Workshops – May – September 2011 Council Study Session – July 19, 2011 Council Study Session – July 19, 2011 Coordination with County/Port/Other Cities – August – September 2011 Coordination with County/Port/Other Cities – August – September 2011 Comments on Fifth Draft – September 29, 2011 Comments on Fifth Draft – September 29, 2011 Joint City/County Letter – September 30, 2011 Joint City/County Letter – September 30, 2011 Coordination with Development Community, Port, County, Other Cities – September/November 2011 Coordination with Development Community, Port, County, Other Cities – September/November 2011 EIR Review/Comments – October/November EIR Review/Comments – October/November Review/Comment on Final Draft Delta Plan – December 2011 Review/Comment on Final Draft Delta Plan – December 2011

Schedule Delta Plan Fifth Draft Comment Period: August 2 – September 30, 2011 Delta Plan Fifth Draft Comment Period: August 2 – September 30, 2011 Delta Plan Draft EIR Public Review: October/November 2011 Delta Plan Draft EIR Public Review: October/November 2011 Delta Plan Final Draft/Final EIR Published: December 2011 Delta Plan Final Draft/Final EIR Published: December 2011 Delta Plan Approval/EIR Certification: December/January 2011 Delta Plan Approval/EIR Certification: December/January 2011 Review by State Office of Administrative Law: January/March 2012 Review by State Office of Administrative Law: January/March 2012 Final Delta Plan Effective: March 2011? Final Delta Plan Effective: March 2011?

EXCERPT FROM CITY’S SEPT. 29, 2011 COMMENT LETTER ON FIFTH DRAFT “Over 50 percent (21,256 acres) of the City’s incorporated urban area and an additional 7,932 acres within the City’s Sphere of Influence are located within the Secondary or Primary Zones of the Delta (see attached Exhibit 1). All development within these boundaries must be consistent with the City’s adopted 2035 General Plan, Infrastructure Master Plans, and the Local Agency Formation Commission’s adopted Sphere Plan and Municipal Service Review for the City. A comprehensive Environmental Impact Report, which was in full compliance with CEQA, and certified on December 11, 2007, and for which a Notice of Determination was filed on December 12, 2007, addressed those approved plans. As there are still discretionary approvals required for some projects contemplated by these approved plans, the Delta Plan, as currently drafted, could act as a de facto reversal of the prior approvals and indirectly usurp the City’s existing land use authority within the areas covered by the Delta Plan. The Delta Plan certainly cannot retroactively invalidate otherwise lawfully adopted plans and should be revised to eliminate the potential conflicts with existing adopted plans. “Over 50 percent (21,256 acres) of the City’s incorporated urban area and an additional 7,932 acres within the City’s Sphere of Influence are located within the Secondary or Primary Zones of the Delta (see attached Exhibit 1). All development within these boundaries must be consistent with the City’s adopted 2035 General Plan, Infrastructure Master Plans, and the Local Agency Formation Commission’s adopted Sphere Plan and Municipal Service Review for the City. A comprehensive Environmental Impact Report, which was in full compliance with CEQA, and certified on December 11, 2007, and for which a Notice of Determination was filed on December 12, 2007, addressed those approved plans. As there are still discretionary approvals required for some projects contemplated by these approved plans, the Delta Plan, as currently drafted, could act as a de facto reversal of the prior approvals and indirectly usurp the City’s existing land use authority within the areas covered by the Delta Plan. The Delta Plan certainly cannot retroactively invalidate otherwise lawfully adopted plans and should be revised to eliminate the potential conflicts with existing adopted plans. The effect of the Delta Plan must not be to stifle progress in existing urban areas or prevent orderly and carefully planned growth. The Draft Plan should consider more carefully the application of “consistency determinations” as applied to urban areas within the Secondary Zone of the Delta and should be revised to exempt planned urban development within the incorporated City limits and the City’s adopted Sphere of Influence, which is defined as of the effective date of the Delta Plan. The effect of the Delta Plan must not be to stifle progress in existing urban areas or prevent orderly and carefully planned growth. The Draft Plan should consider more carefully the application of “consistency determinations” as applied to urban areas within the Secondary Zone of the Delta and should be revised to exempt planned urban development within the incorporated City limits and the City’s adopted Sphere of Influence, which is defined as of the effective date of the Delta Plan. ”

Questions?

5. Communications

6. Staff Comments

7. Commissioners’ Comments

8. Audience Participation

9. Adjournment

Mark Martin, CDD Business Operations Manager (209) Staff Liaison CONTACT INFORMATION Development Oversight Commission