Loading...
CC - Item 3D - Resolution No. 00-13 Supporting The City Of Signal Hills's Petition To The Sate Water Resources controlstaf epor TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGE"42~ DATE: MARCH 28, 2000 RE: RESOLUTION NO. 00-13 - SUPPORTING THE CITY OF SIGNAL HILL'S PETITION TO THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CONTESTING ACTION TAKEN BY THE LOS ANGELES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH STANDARD URBAN STORMWATER LARWQCB ORDER NO. 96-054 Recently, the Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted new, more restrictive standards for storm water clean-up. The new standards require that all development contain and treat the first 1/4 inches of stormwater on-site. The Board's action will affect all new development including significant additions to existing development. These new standards go significantly beyond existing standards. We understand the Board adopted these new standards based on limited scientific evidence as to their effectiveness. The Regional Water Quality Control Board took this action despite substantial opposition from cities and other interested parties. The City of Signal Hill is filing an appeal and has requested resolutions of support from other communities. On February 17, 2000, the Governing Board of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments unanimously approved a resolution of support for Signal Hill's petition. Also, attached is a list of cities supporting the petition to contest this action. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00-13. COUNCIL M,i R 2 88 2000 ITEM No. RESOLUTION NO. 00 - 13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD SUPPORTING THE CITY OF SIGNAL HILL'S PETITION TO THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CONTESTING THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE LOS ANGELES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH THE ADOPTION OF STANDARD URBAN STORMWATER LARWQCB ORDER NO. 96-054 WHEREAS, all cities within the County of Los Angeles (except the City of Long Beach) were issued a Permit from the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) on July 15, 1996, Order No. 96-054 of the Regional Board, which serves as the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit under the federal Clean Water Act, as well as Waste Discharge Requirements for the cities under the Porter Cologne Act; and WHEREAS, under the Permit, each Permittee was required to submit a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to the Executive Officer of the Regional Board for his review and approval or disapproval; and WHEREAS, the SUSMP was to incorporate appropriate elements of the Best Management Practices approved by the Regional Board in April 1999, and was to apply only to discretionary projects in specified development categories to require applicants for discretionary approval of such projects to submit an Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan that implements, to the maximum extent practicable, appropriate requirements and measures to minimize impacts from stormwater run-off, and to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent practicable, along with other requirements as specified in Order No. 96-054; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 1999, Regional Board staff proposed changes to thePermittees' SUSMP Program, including numerical mitigation measures on the retention and/or treatment of stormwater runoffof.75" within a twenty-four hour storm event for nine project categories which had not been agreed to by the Permittees; and WHEREAS, the numerical mitigation measures and other SUSMP terms proposed by Regional Board staff, with some modification, were approved by the Regional Board on January 26, 20001, whereupon the Board directed its Executive Officer to approve the Regional Board's proposed SUSMP Program with the Board's imposed modifications; and WHEREAS, the Regional Board's mandated SUSMP Program would, in many cases, necessitate the imposition of structural controls on non-discretionary as well as discretionary new developments that will either prove infeasible, or so costly as to discourage further development and/or increase costs of any services or products supplied by new developments; and WHEREAS, the action taken by the Regional Board on January 26, 2000, and the action taken by the Executive Officer pursuant to the direction of the Regional Board, are inconsistent with the requirements of the Permit, the Clean Water Act, and state law, and will result in the imposition of unfunded programs on our cities and citizens; and WHEREAS, such mandated programs have not been shown to be cost effective or to reduce pollutants to the maximum extent practicable as required by the Clean Water Act; and WHEREAS, the City of Signal Hill is filing a Petition to the state Water Resources Control Board challenging the action taken by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board in connection with Order No. 96-054 on January 26, 2000, and the action taken by the Executive Officer pursuant to the Regional Board's direction on such date; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rosemead does hereby support the City of Signal Hill's petition to the State Water Resources Control Board, challenging the action taken by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board in connection with Order No. 96-054 on January 26, 2000, and the action taken by the Executive Officer pursuant to the Regional Board's direction on such date. MAYOR Attest: CITY CLERK Fr.OM: SGVCOG SGVCOG TO: NANCY, CITY CLERK DATE: 2/1 8/00 TIME: 2:05:44 PM PAGE 3 OF 3 San Gabriel: Valley Council of Governments On EaSC braW ewe, s ee mt, twos a aoalx. sum o tmC.w: Msea ero2 Fnx: lesel sat-n to E+aae e0varprtlop.ae URGENT Date: February 18, 2000 To: City Managers From: Nicholas T. Conway Executive Director .,RE: Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan On January 26, 2000, despite letters of.opposition from the SGVCOG Board, some of our member cities and other interested parties, the Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted new; more restrictive standards for stosmwater clean up.. The new standards requ* that ,all., development contain and treat the frn,%r inches of storm water oa-site. Titers new standards, which would affect all new developmmit, including significsmt additions to existing development, go above and beyond the existing standards first adopted in 1990 and revised in 1996. The Board adopted the retention or treatment standards based on limited scientific evidence that they wort. There is no evidence that the pollutants impacting the streams, rivers and ocean arc the types of pollutants that would be captured in the on-site retention areas. Moreover, The Board's action does not encourage or permit subregional and regional approaches. It toads the cost of compliance on new development and in-fill development. The deadline for filing appeals of the new standards is February 25, 2000. The City of Signal Hill is filing an appeal and has contacted all cities in Los Angeles County seeking their support of the City's action. On February 17, 2000, the Governing Board of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments unanimously approved Resolution 00-12, supporting Signal Hill's petition and urging its member cities to do so as well. That resolution is attached. We are also urging each member city to agendize this matter for the next-meeting of its City Council, even if that meeting takes place after February 25th. It is our understanding that Dennis Dickerson, the Executive Director for the Water Quality Control Board, will have up to 30 days to take final action after the appeals deadline has passed. Expressions of support for Signal Hill and/or opposition to the now SUSMP standards during that period of time would still be heard and could have an impact on the Executive Director's action. P::oM: SGVCOG SGVCOG To: NANCY, CITY CLERK DATE: 2/78100 TIME: 2:05:44 PM PACE 2 OF 5 RESOLUTION NO. 00-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUMM OF GOVERMIENTS, URGING MEMBER CITIES TO PUBLICLY SUPPO" M MY OF SIGNAL HILL'S PrM70N TO TM STATE WATER. RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CON'TESMG THE AC17UN TAKEN BY THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION, AND ITS EXECUTIVE OMC.'Bk IN CONNECTION: WITII THE ADOPTION OF STANDARD URBAN STORM WATER LARWOCS ORDER NO. 46.054 WHEREAS, the, 30 member cities of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments were, along with all other incorporated cities in the County. of Loa Angeles (except the City of Long Beach) issued a Permit from the Los Angeles Regional Quality Control Board ("Regional Boats") on July 15, 1996, Order No. %-054 of the Regional Board, which serves as City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit under the federal Clean Water Act, as well as Waste Discharge Requirements for the Cities under the Porter. Cologne Act; and WHEREAS, under the Permit, each Permittee was required to submit a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to the Executive Officer of the Regional Board for his review and approval is disapproval; and WHEREAS, the SUSMP was to incorporate appropriate elements of the Best Management Practices approved by the Regional Board in April of. 1999, and was to apply only to discretionary projects in specified development. categories to require applicants for discretionary approval of such projects to submit an Urban Storm Water Nfitigation Plan That implements, to the maximum extent practicable, appropriate mqulrnments and measures to minimize impacts from storm water runoff, and to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent practicable, along with other requirements as specified in Order No. 96-054; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 1999, Regional Board staff proposed changes to the Permittees' SUSMP Program, including numerical mitigation measures on the rttenuon andfor treatment of storm water runoff of .75" within a 24 hour storm event for nine (9) project categories which had not been agreed to by the Permittees; and , WHEREAS, the numerical mitigation measures and other SUSIAP terms proposed by Regional Board staff, with some modification, were approved by the Regional Board on January 26, 20M, whereupon the Board directed its Executive Officer to approve the Regional Board's proposed SUSMP Program with the Board's imposed modifications: and WHEREAS, the Regional Board's mandated SUSMP Program would, in many cases, necessitate the imposition of structural controls on non-discretionary as well as discretionary now developments that will either prove infeasible; or so costly as to discourage further developnont.at nicreasc costs of any services or products supplied by new developments; and WHEREAS, the action taken by the Regional Board on January 26, 2000, and the action to be taken by the Executive Officer pursuant to the direction of the Regional Board: are inconsistent with the requirements of the Permit, the Clem Water Ac4 and state law and will result in the lmposition of unfunded programs on our member cities and their citizens; and WHEREAS, such mandated programs have not been shown to be cost effective or to reduce pollutants to the maximums extent practicable, as required by the Clean Water Act; and WEM", the City of Signal MU is filing a Petition to the State Water Resources Control Board ;challenging the action taken by the Regional Water Quality Control Board in connection with Order No. 96-054 on January 26, 2000, and the action to be taken by the Executive Order pursuant to the Regional Board's direction on such date. NOW, TH'SREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments does hereby resolve as follows: To urge member cities to publicly support Signal Hill's petition to the State Water Resources Control Board, challenging the action taken by the Regional Water Quality Control Board in connection with Order No. 96-054 on January 26, 2000. and the action to be taken by the Executive Officer pursuant to the Regional Board's direction on such data PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17th day of February 2000. SAN dmax; By GOVERNMENTS .J s Han aldwin, President Attc : Nicholas Conway, Secretary 2-29-200 5:a8PM FROM SIGNALHILLCITYHALL 5629897393 Coalition for Practical Regulation DATE: February 28, 2000 TO: CPR Members FROM: Kenneth C. Farfsing City Manager City of Signal Hill Patrick H. West City Manager City of Paramount Gerald M. Caton City Manager City of Downey Frederick W. Latham City Manager City of Santa Fe Springs SUBJECT: STATUS OF THE SUSMP APPEAL/ MARCH 23 ORGANIZATION MEETING This memo provides a brief update on the status of the appeal to the SUSMP (Standard Stormwater Urban Mitigation Plan) requirements by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region. The second part of the memo explores the first organization meeting on Thursday, March 23`d at 2:00 p.m. The meeting will be held in the City of Downey, Council Chambers, at 11111 Brookshire Avenue. Status of the Appeal As of last Friday, 25 cities have adopted resolutions to appeal the decision of the regional board. Four cities have scheduled resolutions in the next two weeks. Two cities have sent in letters of support, as has the Greater Los Angeles Vector Control District. A resolution of support was received from the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments. The Building Industry Association (BIA) of Southern California will also join the appeal and will provide financial assistance. A list of the cities and organizations is attached to this memo. The appeal was filed on Thursday, February 24th. Copies of the appeal will be sent this week. The compliant can be amended as other cities and organizations decide to join into appeal. Organizational Meeting The organizational meeting for CPR (Coalition for Practical Regulation) will be held to receive a status update and review background on the appeal, discuss organizational issues and to begin strategy formulation, including legislative and public information. We will also be presenting a preliminary budget for the appeal and discussing a cost-sharing formula. We propose that you invite an P. 2 2-29-200 5:48PM FROM SIGNALHILLCITYHALL 5629897393 P.3 CRP Members Page 2 elected official, city attorney and staff members most likely involved in follow- through on the appeal. CPR Steering Committee A group of this size will require a steering committee, reporting to the entire organization. We are proposing three elected officials, three city managers, three technical staff persons and two representatives from the BIA. The Steering Committee would be responsible for guiding the appeal through the process. Activities would include reviewing the budget for the appeal and make a recommendation on cost sharing. The Committee will also guide strategy, including any legislative efforts on behalf of the organization. It will be the responsibility of the Steering Committee to keep all CPR members informed. SUSMP Working Group This group will be charged with developing a position that is acceptable to CPR members and engaging the officials and the environmental community in review of the proposed regulations. This group will present a recommendation to the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will need to discuss the composition of the Working Group, since it will need expertise from many areas. Technical Grouo The Clean Water Act, NPDES and the SUSMP's are technical in nature. We are proposing a technical group that will be responsible for explaining the engineering and science behind the various regulations. The Technical Group will evaluate the impact of the regulations on our cities and on development. The group will also begin collecting information on the next update to the NPDES permit, which is scheduled in the next six months. This group will support the Steering Committee and the SUSMP Working Group. BIA Involvement Several of the managers have asked about the involvement of the BIA in the appeal. Technically the cities could stand aside and let the BIA appeal the decision of the board. We could take the position that the only role of the cities is to enforce the regulations upon the building industry. During the recent economic recession, both the BIA and many cities recognized the importance of a constructive relationship between the building industry and the cities. The BIA will bring much needed resources - technical, financial, organizational and political - to the appeal. There may come a time in the appeal process when the cities and the BIA decide to separate the appeal. 2-29-200 5:49PM FROM SIGNALHILLCITYHALL 5629897393 P.4 CRP Members Page 3 Public Information CPR members should provide a list of media contacts, such as the local newspapers, that you want placed on the mailing list for press releases. You should also provide a list of elected officials (County, State and Federal elected officials) that you want placed on the mailing list. Political Strategy The Steering Committee will be involved in developing a detailed political strategy. Members can do two things at this point. The first is to contact cities not on the appeal list and request that they take get involved in the appeal. Adoption of the resolution is preferred, but letters of support are always welcome. The second is to begin to brief your State and Federal officials. SCAG has also indicated that they want to be actively involved in finding the solution to the storm water problems. We will review these issues the organization meeting. Questions should be directed to either Eduard Schroder . at eduardschroder.ci.sign al-hi ILca.us or Ken Farfsing at kfarfsing.ci.sianal-hill.ca.us. Ed can be reached 562-989-7355 and 562-989-7302. Attachment 2-29-200 S:50PM FROM SIGNALHILLCITYHALL 5629897393 CPR Member List Cities Named in the Petition Arcadia Artesia Bellflower Burbank Cerritos Commerce Diamond Bar Downey Irwindale La Canada-Flintridge La Mirada La Verne Lakewood Monrovia Palos Verdes Estates Pico Rivera Pomona Ranco Palos Verdes Santa Fe Springs Signal Hill South Gate Vernon Walnut Whittier Organizations Named in the Petition Cities to Adopt Resolution Baldwin Park Paramount Gardena Sierra Madre Letters of Support Norwalk Santa Clarita South Pasadena Building Industrial Association of Southern California Organizations/ Letters of Support P. 5 Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District San Gabriel Valley Council of Government MAR-20-2000 10:51 TECS ENVIRONMENTAL 1 626 3961916 P.02 ~Vyfw. I nursfay, February 24, 2000 5:10 PM To: Ken Farfsing Suet: Appeal List The folkrwing is the latest list of Cities expressing an interest in the appeal: Cities Named on PeNon: Cities Yet to Adopt Resolution: Ala Bellflower Burbank Cerritos Commerce Diamond Bar Downey Irwindale La Canada-Flimridge La Mirada La Verne ;Lakewood Lawndale !Monrovia 'Palos Verdes Estates Pico Rivera Pomona Rancho Palos Verdes Santa Fe Springs Signal Hill Louth Gate Vernon Walnut Whittier Gardena (3/14/00) Paramount (3170100) Sierra Madre (2128/00) Rosemead (3128/00) Baldwin Park (3/75/00) Letters of Support: Norwalk South Pasadena Greater L A County Vector Control Resolutions of Support Artesia Gateway COG A LvSA /Y>' D N/7 ~Z`LC O L TOTAL P.01