In a week with no council meetings, the biggest news for the city, other than shake ups in the local city council race, are coming from the California Public Employees’ Retirement System.
Two weeks ago, CalSTRS, the teachers’ pension fund, cut its forecasted earning rate from 7.75 to 7.5. That reduction marked the second reduction for the California State Teachers’ Retirement System in a year’s time.
By Alan PryorReaders following the intricacies of the Woodland-Davis Clean Water Agency’s (WDCWA) Sacramento River water project (the “water project”) know that there was one major regulatory stumbling block to overcome before final regulatory approval is given for the agency to obtain the summer water rights for 10,000 acre feet of water.
These water rights were granted to the WDCWA through negotiations with Conaway Preservation Group (“Conaway”) as the current holder of the rights. In this case, the transfer of water rights involves “splitting” two existing licenses now held by Conaway which must be approved by the State Water Resources Control Board (“Water Board”).
WAC Member Recounts the Need For Televised HearingsEvolution? Revolution? That’s not mine to judge. But at a meeting last month, the Water Advisory Committee not only moved its timeline up several notches so it could put an achievable, affordable water plan on the November ballot, it also voted unanimously to televise all future committee meetings and workshops.
I can assure you that choosing to put our meetings on TV wasn’t an easy step for me or my fellow committee members. Some, like me, aren’t too sure our voice or visage should be foisted on an unsuspecting public. Others worry that the nascent collegiality and goodwill among all committee members might be lost in the glare of the cameras.
General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations Position Comes with a Significant Bump in SalaryWhen the Public Works Director position came open about a year ago, the City of Davis did an internal search process and used in-house staff to advertise the position.
It was a basic position whose job description was: “To plan, direct, organize, coordinate, supervise and review the activities of the divisions comprising the Public Works Department; and to provide highly responsible professional and technical staff assistance to the City Manager.”
By Matt WilliamsThe first question about meeting number 4 of the Water Advisory Committee has to be, “What were the Neilsen Ratings?” Thanks to the key decision from the last WAC meeting. There actually was a broadcast to watch.
Did you watch? If you didn’t, will you use the City of Davis website to watch the archived video of the meeting? Hopefully, the answer to at least one of those two questions is “Yes.” If you do watch, the following Agenda (available at http://cityofdavis.org/meetings/water-advisory/Water_Advisory_Committee_Agenda_02-09-12.pdf) will be useful:
The direction back in June was for then-acting City Manager Paul Navazio to return to council in September with proposed ways to cut $2.5 million from the budget to go to bolster road maintenance, Public Employees’ Retirement System and Other Post-Employment Benefits. But “long is the way and hard that out of hell leads up to light.” The path to salvation has been anything but straightforward. It has been complicated by the hiring of a new city manager.
Former Davis Mayor Ann Evans has sent a letter to the city, lobbying them to “rise to the occasion and direct your staff accordingly. There is so much to be done on your watch, but affordable housing availability is not the least of those important items.”
Ms. Evans is married to David Thompson of Neighborhood Partners and Twin Pines Cooperative, one of the developers of the DACHA project. The letter was dated January 30, 2012 and as a letter to the city is a public document.
The message has already been sent, loud and clear. It was the hottest day of the year in mid-June. The community chambers, packed with 150 city employees, was unbearably hot. But despite all of that heat, three members of council held strong and voted to implement the city’s budget.Among the key provisions was the use of general funds to pay to fully fund retiree health, pensions and the city’s infrastructure.
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System has steadfastly refused to revise their 7.75 assumed rate of return (ARR), despite experts’ claims that hitting the long-term earning target will be difficult, at best.Ed Mendel, who runs the Calpensions website, reports this morning, “While CalPERS reported weak earnings in 2011, a prominent private-sector investment manager, Robert Arnott of Research Affiliates, told the board last week he thinks the most they can expect from stocks and bonds next decade is 4 percent.”
The good news this week is that the Water Advisory Committee (WAC) decided to televise their hearings. This is crucial, because what they are being asked to do in the next five to ten months is far beyond what was envisioned when the body was formed.
The issue of televising meetings was important, but at the same time it was clearly a side issue. One of the points made by Councilmember Wolk when the council was discussing water-related issues was the need to determine early on whether or not we want a private or public option for the operator portion of the DBO (Design-Build-Operate) process.
One thing that people need to remember about this issue is that I did not go into Tuesday’s meeting opposed to doing a Conditional Use Permit and moving the facility to the auto mall. In fact, as our article on Tuesday suggested – I actually favored it.My mind was changed during that meeting and the discussions I had immediately following that meeting, when it became clear that something happened that was untoward and that small children and their families became pawns in a larger game.
It seemed when the Vanguard first posed the question of having a November rather than a June ballot, that it would be a controversial matter. However, by the time the vote had occurred on Tuesday night, everyone agreed with it.
As Chair of the Water Advisory Committee (WAC) Elaine Roberts Musser put it, “I would strongly recommend that you make sure the ballot is in November not June. June is too soon. We need to have the water rate study completed and we won’t be able to give you the advice that you need if we have it in June.”
The MarkeTech Group and Davis Diamonds Gymnastics have proposed to jointly purchase and develop parcels located on Chiles Road, formerly occupied by a Ford auto dealership that has since vacated and taken tax revenue with it.According to the city staff, these parcels are located in the Auto-Center zoning and the proposed uses require a Conditional Use Permit.
The debate over the water project has perhaps shifted from a debate over need, to a debate over whether the Surface Water Project as proposed is optimal. Feeding into those concerns are the problems with what the council passed on September 6, with the lack of a rate study and the perplexing and confusing 14% rate hike that wasn’t.One of the reasons for the push for televised Water Advisory Committee hearings is the notion of transparency and accountability that has been lacking.
I debated long and hard whether this was an appropriate topic for today’s column, but finally was pushed into it by a comment made last night by the chair of the Water Advisory Committee on the Vanguard.
Elaine Roberts Musser said: “With such open hostility shown to WAC members, as expressed in the above two comments, is it any wonder the WAC members made the decision they did? Perhaps if some of you toned it down and asked nicely…”
Staff Recommends Against a One-Year Water Rate IncreaseWhen the city council met on December 6 – three months after the fateful September 6 water meeting – and passed their compromise, staff was directed to return by January with recommendations about a ballot initiative and a rate study.
City staff is now recommending that Council direct them to return with proposed language for an advisory measure to be placed before the voters at the November 2012 General Election, adopting a resolution to ask Bartle Wells Associates to undertake a comprehensive water rate study, and direct the Water Advisory Committee to return to Council by July 1 “with a recommendation for the appropriate rate structure and multi-year rate requirements in support of the City’s water utility.”
In 2008, I will never forget going to a Davis City Council debate and hearing two incumbent city councilmembers boast that they had balanced the budget with a 15 percent reserve.
Understand that these words were issued in April or May of 2008. By September of 2008, the world would be very different, both in terms of our budgetary reality and in terms of the view on issues like unfunded liabilities and pensions.
When Davis contemplated rescinding the city’s rate increases on water, Woodland’s city council came down to the chambers in Davis and expressed their concerns about delays and cost hikes, and even threatened that they would go at it alone.
Now, over a month later, perhaps calmer heads are prevailing as Dennis Diemer, the General Manager of the Woodland-Davis Clean Water Agency, came before the city council on Tuesday night to address concerns about costs and timelines.
This week, the Davis City Council will receive a report updating them on the activities of the Woodland-Davis Clean Water Agency.
The staff report notes: “The Davis City Council rescinded the water rates at the December 6, 2011 meeting that would support the cost of design and construction of the surface water facilities. Therefore, the WDCWA anticipates a delay in issuing the draft request for proposal for the procurement of design and construction services for the project.”
by John Munn
The Yolo County Taxpayers Association commends the Davis City Council for recognizing the need for a pause in the rush toward higher water rates. Whether we bring in surface water or not, the primary concern of the Taxpayers Association is affordability, and we hope that the design and cost of facilities needed to meet water quality and quantity needs of both Davis and Woodland can now be re-evaluated based what we can afford.
