Los Angeles Regional Watershed Infrastructure Funding Workgroup Progress Report – December 9, 2004

1. Los Angeles Regional Watershed Infrastructure Funding Workgroup Progress Report – December 9, 2004 Presentation to SCAG Water Policy Task Force Larry Forester, Councilmember, City of Signal Hill Member, Steering Committee, Coalition for Practical Regulation Michael Drennan American Society of Civil Engineers Chair, Environment and Water Resources Technical Group Vice President, Brown and Caldwell

2. “The mission of the Los Angeles County Regional Watershed Infrastructure Funding Workgroup is: To work cooperatively to complete an integrated long-term regional watershed management plan for Los Angeles County by 2007 and a voter-approved funding mechanism by 2008 to implement the plan.”

3. Background: ASCE Held Two Water Symposiums in LA in 2003: 1) Funding is a high priority to address various water needs including storm water pollution, flood control, groundwater recharge, wastewater recycling, and potentially other objectives such as recreation and habitat enhancement. 2) Multiple agencies may benefit from a joint funding mechanism(s) that encourage multipurpose projects where feasible. 3) ASCE may be an appropriate facilitator/coordinator in the pursuit of a regional funding mechanism.

4. Stakeholders (Partial List) Hector Bordas, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Carl Blum, ASCE Mark Christoffels, City of Long Beach Rebecca Drayse, TreePeople Michael Drennan, ASCE Larry Forester, City of Signal Hill, and Coalition for Practical Regulation Mark Gold, Heal the Bay Terri Grant, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Shahram Kharaghani, City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation Andy Lipkis, TreePeople Adan Ortega, Metropolitan Water District Craig Perkins, City of Santa Monica Tim Piasky, Building Industry of Southern California Rita Robinson, City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation Jim Stahl, Los Angeles County Sanitation District Robert Tanowitz, City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation Don Wolfe, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works

5. 2004 Progress Report: Identified broad cross section of stakeholders Held four meetings in 2004 to build trust and agreement of shared values Brought together by common theme of stormwater regulations Reviewed steps of other successful funding measures Adopted mission statementIdentified three committees, chairs, objectives Integrated Plan Funding Public Education Developing action plans to accomplish objectives

6. 2004 Progress Report • Integrated Water Resource Plan Committee • Developing Comprehensive Plan to meet TMDLs Countywide • Identifying Specific Capital Improvements Throughout County • Developing Scope and Resource Needs for Plan Development • Evaluating Existing Plans and Filling in Gaps • Funding Committee • Evaluating Suite of Financing Options • Addressing Long Term Operation and Maintenance Costs • Coordinating Efforts with Prop 50 • Considering Coordination with 2006 State Bond • Public Outreach Committee • Developing a Strategic Outreach Plan and Media Campaign for Various Audiences • Developing Consistent Message • “Tangible Community Benefits Through Innovative Stormwater Management Solutions”

7. Successful New Funding of Stormwater Programs • Napa 1998 – Sales tax for city center river restoration (Prop 218 vote) • Santa Clara 2000 – Parcel assessment vote for parklands and flood protection ( 218 vote) • Santa Barbara 2000 – 2% Transient Occupancy Tax on hotel bills for creek restoration and clean water programs (218 2/3 vote) • San Clemente 2002 – $8/month stormwater fee with a Proposition 218 vote! • Carlsbad 2003 – $1.95 trash fee (vote not needed) • Irvine Ranch WD 2003 – 2% water surcharge ~$0.50/month (vote not needed) • City “X” 2004 – $4.07/month stormwater fee without a vote! (no vote taken, no challenge so far)

8. Steps to Success • 1) Develop a well-designed formal survey of the community to understand their hot buttons and their issues of interest. • 2) Develop a clear, simple technical study which defines the problem, and evaluates alternatives which include costs and benefits of several solutions. • 3) Create at the beginning of the study process a bi-partisan, community advisory committee. • 4) Educate the public to help them understand the problem, the solution, the cost of the solution. • 5) Package the solution to respond to the community's desires. • 6) Design a strong media campaign. • 7) Design solutions to accomplish multiple objectives.

9. Los Angeles Regional Watershed Infrastructure Funding Workgroup Progress Report – December 9, 2004 Presentation to SCAG Water Policy Task Force Larry Forester, Councilmember, City of Signal Hill Member, Steering Committee, Coalition for Practical Regulation Michael Drennan American Society of Civil Engineers Chair, Environment and Water Resources Technical Group Vice President, Brown and Caldwell