01 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiry, Director Yurchak confirmed the City will learn about its groundwater from this study. She noted potable reuse is using highly purified water which could be used in either groundwater recharge or raw water augmentation with both options being considered. In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiries, Director Yurchak confirmed the 2018 Council vote to continue the potable reuse studies was unanimous. She also confirmed the Council is not currently voting on potable reuse and merely the continuation of funding for the study. She stated they are still in the data-collection phase so there is no commitment to potable reuse at this time. She confirmed the "off-ramp" following the study's completion was agreed to by all partners of the Tri-Valley Water Roundtable. In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiries, Director Yurchak confirmed Zone 7 is the State- designated groundwater manager in the Tri-Valley giving Zone 7 jurisdiction over Pleasanton's groundwater. Councilmember Narum stated Zone 7 has been wonderful collaborators with the City in the past but wanted to note they have the ultimate responsibility for Pleasanton's groundwater. In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiries, Director Yurchak confirmed the $300,000 is entirely for efforts looking forward and not retroactively. She added the estimate specifically for the Potable Reuse Study is $250,000 and confirmed this study is strictly focused on potable reuse. In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiries, City Manager Nelson Fialho clarified the General Plan passage cited continues with "which could adversely affect or have potentially negative impacts, on drinking water, surface water, and groundwater resources." He stated this is what the study is intending to answer and the logic behind participating in the study. He advised looking at passages of the General Plan in their full context. He confirmed this study only related to potable reuse because Zone 7 has jurisdiction for evaluating other supply alternatives. He added Zone 7 is currently in the process of evaluating other options such as California Water Fix ant the distinction with potable reuse is it is a local resource controlled by the City in cooperation with its neighbors which is why the City is so directly involved in potable reuse options as opposed to others. Mayor Brown stated her interpretation of General Plan 3.1 differs. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiry, City Manager Fialho explained the passage is in the staff report but not the presentation because there are some conflicting programs and policies that are subject to interpretation. He commented that calling one side out without calling the other side out did not seem like the right thing for staff to do. City Attorney Sodergren explained the Council has broad discretion to interpret the General Plan. He added it is not uncommon for General Plans to have competing policies and goals and the Council holds broad legal discretion to interpret those competing policies. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Director Yurchak said the question of water sourcing in dry summer months has come to Council before and the answer was there is a storage opportunity albeit a costly one. She added the other consideration is groundwater depletion being recharged by wastewater for storage. Storage is an important component of the potable reuse study and confirmed the aquifer is a storage option. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiry, Deputy Director of Utility Services Daniel Repp stated storage systems would be a safeguard in case of aquifer contamination. He added the level of City Council Minutes Page 5 of 12 February 2, 2021