CCMIN030204 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Ayala believed Council should at least initiate the discussion among all of the agencies involved because the pipeline will be completed in 2005. She noted that LAVVv'MA has not spent all of the bond money, and she believed that just because the taxpayers approved a certain amount for the bonds, it did not mean that it had to be spent. She has started to see many ideas as to how the money can be spent. She mentioned that there was some discussion about hiring additional employees, which also triggered this discussion. The City of Livermore will need to make a decision by 2005 as to whether it will participate in the expansion portion of the project. She noted that the discussions were just a starting point. She understood that LAVWMA could not be dissolved until either the bonds were paid or assumed by the member agencies. She was interested in looking at potential changes to management's operations and the maintenance of LAVMWA's facilities once the pipeline had been completed. She would like this option explored and brought back to the various agencies. Ms. Hosterman concurred with Ms. Ayala's comments. She noted that as the City's representatives to LAVWMA, she and Ms. Ayala are looking for direction from fellow councilmembers so that they may request the LAVWMA Board to agendize a discussion in the future. As a former Chair of LAVWMA and long-term boardmember, Mayor Pico noted his concerns with the dissolution of LAVWMA, particularly with respect to ongoing issues, such as the expanded storage capacity that will be needed in a few years. He was concerned about the impact of LAVWMA's dissolution and how it would relate to the contractual arrangements with respect to this community having a voice. He noted that LAVWMA is the only entity on which the City has a seat in dealing with wastewater or water management in the Tri-Valley area. He would be very concerned if Council attempted to dissolve that agency and did not come up with an alternative plan or an alternative superagency that gave the City a greater voice. As a member of the Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission, he noted that LAFCO is required to conduct a service level review of all agencies within Alameda County, which it is currently is in the process of doing. He believed it would be appropriate to look at the management needs with LAVWMA once the construction is completed, but he was not excited about losing what little control the City had over regional kinds of waste management issues. If Council was interested in making a major change to the way in which LAVWMA operates, he suggested that it think in broader terms and consider whether it should be looking for one regional wastewater disposal agency that was a superagency that might consolidate a number of entities together, and perhaps have one sewer agency that was responsible for all communities, including the cities of Livemore, Dublin, San Ramon, and Pleasanton, and responsible for the operation ofwastewater and water recycling. He believed these types of recommendations should be decided for the long term. Given the changing need for management at LAVWMA and the completion of the construction project, he understood that full-time management staff might no longer be needed. He noted that at the time the General Manager was hired, the intent of the position was for the short-term during the construction of the project, and at the completion of the project, LAVWMA would be looking at another management form. He supported Council's representatives to LAVWMA in initiating discussion with Pleasanton City Council 22 03/02/04 Minutes