Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMP 139A; Rancho Carrillo Master Plan; Master Plan (MP) (30)RAUL S. SWIRSKV WILLIAM N. SAUER. JR A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION January 29, 1982 LAW OFFICES OF SWIRSKY & SAUER AN ASSOCIATION INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 27-45 JEFFERSON STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 TELEPHONE (71*1 729-1197 MAILING ADDRESS POST OFFICE BOX 1185 7 fi < Honorable City Council . City of Carlsbad City Hall 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Honorable Sirs: For and on behalf of the Board of Directors of COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, I have been instructed to write to you to call to your attention certain matters which should be considered by your body before taking action in reference to the following pending mat- ters: 1. The final adoption of the revised RANCHO CARRILLO MASTER PLAN (MP-139 (A)). 2. The approval of the tentative Tract Map Of TREETOPS UNLIMITED (MP-150(B)/CT 81 PUD-35). The documents proposed to be adopted in reference to both projects now have a provision that water service will be provided by the City of Carlsbad. Although the matter of water service has been called to your attention in the past, the Board of Directors of COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DIS- TRICT wishes to reiterate and place of record, prior to your final ac- tion on the above matters, that the property on both projects is lo- cated within the retail water service area of COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT and that the COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT is willing and ready to serve retail water to the projects. In addition thereto, there are now existing master plans adopted by COSTA REAL MU- NICIPAL WATER DISTRICT for a distribution system to serve retail water to the areas wherein both of the projects are located. The owners of the property involved in the projects are aware of these master plans and have made their, initial investigation and plans for development upon the basis of the existing master plans and acquisition of retail water service from COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. Honorable City Council City of Carlsbad January 29, 1982 Page -2- It is submitted that the proposed imposition of a condition that water service will be provided by the City of Carlsbad is an unfair restric- tion to be imposed upon the developer in attempting to develop his property in a time?y and economical manner. Although there have been some discussions in reference to an amendment to the existing retail water service areas of the City of Carlsbad and COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, nothing has been accomplished at this time, so that the retail water service areas exist as they have since the retail water service agreement of 1972. Since some of the existing staff and Board members of COSTA REAL MU- NICIPAL WATER DISTRICT participated in the retail water service agree- ment of 1972, hereinafter for convenience referred to as the "1972 Agreement" and none of the staff members or the City Council partici- pated in the development of the 1972 Agreement, it was deemed appro- priate to review the background of the Agreement so that you might have this information before taking action on the two pending matters. Prior to the execution of the 1972 Agreement, the COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT (then known as CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT) raised the issue of retail water service in reference to the Carrillo Annexation to the City of Carlsbad and the La Costa Annexation to the City of Carlsbad at the annexation hearing before the Local Agency Formation Commission of San Diego (LAFCO), since COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT was then serving retail water service in both of the proposed annexed areas at the time of the annexation hearings. One of the fundamental issues considered by LAFCO is whether an annexation will create any duplication of services. LAFCO continued the matter of both annexations until the issue of retail water service was set- tled between the City of Carlsbad and COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DIS- TRICT. The 1972 Agreement was the negotiated agreement that was sub- mitted to LAFCO to eliminate any duplication of retail water services in the proposed areas to be annexed. Upon the basis of the agreement, LAFCO found that there was no duplication of services in the proposed annexation and, therefore, approved the annexation. I might point out that all annexations to the City of Carlsbad since •that time have been approved by LAFCO upon the basis of the 1972 Agreement in reference to the elimination of the duplication of any services as to retail water service. It is submitted that the imposition of a provision that water service will be provided by the City of Carlsbad on the two pending matters is an attempt to circumvent the facts upon which LAFCO based its deci- sion to approve the annexation of the property to the City of Ca'rlsbad, Honorable City Council City of Carlsbad January 29, 1982 Page -3- During the recent election campaign wherein the City of Carlsbad at- tempted to take over COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT by a subsid- iary district proceedings, it was emphasized by the City Council on more than one occasion that the City Council was more "accountable" to the citizens of Carlsbad than the Board of Directors of COSTA REAL MU- NICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. In addition thereto, publicity by the City of Carlsbad and COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT indicated the exist- ing services of water, namely, that the City of Carlsbad provided re- tail water to a portion of the COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT and that COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT provided wholesale water to the City of Carlsbad, and also provided retail water to a portion of COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. In addition, it was emphasized by presentations of members of the City Council that the City Council "just wanted the voters to. have a chance to vote on the matter". The voters did vote on the matter and, by an overwhelming vote, stated that they did not desire to have the City of Carlsbad take over COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. It would seem logical to draw the conclusion from the election that elected officals who are "accountable" to the voters and citizens of Carlsbad would abide by that decision. The discussion by the Council to date would seem to indicate that the Council does not desire to be "accountable" or abide by the desires of the voters and citizens of Carlsbad. In- stead, the Council is attempting to develop a course of action that will carry out the desires of some individual members of the staff and some individual members of the City Council contrary to the expressed desires of the voters and citizens of Carlsbad. I must again point out that, irrespective of the development of the 1972 Agreement, the conditions upon which the property was annexed and the desire of the voters and citizens of the City of Carlsbad, the proposed course of action is an unjust burden upon individuals who de- sire to develop property within the City of Carlsbad. Your proposed course of action can only cost the developers additional money and loss of time to develop their property and for the City to secure ad- ditional development within the City of Carlsbad. It is submitted that this is an unfair and costly burden to impose upon them for the sole purpose of carrying out individual desires. It is, therefore, respectfully requested that, in considering the two matters that are now before you, the conditions in reference to retail water service be changed to provide that "the water service will be provided by the agency serving retail water in the area at the time that retail water service is requested". If in the future the retail water service areas are adjusted between the City of Carlsbad and Honorable City Council City of Carlsbad January 29, 1982 Page -4- COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, such condition would still allow the project to proceed without any delay or additional cost. In ref- erence to design of the improvements for the water service for the project, there is no existing conflict, as the design is now reviewed by both agencies to eliminate any potential conflict between the existing systems. I wish to point out that this letter was reviewed and approved by all members of the Board of Directors of COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DIS- TRICT prior to its delivery to you, so that the statements set forth herein do constitute the viewpoint of the Board of Directors of COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT and they stand ready to carry out their commitments set forth in this letter. Very truly yours, WL S. SWIRSKY C^ Legal Counsel COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PSSzbcs