HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-08-07; City Council; 5942; State Water Resources Control Board appeal supportCITY OF CARLSBAD
AGENDA BILL NO. s9f/ 2
DATE : Auqust 7, 1979
DEPARTMENT: Pub1 i c Works
Initial :
c. Atty
C. Mgr. 5
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF APPEAL - COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO APPEAL TO THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
The City of Lemon Grove has asked the City of Carlsbad to supp of San Diego to the State Water Resources Control Board. This mentation of wastewater reclamation in the San Diego Basin and charge requirements for a proposed satellite treatment and rec Buena Sanitation Di strjct. These issues are discussed in deta randum and attachments.
/ rt an appeal of the County appeal concerns the imple- the adoption of waste dis- amation facility by the 1 in the attached memo-
EXH I BITS
1. Memo to the City Manager dated July 23, 1979 with attachments
2. Resolution No.5874
RECOMMENDAT I ON
If Council concurs with staff's recommendation as itemized in staff report dated July 23, 1979, adopt Resolution No.S'B76 .
Council Action:
8-7-79 Council adopted Resolution No. 5876, supporting water reclamation plans and policies for the San Diego Basin.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Pub1 ic Works Administrator
DATE: July 23, 1979
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF APPEAL - COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO APPEAL TO THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
The Vice-Mayor of the City of Lemon Grove has requested that the City of Carlsbad support the appeal of the County of San Diego to the State Water Resources Control Board as outlined in the attached "Hearing Notice."
The material was not received in time to get it on the agenda of the July 17th meeting, which was the last available scheduled meeting prior to the public hearing. I think that it is important that the Council be aware of some of the issues involved. If the Council desires to take a position on the matter, I think they should act at their earliest con- venience so that the position of the City on such matters can be a mat- ter of pub1 ic record.
A number of issues are raised in the appeal. Many of them deal with the diligence with which the Regional Board has reacted to the State Board's Resolution No. 78-15. whether the Regional Board has or has not complied with the State Board's requests and, if not, if it was a matter of due diligence or limited re- sources. Buena Shadow Ridge project and with regards to encouraging actions that enhance the ability to use reclaimed water.
I don't think we are in a position to judge
We are able to take a position with regards to the proposed
To put the matter as simply as possible, the Buena Sanitation District wishes to construct a satellite treatment and reclamation facility. In order to do this, the Regional Board must assign discharge requirements for the proposed plant. They have not assigned such discharge require- ments. In addition, Buena wants authorization to use effluent for irri- gation purposes without the requirement of demineralization which is re- quired by the so-called 1/3 rule. I recommend that the City support the County appeal on both issues.
The primary concern with regard to the use of reclaimed water should be to insure that it is in conformance with established health standards. Rather than committing resources to the issues of totmsolved solids (TDS) and mineral content, resources should be committed to insure that all pathological matter is removed. The demand of and acceptance by the "market" will determine the appropriate level of effort regarding TDS.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Support the request of the Buena Sanitation District to receive dis- charge requirements for its proposed Shadow Ridge project;
-2-
2. Encourage the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board to work together to establish responsi- bilities with regard to water quality protection, water resource management and wastewater reclamation for San Diego County; and
3. Encourage all reclamation efforts that are in conformance with State guidelines and local policies.
-~ Rokald A. Beckman, P.E. Public Works Administrator
RAB: VEB
Attachments
. ..- . . .. - . . - . .
CITY OF LEMON GROVE
3568 Main Street Suite C
Lemon Grove, California 92045
Telephone ( 714 ) 464 - 6934
Robert E Bums
Councilman
9 July 1979
TO:, Distribution List
FROM: Robert F. Burns Vi ce-Mayor, Ci ty of Lemon Grove
San Diego Water Reuse Study SUBJECT:
As yo~ir City Council's representative on the San Diego CitylCounty !+later Reuse Policy Committee, I wish to call your attention to an urgent matter affecting the future of wastewater reclamation in the San Diegc Region.
bbst of you are aware that the Reuse Study published a work plan .in September 1978 which identified twelve water reuse projects which appeared feasible for implementation within the next five years. a list of the twelve projects. Much work remains to he done before actual inipleiiientation of these projects, such as, establishing of markets, prep- aration of facility plans, finalizing funding, etc.
I have attached
I;aiever, before progress in reclamation can be made, fx-daw-,tal regulatory quest ions must be resolved. the San Diego Regional Mater Quality Control Board (RNQCS), of the State Nondegradation Policy, and Resolution 78-15, as related to groundwater ar,d rx!?.mation in tbe Fzc Diqc Region. The result of the RWQCB inter- pretation is to previtnt water reclamation from being cost effective.
These questions involve the interpretation by
It is believed that reclamation and reuse, and the concurrent reduction of dependence on imported water is a beneficial objective. We find our- selves in the strange position that well water with a total dissolved solids or salts (TDS) in excess of 2000 porn can be used for spray irriyh- tion. However, reclaimed water with a TDS at about the same as that of Colorado River water must be desalinated at great cost to protect, in some
cases, non-existent wes of groundwater, thereby virtually precluding the economic feasibility of water reclamation.
In an effort to: (1) clarify the Rlv'QCB's intent to protect groundwater, and (2) to foster cost effective wastewater reclamation, the State \dater Resources Ccntrol Board adopted Resolution No. 78-15 on 20 April l978. (Copy enclosed)
Di stri buti on Page 2 9 July 1979
On 12 April 1979 the County of San Diego appealed the RWQCB's inaction regarding Resolution No. 78-15.
for. 30 July 1979 in San Diego. are encl osed.
A hearing on the appeal has been set Copies of the appeal and hearing notice
Please review the appeal letter and Resolutior! 78-15. If you feel this is a matter which you could support, a letter of such support should be submitted to the San Diego City/County Water Reuse Study, 5555 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California 92123. The letter will be introduced at t5e 30 July hear-ing.
~ilad: letters should be received by 18 July 1979 if -,c;ssjtjIe.
Should you require additional information please contact Mr. Norm Magneson or Mr. Joe Barry of the San Diego CitylCounty Water Reuse Study staff, phone (71 4) 565-5686.
Because of certain deadlines mandated by the State n
%%a ROBERT F . BURNS, Vi ce-Mayor City of Lemon Grove
RG:mh
Enclosures : 1. Project 1 i st 2. Resolution 78-15 3. County Board of Supervisors Appeal of 12 April 1979 4. Hearing Notice
Distribution:
City of Del Mar City of Escondido 2. tj, of
City of Oceanside City of Chuia Vista City of National City City of La Mesa
City of El Cajon City of Carl sbad City of San Marcos City of Coronado City of Imperial Beach
ATTACHMENT 1
WATER REUSE PROJECTS*
1. Pala Mesa Plant B (Bonsall)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
5%. 8.
9.
?K 10.
11.
12.
Val 1 ey Center
Santee (A1 ternate #4)
Del Mar
Ramona
San Diego Country Estates
San Elijo
Carl sbad/San Marcor
Enci ni tas
Enci na
Escondido/Hale Avenue (San Pasqual Val1 ey)
Buena
*Detailed description and location map in San Diego Water Reuse Plan of September 1978,
\
plin (Basin Plan) for the San Die20 Region; -- ~ne hsin plan men&r:ents grovizfe for the delction of-all
r.atior:s x~l water qmlity object<-qes for gro?~i?Gv;zters for
19 hyCrcyraghic subunits end four- hyc:rosr&ph?c sl?b;:reas;
he zmeni!!zentsdid not provide for a stateacnt of p,cgiczEil
re~zdlng protection of the affected gro:irtdwc..ter h-lsins;
2.mefici-.l use desig-
cozstal portions of
.
1. -~srjrovcs tkDse portions of &solution KO- 72-6 of th- S;.n Dieso %qional t:zter
'Quality Control Sosrd xhich revises tke Fater Quality Control Plzri, snn Diego'
Easin, for groundv;ater beneEiciz1 uses and water +ality objectlves 2nd ilZditiorrs
02 si-rfzce k;ater acf,latic habitat-, b3neficial use deslsEations,
Eenzrds, to the,Szn Diego Reqiozal Ecard for reccnsileratkn, deletions of COSD
End I.;?X4 habitat beneficial cse designations contzine-2 29 i5s Rssol~tion P;o. 78-6,
Rqcests the San Diego Rqlonal Eoard to:
2,
t
3,
..
2 1.
.- . --
.. I
.. .-
.'%- -_ --
I
+. .. - _- .- . .. ..
32 April. 1979
.
Hr- Em !.laughan, Chairman
.P.. 0. Box 100 Szcr-amnto Ccl ifsrnia 95874
-.State !&iter Resources Control Board --
SUBJECT: App2af for Early Resolution of I*las.tewhter Rec? amtion Problems
The purpose of this letter is to appeal the ihaction of the California Regional \-later Quzlity Control Board, San Diego Region (2zgional Board) in
i!nplemmting certain actions, policies and directions af the State Hater Resources Control Board (State Board) i n accordance wi th Section 13320 and other appropriate sectjons of the Porter-Cologne Mater Qual ity Control Act to foster cost effective :water reclan&tSob- problem PR are haying in achieving water reclamation goals in San Diega
Cmnty.
\./e request early resojution of .
0
In !.larch and April 1978, the Board of Sup2rvisors and County staff made a series of appeals (Refs. A and B) to thz State eoard that the ~~dopti~~ of th? present amended Basin Plan will have an adverse effect on the avsila- bility of water rcsouxes ad on benefits to be derived froin water recfam3-
tion in many arms in the Countj. AS a result of 'iilese zppeals, your Board
adopted Resolution 78-15 on 20 April I978 which requested the Regional Bozrd to make a nurr,ber of chaiqes to the Basin Plan which would foster reclarnation- I-bst of the problems hzve been unrgsolved for well over a year.
It is befieved that GUT water resources nust be managed in a sensible, real-istjc and reasonable manner,
1 arJy concerned with prater resources bemuse we arc nearly totally dependmt upon imported water. \.!e would like to becone more self-sufficient through
pii se managernent of water resources erhi ch incl rides the recl annti on and reuse of our \-iaste waters, Efforts to recJairn wter have been harnperd by th2 r?ttitudes and policies of th2 Regional Board staff, which is placing tin- reasonable' demands OR vz tcr reuse acti vi ti2s. The main concerns arc the Regional Bsard's policies which require expensive deiitinerafiza tion of mst reclairiled water pricr to use, and the request for voluqinous infarmation on gi.oimdl;rater basins prjor to issuance OF k:aste dischaqe requirements.
\,!e in Scmthern California are particu-
.. .. T~S Porter-Cologne \later qual iiy Control nct was passed \.;hicj1 dcc1sr-ea that the people of tile State have a prirzary intet-es.t in the -_ consei-vatiori, corltrof , and utilization of the water resources of the State. Revisions to the Act,
tk Water Reclamation taw, further declared that the peoDle 4- of the Stzte
have a primry interest in the developmnt of facilities to reclaini water containing waste to sup21 ewnt existing surface and undzrground \;a ter supplies and to assist in ne2ting the future v!ater requii-en:ents of the
State. The Legislature further found and declared that tile utilizztion of reclaimed wter by local communities for doxstic, agricultural, industrial
recrzational, and fish and wildlife purposes will co'ntribute to the peace,
health, safety and welfare of the people of th2 State- water constitutes the devel opmnt of "new basic mter suppl ies. ''
'rit was the intention of the Legislature, .and is so stated 'in Section 13512
of the Porter-Cologne Act, that the State undertake
encourage development of water recl aii!ati on faci 1 i ti es ss that reclaimed plater may be mde available to help neet the growing plater rcquireKents of the
State.
The State \.later Resources Control Board adopted the Pol icy and Action Plan
for \.later Reclamation in California in January 1977 to imleeent Section 33512 of the Act. ing documents to effect \.rater reclamation. It is novr kpri? 39721 and there hat5 been little trater reclamation in San Diego'County. !!eedless to say, WE! are becoming increasing7y frustrated over..the ..^. -- inaction of State agencies to
Th? Porter-Col ogne 'Kater Quality Act contains provisions relating. to th? po:.:ers arid -- duties of Regional Boards. Sections 13225, 13241, 13267 an3
f3523 arc particularly inportant, as they re-flect the intention of the Legislature to have Regional Boards be reasonable in thz perfornmce of thzir duties. Sections 13225(c) and 13267(a) state thzi the htirtlen ad costs of providinq inwstigations and technica! repwts shall bear a reclsm- able relationship to the need for the report and tho bent-fits to be obtainsd therefron.
The Sari Diego' City/Cgunty Idater Reuse Study 'submitted a Report of I.!aste Dis-
chars2 for the Gwna project (copy enclosed) , which contained extensive soil s
and r.;atei- quality informtion and which indicated demineralization of waste-
bictter was not required for- reuse and that impacts on beneficial uses would
be minimal (See Enc7os~r~ 1 ). Even though extensive information was provided on efflum'i disposal' SE~S, geology, permeability, groundwater levels and quality, and potential tzpacts of the use of reclaimed water including a
ccrnputer program of sait movernwt in soils, the Regional Board staff re- quested considerably rf23r2 detailed informatian prior- to issuance of tentstive
\:aste di schargc IYX~~~ZZ~~~S, which appezrs unreasonable in 1 i ght of Resol u-
tion 78-1 5 (See ~ncIost::--;. 2)
The Regl'onal Board staff reqwsted mre information on porosity, transmissi- bility, surface dra-inage, historic high surface and grounC:.rater Jevels, underlying Srotrndi.iater bas? n capacity , the cnti re basi n transmi ssi bil i ty
cspaci ty, and a comprehznsive report of th2 current groundwater resources of
the entire basin and thp iinpact of percolated reclaimc! wstewatcr- on tk groun&;Jater quality under and dovnstrearn of the rec1airr;ed water use area.
Use of reclai~ed
-. Therzfore, - - - possible steps to
This policy and plan provides the guidince and inplement-
encourage cost effective. reclai?iat-ioii. -*-- -'-. -.
b
. . -+ -., rurJti 3 12 April 1979
This request for additional information as r!iatle even though \later- ft-o!ii. only four t;~lls is being used 3 miles do,-mstrcam from th? project, til2 quality
of trhich is far poorer thanthe basin objectives. The cjround2tatc.r b2lG:-l th;, water reuse ared has a TDS of .over 2209 ng/l, which is nearly tWice the
basin objectives, In light of the poor groundwater quality and the minin:al use no:; made of the jroirnd:.r3ter resources, it seeins to-us that the Region21 Eoard staff request is unreasonable. D2tails .. on the proposed Ctuena pr0jec.t are contained in Enclosure 1,
The- Porter-Col ogne \-later Qual i ty Act a1 so specifies ‘the duties of the State Idater- Resources Control Board. Sections 131 42, 131 44, 131 45, 137 46 and
.,I31 65 are appropriate. These -sections describe the need for long-range re- -source pfanfiing inc’l uding ground:./ater and surface water nanagemnt, control and use of reclaimed mter, and for coordinatinq such efforts with local agenci 2s. Due to the confl 3 cti ng interpretation of your- Resc11 u ti on 78-1 5
by the Regional Eoard staff, it appears that the State 2oard and Regional Eoard staff have a substantial difference of opinion re;ardiny mter rccla- rnation in the Sin Diego Region (See Ref, C). .
The San Diego City/County \later Reuse Study WZS ‘hmrded a grant for developing water reclanlation projects in the San Diego Region. developed a \.!ark Plan for guiding their efforts. around the intent of Resolution 78-15.
th2 Sta-te Board, the City and County, ..-- and. .. by the Executive Of-F-icer of the Regional 6oard on 8 September 1978. Ho:;ever, we nv;i find that cons.idr.rable and extensive new infomation is noyr required for the RegSonal BoaFd staff.
Ne believe the Regional Board staff has delayed water reclamation efforts,
is not responsive to progressive water resource r;mnagar.c.nt plans
increasing costs to taxpayers due to both delays and reqtiests for iinreasonabl e
and irrn!evant infornation.
_.. .
--. -
i
Th? 2euse. Study staf-f
The Kork Plan vias approved by €PA,
The P;an was developed .
and is
._ _. -
As the duly elected rzpresentatives of the citizens of San Diego County, we like to use advanced techniques for best manayemerit practices and make hetter use of and conserve all natural resources, including water resources. It is cxrr
RECCW5KDATION : That ycQr Board
1. Resolve early the responsibilities of tk State and Regional Boards in regard to water qmfity protection, water resource manaqeingnt and krastemter reclm3ti on for San Diego Cosnty.
Develop a plan of cction to allow implenentation of water reclamation plans, policies, ~22 2esolution 72-15 and direct tk Regional Eoard to take appropriate ZA t<x?ly action.
2.
3. Direct tfio Region2.f 5oa.rd staff to provide tentative waste discharge requ-i rerents for th? EWR~ project based upn the information received.
.-. " 13. April 1979
-. I
4. Reaff-ir-si that the San Diego CitylCoanty \.later Reuse Study is to
proceed with \.rater reclari!stion cffoi-ts in conscnsnce'wi th thc
approved Ik~rk P1 an, and di rect tk Rcgi onal Board to coopera te.
Pertinent references and enclosures to this appeal are listed belov.
3
Board of Supx-vi son
!
LLJC~LLE I:100P,E, 'Supzrvi sor, and P&rnkr, S;Jbcormi ttee on
Water 1.1 a nag ea 2n t
ROGER HEDGECKK, SuQ'ervi sor, and Mernber, Subcomj ttee on Water Ma na 5 ez2'n t
t
Chairwoman, Eoard of Supervisors letter to State !-later Resources -..- -- Control . _. Board dated 21 March 1978
Co. Dept, of Sanitation and Flood Control lettep+ to State kter Resources Control Eoard dated 11 April 197E:
Co, Dept, of Sanitation and Flood Control letter to State \.later Resources Control Board dated 27 March 1979
Sumrnary Report - Cuena \later Reclamation Project dated 1'1 April 1979
-_ ._
(with attachwnts t exhibits)
Regional Board letter dated 29 t9arch 1979
cc; Envi ronmntal 'Protection Agency City of San Diego San Diego RegirJnal \.later Qual i ty Ccntrol Eoard State \later Resources Control Board, J Dr. Ielayne Pierson
City of Vista City of Del Plar City of CarlsSad City of Escondido . County Uater Atithor-fty Comprehensive Plsr;nsr,g Organization Department of hkr Xesources
Henrbers, Pol icy hixi ttee of \*later Reuse Study iqelnbers, Executi ?:e Comi ttee of llater Reuse Study
Chief Administrative Officer I County Counse?
I
P:ONT>AY, July 30, 1979 - l0:OO a-m,
Roon B-109, State OfEice Building
1350 Front Street, San Diego, California
Vias tewater Reclanation in the San Diego Easin.
KEY ISSUE:
Should the State Board take further action to. i.IpLeneRt 'wastewater
reclamation. in the San Diego Basin and should th- State Board direct adoption of waste discharge requirements. for the 33uena Project,
- --
BZiCKGROUND: I
A hearing will be held for the purpose of receivicg evidence regarding implemontation of State Board Resolution No, 78-15 which
ap2xoved amendments to the !.later Quality Control Plan, San Diego
Basin, and which requested the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board to take certain actions concerning wastpwaker
reclanation in the San Diego Basin, On April 20, 1973, the State
Board received a petition fron the County of San Diego for review
of irrplernentation of this Resolution, The County's petition was
arwnded. on Eay 29* 1979-
-
The hearing will 132 held by the State Board for the purpose of
receiving evidence on the following issues: *
(1) Resolution z;~. 78-15 requests the Regional Board to
"adopt a resolutbn which clarifies its intent to protect
under th? NcJn-Ds,sradation Policy, those groundwater bodies
where beneficizl *ises and water quality objectives have
been entirely t2212ted. I)
i
I
(2) Kcsolution KO- 78-15 requests thc Regional notlrd to
"identify, -within 30 days, those arcas where proposes
rccla:nztion projects would provide a 'dater supply of cor.-
parable or b2tter quality tha!i existing-:su?Dlies and those
ground:\;a tcr basins where existincj water quality is degraded
to the point !.;here beneficial uses are marginal or do not
exist; for such areas in basins, modify berrzzicial uses/watcr
quality objectives .to foster wastewater reclamation-
tIas this been accoxplished?
(3) Resolution KO. 78-15 requests the Regional Board to "review belief icial uses and water quality objectives for grounclwater basins in all areas or' potential wrzstewater
reclanation as a part or' the continuing plclnning process .. and in coordination Twith the 201 ~n,qion.rtl \izstet.iater
Rcclsnation Study- The Regional Eoard shocld work with
the Departnint of Nater Resources tp' reach :?ar-terrrt decisions based on existing data for those s2iciEic
reclamation projects identified in, the dr-lfk San Uic,-o
Area 208 Pian." I
Has this been 3ccornplished?
\. (4) Resolution P!o. 78-15 requests thc Regional Eo-lrd to
11 consiGier the elimination of all numerical objectives for
giound;Js.ters in favor of estzblishincj a palicy for pro-
tection of grounclwaters consistent with the Kon-Degradation __
Policy which dces a3.10~ for a controlled rate of dc:jraiiaki.on
where rcasoxabl3 and consistent with maxiinzm benefit to the
pco2le of the state."
Has this been acconplished?
(5) If any of the requests listed in Issues 1-4 have not
been satisfactorily accom?lished, does good cause exist
for nodification of these requests?
(6) h report OF waste disciiarge was submitted to the Rsyional
Eoard for the Eiisne Project by the San Diego Water l?.tuse Study.
Is this report car;;lete and should the Regional Board adopt
waste discharge requirements for this project?
(7) k7hat fcrtkr action, if any, should the State Soard take
to implenent %solution Eo. 78-15 and wastewater reclamation
in the San Diefc %sin.
'* ,a
No action will be taken by the State Board at the hearing. after consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing,
Statc Board dccides to take action, all intcrcstcd persons will b: no ti f ieci.
The Regioaal Board, the County of San Diego, all6 other interested
public agencies and individuals will be given an opportunity to
present coiments and evidence concer'ning the above issues,
statements should be submitted at least 5 days prior to the date of hearing to the State Water Resources Control Board, Legal Di.cr;c-' Laion,
P.O. Box 100, Sacranento, California 95801. In addition, interested
psrsons may present oral conrnents or may present written comnents, if good cause can be shown for failure to make an earlier written
submittal at the hearing,
Copies of the record may be obtained, at cost, by writing to the
above address, or by calling (916) 322-3580,
When,
the
Written
Dated: JUN 29 1979
Executive Director
+. *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
12
14
LE
1E
17
1E
1E
2c
21
22
2:
24
2:
2E
23
2E
.-
RESOLUTION NO. 5876
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY couruL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING !4ATER RECLAMATION PLANS AND POLICIES FOR THE SAN DIEGO BASIN
WHEREAS, the City of Carlshad is a charter member of the Sari Diego Water
Reclamation Agency ar?d supports its goals and objectives; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad supports water reuse efforts in order to
reduce our dependency on imported water; and
WHEREAS, the County of San Diego has appealed to the State Water Resources
Control Eoard to receive discharge standards for a proposed reclamation project;
and
MHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad supports efforts to repeal the application
of the one-third rule with regards to the use of reclaimed water for non-potable
irrigation purposes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad
as follows:
1. The State Water Resources Control Board should grant the appeal of
the County of San Diego with regard to the establishment of discharge require-
ments for the proposed reclamaticn project.
The State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality 2.
Control Board should work together to establ ish responsibilities with regard
to water qual i ty protection, water resource management and wastewater recl ama-
tion for San Diego County.
3. The State Mater Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality
Control Board should encourage and work to promote all reclamation efforts that
are in conformance with State guidelines and local policies.
xxx
xxx
xxx
I
- .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
35
16
17
,le
19
20
21
22
23
24
. 25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad,
California, at a regular rneetjng held the 7th day of Ausust , 1979,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmen Packard, Skotnicki, Anear, Lewis and
NOES: None Councilwoman Casler
AlIEST:
(SEAL)
-2-