Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-03-04; Municipal Water District; 353; Update on Water Authority Weighted Vote. prMk 0 3 CARLSBAL) MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT - AGENDA BILL 2-t--- AB# 33-3 TITLE: DEPT. HD. MTG. 03/04/97 UPDATE ON THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY WEIGHTED VOTE CITY ATTY. . DEPT. CMWD RECOMMENDED ACTION: This is an informational update and there is no specific action requested. The Board may, however, give some direction to the Board President, regarding the CWA weighted vote issue. ITEM EXPLANATION: At the County Water Authority Board of Directors meeting, on December 12, the Board exercised a little used provision of its state law authority and instituted a weighted-vote system that gave the City of San Diego control of the Board. This weighted-vote is a vote based on the assessed valuation in the jurisdiction of the board member voting. Under this voting method, the City of San Diego’s 10 seats on the 34 member Board actually counts for 48 percent of all the votes, meaning San Diego has to have only one or two other Board members vote with it in order to have a majority on any issue. This weighted vote was called for, at the last Board meeting, to select officers of the Board. The decision the City of San Diego wanted was to elect a chair and a vice-chair both from the San Diego delegation, bypassing a power-sharing arrangement among various water agencies that has worked since 1944. The ability of the remaining water agencies in the county to control their own destiny and negotiate water prices and availability have been seriously threatened by this call for a weighted vote. As a result, a number of water agencies, mostly from north county at this time, have formed a coalition called the County Water Coalition (CWC) of which your Board President is the Vice- Chair. This coalition has developed a proposal regarding the weighted vote issue and has presented this proposal to the CWA Board at their January meeting. Staff will be making a presentation at tonight’s meeting to review this proposal. On March 3’ there is a Natural Resources, Cultural, and the Arts Committee meeting which is comprised of members of the San Diego City Council. The CWC proposal will be discussed at this meeting. There is also a possibility of a counter proposal from the City of San Diego. The results of this committee meeting will be presented for discussion by the CMWD staff at tonight’s meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: None ~ EXHIBITS: ~ 1. CWC proposal slides (3 pages). EXHIBIT 1 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 ‘ 03/04/97 09:46 ?y61~431 1601 CMWD -+a c MGR @I 002/009 March 4,1997 TO BOARD OFDIRECTORS WA; CIIYMANAGRR FROM: GENE&IL MANAGER DISCXJSSION OF THE VOTING PROCECURES OF THE COUNTY WATER AUTHORI’IY BY TEE CITY OF SAN DIEGO On Monday, March 3, there was a meeting of the City of San Diego’s Rules Committee, the agenda included the voting procedures for the San Diego County Water Authority. This Committee is comprised of the Mayor, Susan Gelding; and Council members Barbara Warden (Deputy Mayor), Harry Mathis, Byron Wear and George Stevens. Fred Thompson, who is one of the San Diego representatives on the County Water Authority and the Chairman of the ten city delegates, introduced the San Dicgo delegates to the Committee and those in the auciieuce. He also introduced two new delega&, appointed by Mayor Golding, Johu Fowler and Mike Madigan. Fred then proceeded with an introduction of the issue at hand, which is the voting procednres at the Water Authority. He then introduced Chris Frahm, the Chair of the Board of the Water Authority, described the Voting Procedure at the Water Authority. Ms. Frahm explained that, although there is no unanimity at the Water Authority, all want to solve the problem. The Authority has begun the healthy process of discussing the issue in an attempt to solve the problem. She outlined the general parameters that the Board has arrived at to date- They are: Any weighted vote should be based cm some form of “financial contribution” although there is not agreement on the formula. (There was a board member or two that prehrcd a weighted vote based on population.) Further discussion of the “n” factor. Thjs would require a minimum of five member agencies to carry a vote even though two of these member agencies may total more than 50% of the weighted vote based on “fknmcial contribution”. The issue of Unit Voting. Basis of representation. Ms. Frahm stated that an ideal solution would be fix further dialog with other member agencies at the Water Authority ifthe “financial contribution” formula is acceptable to the City of San Diego. Dale Mason, representative Vallecitos Water District on the CWA Board, a past Chair of the CWA Board, a representative on the Metropolitan Board and also the Chair of the County Water Coalition, gave a brief presentation on this issue. 03/04/97 09: 47 ZBl~, 431 1601 A++ c IGR March 4,1997 Page 2 Committee member Barbara Warden questioned Dale on the Bill Morrow’s bill (AB 629), recently introduced, that targets the Water Authority’s weighted vote issue and attmpts to solve the problem by using a five year financial contribution instead of the City of San Diego’s preferred his&&al contribution method. Mr, Mason mentioned that this bill is supported by the members of the Coalition and is mostly a “spot bill” because of legislative time cons&aints. (To my knowledge the Coalition has not formally endorsed this proposed bill and Carlsbad does not support it at this time.) Mayor Gohiing gave her views on this issue and explained that this is a high profile issue and needs to be resolved as soon as possible. There are many important water issues on the Authority’s agenda and the this voting issue needs resolution so that proper attention can be paid to the other pressing issues. She went on to state her preferences and these prefcnnces are detailed in her memo (copy attached). The bottom line is she prefers the existing voting pmcedure. However, if there is a change to be made, she would opt for the “all-in” financial contribution that takes all contributions from day one including ou- going City of San Diego contributions provided separately &om CWA eqxnditures benefiting other member agencies. All these contributions would be adjusted fix inflation. This preference differs &om Committee Member Warden’s proposal (also attached) mostly in the area of representation. Committee Member Warden prefa the representation to be based on proportional representation. This would mean that the San Diego “10” would increase to about 15 or 16 delegates. These proposals would mean that San Diego’s pementage of the weighted vote would be changed m the present 48% to about 45 or 46%. This would mean no change in the call for a weighted vote and that San Diego plus one other member agency (possibly two) would cany any vote that may be called. That results in no change from the present situation. These attached memos show a “suggested preference” for what any revised voting procedure should look like and the CWA would have the flexibility to modify these suggested revisions. However, I view these suggestions as ground rules to be followed and there may not be much leeway or flexibility for CWA to modify the voting procedures. Robert Greaney @I 003/009 cc: Assistant City Manager ~004/009 .- .I, OFFICE OF MAYOR SUSAN GOLDING City of San OJego MEMORANDUM TO: Rules Committee Members FROM: Mayor Gelding . DATE: March 3,1997 3 SUBJECT: County Water Authority Voting Procedures I ’ Understanding the importance of water reliability to our City and region, the policy items and negotiations currently before the County Water Authority (CWA) are critical. CWA representatives’ full attention is essential to complete successful negotiations. As we are all aware, and as seen in the press, the recent controversy over the CWA voting procedure has’taken away the representatives ability to address the pressing issues related to water supply. Subsequent to a call for the ‘assessed valuation vote” at the December meeting of the CWA, internal debate has been pervasive. The CWA has operated for many years under the current voting structure and has found a way to keep power and need for movement balanced. The City of San Diego has historically and continues to provide many facilities of the region, for the benefit of all member ag&xies. The City of * San Diego also has the largest population and valuation. AS such, the City should continue to lead thoughtfully and effectively. A good working relationship among all member agencies is imperative. We have before us< alternatives to the current assessed valuation procedure being proposed. f have reviewed the City 10 report and propose the following voting procedure modifications: * The basis of the vote to be according to “all-in Financial Contributions” which would take into account previous financial contributions adjusted for inflation and on-going City of San Oiego contribu’tions of other infrastructure provided separately from OVA expenditures - benefiting other member agencies; * In order to pass, any matter or some matters could require a majority of the outstanding votes; I Voting for agencies with more than one representative to remain as per the existing Act; and, l Quorum and board representation. to remain as per the existing Act I believe it is imperative though, to-rectiq the current internal debate before we finalize a modified v&g structure, therefore, I propose that we approve the above outlined voting procedure and provide it to our representatives, but with the explicit direction to not move forward on the alternative structure until all member agencies have come to closure on their continued involvement in the CWA. .I a 03/04/97 09:48 eela 431 1601 .-. _- -* 'a Rules Committee Members Page 2 March 3,1997 , A++ c IGR a 005/009 As you know, I have recently reappointed Francie Krauel and newly appointed John Fowfer and Michael Madigan, all with a long history of knowledge and leadership in water in the region. The policy issues needing attention at the CWA carry too much importance to the provision of water in our region to let the internal ,tie taint the negotiations of the policy items at hand. The voting formula should either be left in W’s current arrangement or a new process established as soon as possible so significant water contracts can be addressed. I ask for your support of this approach and look forward to the CWA getting back to, business. . . .- I. ,- . . - . . .: 03/04/97 OS:48 ff$%liJ 431 1001 . A-b-P c MGR a 006/009 - .- -- __- --.-. THECITYOFSANDIEGO IURBARAWARDEN OOmJw UIYOW cowen aa~smwcr nvm Date: February Z&l997 To: , From: Subjectz Mayor Susan Goldiug and Mcmbcrs of the City Council Members of the City’s Delegation to the County Water Authority . Deputy Mayor B&am Warden s- Rules Committee Discussion of Voting Pro&m at the Comny Water Authority As a long-standing resident of the City and Nor$h County, I have been deeply concerned by the Icvel of d&i&&nation, discord and in-fighting within the Authority Board and within the City Tar. Over the past few years, a hand&l of dissenters have attempted to divide our City Ten and create wedges among Authority members to destroy the rcgionaI unity and mission of the Water Authority. Udorhmateiy, those efforts underscore the lack of agreement on the central policy question fking the Water Authority: how -or if - the County Water Authori@ should meet the growing demanda for ne+v water supplies for the citizens of San Dicgo County. For those who have attemptal to divide the region, I would I&e to remind them of bow the City of San Diego and its appointees to the County Water Authority Board of Directors have protcctcd the region’s - and North County’s - economic interests, the region’s agricultural growexs, North County water agencies, and all of our county’s taxpayers: . a Apicukral Discounts and Subsidies. It wa¶ the City of San Diego which supported the ti&dtml discount policy North County growers sought at CWA and MWD. 0 At a time xkhen MWD ordered its member agencies to slash water use by 40-50% during the last drought, it was the City of San Diego - with n+dy 70% of the region’s water storage -which supported protections for San DicgoCounty’s’agricultural grow&s md North County water agencica 2~FsTa6m. MDlEao l cauMllm*oa~o( - rnlrnm6.oOO6 s--rr. 03/04/97 09:48 trera 431 1601 t-‘-’ c HGR @007/009 Mayor Gelding & Members of the City Council March 3.1997 Page Two a With just a small need for emergky rcscrvoir storage capacity in the q orthcxn m of our city, it was the Sau Dicgo City Council and its Water Authority members which supportaitheAuthori~'s~ storage project for North County agencies to use the City’s rcscrvoir system fix the be&t of North County agencies. Despite the x&to& and grand-star&g, this City Council and a majoriv of its appointees to the County Water Authority have demonstrated by deeds and by words a regional commitment and leadaship fbr which we need not apologize. At a time in our region’s history when the impor&nce of critical water supply issues has never been greater, the debate over voting procedures is really a debate over the fbturc of our region’s woxtomy between tboso who embrace the ti versus those who embrace the status quo; bctwtea those who embrace the IID water transfer and those who wish to remain dependent upon MWD; between those who’ look eah for additional water supplies and partial independence hnn MWD and those who look north far total dcpe&nce upon MWD. I In the event that the City Council wishes to consider and/or support possible changes to the Water Authority Act, I would hereby like to propose the fbllowing principles f6r your consideration: I bJ I agree with the proposition that the basis of vote should be according to the All- in:Finakal k&ibution (FC) ~tedforjnflation As a founding member, I i investor and sharchoidcr in the public corporation called the County Wakr Authority, the investments City taxpayers have made in the Water Authoriq since its creation should not be diminished because of inflaGon. The City of San I Diego’s investments iu CWA - like the Stock Market or shares in a private i coq=Y -have appreciated over time and should be accounted for accordingly. d / I agree with the proposition that all matters of Water Authority business - like I the City Council - should requin? a simple majority of the out&aading votes to 1 pass. If the current law were to be changed to the All-in-Financial Contribution I (r;c) adinsted then the City’s share of investments and ownership in I CWA’s assets would be r&uccd from 48% to 45%. By its own nature, the City’s ! appointees to the Water Authority Board would still be rquired to obtain the I support of other manba agency investors to conduct any business. . r/ I agree with the proposition that Unit Voting for agencies with more than one rqmxentative to the Water Authority Board should remain unchanged per the existing Act. d I agree ~jth the proposition that quorum rqticnts should remain the same. 03/04/97 09:49 ml9 431 1601 -. 2-w c rJfGR a 008/009 Mayor Gelding & Manbers of the City Council Mad 3,1997 Page Three d I disagree with the proposition that Water Authority Board representation should remain the same. In fact, I would suggest that the Water Authority Board membership should be proportionzll rqmscntati~n. For tbosc in support of “equal representation,” that model of govemancs best reflects the compctsition of the U.S, Sen@e where every state is provided the sme numaical repruwtstion regardiess of size or population. For those in support of pnzqortionate rqresentation, that model of governance best reflects the composition of the U.S. House of Represcntativts. Like the House of Repdves, the City of San Dicgo’s proportional investment in the Water Authority should provide city ratepayers withpqortional representation on the Authority’s Board. Like the Howe, the number of Authority Board seats CauId also be fixed at a pdctcnnind number. Those agencies with a higher level of inveshnent in the Autbority would receive a higher number of seats on ‘the Authority’s Board of Directors. This change in the Authority Act would not @tange the number of votes, but would provide those larger and medium-sized agencies with more voices at the table. Another reason proportional Board membership makes sense as a means to redismiute and share the workload and scheduling dmds among more city representatives. with 48% of the existing --tation at the Water Authority, our City Ten delegates have accepted a trenkdous responsibility aud workload placed upon their outside proftisional intezcsts. other agencies - represented on the Authority Board by Agency General Maqers or staff-may not have the same workload demands outside the Authority as our City Tenvolunteers may have.. I/ ’ bgree with tic proposition that any proposed change5 to the voting formula at CWA must also be consistent with the Authtxity’s position at MWD. Since the Water Authority Act and its assessed valuation voting formuIa were patterned after the MWD Act, whatever changes developed for CWA m also be made to the MWD Act to presavc the level of our investments and voicu in both public wateq agencies. 03/04/97 09:49 6 mra_431 1601 . ,. i ” Mayor Golding.& Members of the City Council March3,1997 Page Four +2+ c YGR c/ I agree with the proposition that each and every investor and member agency at CWA must also rea&n its existing commitment and determine its level of future investments in the Water Authority. In the event the City of San Diego should voluntarily agree to reduce its mpresentation on the Authority Board, thcrc is no guarantee that these changes will silence the dissenters. In order to achieve that regional consensus, I would like to suggest that each and evety other member agency of the Wats Authoxity should also: mt Work in good faith towards a consensus on these and other principles aimed at modifying the County Water Authority Act; 8 Agree that, if a consensus far changes is created, each agency wilJ support these consensus changes throughout the legislative process. Proposal legislation without regional consensus will only further divide member agencies and will ultimately fhil in the event our region is not united in Sacramento, We should not endorse any legislative changes which arc unilataally introduced in Sacramento. -As the Authority continues to plan fat our e&momic fixture and invest in new water supply, treatment and storage altematives, each member agency should also make its own indcpcndent decisio&ommitmem to determine its own lcvci of desired r&ability. The Water Authority is the sum of the ncuis of its member agencies. With these individual decisions, the Water Authority Board can begin to invest in strategic wata decisions and investments with the consensus and concurrence of its member agencies. AU of us should be hesitant to endorse any changes to the Authority Act which reduce the city’s level of investment pu,&g the division, rancor and personal attacks are set aside. Those who caU for changes in the Author@ Act must also become part of the soiution, not just the problem, ti agree to make critical decisions on their fbture role and investment choices in the Water Author@ I believe this Council and future Councils will continue to serve the region’s beat intereats, but it take pattners equally committed to pmgrcss to make the partnership work. IIZ closing, I need to rccognize and compliment those individual members of the City Ten who have workal so diligently to represent our city’s intereats with a clear and unified voice. Through their deeply committed and professional conduct, they have resisted efirts to divide and weaken their resolve. With continucd interfuence and opposition by MWD to IID and partial independence by the Water Authority, those City Ten members speaking with a unified voice have steadfastly conducted thanseivcs in the highest of professional standards. For that I am grateful and proud. B 009/009 In the spirit ofprotecting the investments of our city ratepayers, I offer these comments and suggestions for the Rules Committee’s consideration and discussion on Monday,