News

Pleasanton City Council to revisit potable water project

Staff recommends $300,000 funding to study local water supply alternatives

The Pleasanton City Council will revisit the subject of potable water and the city's regional efforts to study water supply alternatives at its Tuesday night online meeting, starting 7 p.m.

In November, the council asked city staff to make recommendations on continuing "to participate with regional agencies on studies of water supply alternatives including potable reuse and $300,000 in funding from the city's Capital Improvement program."

The city has participated in numerous water policy roundtables and meetings of the Tri-Valley Water Liaison Committee -- which includes Pleasanton along with the cities of Dublin, Livermore, and San Ramon, as well as Zone 7 Water Agency, Danville San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) and others -- since the 2014 water drought.

In July 2019, the committee supported further study of a regional potable reuse project. Pleasanton, Livermore, Zone 7 and DSRSD representatives supported joint funding for such efforts, while private investor-owned utility Cal Water "may later become a partner in sharing the costs of further studies," according to staff.

To date, Zone 7, DSRSD and Livermore have entered a task order for $250,000 each and sharing costs of the studies. Pleasanton and Cal Water have yet to enter a task order to participate in funding.

What's local journalism worth to you?

Support PleasantonWeekly.com for as little as $5/month.

Join

City spokesperson Cindy Chin told the Weekly that staff "is not recommending to discontinue participation in further potable reuse studies," but did provide an option for council’s consideration that eliminates the city’s continued participation in water supply studies that include potable reuse.

If council chooses the option to discontinue participation, the $300,000 could be used for the treatment of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are manmade chemicals that are found in common household solutions or items like paint.

"The city is already pursuing PFAS treatment with its current PFAS Treatment and Wells 5, 6, and 8 Rehabilitation Project," Chin said. "If the council returns the $300,000 budgeted for associated potable reuse studies to the Water Enterprise, that funding could be used towards the next phase of the PFAS treatment project, which will be design and construction."

Chin added, "The city is still undergoing a financial analysis to determine the cost of a PFAS treatment project and how it will be funded and is looking into low-interest loans, grants, bonds, and other funding options."

Staff is recommending the council authorize the city "to continue additional technical investigation of potable reuse technologies and further evaluate how potable reuse improves regional water supply reliability compared to other supply options."

Stay informed

Get the latest local news and information sent straight to your inbox.

Stay informed

Get the latest local news and information sent straight to your inbox.

Should the city council decide to continue evaluating potable reuse, conceptual next steps and costs would be discussed at a water liaison committee meeting this summer.

In other business

* The council will consider a resolution on the consent agenda on Tuesday that, if adopted, would express the city's "support for actions to further strengthen local democracy, authority, and control as related to local zoning and housing issues," as well as for the California Cities For Local Control Coalition's (CCLC) advocacy efforts at the state level.

In August, the council backed a number of legislative frameworks, rejecting a number of statewide housing bills that staff argued would eliminate local review and discretion and hurt local tax revenue if passed.

CCLC formed in Southern California around the same time; since then the group has been "seeking out allies for possible legal action against the state and/or to promote efforts for a ballot initiative to legislate the desired results."

Items on the consent agenda are usually routine in nature and voted on in one motion, but former council member Becky Dennis implored the council to reconsider in a Feb. 1 letter.

"California's worsening homelessness crisis, exacerbated by some cities' resistance to accommodating affordable workforce housing, has not improved the prospects for the defense of 'local control' through the initiative process or in the courts," Dennis said, adding that CCLC "cannot proceed without substantial funding."

"Given the expense of fielding initiatives and the inevitable litigation that would follow, it is hardly surprising that CCLC would love to recruit Pleasanton," Dennis said, noting the last U.S. Census found the city was the wealthiest of its size in the country.

Dennis added, "More than the potential expense, any association with CCLC's efforts may uniquely damage Pleasanton's ability to get through the next Housing Element update while maximally preserving our local planning options."

Formally adopting CCLC's position also "undercuts our own staff efforts," Dennis said. "It publicly positions Pleasanton as an outlier, hostile to addressing the statewide housing prices, and actively seeking to avoid providing housing for our city's growing workforce."

* Pleasanton's all-abilities playground master plan will "focus on the necessary components for a successful all-abilities playground at Ken Mercer Sports Park," according to a staff report that includes a recommendation for the council to approve a $105,335 contract with San Leandro-based RRM Design Group on Tuesday.

Over three years ago, Pleasanton residents first approached the city and shared their need for a local all-abilities playground. The Parks and Recreation Commission made it their top priority last year, and in September the council unanimously voted to begin the design process.

Nine design firms later submitted a statement of qualifications, and the top four firms were invited for a panel interview with city staff. Based on the interviews, reference checks and ratings of the statements of qualifications, staff recommended awarding the contract to RRM Design.

A front row seat to local high school sports.

Check out our new newsletter, the Playbook.

Follow PleasantonWeekly.com and the Pleasanton Weekly on Twitter @pleasantonnews, Facebook and on Instagram @pleasantonweekly for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Stay informed on important city government news. Sign up for our FREE daily Express newsletter.

Pleasanton City Council to revisit potable water project

Staff recommends $300,000 funding to study local water supply alternatives

by / Pleasanton Weekly

Uploaded: Mon, Feb 1, 2021, 5:37 pm

The Pleasanton City Council will revisit the subject of potable water and the city's regional efforts to study water supply alternatives at its Tuesday night online meeting, starting 7 p.m.

In November, the council asked city staff to make recommendations on continuing "to participate with regional agencies on studies of water supply alternatives including potable reuse and $300,000 in funding from the city's Capital Improvement program."

The city has participated in numerous water policy roundtables and meetings of the Tri-Valley Water Liaison Committee -- which includes Pleasanton along with the cities of Dublin, Livermore, and San Ramon, as well as Zone 7 Water Agency, Danville San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) and others -- since the 2014 water drought.

In July 2019, the committee supported further study of a regional potable reuse project. Pleasanton, Livermore, Zone 7 and DSRSD representatives supported joint funding for such efforts, while private investor-owned utility Cal Water "may later become a partner in sharing the costs of further studies," according to staff.

To date, Zone 7, DSRSD and Livermore have entered a task order for $250,000 each and sharing costs of the studies. Pleasanton and Cal Water have yet to enter a task order to participate in funding.

City spokesperson Cindy Chin told the Weekly that staff "is not recommending to discontinue participation in further potable reuse studies," but did provide an option for council’s consideration that eliminates the city’s continued participation in water supply studies that include potable reuse.

If council chooses the option to discontinue participation, the $300,000 could be used for the treatment of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are manmade chemicals that are found in common household solutions or items like paint.

"The city is already pursuing PFAS treatment with its current PFAS Treatment and Wells 5, 6, and 8 Rehabilitation Project," Chin said. "If the council returns the $300,000 budgeted for associated potable reuse studies to the Water Enterprise, that funding could be used towards the next phase of the PFAS treatment project, which will be design and construction."

Chin added, "The city is still undergoing a financial analysis to determine the cost of a PFAS treatment project and how it will be funded and is looking into low-interest loans, grants, bonds, and other funding options."

Staff is recommending the council authorize the city "to continue additional technical investigation of potable reuse technologies and further evaluate how potable reuse improves regional water supply reliability compared to other supply options."

Should the city council decide to continue evaluating potable reuse, conceptual next steps and costs would be discussed at a water liaison committee meeting this summer.

In other business

* The council will consider a resolution on the consent agenda on Tuesday that, if adopted, would express the city's "support for actions to further strengthen local democracy, authority, and control as related to local zoning and housing issues," as well as for the California Cities For Local Control Coalition's (CCLC) advocacy efforts at the state level.

In August, the council backed a number of legislative frameworks, rejecting a number of statewide housing bills that staff argued would eliminate local review and discretion and hurt local tax revenue if passed.

CCLC formed in Southern California around the same time; since then the group has been "seeking out allies for possible legal action against the state and/or to promote efforts for a ballot initiative to legislate the desired results."

Items on the consent agenda are usually routine in nature and voted on in one motion, but former council member Becky Dennis implored the council to reconsider in a Feb. 1 letter.

"California's worsening homelessness crisis, exacerbated by some cities' resistance to accommodating affordable workforce housing, has not improved the prospects for the defense of 'local control' through the initiative process or in the courts," Dennis said, adding that CCLC "cannot proceed without substantial funding."

"Given the expense of fielding initiatives and the inevitable litigation that would follow, it is hardly surprising that CCLC would love to recruit Pleasanton," Dennis said, noting the last U.S. Census found the city was the wealthiest of its size in the country.

Dennis added, "More than the potential expense, any association with CCLC's efforts may uniquely damage Pleasanton's ability to get through the next Housing Element update while maximally preserving our local planning options."

Formally adopting CCLC's position also "undercuts our own staff efforts," Dennis said. "It publicly positions Pleasanton as an outlier, hostile to addressing the statewide housing prices, and actively seeking to avoid providing housing for our city's growing workforce."

* Pleasanton's all-abilities playground master plan will "focus on the necessary components for a successful all-abilities playground at Ken Mercer Sports Park," according to a staff report that includes a recommendation for the council to approve a $105,335 contract with San Leandro-based RRM Design Group on Tuesday.

Over three years ago, Pleasanton residents first approached the city and shared their need for a local all-abilities playground. The Parks and Recreation Commission made it their top priority last year, and in September the council unanimously voted to begin the design process.

Nine design firms later submitted a statement of qualifications, and the top four firms were invited for a panel interview with city staff. Based on the interviews, reference checks and ratings of the statements of qualifications, staff recommended awarding the contract to RRM Design.

Comments

Joe Public
Registered user
Amador Valley High School
on Feb 3, 2021 at 8:12 pm
Joe Public, Amador Valley High School
Registered user
on Feb 3, 2021 at 8:12 pm

Thank you, Mayor Karla Brown and Council Members Valerie Arkin and Julie Testa for voting at this Tuesday’s Council Meeting to stop putting the tax payer’s money towards the study of “toilet to tap” or the potable reuse recycled water. We need to put our taxes towards a more important issue in our town which is getting rid of the PFAS and other forever chemicals in our well water which have limited our drinking water supply by 10%. The voters in 2000 said no to toilet to tap! Let’s remember that the residents should get clean and safe water.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.