Laserfiche WebLink
Froelich advised the City Council that a letter received today from resident Barbara <br /> Goodrich commenting on the proposed ordinance was available on the dais. Goodrich <br /> opposed the draft ordinance. <br /> Council Discussion: <br /> Councilmember Mordo summarized the primary decisions before the Council with <br /> respect to the proposed ordinance: 1) should the slope be included in factoring the PWB; <br /> 2) should the formula include a water conservation factor less than the state model <br /> ordinance 1.0; 3) should penalties be imposed; and 4) whether to initiate an information <br /> campaign directed at existing residents to help them understand what their PWB would <br /> be for their parcel. <br /> OPENED PUBLIC HEARING <br /> Phil Mahoney, resident, expressed his opposition to the proposed ordinance and <br /> suggested that it was an example of over regulation by the Town. He noted that the Town <br /> was adopting an ordinance that was more restrictive than the State requirement. Mahoney <br /> questioned if the Council had considered the impact the proposed regulation would have <br /> on residents with families. He questioned if other communities were adopting more <br /> restrictive ordinances. Mahoney suggested that the Town put the ordinance to a vote of <br /> the residents. <br /> Gary Waldeck, resident, Purissima Hills Water District Board member, commented that <br /> the Board of Directors had recommended a water conservation factor of 1.0 be used in <br /> . calculating the PWB for the ordinance. However, as a resident and citizen of Los Altos <br /> Hills, he supported using a more stringent conservation factor of 0.6, 0.7 or 0.8. He <br /> supported the recommendations of Councilmember Mordo as outlined in his letter to the <br /> Council and included in the staff report as an attachment. In response to a <br /> Councilmember inquiry, he noted that the Water District did not believe that there was an <br /> immediate problem with water supply. He acknowledged that he had voted with the other <br /> Board members to recommend the conservation factor of 1.0 citing it as a good business <br /> decision for a water purveyor. <br /> CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING <br /> Councilmember Summit commented that she believed it was important for the Council to <br /> adopt an ordinance that was tailored to the Town's needs rather than the State Model <br /> Ordinance. She offered that the State model was onerous and would be more expensive <br /> for residents given the wide number of special professionals that would be required for a <br /> landscape project to be compliant and meet the criteria mandated by the ordinance. In <br /> addition, the State's ordinance included mandatory water audits. The model ordinances <br /> from Santa Clara County and BAWSCA were also problematic. She supported the <br /> addition of a water conservation factor of 0.8 in the formula as a good starting point. She <br /> noted that the factor could be amended in the future. In addition, Summit concurred with <br /> Councilmember Mordo that current residents should be sent advisory notices to make <br /> them aware of their water usage and to raise their level of awareness given the more <br /> restrictive water conservation compliance that will be required by the State in 10 years. <br /> 5 Approved City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br /> July 15,2010 <br />