My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
(11)AR 061609 MOU/Riverside
Colton
>
CITY CLERK
>
City Council Agendas
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2009
>
2009
>
06/16/2009 6:00 pm
>
CONSENT CALENDAR:
>
MOU/Riverside
>
(11)AR 061609 MOU/Riverside
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2014 5:03:46 AM
Creation date
2/20/2014 12:21:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Agenda Item
Item Number
11
Subject (2)
- Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Riverside and the City of Colton.
Submitted On
6/11/2009
Submitted By
Sabdi Espinoza
Item Title
AR 061609 MOU/Riverside
ATRequest
2824
Status (2)
2
Department
City Clerk
Meeting Date
6/16/2009
Meeting Time
6:00:00 PM
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CITY OF COLTON ITEM #11 <br />AGENDA REPORT <br />FOR COUNCIL MEETING OF June 16, 2009 <br />TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />FROM: City Manager and City Attorney <br />SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Riverside <br />and the City of Colton Regarding Mutual Cooperation on Matters o <br />Regional Significance <br />DATE: June 10, 2009 <br />BACKGROUND <br />On June 13, 2008, Riverside initiated the case entitled City of Riverside vs. City of Colton, San <br />Bernardino Superior Court No. CIVSS807782, alleging that Colton's environmental analysis <br />under the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) <br />("CEQA") of Wells 30 and 31 was inadequate and did not comply with CEQA (the "CEQA <br />lawsuit"). Riverside indicated to Colton that it believed that the operation of Wells 30 and 31 <br />would have an adverse impact on Riverside's adjacent water resources, including Flume Wells 2, <br />3, 4 and 6 (the "Flume Wells"). <br />Riverside claimed in its lawsuit that the wells would have significant impacts on Riverside's <br />water supply and that these impacts were required to be analyzed in an EIR. Shortly after the <br />lawsuit was filed, the parties began extensive settlement discussions. The cities concluded that <br />the well lawsuit was in fact reflective of a larger set of issues between the two cities and that any <br />settlement of the lawsuit should also address other outstanding issues. Staff and legal counsel <br />have been meeting regularly to discuss these issues and have agreed upon terms to address the <br />number of outstanding issues. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was drafted to address <br />these issues. <br />DISCUSSION <br />For several years, Colton has been evaluating possible sites to drill new water wells to augment <br />the City's water needs. The City's Water Facilities Master Plan includes the construction of <br />eight new wells by the year 2010 in order to effectively meet the recommended water production <br />capacity for the City. After extensive investigation, the City determined that the ideal location <br />for two new wells would be at the intersection of Fogg and Congress Streets. <br />In October 2007, the City prepared, pursuant to CEQA, an Initial Study for the Project. On the <br />basis of the Initial Study, staff concluded that drilling the wells would not have significant <br />environmental impacts under CEQA. Staff then prepared a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.