LAFCO
Ukiah Valley Special Districts, 2013
Read the report at Local Agency Formation Commissions ↗
Municipal Service Review
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Adopted May 6, 2013
E Mulberg & Associates
P.O. Box 582931
Elk Grove, CA 95758
916.217.8393
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Acronyms and Abbreviations
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. x
1: Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Role and Responsibility of LAFCO ........................................................................................ 1-1
Purpose of the Municipal Service Review .......................................................................... 1-1
Uses of the Municipal Service Review ................................................................................ 1-2
Sphere of Influence ................................................................................................................. 1-3
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .................................................................. 1-4
2: Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 2-1
Role and Responsibility of LAFCO ....................................................................................... 2-1
Ukiah Valley Fire District ........................................................................................................ 2-2
Millview County Water District ............................................................................................ 2-3
Potter Valley Irrigation District ............................................................................................ 2-5
Redwood Valley County Water District ............................................................................. 2-7
Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District ......... 2-8
Willow County Water District ............................................................................................... 2-9
Calpella County Water District ............................................................................................ 2-11
Hopland Public Utility District ............................................................................................ 2-12
Recommendations................................................................................................................. 2-14
3: Single Service Districts .................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 – Ukiah Valley Fire District .............................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 – Millview County Water District ................................................................................ 3-15
3.3 – Potter Valley Irrigation District ................................................................................3-27
3.4 – Redwood Valley County Water District ................................................................. 3-41
3.5 – Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District3-53
3.6 – Willow County Water District ................................................................................... 3-61
4: Multiple Service Districts ................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.1 – Calpella County Water District ................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 – Hopland Public Utility District .................................................................................. 4-13
5: Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 5-1
5.1 – Consolidations ................................................................................................................ 5-1
5.2 – Annexations .................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.3 – Other ................................................................................................................................. 5-2
6: References .............................................................................................................................................. 1
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Acronyms and Abbreviations
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Ukiah Valley Special Districts .................................................................................... 1-1
Table 3.1-1: Ukiah Valley Fire District Population Estimates ..................................................... 3-1
Table 3.1-2: Median Household Income – Ukiah Valley Fire District Communities .................... 3-5
Table 3.1-3: Ukiah Valley Fire District Stations Staffing and Equipment .................................... 3-5
Table 3.1-4: Ukiah Valley Fire District Fleet Replacement Needs ............................................. 3-6
Table 3.1-5: Ukiah Valley Fire District FY 2012–13 Budget ...................................................... 3-9
Table 3.1-6: Ukiah Valley Fire District Long-Term Debt............................................................ 3-9
Table 3.1-7: Ukiah Valley Fire District Total Staffing ................................................................ 3-11
:
Table 3.2-1 Mendocino County Population and Housing – 2011............................................ 3-15
Table 3.2-2: Median Household Income Millview County Water District Communities ............. 3-16
Table 3.2-3: Millview County Water District Monthly Water Production 2008 (AF) ................. 3-19
Table 3.2-4: Millview County Water District Supply and Demand (AFY) ................................ 3-20
Table 3.2-5: Millview County Water District Budget Summary, FY 2007–2008 to FY
2011–2012 ...................................................................................................... 3-22
Table 3.3-1: Potter Valley Irrigation District Overview ............................................................. 3-27
Table 3.3-2: 2010 Census Population of Potter Valley ........................................................... 3-27
Table 3.3-3: Potter Valley Irrigation District Water Rights ....................................................... 3-32
Table 3.3-4: Potter Valley Irrigation District System Characteristics ........................................ 3-32
Table 3.3-5: Potter Valley Irrigation District Revenues and Expenditures 2007 to 2011 ......... 3-36
Table 3.4-1: Mendocino County Population and Housing—2011 ............................................. 3-41
Table 3.4-2: Median Household Income Redwood Valley County Water District
Communities ................................................................................................... 3-42
Table 3.4-3: Redwood Valley County Water District Revenues and Expenditures................... 3-46
Table 3.4-4: Redwood Valley County Water District Residential/Commercial Meter
Charges .......................................................................................................... 3-46
Table 3.4-5: Redwood Valley County Water District Residential/Commercial Usage
Charges .......................................................................................................... 3-47
Table 3.4-6: Redwood Valley County Water District Agricultural Rates................................... 3-47
Table 3.4-7: Redwood Valley County Water District Capital Improvement Expense ................ 3-48
:
Table 3.5-1 Median Household Income RRFC Communities ................................................. 3-54
Table 3.5-2: Summary of RRFC Water Supply Agreements ................................................... 3-57
Table 3.5-3: RRFC Revenues and Expenses FY 2009–10 to FY 2011–12 ............................ 3-57
Table 3.6-1: Median Household Income Willow County Water District Communities ............... 3-62
Table 3.6-2: Willow County Water District System Components ............................................. 3-66
Table 3.6-3: Willow County Water District Supply and Demand (AFY) .................................. 3-67
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Acronyms and Abbreviations
Table 3.6-4: Willow County Water District Water Rates and Connection Fees ........................ 3-68
Table 4.1-1: 2010 Population Calpella CWD ............................................................................ 4-1
Table 4.1-2: Median Household Income - Calpella CWD Communities .................................... 4-2
Table 4.1-3: Projected Supply and Demand Calpella CWD ...................................................... 4-6
Table 4.1-4: Calpella CWD FY 2011–12 Budget....................................................................... 4-8
Table 4.1-5: CCWD Actual Revenues and Expenses FY 2007/08 - FY 2009/10 .................. 4-9
Table 4.1-6: Calpella CWD Domestic Water and Sewer Rates ................................................. 4-9
Table 4.2-1: Population 2010 Census Hopland PUD .............................................................. 4-13
Table 4.2-2: Hopland PUD Summary of Revenues and Expenses FY 2008–09 to FY
2011–12 .......................................................................................................... 4-18
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1-1: Ukiah Valley Special Districts ................................................................................. 1-5
Exhibit 3.1-1: Ukiah Fire Protection District Boundary Map ....................................................... 3-3
Exhibit 3.1-2: Ukiah Valley Fire District Calls for Service 2008–2011 ....................................... 3-6
Exhibit 3.1-3: Ukiah Valley Fire District Revenue Sources FY 2010–11 .................................... 3-8
Exhibit 3.2-1: Millview County Water District Boundary Map ................................................... 3-17
Exhibit 3.2-2: Millview County Water District Production and Demand 2000–2009 (AF) ....... 3-19
Exhibit 3.3-1: Potter Valley Irrigation District Boundary Map ................................................... 3-30
Exhibit 3.3-2: Potter Valley Irrigation District Water Usage 2007–2011 .................................. 3-31
Exhibit 3.3-3: Schematic of PVID System .............................................................................. 3-34
Exhibit 3.3-4: Potter Valley Irrigation District Distribution of Revenues ................................... 3-35
Exhibit 3.4-1: Redwood Valley County Water District Boundary Map ...................................... 3-43
Exhibit 3.5-1: Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District
Boundary Map ................................................................................................. 3-55
Exhibit 3.6-1: Willow County Water District Boundary Map ..................................................... 3-63
Exhibit 3.6-2: Willow County Water District Water Production 2000–2009 ............................ 3-65
Exhibit 3.6-3: Willow County Water District Distribution of Water Sales Revenues.................. 3-68
Exhibit 4.1-1: Calpella County Water District Boundary Map ..................................................... 4-3
Exhibit 4.1-2: Water Demand 2000–2006 .............................................................................. 4-5
Exhibit 4.1-3: Calpella CWD Revenue Sources ........................................................................ 4-8
Exhibit 4.2-1: Hopland Public Utility District Boundary Map .................................................... 4-15
Exhibit 4.2-2: Hopland PUD Distribution of Revenues FY 2008–09 to FY 2011–12 ............... 4-17
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADWF average dry weather flow
AF acre-feet
AFY acre-feet per year
ALS advanced life support
AWT Advanced Wastewater Treatment
BLS basic life support
CAD Computer Aided Dispatching
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry fire department
Cal-ISO California Independent System Operator
CALTRANS California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCWD Calpella County Water District
CDOF California Department of Finance
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
cfs cubic feet per second
CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board
CKH Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
CWD County Water District
EMD Emergency Medical Dispatching
EMS emergency medical services
ESSUs equivalent sewer service units
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FOG Fats, Oils, and Grease
FY fiscal year
gpd gallons per day
gpm gallons per minute
HazMat hazardous materials
HCF hundred cubic feet
HPUD Hopland Public Utility District
HWY Highway
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Acronyms and Abbreviations
ISO Insurance Services Office
JPA Joint Powers Agreement
JPIA Joint Powers Insurance Authority
LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission
MCIWPC Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission
MCWA Mendocino County Water Agency
MCWD Millview County Water District
MG million gallons
mgd million gallons per day
MSR Municipal Service Review
NCIRWMP North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OASA Out of Area Service Agreement
POU publicly owned utility
PPD pounds per person per day
PUD public utility district
PVID Potter Valley Irrigation District
PVP Potter Valley Project
RRFC Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District
RVCWD Redwood Valley County Water District
RRWA Russian River Watershed Association
RTU remote telemetry unit
SB Senate Bill
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Analysis
SCWA Sonoma County Water Agency
SDRMA Special District Risk Management Authority
sfc surface
SOI Sphere(s) of Influence
TTS total suspended solids
UAF unaccounted for water
UFD Ukiah Fire Department
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
UVA Ukiah Valley Area
UVAP Ukiah Valley Area Plan
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Acronyms and Abbreviations
UVFD Ukiah Valley Fire District
UVSD Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
WCWD Willow County Water District
WTP Water treatment plant
WWTP wastewater treatment plant
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Introduction
1:
INTRODUCTION
Eight districts are the subject of this Municipal Service Review (MSR), whose scope comprises the
services provided within the current boundaries of each district. The only exception is the Ukiah
Valley Sanitation District (UVSD), which has applied to LAFCO to update its sphere of influence. Per
the Mendocino LAFCo decision of May 6, 2013, the UVSD MSR has been removed from this document
to be presented individually. Table 1-1 shows the six single-service districts and two multi-service
districts that are included in this review. Exhibit 1-1 shows boundaries of each of the districts.
Table 1-1: Ukiah Valley Special Districts
DISTRICT SERVICES MORATORIUM
Ukiah Valley Fire Protection District (UVFD) Fire
Millview County Water District (MCWD) Water X
Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) Water X
Redwood Valley County Water District (RVCWD) Water X
Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Water
Improvement District (RRFC)
Willow County Water District (WCWD) Water
Calpella County Water District (CCWD) Water and
X
Sewer
Hopland Public Utility District (HPUD) Water and
Sewer
Four agencies that will be part of this review are under a moratorium for extending new service. A
moratorium can be the result of a number of factors, including uncertain supply or misuse of
permitted water rights. A listing of those districts is shown in Table 1-1.
Role and Responsibility of LAFCO
The fundamental role of a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is to implement the
Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg (CKH) Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code
Section 56000, et seq.), which provides for the most logical, efficient, and appropriate formation
of local municipalities, service areas, and special districts. The CKH requires all LAFCOs, including
LAFCO of Mendocino County, to conduct a Municipal Service Review (MSR) prior to updating the
sphere of influence (SOI) of the various cities and special districts in the County (Government Code
Section 56430). CKH requires an MSR and SOI update every 5 years.
Purpose of the Municipal Service Review
The focus of this MSR is to provide LAFCO of Mendocino County with all the necessary and relevant
information related to services provided by the Ukiah Valley special districts. This MSR will provide
Mendocino LAFCO with an informational document and make determinations for each of the seven
elements prescribed by CKH; it evaluates the structure and operation of each district; and it
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Introduction
discusses possible areas for improvement, coordination, or changes to the SOI. The purpose of the
MSR is to collect data in order to provide a comprehensive analysis of service provision by the Ukiah
Valley special districts (Table 1-1). Key sources for this study included agency-specific information
gathered through a questionnaire, strategic plans, general plans, websites, financial reports,
agency audits, research, personal communication, and the Municipal Service Review Guidelines
published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.
The report contains one section for each of the following seven elements as prescribed by CKH:
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area. This section reviews projected
growth within the existing service boundaries of the district and analyzes the district’s plans
to accommodate future growth.
The Location and Characteristics of any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
Within or Contiguous to the Sphere of Influence. This section was added by Senate Bill
(SB) 244, which became effective in January 2012. A disadvantaged community is defined as
having a median household income of 80 percent or less of the statewide median income.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities and Adequacy of Public Services
Including Infrastructure Needs or Deficiencies. This section discusses the services
provided, including their quality; the ability of the district to provide those services.; It will
include a discussion of capital improvement projects currently underway and projects
planned for the future where applicable.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services. This section reviews the district’s fiscal
data and rate structure to determine viability and ability to meet service demands. It also
addresses funding for capital improvement projects.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities. This section examines efficiencies in
service delivery that could include sharing facilities with other agencies to reduce costs by
avoiding duplication.
Accountability for Community Service Needs, including Government Structure and
Operational Efficiencies. This section examines the district’s current government structure,
and considers the overall managerial practices. It also examines how well the each district
makes its processes transparent to the public and invites and encourages public
participation.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy.
This section includes a discussion of any Mendocino LAFCO policies that may affect the
ability of each district to provide efficient services.
Uses of the Municipal Service Review
The MSR is used to shed light on the operations of a local agency; to identify agencies unable to
perform their mandated services; or to identify ways to provide more effective, efficient services.
Government Code Section 56375 allows LAFCO to take action on recommendations found in the
MSR, such as initiating studies for changes of organization, updating the SOI, or initiating a change
of organization.
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Introduction
Studies in anticipation of a change of organization are useful to identify potential issues that may
arise during the process. Issues can range from legal barriers to fiscal constraints to concerns of
residents and landowners. A study would allow more focused analysis and the opportunity to
resolve issues or options before beginning the process.
The MSR also provides the necessary information to help LAFCO make decisions on the proposed SOI
update, and to determine if the agency has the capability to serve a larger area. The MSR
discusses the financial condition of each district, source of revenues, and projected expenses. It
also includes a discussion of the projected infrastructure needs that would allow for expansion of
those services. However, it does not address California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
requirements for the SOI update. That requires a separate analysis.
Alternately, the MSR can recommend changes of organization: consolidation, dissolution, merger,
establishment of a subsidiary district, or the creation of a new agency that typically involves a
consolidation of agencies. Those changes of organization may also require an environmental
review, a property tax sharing agreement, and an election.
Sphere of Influence
The SOI is defined as “a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service areas of a local
agency” (Government Code 56076). The SOI represents one of the most important tools LAFCO
uses to “carry out its purposes and responsibilities for planning and shaping the logical and orderly
development and coordination of local government agencies” (Government Code Section 56425).
CKH requires LAFCO to adopt an SOI for each city and special district in the County. The SOI serves
much the same function for LAFCO as general plans serve for cities and counties: it guides the
Commission in its consideration of annexations and other forms of reorganization. The sphere
represents the logical extent of the agency’s boundary in the next 5 to 10 years. However, since
LAFCO is required to update and review the sphere every 5 years, the sphere in all practicality has
a 5-year planning horizon. When adopting the SOI, the Commission must make the following
determinations:
Present and planned land uses in the area. This consists of a review of current and
planned land uses, including agricultural and open-space, based on planning documents.
Present and probable need for public facilities and services. This includes a review of the
services available in the area and the need for additional services.
Present capacity of public facilities. This section includes an analysis of the capacity of
public facilities and the adequacy of public services that the district provides or is
authorized to provide.
Social or economic communities of interest. This section discusses the existence of any
social or economic communities of interest in the area if the Commission determines that
they are relevant to the district. These are areas that may be affected by services provided
by the district or may be receiving services in the future.
Present and probable need for services to disadvantaged communities. Beginning July 1,
2012 the commission must also consider services to disadvantaged communities which are
defined as populated areas within the SOI whose median household income is less than or
equal to 80 percent of the statewide median income.
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Introduction
A SOI may be amended or updated. An amendment is a relatively limited change to the SOI to
accommodate a specific project. Amendments can add or remove territory, address a change in
provision of services by an agency, or revise a plan for services when it becomes impractical.
An update is a comprehensive review of the SOI that includes the map and relevant portions of one
or more MSRs. The review allows for the identification of areas that are likely to receive services
and to exclude those territories that are not or will not be served in the SOI.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., also known as the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), requires public agencies to evaluate the potential environmental effects of their
actions. This MSR is exempt from CEQA under a Class 6 categorical exemption. CEQA Guidelines
Section 15306 states that “Class 6 consists of basic data collection, research, experimental
management, and resource evaluation activities that do not result in a serious or major disturbance
to an environmental resource.”
Establishment of the SOI is not exempt. The lead agency, most likely LAFCO, may prepare an
Initial Study to determine whether a Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or a
full Environmental Impact Report is needed to satisfy CEQA requirements.
EEL RIVER
E
CR
240
e
l
R
ive
r
R
d
T
o
m
ki
R
d
d
R
£¤
101 W
est
E School W
E a
st
a
R
d
y
Potter
Valley Rd
ST
20
OOrrrr SSpprriinnggss RRdd
Lake Mendocino
ST
20
Orr Springs
Rd
Low Gap
Rd
Vichy
Springs
Rd
Blue
Lakes
Rd
ST
20
E P S erkins St
S
ta
te James St
S t ST
222
M
O
ld
R
iv
e
ill
Creek
Rd
Scotts
Valley
Rd
r
R
d
ST
253 Lake County
R
U
S
S
£¤ IA N
101 R IV
Mcnab Ranch Rd E R
Crawford
Ranch R
£¤
d
101
ST
175
Rivers
Highways
Local Traffic
Calpella Water District
£¤
Old
Toll Rd
101
Calpella Water District (Out of District Service Agreement)
Hopland PUD
Redwood Valley Water District
d
R
e
Potter Valley Irrigation District us
o
H
n
Redwood Valley Water ai
nt
u
Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvem STST 11e22n88t District M o
Ukiah Valley Fire District C
om
m
W
U
M
M
k
i
e
i
l
l
i
n
l
l
a
v
o
d
h
i
w
o
e
S
w
c
a
C
in
n
o
C
o
i
u
t
o
a
C
n
u
t
t
o
i
n
y
o
u
t
n
y
W
n
D
t
W
y
a
i
t
s
a
B
e
t
t
r
o
r
e
i
u
D
r
c t
n
D
is
d
t
i
a
s
ri
t
r
c
r
y
t
ict
ST
128
isky
Station
R
d Redwood
Hwy
Sonoma County
Created September, 2012 - Exhibit1_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, Esri
Exhibit 1.1
£
0 4 Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Miles
E Mulberg & Associates LAFCO of Mendocino Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
2:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Role and Responsibility of LAFCO
The fundamental role of a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is to implement the
Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg (CKH) Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code
Section 56000, et seq.), thereby providing for the logical, efficient, and most appropriate
formation of local municipalities, service areas, and special districts. The CKH requires all LAFCOs,
including LAFCO of Mendocino County, to conduct a Municipal Service Review (MSR) prior to
updating the SOI of the various cities and special districts in the County (Government Code Section
56430). CKH requires an MSR and SOI update every 5 years. The focus of this MSR is to provide
LAFCO of Mendocino County with all necessary and relevant information related to services
provided by the Ukiah Valley special districts. In all, eight districts will be reviewed. Table 1-1
lists six single-service districts and two multiple-service districts.
Exhibit 1-1 shows the current boundaries of each of the districts, plus the UVSD. The scope of this
review will be the services provided within the current boundaries of each of the districts to allow
LAFCO to set a coterminous sphere.
This MSR will provide Mendocino LAFCO with an informational document and make determinations
in each of the seven areas prescribed by CKH. This MSR evaluates the structure and operation of
the each of the districts and discusses possible areas for improvement and coordination. The
report contains one section for each of the following as prescribed by CKH:
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The Location and Characteristics of any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities Within
or Contiguous to the Sphere of Influence
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities and Adequacy of Public Services Including
Infrastructure Needs or Deficiencies
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
Accountability for Community Service Needs, Including Government Structure and
Operational Efficiencies
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
The MSR is used to shed light on the operations of a local agency, identify agencies unable to
perform their mandated services, or identify ways to provide more effective, efficient services.
Government Code Section 56375 allows LAFCO to take action on recommendations found in the
MSR, such as initiating studies for changes of organization, updating the SOI, or initiating a change
in organization.
2-1
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Ukiah Valley Fire District
The Ukiah Valley Fire District (UVFD) provides fire protection services to approximately 80 square
miles to the north, east, and south outside the city limits (Exhibit 3.1-1). It stretches from
Highway 101 at Nelson Ranch Road to the south to the Gold Gulch drainage on Highway 101 to the
north—including the southern half of Lake Mendocino—to the top of Cow Mountain to the east and
the top of Highway 253 to the west.
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The current population of 14,764 is expected to grow by an average annual rate of 1 percent to
approximately 15,945 by 2020.
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
The communities of Calpella and Redwood Valley to the north and Hopland to the south are
adjacent to district boundaries, but only Hopland meets the definition of a disadvantaged
unincorporated community. The Hopland community receives municipal services from the Hopland
Public Utility District, which provides water and sewer, and the Hopland Fire Protection District.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The UVFD provides structural, wildland fire suppression, and emergency medical services. The
UVFD operates from three fire stations (Exhibit 3.1-1). Most of the equipment is located at the
main station at 1500 South State Street. That includes four of the five engines, a utility vehicle, a
communications vehicle, and a support vehicle.
Over the last four-years, calls for service ranged from a peak of 947 in 2008 to a low of 809 in 2009.
Volunteers responded to 188 calls in 2008 or about 23 percent. Between 2008 and 2011, the
number of calls ranged from 800 to 900 per year. The UVFD has the capacity to respond to
approximately 1,000 calls per year.
Average response time in the Ukiah Valley is 4 minutes. The UVFD currently has an Insurance
Services Office (ISO) rating of 4 (on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is the highest). By comparison, the
Ukiah Fire Department received an ISO rating of 3.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The UVFD’s operating budget is just under $1 million per year. The UVFD derives most of its
revenues from property tax and a special assessment. The property tax represents 32 percent of
the total and the special assessment accounts for 64 percent. Of the total expenditures, 72
percent goes for salaries and benefits.
The long-term debt totaling $731,951 represents obligations for vehicles, equipment, land, and
workers’ compensation liability. As of fiscal year (FY) 20011/12, the UVFD owed approximately
$543,440 on those obligations.
The UVFD has another special tax, Measure B, which generates $114,000 annually for vehicle
replacement. The UVFD collects fire mitigation fees that allow the UVFD sufficient funding to
accommodate new growth.
2-2
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The UVFD works cooperatively with state and local agencies. It has automatic aid agreements with
the City of Ukiah and CAL FIRE, and a mutual aid agreement with Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire
District and the Hopland Fire Protection District. The UVFD is a sponsor of the Mendocino Fire Safe
Council.
Government Structure and Accountability
The Board of Directors consists of five members elected at large to four-year staggered terms.
They meet regularly on the second Wednesday of the month at 1500 South State Street. The UVFD
does not maintain a website; rather, it communicates with the public through noticed public
meetings.
Fire agencies are structured as paramilitary agencies. The fire chief is supported by battalion
chiefs, who in turn are supported by captains, engineers, and firefighters. District staff includes
seven full-time and 29 volunteers, sufficient to provide fire protection and basic life support
emergency medical services.
The UVFD and the City are moving toward consolidation. On August 1, 2012, the City hired the
UVFD/Hopland Chief to be Chief of the Ukiah Fire Department as well. On October 3, 2012, the
City Council approved a cooperative agreement with UVFD to drop jurisdictional boundaries of the
two fire agencies as a step toward consolidation. In addition, the UVFD and the City have moved to
assigning three firefighters to an engine—including two paid firefighters—and one volunteer to staff
the north station and the south station, leaving the central station in the city limits to respond to
ambulance calls. To help accomplish that, volunteers will now be given a stipend. On October 17,
the City moved to consolidate dispatch services with CAL FIRE so that both the UFD and the UVFD
would be dispatched from the same center effective March 2013.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
LAFCO policies for the efficient provision of services apply as the UVFD and the City of Ukiah move
toward consolidating fire protection services.
Millview County Water District
The Millview County Water District (MCWD) was formed by the Mendocino County Board of
Supervisors on November 19, 1956 under the California Water Code Section 30000. The MCWD
provides water via 1,608 total connections, of which 1,333 are residential customers, 234 are
commercial customers with 41 fire service connections, within an 8.5-square-mile service area
northeast and immediately north of the city limits. The MCWD also wheels treated water to
Calpella. The MCWD is currently under a State-imposed moratorium on new water hookups.
Exhibit 3.2-1 illustrates the MCWD boundaries and the relationship to the City of Ukiah.
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The population of the MCWD is estimated at approximately 5,156. The population and growth
study completed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan estimated a growth rate between 1 percent and
1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population
of the MCWD in 2020 is expected to be 5,568.
2-3
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the MCWD boundaries.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The MCWD receives most of its water from surface water rights. In addition, it can purchase up to
1,520 acre-feet (AF) of Lake Mendocino water. During the period from 2000 to 2009, the MCWD
was able to meet demand. The average demand from 2000 to 2008 was 1,462 AF and production
was 1,556 AF. Demand for a year with normal precipitation (2004) was 1,522 AF, which is used as
the baseline for projections to 2030.
The MCWD has sufficient supply to serve its customers through 2015. A recent cease and desist
order would reduce available supply by 785 acre-feet per year (AFY). The order is being contested;
however, if it is upheld, the MCWD would have difficulty supplying water in 2020 and beyond unless
it can purchase additional Lake Mendocino water or find another source.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The MCWD’s annual budget is approximately $1 million. As an enterprise, district revenues are
generated by fees and charges. Water sales account for nearly all the income.
In 2009, the MCWD instituted a new rate schedule that provides sufficient funding for expenses and
leaves a balance of approximately $130,000 annually. In addition to a meter charge, the MCWD
charges a fee of $3.42 for every 1,000 gallons, which goes to operation and maintenance and
capital improvements. As a result of the rate increase, the MCWD has the ability to provide
services.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The MCWD works cooperatively with other local water purveyors. The MCWD treats and wheels
water to the Calpella County Water District. The MCWD shares office space and the boardroom at
151 Laws Avenue.
Government Structure and Accountability
The MCWD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered terms.
Board members receive a stipend of $25 per meeting for a maximum of six meetings or $150 per
month. The board meets regularly on the third Tuesday of the month at 5 p.m. at Mendocino
College, Room 1060. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
The MCWD communicates with its residents through inserts in their monthly water bills. The MCWD
provides a subscription service to the agendas. The service is free but requires renewal each
calendar year. The MCWD does not maintain a website.
The MCWD currently has four employees, including the general manager, two operators of the
water treatment plant, and an administrative assistant. The staff and structure are sufficient to
provide for efficient operations of the MCWD. The MCWD has adopted a number of policies and
procedures to ensure it provides safe, potable water; tracks maintenance needs; and ensures that
potable water is not used for agricultural irrigation.
2-4
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
Expansion of the MCWD’s boundaries is dependent on lifting the moratorium. Until that happens,
establishing a coterminous sphere may be appropriate but would not affect current service
delivery.
Potter Valley Irrigation District
The Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) was formed by the Board of Supervisors in 1924 under
Section 20500 of the Water Code, which relates to irrigation districts. The purpose was to provide
irrigation water to support agriculture in Potter Valley. Potter Valley produces wine grapes, pears,
grass-fed cattle, sheep, and other agricultural products. The PVID serves 272 agricultural
customers on 6,964 acres.
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The PVID has a population of approximately 1,700, based on California Department of Finance
(CDOF) analysis of zip codes in the 2010 census. A similar analysis of 2000 census data indicated no
growth in population between 2000 and 2010. The projected population in 2020 is the same as it
was in 2010.
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the sphere of influence of the
PVID.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The PVID has three licenses (5246, 1199, 5545) with the State Water Resources Control Board that
allow it to divert up to 22,670 AFY between April 1 and November 15 of each year. As part of this
allotment, the PVID has a contract with PG&E to supply 19,000 AFY of irrigation water through
2022.
The Contract between the District and PG&E is depends on a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) hydropower production license that PG&E holds allowing the diversion of water from the
Upper Main Eel River termed the Potter Valley Project. Water from the Potter Valley Project feeds
the Potter Valley Powerhouse which supplies water to the District’s delivery canals. The Potter
Valley Project consists of Scott Dam which impounds Lake Pillsbury; Cape Horn Dam forming Van
Arsdale Reservoir, which serves as the forebay for the diversion tunnel; the fish screen and ladder
at Van Arsdale which partially mitigate the impact of the diversion; the diversion tunnel itself
which conveys water through the hill to the north end of Potter Valley; and finally the penstock
and powerhouse in Potter Valley. The District's delivery canals begin at the Potter Valley
Powerhouse. The current FERC license expires on April 14, 2022. The relicensing process is
scheduled to begin in 2017.
The total annual diversion of water through the Potter Valley Project has been reduced by up to
60% of the flows allowed prior to the last relicensing in 1983. In the past six years the total
diversion from the Eel River has, on average, been approximately 77,000 acre feet. The District
uses some of the water. The remaining water, and recharge from the District system, flows into
the East Branch of the Russian River and is stored in Lake Mendocino. The water stored in Lake
2-5
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Mendocino subsequently becomes the majority of the water supply for downstream water users,
including Redwood Valley, Calpella, Ukiah, Ukiah Valley, Hopland and northern Sonoma County
above the confluence with Dry Creek. Any further reduction of this water supply will impact the
economy of and quality of life for all of these communities. The water stored in Lake Mendocino is
also an integral part of Russian River flow releases provided to protect and enhance anadromous
fish populations. The relicensing of the Potter Valley Project will be of critical importance to
water purveyors throughout Mendocino County.
The average annual demand is 16,588 AF with a normal year supply of 22,670. In dry years, the
supply is reduced by more than 50 percent. The uncertainty in capacity has resulted in a
moratorium on new customers through 2022.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The PVID budget operates on a calendar-year basis. Revenue sources are derived primarily from
property taxes, which accounts for 70 percent of all revenues; water sales of 12.5 percent; and
standby charges of 13.5 percent. Revenues for 2011 amounted to $412,050 and expenses were
$299,230. The PVID has shown an average net income of $115,000 over the last five years. The
PVID has sufficient revenues to provide service.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The PVID works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. The PVID holds a seat on the
Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIWPC) and is active with a number of
conservation groups to maintain the quality of the Upper Main Stem Eel River Watershed.
Government Structure and Accountability
The PVID is governed by a five-member board elected at large from divisions. Board members
receive no compensation. The board meets regularly on the third Wednesday of the month at
7 p.m. at the PVID office at 10170 Main Street in Potter Valley. Board meetings are noticed
according to the Brown Act. The board has one standing committee, the Safety Committee, and
functions under a set of by-laws.
The PVID maintains a website that allows for communication with the public. It engages the public
through community events such as the Eel River Cleanup.
The PVID has four full-time and seven part-time employees who provide efficient services to the
PVID residents and customers.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
Because of the moratorium, the PVID is precluded from expanding services or seeking to expand its
SOI. The PVID is responsible for providing irrigation water to maintain production of agricultural
lands, which is consistent with LAFCO policies for preservation of agricultural land and open space.
2-6
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Redwood Valley County Water District
The Redwood Valley County Water District (RVCWD) was incorporated on January 16, 1964 under
Sections 30322 and 30323 of the Water Code. The RVCWD’s service area is roughly 15 square miles
in a valley 5 miles long by 3 miles wide. The RVCWD has a total of 1,335 connections, of which
1,135 are residential and 200 are agricultural.
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The population of the RVCWD is estimated at approximately 3,349. The population and growth
study completed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan estimated an annual growth rate between 1
percent and 1.63 percent. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated
population of the RVCWD is expected to be 3,617 in 2020.
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the RVCWD boundaries.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The annual demand is approximately 750 AF domestic and 1,450 AF for irrigation, a total of 2,200
AF. The RVCWD maintains a 68-acre-foot storage tank of untreated water from which water is
transmitted to the water treatment plant to produce domestic water. The plant has a capacity of
1.7 million gallons per day.
The RVCWD’s supply consists of a right to divert up to 4,900 AF from Lake Mendocino if flow at the
confluence of the forks of the Russian River exceeds 72,000 AF. It is estimated that water will be
available for 70 days in wet years and one or two days in dry years. As a result of the uncertain
supply, the RVCWD is under a moratorium for new domestic and irrigation connections.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The RVCWD has an annual budget of approximately $1 million. Sources of revenues are water
sales, property taxes, and interest. Water sales account for 96 percent of all operating revenues.
Revenues are split between 75 percent domestic and 25 percent irrigation.
A new rate schedule went into effect on January 1, 2010. The need for a rate increase was shown
by the net operating loss in the preceding two fiscal years. The rates include a meter charge based
on the size of the meter plus a usage charge. Domestic water customers are assessed on a five-tier
usage schedule ranging from $3.75 to $5.50 per 1,000 gallons. Agricultural customers are charged
a flat $0.69 per 1,000 gallons.
The RVCWD has a capital improvement plan with a schedule of projects to be completed each year.
In the last three years, the RVCWD allocated an average of $87,000 annually for capital
improvements.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The RVCWD works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. For instance, the RVCWD
is a member of the MCIWPC and is a partner in the assessment of the quagga/zebra mussel impacts
2-7
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
on water delivery systems. The RVCWD is also a member of the Joint Powers Insurance Authority
(JPIA) to reduce insurance costs by joining in a pool with other agencies.
Government Structure and Accountability
A five-member board elected by division to four-year staggered terms governs the RVCWD. Board
meetings are held regularly on the third Thursday of the month and are noticed according to the
Brown Act. The RVCWD is unique in its use of a sandwich board to publicize its meetings. The
RVCWD also maintains a website that is used to communicate with its residents.
The RVCWD has six employees: a general manager, one full-time and one part-time office staff,
and three field technicians. Staffing is sufficient to perform the functions of the RVCWD.
One of the key issues is the potential consolidation with the RRFC. An ad hoc committee has been
at work to address issues. The consolidation is complicated by its interaction with SCWA, which
controls water from Lake Mendocino that is critical to successful consolidation.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
Since the RVCWD is considering consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to
consolidation will apply.
Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District
The Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District
(RRFC) was formed to serve as the local sponsor for the development of Coyote Dam and Lake
Mendocino, along with the Sonoma County Water Agency. The RRFC encompasses approximately
51,000 acres from just north of the Sonoma County line to Calpella in the north.
The RRFC provides raw water for irrigation (nearly 60% of its allocation) and to municipal water
purveyors within its boundaries and place of use. The municipal service provider then treats and
distributes the water to its customers. The RRFC has contracts to provide Lake Mendocino water to
nine water agencies in the Ukiah Valley, including the City of Ukiah, three county water districts
(Millview, Calpella, and Redwood Valley), one public utility district (Hopland Public Utility
District), two mutual water companies (River Estates and Henry Station), one water company
(Rogina), and one irrigation district (East Sanel).
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The population of the RRFC is estimated at 33,300. Projected growth ranges from 1 percent to
1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population
of the RRFC is expected to be approximately 36,000 in 2020.
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the RRFC boundaries.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The RRFC is limited to a maximum of 8,000 AF of water from Lake Mendocino by water right permit
12947B. Of these, the RRFC presently has contracts for 6,600 AF. The remaining 1,400 AF, when
2-8
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
available, are considered surplus and historically have been sold to the Redwood Valley County
Water District.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The RRFC has a budget for FY 2012–13 of approximately $342,000. The RRFC receives
approximately 10 percent of its revenues from property taxes and 90 percent from water sales. In
the last 3 years, the RRFC has had some surplus water, which it sells to RVCWD. The capacity is
limited by its water right permit.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The RRFC works cooperatively with a number of other water agencies such as SCWA. The RRFC
holds a seat on the IWPC and has participated in the study with other regional agencies to assess
impacts of the quagga/zebra mussels.
Government Structure and Accountability
The RRFC is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered terms. The
board meets on the second Wednesday of the month at RRFC headquarters. The board has four
standing committees. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act. The RRFC communicates
with residents through its website and meeting notices.
The RRFC has one employee, the general manager. He is able to manage water contracts, has the
technical background to operate the RRFC, and provides technical expertise to other agencies.
The RRFC has been actively working with the Redwood Valley County Water District on a
consolidation. Both Districts have signed a Memorandum of Agreement that has expired; however,
the consolidation hinges on the ability to acquire additional water rights.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
Since the RRFC is considering consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to consolidation
apply.
Willow County Water District
The Willow County Water District (WCWD) was formed on July 20, 1950 under section 30321 of the
Water Code. The WCWD provides water service to approximately 990 residential and 60
commercial connections covering approximately 2,760 acres located immediately south of Ukiah.
The WCWD also serves 85 customers in the City on South Dora, Rose, and Yokayo Streets. The area
was annexed to the City; however, in order to maintain revenue stability, the WCWD continues to
provide service.
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The current population of the WCWD is estimated at 3,760. The unincorporated portion of the
Ukiah Valley is expected to grow at a rate of 1.00 to 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions
would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population of the WCWD is expected to be
approximately 4,200 by 2020.
2-9
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
Hopland to the south is adjacent to district boundaries and meets the definition of a disadvantaged
unincorporated community. The Hopland community receives municipal services from the Hopland
Public Utility District, which provides water and sewer, and from the Hopland Fire Protection
District.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
During a normal year such as 2004, the WCWD distributes 1,210 AF of water for domestic and
irrigation uses. Between 2000 and 2009, the average production was 1,094 AF, of which 94 percent
was for domestic uses.
The WCWD maintains a storage capacity of 1.348 million gallons in nine storage tanks strategically
located throughout the WCWD. It has surface water rights of 2,166 AF and can purchase up to 515
AF from RRFC.
Demand in 2010 was 1,301 AF and is expected to increase to 1,904 AF in 2030, assuming there are
no conservation measures in place. Total supply from all sources is estimated at 2,681 AF in a
normal year and 2,308 AF in an extended dry year. On that basis, the WCWD has sufficient
capacity to meet anticipated demand.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The WCWD budget is approximately $680,000, which is sufficient to fund domestic and irrigation
services. Water sales account for 70 percent of all revenues; of that total, approximately 81
percent is derived from residential sales, 14 percent is derived from commercial or sales to
businesses, and 5 percent comes from industrial customers.
The WCWD also receives revenue from management contracts. It currently provides staffing for
the Calpella County Water District, the Hopland Public Utility District, and the River Estates Mutual
Water Company.
The WCWD has a long-term capital improvement plan funded as “pay-go,” which means projects
are initiated as funding becomes available. The WCWD has no long-term debt obligations.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The WCWD works with other water agencies in the Ukiah Valley and maintains an emergency
intertie with the City of Ukiah. Cooperation among the water agencies is facilitated by the fact
that RRFC, Millview, Calpella, Hopland, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, and Willow all have offices
in the 151 Laws Avenue building.
Government Structure and Accountability
The WCWD is governed by a five-member board of directors elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. Directors receive a stipend of $25 per meeting. The board meets regularly on the second
Monday of the month at district headquarters. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
The WCWD does not have a website but communicates with residents by posting the agenda. The
WCWD also maintains regular office hours to answer billing questions and provide customer service.
2-10
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
The WCWD has five employees, each with well-defined responsibilities. One measure of
management efficiency is long-range planning. The WCWD has a capital improvement plan, a
disaster plan, and maintains a policy and procedure manual.
The WCWD provides staffing for Calpella CWD and Hopland PUD through management contracts.
The contracts provide for functional consolidation of the two districts with Willow CWD.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to consolidation,
should that action be of interest to Calpella CWD, Hopland PUD, and Willow CWD.
Calpella County Water District
The Calpella County Water District (CCWD) was formed in 1955 under the County Water District
Law. The CCWD provides water and sewer to the Calpella Community. The CCWD is located in the
northwest corner of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP), and it currently provides water to 140
residential and 25 commercial water connections and sewer services to approximately 103 sewer
connections in the community of Calpella and surrounding area. The CCWD serves an area of
approximately 1,297 acres. In addition, there is an area to the west that is not part of the CCWD
but where services are provided through an out-of-area service agreement to provide water for
non-agricultural uses. The area consists of 46 parcels and approximately 233 acres. The CCWD
boundaries along with the present sphere of influence are shown in Exhibit 4.1-1.
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The current population of the CCWD is estimated at 679. The unincorporated portion of the Ukiah
Valley is expected to grow at a rate of 1.00 to 1.63 percent annual. Economic conditions would
favor the lower rate, so the estimated population of the CCWD is expected to be approximately 730
by 2020.
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the CCWD boundaries.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The average normal year demand is 119 AF. The CCWD operates one well with a capacity of 40 AF
and in order to meet demand must contract with RRFC for the remainder. Because of geographical
constraints, the CCWD must contract with Millview County Water District for treatment and
transport. Because of the uncertainty in water supply, the CCWD is under a new hookup moratorium.
The CCWD serves 103 sewer connections and operates a wastewater treatment plant. The capacity of
the plant was increased to 80,000 gpd. In 2007, the average daily flow rate was estimated at 32,000
gallons. The CCWD has additional treatment capacity and can accommodate up to 1,000 residents,
which is about 300 more than the current population of the CCWD.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
Revenue sources are water sales, sewer charges, and limited amount of property taxes. Relative
proportions are property tax, 8 percent; sewer charges, 39 percent; and water sales, 53 percent.
2-11
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
The CCWD has a budget of income averaging approximately $207,000 and expenses averaging
approximately $223,000. The actuals for FY 2007–08 through FY 2009–10 also show deficits.
In 1979, the CCWD secured a revenue bond for $31,300. The bond is due in 2019. The CCWD pays
$1,000 a year to repay the bond.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The CCWD shares office space with the Willow County Water District. The CCWD has a contract
with WCWD for staff services that includes administrative services as well as operations. The
CCWD has no employees.
Government Structure and Accountability
The CCWD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered terms.
Board member receives a stipend of $40 per meeting up to $80 per month. The board meets on
second Wednesday of each month at 6 p.m. at Calpella Elementary School on Moore Street in
Calpella.
Meeting notices are posted on the front door of the CCWD Office on Laws Avenue and as required
by the Brown Act. The CCWD keeps a mailing list of interested parties who receive a notice by
mail. The CCWD does not maintain a website.
The CCWD and the Commission should consider a change in organization that could include
annexation of the Out of Area Service Agreement (OASA) area and/or consolidation with Willow
CWD.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to annexation and
consolidation, should that action be of interest to Calpella CWD and Willow CWD.
Hopland Public Utility District
The Hopland Public Utility District (HPUD), established in 1955, is located south of the Ukiah Valley
Area Plan study area. Hopland PUD originally provided water, wastewater, and fire services. The
Fire department became a separate entity in 1995. Willow CWD ran the system from 1983 to 1992
and more recently was asked by the board of directors to operate the system through a staffing
agreement.
The HPUD now provides water and sewer service to the Hopland community. There are 350 water
connections and 303 sewer connections. The HPUD had been supplying water to the Hopland Band
of the Pomo Indian Tribe and their casino. In September 2007, the California Department of Public
Health imposed a moratorium on new water hookups by the Hopland Public Utility District after
concluding the HPUD pumped 24.1 million more gallons of water from the Russian River than it was
entitled to. The moratorium was lifted in 2011 because the HPUD was able to show compliance.
2-12
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area
The population of Hopland is estimated 756 by the 2010 Census. Growth in the previous 10 years
was 10 percent or about 1 percent per year. Using the 1 percent growth rate, the population is
estimated at 830 in 2020.
Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the sphere of influence of the
HPUD.
Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The HPUD serves 350 water customers but has no water rights. The HPUD maintains two storage
tanks with a capacity of 800,000 gallons, which is approximately half the summer supply. Current
demand is 350 AFY. The HPUD contracts with RRFC for up to 400 AF of Lake Mendocino water. The
HPUD has sufficient water capacity.
The HPUD has 303 sewer connections. Average daily flow is 45,000 gpd while capacity is 90,000
gpd. The peak daily flow capacity is 220,000. The HPUD has the capacity to double its sewer
customers.
Financial Ability of Agencies to Provide Services
The HPUD’s annual budget averages $470,000. Revenues are derived primarily from sewer charges
(56 percent) and water sales (36 percent). The long-term debt obligation is $1,380,221. Annual
principal interest payments amount to $62,000 in FY 2012–13. Operating revenues exceed
operating expenses; however, net operating revenue has been less than interest expenses for long-
term debt three of the last four-years.
Status of and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The HPUD shares office space with the staff of Willow CWD as part of their staff services
agreement. The HPUD has no employees.
Government Structure and Accountability
The HPUD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered terms. They
meet on the second Thursday of each month at 6:30 p.m. at the Old Train Depot. Directors receive
a monthly stipend of $84.40, which is deducted from their water and sewer bill.
The HPUD keeps a record of the proceedings. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
The contract with Willow CWD allows the HPUD to maintain an office where staff can respond to
customers and the public.
Matters Related to Effective or Efficient Service Delivery Required by Commission Policy
The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to consolidation,
should that action be of interest to HPUD and Willow CWD.
2-13
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Executive Summary
Recommendations
Anticipated growth in the Ukiah Valley is less than 1 percent annually through 2020. The enterprise-
funded districts can adjust to growth through their ability to make rate adjustments. The Ukiah
Valley Fire District is funded by a special tax and property taxes. The UVFD has the ability to respond
to approximately 1,000 calls per year. Between 2008 and 2011, the number of calls ranged from 800
to 900 per year. With a 1 percent growth rate, it is anticipated the Ukiah Valley Fire District will be
responding to approximately 1,000 calls per year by 2020. The present level of funding for the UVFD
should accommodate the limited growth.
Consolidations. After review of the eightdistricts, there are several recommendations concerning,
consolidation, annexation, and others. A number of agencies have achieved a functional
consolidation, including (1) UVFD with the City of Ukiah Fire Department and (2) Willow CWD,
Calpella CWD, and Hopland PUD. These agencies should consider a formal consolidation through
LAFCO.
Calpella CWD. The Calpella CWD has been providing water service to an area west of US 101
through an out-of-area service agreement since 2001. Although the CCWD is under a moratorium,
the CCWD should consider an annexation of this area primarily because it has already been
providing service. Service to this area may not be considered new connections. In addition, the
CCWD may receive some additional property tax to help balance shortfall due to interest payments
on debt service. Should the Calpella CWD pursue annexation, it may have to establish two zones
of services. One zone would provide water and sewer, while the other zone would provide water
only.
Hopland PUD. A review of the financial statements for Hopland PUD shows that although the
HPUD’s revenues exceed expenses, the interest payments on debt service have exceeded net
income in two of the last three years. One solution would be to perform a rate study and adopt a
schedule that provides sufficient revenue to cover debt service.
Websites. Of the eight districts included in this municipal service review, only three districts—
Redwood Valley, RRFC, and PVID—have websites. Websites are an inexpensive way to
communicate with residents and other agencies. Websites are recognized as a way to notice a
public meeting. The other five districts—UVFD, WCWD, MCWD, CCWD, and HPUD—do not. These
districts should establish websites to improve exchanges of information.
2-14
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
3:
SINGLE SERVICE DISTRICTS
3.1 – Ukiah Valley Fire District
District Profile
The Ukiah Valley Fire District (UVFD) provides fire protection services to approximately 80 square
miles to the north, east, and south outside the city limits. As shown in Exhibit 3.1-1, it stretches
from the Highway 101 at Nelson Ranch Road to the south; to the Gold Gulch drainage on Highway
101 to the North, including the southern half of Lake Mendocino; to the top of Cow Mountain to the
east; and the top of Highway 253 to the west.
The UVFD provides structural, wildland fire suppression, and emergency medical services. UVFD
staff are trained to provide emergency medical service at the Basic Life Support (BLS) level and are
the first responders to these types of calls. Two private ambulance companies, Ukiah Ambulance
Service and Vari Health Ambulance Service, provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) and transport to
the hospital. The UVFD reviews all applications for new commercial construction, multi-unit
housing, occupancy changes, or tenant changes that are within its service area and require a
building permit.
3.1.1 – Growth and Population Projections
The UVFD boundaries are contained within three census tracts whose population in the 2010 census
is estimated at 15,443. Those census tracts also include the community of Calpella, which is not in
the UVFD and has a population of 679. Excluding Calpella, an upper limit for the population is
14,769. Table 3.1-1 shows the population estimates of the three census tracts in comparison to the
population of the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County. The table indicates the population of the
UVFD is comparable to the City of Ukiah.
Table 3.1-1: Ukiah Valley Fire District Population Estimates
Area 2010 Population
Census Tract 109 4,863
Census Tract 113 6,340
Census Tract 117 4,240
Less Calpella 679
Estimated District Total 14,764
City of Ukiah 15,628
Mendocino County 87,487
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
Another population estimate can be derived from a study undertaken by the City of Ukiah to
evaluate fire service alternatives. The study assessed the advantages and disadvantages of a
consolidation of the Ukiah Fire Department and the Ukiah Valley Fire Protection District. That
3-1
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
study, completed in 2012, estimated population of the UVFD as 13,000. As a result, the population
of the UVFD can be estimated between 13,000 and 15,000.
The population of the UVFD was also studied as a part of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). In a
review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population between 2005 and 2020 was
projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year, but this may be optimistic, since the
analysis was completed before the economic downturn. The same study shows an average
1 percent annual growth rate between 1990 and 2005. Using the more conservative historic growth
rate the population for 2020 would grow to 13,650. With the higher population and the higher
growth rate, the population in 2020 may be expected to reach 16,700.
However, given economic conditions and the historic slow growth rate in the Ukiah Valley, the
16,700 figure can be viewed as an upper bound. Perhaps the best estimate of growth would be 1
percent annual growth rate on the census population of 14,764, so that in 2020, the population of
the UVFD would likely grow to 15,945.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.1.1 The current population of 14,764 is expected to grow by an average annual rate of 1
percent to approximately 15,945 by 2020.
3.1.2 – Disadvantaged Communities
In 2011, the legislature passed SB 244, which was signed into law and became effective on January
1, 2012. The new law added a seventh area to evaluate in the MSR. SB 244 requires identification
of disadvantaged unincorporated communities that lie within the UVFD’s SOI or proposed SOI.
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within a city’s sphere of influence. An
unincorporated island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is
surrounded or substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county
boundary or the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community means a geographically
isolated community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities, but three communities just outside the
district boundaries that should be evaluated are Hopland to the south and Calpella and Redwood
Valley to the north. Both areas are served by fire protection districts, the Hopland Fire Protection
UVFD and the Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District.
Table 3.1-2 shows the median household income of each area compared to the statewide median
household income, based on the 2010 census. The data show that the median income for Calpella
and Redwood Valley exceed the 80-percent threshold and should not be considered disadvantaged
unincorporated communities. The Hopland community, however, meets the test. Despite the
designation, the Hopland community does receive essential municipal services from special
districts. The Hopland Public Utilities District provides water and sewer and the Hopland Fire
Protection Department provides fire suppression.
3-2
d
R
st
e
W E School Way
Uva
Dr
E
as
t
R
d
R d
ST
20
a
ell
p
al
C
e
d
Gold Gulch
R
E
a st
si
d
g
e
R d
d Ri
e
k
a
L
Lake Mendocino
St
e
at
St
N
Orr Springs
Rd
H e
B
n
e
s
n
le y
R d
C ree¨k Rd C
L
A
a
L
ke
F
M
IR
en
E
docino Dr Rafello Dr
Masonite Industrial Rd Deerwood Dr
R
e
d
¨ Ukiah Valley Fire District e m
e
y
e
Low Gap Rd £¤
r
R
d
Vichy
Springs
Rd
101
tS
Stanley Ave
h
s
u B
N
tS
a ro
D
¨
tS e ta
E
tS
S
U
E
P
k
e
i
r
G
a
k
o
h
in
b
s
F
b i
i
S
r
S
t
e
t
Depa
rD
ro n
r
a
M
t
k a O
m e
Vi
n
c
t
hy
Springs
Rd
W atso
n
R d
Bartolomei Rd
S Hastings Ave ST 222 ¨ Ukiah Valley Fire District
Ukiah Valley Fire District MM
¨ iillll
CCrreeeekk
RR
Gielow Ln Twining
Rd
dd
Plant Rd O
dl
R
vi
e
Ruddick Cunningham Rd
d
R r
Robinson Creek Rd
S
ST
253
cott
C ree
k
R
d
£¤
101
Eastside
R
ST d
253
Lakeside Dr Mcnab Ranch Rd
Valley
View Rd
Ukiah Valley Fire District
Ukiah City Boundary
¨
Fire Stations Crawford
Ranch
Rd
Created August, 2012 (Updated October,2012) - Exhibit3_1_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, Esri
£
Exhibit 3.1.1
0 4
Ukiah Fire Protection District Boundary Map
Miles
E Mulberg & Associates Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
Table 3.1-2: Median Household Income – Ukiah Valley Fire District Communities
PERCENT OF MEDIAN
CALIFORNIA
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD HOUSEHOLD INCOME
LOCATION CENSUS TRACT INCOME OF $57,708
Calpella 109 $53,725 93
Redwood Valley 108.01 $53,563 93
Hopland 118 $44,700 77
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.2.1 The communities of Calpella and Redwood Valley to the north and Hopland to the south
are adjacent to district boundaries. Of these, only Hopland meets the definition of a
disadvantaged unincorporated community. The Hopland community receives municipal
services from the Hopland Public Utility District, which provides water and sewer, and
from the Hopland Fire Protection District providing fire suppression.
3.1.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The UVFD operates from three stations. The station at 1500 South State Street is its main station.
A second station to serve the northern portion of the UVFD is located at 1800 North State Street.
Its new station on 1301 Talmage Road is the Talmage Volunteer Fire Station (Exhibit 3.1-1).
The UVFD’s emergency fleet consists of 11 vehicles: three Type 1 (structural) fire engines, two
Type 3 (wildland) fire pumpers, one multi-purpose squad vehicle, one wildland patrol vehicle,
one incident support unit, one water tender, and two utility vehicles. The UVFD facilities,
allocation of personnel, and equipment are shown in Table 3.1-3.
Table 3.1-3: Ukiah Valley Fire District Stations Staffing and Equipment
STATION LOCATION STAFFING PERSONNEL APPARATUS
Station 1 (South Station) Staffed 24/7 Battalion Chief or Unit 6400. Utility 6440
1500 South State Street 365 days/year Captain Support 6456
Ukiah, CA 95482 Volunteers Engine 6460, Engine 6472
Engine 6483, Engine 6481
Communication 11
MCI/USAR 64
Station 2 (North Station) Staffed 24/7 Captain Engine 6485
1800 North State Street 365 days/year Engineer Squad 6431
Ukiah, CA 95482 Volunteers
Station 3 (Central Station) Volunteers Water Tender 6490
1301 Talmage Road Patrol 6468
Ukiah, CA 95482
Source: Bartlett, 2012.
3-5
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
Several pieces of equipment are in need of replacement. Table 3.1-4 shows the need to replace
three engines and a patrol mini pumper.
Table 3.1-4: Ukiah Valley Fire District Fleet Replacement Needs
APPARATUS AGE (YEARS)
Patrol Mini Pumper 22
Engine – Type III Wildland 32
Engine - Type I 17
Engine – Type I/II 16
Source: Citygate, 2012.
Emergency calls for service are dispatched via radio from CAL FIRE’s Emergency Command Center
located on US 101 at the top of the Ridgewood Grade. Calls for service for the period 2008–2011
are shown in Exhibit 3.1-2. As shown, calls for service have ranged from 809 to 947, with a steady
increase over the last three years. In 2008, volunteers were alerted for 188 calls out of the 809
handled by UVFD.
Exhibit 3.1-2: Ukiah Valley Fire District Calls for Service 2008–2011
Source: Grebil, 2012.
In 2011, UVFD responded to 877 calls for service up from 864 calls in 2010. Of these, an average of
79 percent were for non-fire incidents and volunteers responded to 21 percent.
Average response time to a fire or medical emergency in the Ukiah Valley Area Plan area is
approximately 4 minutes. The UVFD currently has an Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of 4 (on
a scale of 1 to 10,with 1 being the best). In comparison, the ISO rating for the Ukiah Fire
Department is 3.
3-6
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
Emergency Medical Dispatching (EMD) provides a tiered emergency medical response, based on
national standards, and pre-arrival instructions to the 911 caller. In 2011, this tiered response
reduced UVFD’s medical responses by approximately 120. A non-emergency ambulance handled
those calls alone.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.3.1 The UVFD provides structural, wildland fire suppression services, and emergency
medical services.
3.1.3.2 The UVFD operates from three fire stations staffed by full-time, volunteers, and part-
time staff.
3.1.3.3 Most of the equipment is located at the main station at 1500 South State Street.
Equipment includes four of the five engines, a utility vehicle, a communications vehicle
and a support vehicle.
3.1.3.4 Over the last four-years, calls for service ranged from a peak of 947 in 2008 to a low of
809 in 2009. Volunteers responded to 188 calls in 2008 or about 23 percent. Between
2008 and 2011, the number of calls ranged from 800 to 900 per year. The UVFD has the
capacity to respond to approximately 1,000 calls per year.
3.1.3.5 Average response times in the Ukiah Valley are 4 minutes. The UVFD currently has an
Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of 4 (on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the best).
In comparison, the ISO rating for the Ukiah Fire Department is 3.
3.1.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Services
The UVFD is funded primarily by property taxes and a special assessment. A special fire tax passed
by voters on March 4, 1998 replaced 95 percent of the Benefit of Assessment that was nullified by
the passage of Proposition 218. This special fire tax is assigned a variable unit value of $50 per
“unit.” For example, a single-family household within the UVFD is assigned two units of value for
an annual tax of $100.
On November 4, 2003, UVFD voters passed Measure B, a special tax for the specific purpose of
replacing fire suppression vehicles, emergency equipment, personnel safety equipment, and the
provision of training. The tax funds approximately $114,000 annually and is assigned a variable
unit value of $10 per unit. To date, the Measure B Fund has allowed for the replacement of seven
of the UVFD’s eleven emergency response vehicles, radio communications equipment, fire hose,
self-contained breathing apparatus, and other firefighting equipment.
Exhibit 3.1-3 shows revenues for FY 2010-11, which are fairly representative of the split between
property tax and the special assessment. The exhibit shows that the special assessment accounts
for nearly two-thirds of the revenue and property taxes account for approximately one-third.
3-7
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
Exhibit 3.1-3: Ukiah Valley Fire District Revenue Sources FY 2010–11
Source: Citygate, 2012.
The UVFD relies on Fire Protection Mitigation Fees authorized by County Ordinance No. 4175 as a
funding mechanism for capital facilities and equipment needed to accommodate new growth. The
UVFD assesses a fee of $0.39 per square foot of new development. At present, the mitigation
fees are sufficient for infrastructure needs of new areas. Exhibit 3.1-3 shows mitigation fees
account for approximately 1 percent of UVFD revenues.
The annual budget is approximately $1 million. Table 3.1-5 summarizes budgeted revenues and
expenditures for FY 2012–13. The table also shows the percent of total revenues and expenses for
each account. Revenues are split between property tax (32 percent) and special tax (64 percent).
Mitigation fees to accommodate growth are approximately 1.5 percent. On the expenditure side,
salaries and benefits account for 72 percent.
3-8
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
Table 3.1-5: Ukiah Valley Fire District FY 2012–13 Budget
PERCENT
TOTAL PERCENT TOTAL
ACCOUNT REVENUES REVENUES ACCOUNT EXPENSES EXPENSES
Secured and $278,200 31.2% Salaries and $640,00 72.0%
Unsecured Property Benefits
Tax
572,850 64.3% Services and 199,900 22.5%
Special Tax Supplies
Fire Protection 12,900 1.4% Other Charges 48,100 5.4%
Mitigation Fees
Other revenues 22,400 2.5% Fixed Assets 1,000 0.1%
Miscellaneous Fees 5,000 0.6%
Total Revenues $891,350
Total Revenues less $889,000 Total Expenses $889,000
Reserves
Source: Bartlett, 2012b.
Table 3.1-6 shows long-term debt obligations of the UVFD ending FY 2009–10. The UVFD has
borrowed to purchase equipment and vehicles. In addition, the UVFD has borrowed to meet its
Workers’ Compensation liability. The outstanding debt is approximately 57 percent of one year’s
revenues.
Table 3.1-6: Ukiah Valley Fire District Long-Term Debt
YEAR ENDING OUTSTANDING
PURPOSE ISSUED MATURITY AMOUNT FY2011/12
Fire Protection 2010 2020 $200,000 $204,305
Workers’ Compensation 2003 2013 $26,951 $11,311
Liability
Real Estate Purchase 2008 2018 $200,000 $156,810
Vehicle Purchase 2005 2015 $265,000 $131,014
Total $731,951 $503,440
Source: State Controller’s Report, 2011, Bartlett,2013.
More recently, instead of borrowing for equipment purchases, the UVFD leases new equipment.
The cost of leasing is approximately $67,500 annually.
3-9
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.4.1 The UVFD’s operating budget is just under $1 million per year. The UVFD derives most
of its revenues from property tax and a special assessment. The property tax
represents 32 percent of the total and the special assessment accounts for 64 percent.
Of the total expenditures, 72 percent goes for salaries and benefits.
3.1.4.2 The long-term debt totals $731,951 and represents obligations for vehicles, equipment,
land, and Workers’ Compensation liability. As of FY 2011/12, the UVFD owed
approximately $543,440 on those obligations.
3.1.4.3 The UVFD has another special tax, Measure B, which generates $114,000 annually for
vehicle replacement.
3.1.4.4 The UVFD collects fire mitigation fees that allow the UVFD sufficient funding to
accommodate new growth.
3.1.5 – Status and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The UVFD can draw upon the emergency resources of other fire departments located in the area
on the basis of automatic and mutual aid agreements. The UVFD is a participant in the
statewide fire and rescue mutual aid system and can call upon statewide assistance if
needed. UVFD has automatic aid agreements with the City of Ukiah Fire Department and the CAL
FIRE. It has a mutual aid agreement with the Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire District and the Hopland
Fire Protection District. The UVFD also receives dispatch services via radio from CAL FIRE’s
Emergency Command Center.
The UVFD also supports the Redwood Empire Hazardous Incident Team, which responds to calls
involving hazardous materials spills. The team is a cooperative effort of County fire agencies and
the Mendocino County Division of Environmental Health, which oversees the team.
The UVFD is one of the sponsors of the Mendocino Fire Safe Council. The Mendocino County Fire Safe
Council, founded in 2004, assists by (1) educating residents about the dangers of wildfire and how
they can save their lives and property when one occurs; (2) encouraging mapping, evacuation route
planning, road sign installation, water supply development, and other projects in rural areas to
prepare for wildfire situations; and (3) obtaining grant funding to help residents make the
necessary changes.
The UVFD has worked with the City on the Ad Hoc Fire Integration Study Committee. The
Committee consists of 10 members appointed by the Ukiah City Council and the UVFD’s Board of
Directors to evaluate opportunities to bring greater efficiencies to the fire service in the Ukiah
area. The Committee met regularly between October 2007 and January 2008. During April of
2012, the committee was reduced to two members from the UVFD board and two from the City
Council. On August 1, 2012, the City Council approved the hiring of Chief Bartlett as Chief of the
Ukiah Fire Department. The City and UVFD are working to consolidate dispatching services, which
should become effective in March 2013.
3-10
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.5.1 The UVFD works cooperatively with state and local agencies. It has automatic aid
agreements with the City of Ukiah and CAL FIRE. It has a mutual aid agreement with
Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire District and the Hopland Fire Protection District.
3.1.5.2 The UVFD is a sponsor of the Mendocino Fire Safe Council.
3.1.6 – Government Structure and Accountability
The Board of Directors consists of five members elected at large to four-year staggered terms. The
board meets on the second Wednesday of each month at 7 p.m. at 1500 South State Street.
Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act and the public is welcomed. The UVFD does not
maintain a website and communicates with the public by noticing its public meetings.
The UVFD is a combination of a full-time and volunteer department. The structure of the
organization is typical of many fire departments and appears to be appropriate for the type of
department. Table 3.1-7 shows staffing and status of the UVFD personnel.
There are seven paid career staff: a fire chief, three fire captains, and three fire apparatus
engineers. Career staff provide support to the volunteers by managing day-to-day operations of
the UVFD in such areas as administration, prevention, training, and equipment maintenance.
In addition, the UVFD employs an average of 29 volunteers and part-time staff who support the
career staff in times of emergency. Volunteers attend training every Thursday evening and
participate in public education events. UVFD volunteers are alerted of emergency incidents by
a radio pager and either respond directly to the scene or stop at a fire station to staff
additional emergency vehicles.
Table 3.1-7: Ukiah Valley Fire District Total Staffing
POSITION NUMBER STATUS
Chief 1 paid
Battalion Chief 2 1 paid, 1 volunteer
Captains 4 3 paid, 1 part-time
Engineers 6 2 paid, 4 volunteer
Firefighters 20 volunteer
Support Personnel 3 volunteer
Total 36 7 paid, 29 volunteer/part-time
Source: Bartlett, 2012.
One of the main governance issues is consolidation of the Ukiah Fire Department and the UVFD. In
2007, the Ad Hoc Fire Integration Study Committee was formed to look at ways to provide more
efficient services. The Committee discussed merging volunteer programs, merging the vehicle
fleet, merging fire inspection programs, training, and eliminating duplication of effort. One of the
3-11
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
issues raised was allowing the UVFD to maintain service to areas detached and annexed to the City
so the UVFD could retain its tax revenues and the possibility of consolidation.
In December 2011, the City Council directed staff to hire a consultant, Citygate, to study
consolidation options with the UVFD. In February 2012, Citygate presented its findings to the City
Council that concluded that consolidation would improve service but would not provide any cost
savings. Some of the hurdles include the salary differential between City fire personnel and UVFD
personnel, and the substantial apparatus replacement needs of both agencies.
The City Fire Department and the UVFD continued discussions on consolidation. On August 1, 2012,
the City hired the UVFD/Hopland Chief to be Chief of the Ukiah Fire Department as well. On
October 3, 2012, the City Council approved a cooperative agreement with UVFD to drop
jurisdictional boundaries of the two fire agencies as a step toward consolidation. In addition, the
UVFD and the City assigned three firefighters to an engine, which included two paid firefighters
and one volunteer, to staff the north station and the south station, leaving the central station in
the city limits to respond to ambulance calls. To accomplish that, volunteers will now be given a
stipend. On October 17, the City moved to consolidate dispatch services with CAL FIRE so that
both the UFD and the UVFD will be dispatched from the same center effective March 2013.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.6.1 The Board of Directors consists of five members elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. They meet regularly on the second Wednesday of the month at 1500 South
State Street. The UVFD does not maintain a website but communicates with the public
through noticed public meetings.
3.1.6.2 The UVFD staff includes seven full-time personnel and 29 volunteers, which is sufficient
to provide fire protection and basic life support emergency medical services.
3.1.6.3 The UVFD and the City are moving toward consolidation by dropping jurisdictional
boundaries, hiring the same fire chief, using CAL FIRE as the common dispatch center,
and providing three-person engine companies at the north end and south end of the
City.
3.1.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
Mendocino LAFCO has established policies to help meet its CKH mandates. This section identifies
local LAFCO policies that may affect delivery of services by the UVFD. One of the goals of LAFCO is
“encouraging orderly formation of local agencies and the efficient provision of services.” As the
District and the City of Ukiah move toward functional consolidation, the policies related to
efficient provision of services would apply.
Section H in Chapter IV states “LAFCO requires that all service providers must document their
ability to provide service to proposed annexations. An evaluation of an agency’s plan for services
is necessary to the proper consideration of any change of organization or reorganization, which
expands or diminishes a service provider’s responsibilities. The intent of the plan for service
evaluations is to ensure that the capacity, cost and adequacy of service within the existing district
or city are not adversely impacted by the proposed LAFCO action and that the agency can provide
all the services to the subject territory as the same level, or greater, than that presently received
by the existing agency territory” (56375(g), 56375(h), 56668, 56653). The completion of the MSR
3-12
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
for the UVFD and the City’s recently completed MSR address the requirement for a study to
consider a potential out-of-area service agreement by the UVFD or annexation.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.1.7.1 LAFCO policies for the efficient provision of services apply as the UVFD and the City of
Ukiah move toward consolidation of fire protection services.
3.1.8 – Summary of Determinations
3.1.1.1 The current population of 14,764 is expected to grow by an average annual rate of 1
percent to approximately 15,945 by 2020.
3.1.2.1 The communities of Calpella and Redwood Valley to the north and Hopland to the south
are adjacent to district boundaries. Of these, only Hopland meets the definition of a
disadvantaged unincorporated community. The Hopland community receives municipal
services from the Hopland Public Utility District, which provides water and sewer, and
from the Hopland Fire Protection District providing fire suppression.
3.1.3.1 The UVFD provides structural, wildland fire suppression services, and emergency
medical services.
3.1.3.2 The UVFD operates from three fire stations staffed by full-time, volunteers, and part-
time staff.
3.1.3.3 Most of the equipment is located at the main station at 1500 South State Street.
Equipment includes four of the five engines, a utility vehicle, a communications vehicle
and a support vehicle.
3.1.3.4 Over the last four-years, calls for service ranged from a peak of 947 in 2008 to a low of
809 in 2009. Volunteers responded to 188 calls in 2008 or about 23 percent. Between
2008 and 2011, the number of calls ranged from 800 to 900 per year. The UVFD has the
capacity to respond to approximately 1,000 calls per year.
3.1.3.5 Average response times in the Ukiah Valley are 4 minutes. The UVFD currently has an
Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of 4 (on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the best).
In comparison, the ISO rating for the Ukiah Fire Department is 3.
3.1.4.1 The UVFD’s operating budget is just under $1 million per year. The UVFD derives most
of its revenues from property tax and a special assessment. The property tax
represents 32 percent of the total and the special assessment accounts for 64 percent.
Of the total expenditures, 72 percent goes for salaries and benefits.
3.1.4.2 The long-term debt totals $731,951 and represents obligations for vehicles, equipment,
land, and Workers’ Compensation liability. As of FY 2011/12, the UVFD owed
approximately $543,440 on those obligations.
3.1.4.3 The UVFD has another special tax, Measure B, which generates $114,000 annually for
vehicle replacement.
3.1.4.4 The UVFD collects fire mitigation fees that allow the UVFD sufficient funding to
accommodate new growth.
3.1.5.1 The UVFD works cooperatively with state and local agencies. It has automatic aid
agreements with the City of Ukiah and CAL FIRE. It has a mutual aid agreement with
Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire District and the Hopland Fire Protection District.
3.1.5.2 The UVFD is a sponsor of the Mendocino Fire Safe Council.
3-13
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Ukiah Valley Fire District
3.1.6.1 The Board of Directors consists of five members elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. They meet regularly on the second Wednesday of the month at 1500 South
State Street. The UVFD does not maintain a website but communicates with the public
through noticed public meetings.
3.1.6.2 The UVFD staff includes seven full-time personnel and 29 volunteers, which is sufficient
to provide fire protection and basic life support emergency medical services.
3.1.6.3 The UVFD and the City are moving toward consolidation by dropping jurisdictional
boundaries, hiring the same fire chief, using CAL FIRE as the common dispatch center,
and providing three-person engine companies at the north end and south end of the
City.
3.1.7.1 LAFCO policies for the efficient provision of services apply as the UVFD and the City of
Ukiah move toward consolidation of fire protection services.
3-14
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
3.2 – Millview County Water District
District Profile
The Millview County Water District (MCWD) was formed by the Mendocino County Board of
Supervisors on November 19, 1956 under the California Water Code Section 30000. The MCWD
provides water to 1,608 total connections, of which 1,333 are residential customers 234 are
commercial customers and 41 fire service connections. The residential connections include 36
connections that serve several mobile home parks, apartments and single- family homes equivalent
to 738 connections. That amounts to 2071 equivalent dwelling units that receive service.
The MCWD serves an 8.5-square-mile service area northeast and immediately north of Ukiah city
limits. Exhibit 3.2-1 illustrates the MCWD boundaries and the relationship to the City of Ukiah.
The District wheels treated RRFC water to Calpella under a separate contract with the RRFC.
The District remains under the 2001 State imposed moratorium on new service connections due to a
lack of reliable source capacity.
3.2.1 – Growth and Population Projections
One method to estimate population relies on the number of residential connections multiplied by
persons per household of the unincorporated portion of the County. The method assumes all
residential connections are to single residences. Table 3.2-1 represents population and housing for
2011 from the California Department of Finance.
Table 3.2-1: Mendocino County Population and Housing – 2011
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PERSONS PER
CITY POPULATION HOUSING UNITS HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD
Fort Bragg 7,308 3,206 2,872 2.54
Point Arena 450 225 192 2.34
Ukiah 16,109 6,491 6,161 2.61
Willits 4,898 2,074 1,915 2.56
Unincorporated 59,432 28,417 23,882 2.49
County Total 88,197 40,413 35,022 2.52
Source: California Department of Finance 2011a.
Using 2.49 persons per household and 2,071 equivalent dwelling units estimates a population of
5,156.
The population of the MCWD was also studied as a part of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). In a
review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population of the unincorporated portion
between 2005 and 2020 was projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year. Since the
analysis was completed before the economic downturn, the estimate may be optimistic. The same
study shows the historic growth rate between 1990 and 2005 averages 1 percent annually. Using
3-15
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
the more conservative growth rate projects a population of 5,568 in 2020. With the higher growth
rate, the population in 2020 would be expected to reach 35,828.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.1.1 The population of the MCWD is estimated is approximately 5,156. The population and
growth study completed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan estimated a growth rate between
1 percent and 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so
the estimated population of the MCWD is expected to be 5,568 in 2020.
3.2.2 – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within the SOI. An unincorporated island community
is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is surrounded or substantially
surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county boundary or the Pacific
Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically isolated community that is
inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities, but the community of Calpella lies just
outside the district boundaries. The Calpella community is served by the Calpella County Water
District, which provides both water and sewer, and the Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire District,
which provides fire protection.
Table 3.2-2 shows the median household income compared with the statewide median household
income, based on the 2010 census. The data show that the median income for Calpella exceeds
the 80-percent threshold and should not be considered a disadvantaged unincorporated community.
Table 3.2-2: Median Household Income Millview County Water District Communities
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD PERCENT OF MEDIAN CALIFORNIA
LOCATION CENSUS TRACT INCOME HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF $57,708
Calpella 109 $53,725 93
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the MCWD
boundaries.
3.2.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The MCWD produces about 1,500 AFY from surface water rights. Exhibit 3.2-2 shows production
and demand for the period 2000 through 2009. In addition to variation caused by climatic
conditions such as drought, the exhibit shows the MCWD has had sufficient production to meet
demand. The difference between production and demand is often sold to other water purveyors,
such as the Calpella County Water District.
3-16
R d
ST
20
e
v
A
ella
la
rtn
e C
st
si d e
C
al p
a
E
Lake Mendocino
500,000
200,000
Lake
Mendocino Dr
530,000
*
Water Treatment Plant
St Booster Station 53,000 and Booster Station
6
5
0
0
0
0
,
0
0
,
0
0
0
0 0 Orr Springs
Rd
N
State
R
edem
e
y
e
Lovers Ln
r
R d
200,000
Ford Rd
Low Gap Rd
£¤
101
Vichy
Springs
Rd
Ford St
Cypress Ave
N
N
B
u
Vichy
Springs
Rd
B a rn
e
s
S
W t Clay S
s
h
t
S t E Perkins St Bartolomei Rd
W
Mil
S
l
D
o ra
S
S
t
tS
e ta
tS
S
E Gobbi St
W atso
n
R d
t
Washington Ave ST
222
O
ld
R
iver
R
d
Millview County Water District Boundary
Ukiah City Boundary
Storage Tanks ( capacity in gallons)
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit3_3_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, Esri dl
O
R
vi
e
£ d R
r
Exhibit 3.3.1
0 2
Miles Millview County Water District Boundary Map
E Mulberg & Associates
LAFCO of Mendocino
U kiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
Exhibit 3.2-2: Millview County Water District Production and Demand 2000–2009 (AF)
Source: Mendocino County Water Agency, 2010.
Excluding 2009, production averaged 1,556 AFY and demand averaged 1,462 AFY. During the
period shown, the region experienced severe drought conditions from 2007 through 2009 and well
below average precipitation in 2002. Conditions were particularly challenging in 2009, when Lake
Mendocino water levels receded to record lows and mandatory rationing, a 50-percent reduction in
water use, was instituted by the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. Water usage in 2004, a
year of near average precipitation and a year in which no extraordinary efforts to conserve water
occurred, is considered more realistic and the best available representation of current average
annual water production.
Under existing conditions, approximately 75 percent of the water produced is used for residential
purposes, while commercial uses account for approximately 15 percent of the total production, and
the remaining 10 percent is used for industrial and miscellaneous purposes.
Table 3.2-3 shows monthly water production for 2008. The pattern is typical for water use in that
more water is used in the summer, when water is used for outdoor landscaping than in winter,
when most of the water is for indoor use.
Table 3.2-3: Millview County Water District Monthly Water Production 2008 (AF)
JAN FEB MAR APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
78 74 87 106 170 186 207 209 172 147 78 70
Source: MMCWAendocino County Water Agency, 2010 Table 2-2.
Table 3.2-4 shows expected demand and supply from 2010 to 2030. The table also shows available
supply during normal years, a single dry year, and multiple dry years. The table shows the MCWD
has surface water rights of 1,522 AFY. That includes some pre-1914 rights, which are being
3-19
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
contested. In 2002, the MCWD purchased pre-1914 water rights that had been issued for a 34-acre
parcel along the West Fork of the Russian River for 15 AFY. According to an investigation by the
State Water Resources Control Board, the MCWD has changed the purpose of use from irrigation
water to domestic uses, the place of use from the 34-acre parcel to its entire service territory, and
point of diversion from the West Fork to a point below the confluence of the East and West Forks
with greater flow. As a result, diversion exceeded the 15 AFY allowable. In 2008, the diversion
was 800 AFY, about half the surface water rights shown in Table 3.2-4.
In 2006 the District negotiated an agreement with the Masonite Corporation the transfer of their
water right license to Millview for diversion of Russian River underflow. Both parties understood
that the water available under the license was subject to reduction based on recent use of 1100 –
1200 acre feet per year. In August of 2006 the SWRCB transferred the license to Millview and in
September 2006 the State Water Resources Control Board received a request to have the license
revoked. A hearing is scheduled for April 2, 2013.
On October 18, 2011, the State Water Resources Control Board issued a cease and desist order for
the unauthorized diversion of water. The order restricts the MCWD to 15 AFY between April and
September for this water right. The MCWD is likely to replace the diverted surface water by
purchasing more Lake Mendocino water from the RRFC. In the meantime, the MCWD has filed suit
to block implementation of the cease and desist order. It appears the MCWD will have the ability
to serve its present customers and still have enough supply to serve anticipated demand.
As seen in Table 3.2-4, normal year and single dry year supply is sufficient for anticipated growth
assuming the MCWD implements the SBX7 requirement of 20 percent conservation; however, the
MCWD would have difficulty meeting the anticipated demand in 2025 and beyond without
conservation programs and in extended dry years beyond 2025 even with conservation. If the cease
and desist order is upheld, the MCWD would have difficulty meeting demand in 2020 in an extended
dry period and in 2025 and beyond unless it can purchase additional Lake Mendocino water or find
another source.
Table 3.2-4: Millview County Water District Supply and Demand (AFY)
SCENARIO 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Demand (no 20X20 conservation)1 1,787 2,223 2,666 3,104 3,541
Demand (with conservation)1 1,430 1,778 2,133 2,483 2,833
2004 Production2 1,522 1,522 1,522 1,522 1,522
Normal/Single Dry Year Supply1
Lake Mendocino 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520
Surface Water Rights 1,522 1,522 1,522 1,522 1,522
Totals 3,042 3,042 3,042 3,042 3,042
Extended/Critical Dry Year Supply1
Lake Mendocino 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140
Surface Water Rights 1,525 1,525 1,525 1,525 1,525
Totals 2,665 2,665 2,665 2,665 2,665
Notes: 1 Ukiah Valley Area Plan Water Supply Assessment Table 6-1
2 Ukiah Valley Area Plan Water Supply Assessment Table 2-12
Source: MCWA 2010.
3-20
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
The MCWD also owns and operates a treatment plant capable of treating 2400 gallons per minute.
The plant is located at 2850 Redemeyer Road (Exhibit 3.2-1). It has a design capacity of 3.0 million
gallons per day (mgd). Average daily demand is 1.7 mgd, maximum daily demand is 2.7 mgd. The
plant has sufficient capacity to meet an estimated peak demand of 2.8 mgd.
The plant consists of three river intake pumps, four horizontal press filters, two clearwells, and
three high-service pumps. The plant is normally used in the summer months, due to higher
demands. The MCWD also owns and operates a well field located immediately adjacent to the
existing water treatment plant. The well field is used to provide water through the water
treatment plant and to the distribution system for a majority of the year. During the summer
higher demand period, groundwater is blended with treated surface water.
The MCWD has a storage capacity of 3.24 million gallons or approximately two days’ supply. The
MCWD also maintains two pump stations located in the Deerwood subdivision that pump water to
and from its storage facilities. The MCWD’s existing infrastructure is sufficient to meet current
demand; as additional supplies are secured, the MCWD can increase treatment plant capacity and
storage to meet demands of additional new services. However, with the moratorium, expansion is
not contemplated in the near future.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.3.1 The MCWD receives most of its water from surface water rights. In addition, it can
purchase up to 1,520 AF of Lake Mendocino water.
3.3.3.2 During the period from 2000 to 2009, the MCWD was able to meet demand. The
average demand from 2000 to 2008 was 1,462 AF and production was 1,556 AF.
Demand for a year with normal precipitation, 2004, was 1,522 AF, which is used for
projections to 2030.
3.3.3.3 The Millview County Water MCWD has sufficient supply to serve its customers through
2015. A recent cease and desist order would reduce available supply by 785 AFY. The
order is being contested, but should it be upheld, the MCWD would have difficulty
supplying water in 2020 and beyond unless it can purchase additional Lake Mendocino
water or find another source.
3.2.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Service
The MCWD as an enterprise district relies on fees and charges to produce sufficient revenues to
provide services. Table 3.2-5 summarizes the budgets for the fiscal years from FY 2007–2008 to FY
2011–2012.
3-21
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
Table 3.2-5: Millview County Water District Budget Summary, FY 2007–2008 to FY 2011–2012
ITEM FY 2007–08 FY 2008–09 FY 2009–10 FY 2010–11 FY 2011–12
Total Income $688,363.00 $772,750.00 $860,790.20 $1,043,794.84 $1,055,470.28
Total Cost of Water $486,896.18 $473,634.28 $440,054.00 $542,355.06 $543,117.23
Total Expenses $406,543.89 $496,158.82 $392,991.91 $366,873.65 $382,800.47
Net Ordinary Income ($205,077.07) ($197,043.10) $27,743.81 $134,566.13 $129,552.54
Source: Millview CWD Budgets FY2007–08 through FY2011–12.
Total income in the table refers to fees, charges, and water sales. Water sales comprise 98
percent of the total income. The cost of water is the total cost of billing customer accounts,
operating the distribution system, supply, purchased water, and water treatment. The cost of
water is not included in total expenses that relate to employee salaries and benefits, insurance
costs, utilities, professional services, and vehicle expenses.
Table 3.2-5 also shows that the MCWD was operating at a loss in FY 2007–08 and FY 2008–09. A rate
study showed that the charges for metered water were well below the cost to the District. In
January 2009, the MCWD Board of Directors approved a three-step rate increase beginning in June
of 2009. The first step raised meter charges for a standard 1-inch meter from $5.95 to $25.30.
Subsequent increases in January 2010 and January 2011 raised the rate to its present value of
$33.46. The rate increase also included a surcharge per 1,000 gallons: $1.92 for operations and
maintenance and $1.50 for capital improvements. The usage surcharge for capital improvements
goes into a capital improvement reserve account to be used as needed.
The MCWD has one outstanding debt obligation that was assumed in 2003 and is due in 2014. The
MCWD pays $59,370 per year to repay the debt.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.4.1 The MCWD’s annual budget is approximately $1 million. As an enterprise district,
revenues are generated by fees and charges. Water sales account for nearly all the
income.
3.3.4.2 In 2009, the MCWD instituted a new rate schedule that provided sufficient funding for
expenses and leaves a balance of approximately $130,000 annually. In addition to a
meter charge, the MCWD charges a fee of $3.42 for every 1,000 gallons, which goes for
operation and maintenance and capital improvements. As a result of the rate increase,
the MCWD has the ability to provide services.
3.2.5 – Status and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The MCWD works cooperatively with other local agencies. The MCWD maintains an emergency
intertie with the City of Ukiah to the south and the CCWD to the north. In addition, the MCWD
treats and wheels water to CCWD. The MCWD also has a contract to purchase Lake Mendocino
Water from the RRFC.
3-22
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
The MCWD offices have moved to 151 Laws Avenue, which houses the RRFC and WCWD, and shares
office space with the staff of the Willow County Water District. This move has resulted in the cross
training of office staff, field personnel and the opportunity to combine resources, reduce cost, and
provide more efficient service to better serve the customers of the districts. The MCWD
occasionally uses the boardroom at that location for special meetings.
Management Efficiencies
The MCWD has implemented routines and procedures to improve efficiency. One such procedure
includes daily inspections of the water treatment facility to record instrument readings, mix
chemicals, perform routine maintenance, and identify potential operational changes needed to
meet daily demands. When the treatment plant is unmanned, a Supervisory Control and Data
Analysis (SCADA) system monitors and records all instrument data that can be viewed at the
administration office from a remote telemetry unit (RTU). If an alarm condition arises, the RTU
reports the alarm condition locally at the main panel and notifies the treatment plant operator by
phone, using a phone dialer and modem to announce a recorded message that identifies the nature
of alarm condition. The plant operator may also monitor conditions remotely simply by calling the
unit and entering a series of numbers to examine any operational parameter.
Other procedures relate to operating parameters established by the regulatory agencies to safe
guard and protect public health. After ensuring high-quality water standards are met, the MCWD
focuses on improving the methods used for pumping and treating the water by examining utility
and chemical bills, length of filter runs, scheduled maintenance frequency, and water production
to identify possible adjustments that will increase production while reducing the overall cost.
In order to provide improved and more efficient customer service, the MCWD created a work order
system that is based largely on customer contacts with the MCWD. Any time a customer reports a
leak, requests water service to be turned on or off, has a water quality complaint, requests
assistance in locating a leak or service line, has concerns regarding pressure being too high or too
low, reports water theft, complains of a neighbor wasting water, or any other water-related issues,
a work order is generated. Information on the work order includes the customer’s name and
address, the time the call was received, which field operator is assigned to respond to the call, the
time and date the operator arrived at the address, corrective action taken, and if customer contact
is made during the site visit. The operations supervisor reviews each completed work order for
completeness, the amount of time onsite, materials used, and confirmation that customer contact
was made. This has proven effective, as the MCWD has not received any complaints regarding
customer service in the past four-years, and it occasionally receives letters thanking the staff for
providing prompt quality service.
Since agriculture has placed increased demands in the past upon MCWD resources, resulting in the use
of treated water being used for irrigation, the MCWD has adopted policies to prohibit use of treated
water for irrigation.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.5.1 The MCWD works cooperatively with other local water purveyors. The MCWD treats
and wheels water to the Calpella County Water District.
3.3.5.2 The MCWD shares office space and the boardroom at 151 Laws Avenue.
3-23
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
3.3.5.3 The MCWD has adopted a number of policies and procedures to ensure it provides safe
potable water, keeps track of maintenance needs, and ensures that potable water is
not used for agricultural irrigation.
3.2.6 – Government Structure and Accountability
The MCWD is governed by a five-member board of directors elected at large to staggered four-year
terms. Board members receive a stipend of $25 per meeting with a maximum of $150 per month.
The board is considering an option to waive the stipend. Board meetings are held regularly on the
third Tuesday of the month at 5 p.m. at Mendocino College, 1000 Hensley Creek Road, Room 1060.
Special Meeting Agenda’s are posted at the District office a minimum three days prior to the
meeting and are held at 151 Laws Avenue. Board meetings are posted to comply with the Brown
Act.
The MCWD currently has four employees and one vacant position. Employees are the general
manager, two operators responsible for operating the water treatment plant, and an administrative
assistant. The vacant position is for the operations manager, which may or may not be filled. The
MCWD responds to calls for service during normal business hours or through an answering service
that operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
The MCWD does not maintain a website but communicates with the public by means of its meeting
postings and notices. The MCWD does maintain a mailing list of interested parties that wish to
subscribe to meeting notices. There is no charge to be on the list but the subscription must be
renewed annually.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.6.1 The MCWD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. For their services, board members receive a stipend of $25 per meeting for a
maximum of six meetings or $150 per month.
3.3.6.2 The board meets regularly on the third Tuesday of the month at 5 p.m. at Mendocino
College, Room 1060. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
3.3.6.3 The MCWD currently has four employees: the general manager, two operators of the
water treatment plant, and an administrative assistant. The staff and structure are
sufficient to provide for efficient operations of the MCWD.
3.3.6.4 The MCWD communicates with its residents through inserts in their monthly water bill.
The MCWD provides a subscription service to its agendas. The service is free but
requires renewal each calendar year. The MCWD does not maintain a website.
3.2.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
The MCWD is in the middle of resolving a cease and desist order and sorting out water rights to
serve existing customers. The District has received a request for service to the former Masonite
property east of the Railroad tracks. The applicants intend to file a petition with LAFCO for
annexation to the District and the District intends to submit a resolution requesting the
annexation. However, no expanded services can be approved until the moratorium is lifted. Should
LAFCO want to establish a sphere before the moratorium is lifted it may want to establish a
3-24
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
coterminous sphere. Those policies are found in Chapter V policy 23, which states that a local
agency may be assigned a coterminous sphere with its existing boundaries if:
There is no anticipated need for the agency’s services outside its existing boundaries.
There is insufficient information to support inclusion of areas outside the agency’s
boundaries in a sphere of influence.
The agency does not have the service capacity, access to resources (e.g., water rights) or
financial ability to serve an area outside its boundaries.
The agency’s boundaries are contiguous with the boundaries of other agencies providing
similar services.
The agency’s boundaries are contiguous with the sphere of influence boundaries previously
assigned to another agency providing similar services.
The agency requests that their sphere of influence be coterminous with their boundaries.
The establishment of a coterminous sphere would not affect service delivery at the present time.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.3.7.1 Expansion of the MCWD’s boundaries is dependent on lifting the moratorium. Until that
happens, establishing a coterminous sphere may be appropriate but would not affect
current service delivery.
3.2.8 – Summary of Determinations
3.3.1.1 The population of the MCWD is estimated is approximately 5,156. The population and
growth study completed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan estimated a growth rate
between 1 percent and 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the
lower rate, so the estimated population of the MCWD is expected to be 5,568 in 2020.
3.3.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the MCWD
boundaries.
3.3.3.1 The MCWD receives most of its water from surface water rights. In addition, it can
purchase up to 1,520 AF of Lake Mendocino water.
3.3.3.2 During the period from 2000 to 2009, the MCWD was able to meet demand. The
average demand from 2000 to 2008 was 1,462 AF and production was 1,556 AF.
Demand for a year with normal precipitation, 2004, was 1,522 AF, which is used for
projections to 2030.
3.3.3.3 The Millview County Water District has sufficient supply to serve its customers through
2015. A recent cease and desist order would reduce available supply by 785 AFY. The
order is being contested, but should it be upheld, the MCWD would have difficulty
supplying water in 2020 and beyond unless it can purchase additional Lake Mendocino
water or find another source.
3.3.4.1 The MCWD annual budget is approximately $1 million. As an enterprise district,
revenues are generated by fees and charges. Water sales account for nearly all the
income.
3-25
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Millview County Water District
3.3.4.2 In 2009, the MCWD instituted a new rate schedule that provided sufficient funding for
expenses and leaves a balance of approximately $130,000 annually. In addition to a
meter charge the MCWD charges a fee of $3.42 for every 1,000 gallons, which goes for
operation and maintenance and capital improvements. Because of the rate increase,
the MCWD has the ability to provide services.
3.3.5.1 The MCWD works cooperatively with other local water purveyors. The MCWD treats
and wheels water to the Calpella County Water District.
3.3.5.2 The MCWD share office space and the boardroom at 151 Laws Avenue.
3.3.5.3 The MCWD has adopted a number of policies and procedures to ensure it provides safe
potable water, keeps track of maintenance needs, and ensures that potable water is
not used for agricultural irrigation.
3.3.6.1 The MCWD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. For their services, board members receive a stipend of $25 per meeting for a
maximum of six meetings or $150 per month.
3.3.6.2 The board meets regularly on the third Tuesday of the month at 5 p.m. at Mendocino
College, Room 1060. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
3.3.6.3 The MCWD currently has four employees: the general manager, two operators of the
water treatment plant, and an administrative assistant. The staff and structure are
sufficient to provide for efficient operations of the MCWD.
3.3.6.4 The MCWD communicates with its residents through inserts in their monthly water bill.
The MCWD provides a subscription service to its agendas. The service is free but
requires renewal each calendar year. The MCWD does not maintain a website.
3.3.7.1 Expansion of the MCWD’s boundaries is dependent on lifting the moratorium. Until that
happens, establishing a coterminous sphere may be appropriate but would not affect
current service delivery.
3-26
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
3.3 – Potter Valley Irrigation District
District Profile
The Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) was formed by the Board of Supervisors in 1924 under
Section 20500 of the Water Code that relates to irrigation districts. The purpose was to provide
irrigation water to support agriculture in Potter Valley. Potter Valley produces wine grapes,
clover/grass hay, pears, grass-fed cattle, sheep, and other agricultural products. The PVID serves
272 agricultural customers on 6,964 acres. Exhibit 3.4-1 shows the district boundaries.
The PVID diverts water from the tailrace of the PG&E Potter Valley Powerhouse into its canals to
provide irrigation water to its customers. Lake Pillsbury was formed as part of the PG&E Potter
Valley Project (PVP), which diverts water from the Eel River. The PVP, which began in 1905, consists
of a 9.4-megawatt hydroelectric project, owned and operated by PG&E, and two dams on the Upper
Main Stem Eel River. Scott Dam forms Lake Pillsbury and Cape Horn Dam forms Van Arsdale
Reservoir. The PVID has a contract with PG&E for 50 cubic feet per second (cfs) from Lake Pillsbury
water through 2022.
Table 3.3-1 provides a quick overview of the districts as well as some key statistics.
Table 3.3-1: Potter Valley Irrigation District Overview
STATISTIC VALUE
Total area 6963.97 acres
Total acres being irrigated 4,727.84
Total acres not being irrigated1 1,838.81
Number of landowners in district 276
Water customer accounts 260
Note:
1 Includes lands in district but not connected to PVID, fallow land, lands not
being farmed
Source: Elliott 2012a, 2012b.
3.3.1 – Growth and Population Projections
According to the 2010 Census, the Potter Valley community has approximately 646 residents. Table
3.3-2 contains the population data from the census compared with Ukiah and Mendocino County.
Table 3.3-2: 2010 Census Population of Potter Valley
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PERSONS PER
GEOGRAPHIC AREA POPULATION HOUSING UNITS HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD
Potter Valley 646 267 241 2.68
Ukiah 16,069 6,488 6,158 2.61
County Total 87,841 40,323 34,945 2.51
3-27
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
Source: U.S. Census 2012.
However, the PVID is much larger in area than the Potter Valley community. The California
Department of Finance (CDOF) also analyzed the population by zip codes in the 2000 and 2010
census. According to the CDOF, the population ranged from 1,883 in 2000 to 1,767 in 2010.
However, the size of the zip code area was reduced by 10 square miles in 2010, which would
account for the decrease in population. The population density in 2000 and 2010 remained at 10
persons per square mile. Based on this information, the population in the PVID remained
unchanged over a 10-year period and no growth rate in population is inferred.
DETERMINATION:
3.4.1.1 The PVID has a population of approximately 1,700, based on CDOF analysis of zip codes
in the 2010 census. A similar analysis to the 2000 census data indicated no growth in
population between 2000 and 2010. The projected population in 2020 is the same as in
2010.
3.3.2 – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within the sphere of influence. An unincorporated
island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is surrounded or
substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county boundary or
the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically isolated
community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities or fringe communities adjacent to the
PVID’s boundaries. Therefore, there are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the
SOI of the PVID.
DETERMINATION:
3.4.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the SOI of the PVID.
3.3.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The PVID has access to water under three licenses (5246, 1199, 5545) with the State Water
Resources Control Board that allow it to divert up to 22,670 AFY between May 1 and April 30 of
each year. As part of this allotment, the PVID has a contract with PG&E to supply 19,000 AFY
irrigation water through 2022.
The Contract between the District and PG&E is depends on a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) hydropower production license that PG&E holds allowing the diversion of water from the
Upper Main Eel River termed the Potter Valley Project. Water from the Potter Valley Project feeds
the Potter Valley Powerhouse which supplies water to the District’s delivery canals. The Potter
Valley Project consists of Scott Dam which impounds Lake Pillsbury; Cape Horn Dam forming Van
Arsdale Reservoir, which serves as the forebay for the diversion tunnel; the fish screen and ladder
at Van Arsdale which partially mitigate the impact of the diversion; the diversion tunnel itself
3-28
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
which conveys water through the hill to the north end of Potter Valley; and finally the penstock
and powerhouse in Potter Valley. The District's delivery canals begin at the Potter Valley
3-29
Busch Ln
Gibson Ln
Main St
e
ott
P
e
d si
st e
W
r
CR
240
E
e
l
R
iv
e
r
R
d
M
oonbeam
M
eadow
W
ay
h
L n
h
o u s
e
R
d
u s
c
w
er
B o
N
P
d
R
y
e
la l
V
Mid Mountain
Rd
Rd
0
Spring
Valley
C
R
2 4
Pine Ave
Potter
Valley Rd
ST
20
Potter Valley Irrigation District Boundary
Major Roads
Lake Mendocino
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit3_4_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, Esri
£ Exhibit 3.4.1
0 2
Miles Potter Valley Irrigation District Boundary Map
E Mulberg & Associates LAFCO of Mendocino U k iah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
Powerhouse. The current FERC license expires on April 14, 2022. The relicensing process is
scheduled to begin in 2017.
The total annual diversion of water through the Potter Valley Project has been reduced by up to
60% of the flows allowed prior to the last relicensing in 1983. In the past six years the total
diversion from the Eel River has, on average, been approximately 77,000 acre feet. The District
uses some of the water. The remaining water, and recharge from the District system, flows into
the East Branch of the Russian River and is stored in Lake Mendocino. The water stored in Lake
Mendocino subsequently becomes the majority of the water supply for downstream water users,
including Redwood Valley, Calpella, Ukiah, Ukiah Valley, Hopland and northern Sonoma County
above the confluence with Dry Creek. Any further reduction of this water supply will impact the
economy of and quality of life for all of these communities. The water stored in Lake Mendocino is
also an integral part of Russian River flow releases provided to protect and enhance anadromous
fish populations. The relicensing of the Potter Valley Project will be of critical importance to
water purveyors throughout Mendocino County.
The Exhibit 3.4-2 shows the PVID sells between 70 to 80 percent of the water that is diverted. The
remainder is returned to the East Branch Russian River. Average daily supply and average daily
demand are 120 AF. Maximum daily water demand is 170 AF and minimum is 100 AF. The PVID’s
peak demand capacity is 100 cfs or 200 AF per day.
Exhibit 3.3-2: Potter Valley Irrigation District Water Usage 2007–2011
Source: Elliott 2012b.
Exhibit 3.4-3 is a schematic showing the PVID system, including canals, ponds, and gates. The
exhibit shows that water is diverted to two canals—one on the east side of the valley and the other
on the west side. The East Branch Russian River flows north to south near the center of the PVID.
Table 3.3-3 shows the details of the water rights.
3-31
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
Table 3.3-3: Potter Valley Irrigation District Water Rights
WATER POINT OF
RIGHT OWNER SOURCE AMOUNT SEASON PURPOSE USE
S-1010 PG&E Eel R. (Van Arsdale/Cape 340 cfs Jan 1-Dec 31 Power & Irrigation PVID
(filed) Horn Dam)
L-1199 PG&E Eel R. (Lake Pillsbury 4,500 AF Nov 1–Apr 1 Irrigation PVID
L-5545 PG&E Eel R (Lake Pillsbury and a. 4,908 storage a. March 15–Oct 30 Irrigation PVID
Van Arsdale Dam) b. 50 cfs diversion b. Nov 1–June 1
L-5246 PVID Powerhouse Canal 50 cfs diversion Apr 1-Nov 15 Irrigation PVID
Source: Elliot 2012b.
Other characteristics of the PVID system are summarized in
Table 3.3-4. The table identifies the total capacity, the length of the two canals, service gates,
private storage ponds, flumes, and siphons. It is important to note that private storage allows for
an additional 650 AF.
Table 3.3-4: Potter Valley Irrigation District System Characteristics
CHARACTERISTIC AMOUNT
Total PVID Annual Water Rights1 22,670 AF
Main Canals 18 miles
Laterals 18 miles
Main Service Gates 88
Private Storage Ponds 40
Private Storage 650 AF
Private Storage Ponds Outside District 12
Private Storage Outside District 140 AF
Flumes 3
Siphons 6
Note:
1 Includes PGE contract for 19,000 AF and PVID Lic. 5246
Source: Elliott 2012a, 2012b.
The average annual demand is 16,588 AF; therefore, the PVID has sufficient capacity to serve its
customers in normal years. During drought years it is estimated the total available water could be
reduced by 50 percent. In dry years, customers must rely on private ponds and storage facilities
to address the district rotational delivery interval. The PVID also looks to winter storage in Lake
Pillsbury to meet customer demand. A self-imposed annexation moratorium was placed on the
3-32
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
PVID in 1997, due to uncertainty in capacity. The moratorium extends through 2022 limiting the
number of new customers to the PVID.
3-33
N
Exhibit 3.4.3 Potter Valley Irrigation
<
System Schematic
E Mulberg & Associates Source: PVID 2012 LAFCO of Mendocino ‐ Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
DETERMINATION:
3.4.3.1 The PVID operates under three licenses (5246, 1199, 5545) with the State Water
Resources Control board that allow it to divert up to 22,670 AFY between May 1 and
September 30 of each year. As part of this allotment, the PVID has a contract with
PG&E to supply 19,000 AFY irrigation water through 2022.
3.4.3.2 The average annual demand is 16,588 AF and a normal year supply of 22,670. In dry
years, the supply is reduced by more than 50 percent. The uncertainty in capacity has
resulted in a moratorium on new customers through 2022.
3.3.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Services
The PVID’s budget operates on a calendar-year basis. The 2011 total income was $412,050; total
expenses were $299,230, for a net income of $112,820. The PVID is funded primarily by property
taxes, in addition to a combination of standby charges and water sales. The PVID charges an $8.50
standby fee per acre per year and $4.50 per acre-foot of water used. The PVID bills annually on
December 1 with payment due on December 15. Standby charges are assessed on January 1.
Exhibit 3.4-4 shows the distribution of revenues. As shown, property tax accounts for
approximately 70 percent of revenues.
Exhibit 3.3-4: Potter Valley Irrigation District Distribution of Revenues
5-Year Average of 2007–2011
Source: Potter Valley Irrigation District 2007b,2008,2009,2010,2011
3-35
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
Table 3.3-5 summarizes revenues and expenses for the period 2007 to 2011. All data are actual
numbers. The table shows revenues and expenses have been fairly consistent and that the PVID
has been able to show an average net income of approximately $115,000 per year. The net profit
has been able to fund capital expenses and special studies without drawing down reserves.
Table 3.3-5: Potter Valley Irrigation District Revenues and Expenditures 2007 to 2011
RESERVE RESERVE
YEAR REVENUES EXPENSES BALANCE EXPENSES1 BALANCE
2007 $402,111 $251966 $150,145 $61,948 $88,197
2008 $428,479 $309865 $118,614 $71,519 $47,915
2009 $435,190 $319,766 $115,424 $63,158 $52,266
2010 $394,500 $313,373 $81,127 $59,015
2011 $412,050 $299,230 $112,820 $30,990
Note:
1 Reserve Expenses include construction, capitalized salary, and an ongoing dam study.
Source: Elliott 20112b.
The PVID also maintains 5- and 10-year capital improvement plans. Funding for projects is shown
in Table 3.3-5 as reserve expenses. Most of the projects are construction and maintenance
projects to keep the canals and works in good working order and to repair leaks.
DETERMINATION:
3.4.4.1 The PVID budget operates on a calendar-year basis. Revenue sources are derived
primarily from property tax, which accounts for 70 percent of all revenues; water sales
for 12.5 percent; and standby charges for 13.5 percent. Revenues for 2011 amounted
to $412,050 and expenses $299,230.
3.4.4.2 The PVID standby charges are $8.50 per acre per year and water use charges are $4.50
per acre-foot water.
3.4.4.3 The PVID has shown an average net income of $115,000 over the last five years. The
PVID has sufficient revenues to provide service.
3.3.5 – Status and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The PVID’s purpose and mission is the equitable and efficient distribution of the water carried in its
canals and ditches. The PVID sees that part of its mission is to protect the environment to allow
the free flow of water through its canals. PVID works cooperatively with federal, state, and local
agencies toward that goal.
Most recently, the PVID has been working with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) on the Upper Main Stem Eel River Draft Coho Recovery Action Plan. The
purpose of the study is to protect the Central California Coast Coho Salmon population, which is on
the endangered species list. The goal of the plan is restoring and safeguarding a future for the
species so that the protections of the Endangered Species Act are no longer needed.
3-36
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
The PVID works with the Department of Fish and Wildlife on Russian River frost water regulations
and supports the quagga and zebra mussel monitoring program. Quagga and zebra mussels are
recent invaders to California. The mussels are internationally recognized pests that have caused
significant impacts on water delivery systems, fisheries, and ecosystems, with control costing
millions of dollars annually in many states and countries.
The PVID works with the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Irrigated Lands
Discharge Program. The goal of the Irrigated Lands Discharge Program is to set water quality goals
for receiving waters in the region and to suggest farm water quality management goals.
The PVID works with other county agencies such as the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power
Commission (MCIWPC). The MCIWPC is a joint powers agency that includes Mendocino County, the
City of Ukiah, Potter Valley Irrigation District, Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation
Improvement District, and Redwood Valley County Water District. The agency was formed to
protect and procure adequate water supplies for its members.
The PVID also works with a number of private environmental groups such as the Pacific Forest and
Watershed Lands Stewardship Council (Stewardship Council), the Eel River Recovery Project, and
the Eel River Task Force. The Stewardship Council is a private, nonprofit foundation that was
established in 2004 as part of a PG&E settlement. Its goals are to ensure that over 140,000 acres
of PG&E watershed lands are conserved for the public good through a Land Conservation Program
and to invest in outdoor programs that serve California’s young people through its Youth
Investment Program. The PVID is active in the Land Conservation Program, which includes the
Upper Main Stem Eel River Watershed.
The Eel River Recovery Project addresses water conservation, nutrient pollution, and ecosystem
recovery. This project is operating under the umbrella of the Trees Foundation and has an Advisory
Group made up of people from throughout the Eel River Basin, which includes communities, Tribes,
and government agencies.
In addition, the PVID is working with the community and the Potter Valley Tribe to form the Upper
Eel River Conservancy to protect the land in the Upper Main Stem Eel River watershed.
DETERMINATION:
3.4.5.1 The PVID works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. The PVID holds a
seat on the MCIWPC and cooperates with a number of conservation groups to maintain
the quality of the Upper Main Stem Eel River Watershed.
3.3.6 – Governance and Accountability
The PVID is governed by a five-member board of directors elected by division at large to four-year
staggered terms. Board members receive no compensation. Board meetings are held on the third
Wednesday of the month at 7 p.m. at the PVID office, 10170 Main Street, in Potter Valley.
Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act and function under a set of by-laws. An agenda is
posted at Hoppers Corner Store, outside the office door, and on the website. The PVID contracts
with an independent CPA for a biannual audit of PVID operations.
3-37
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
The board has one standing committee, the Safety Committee. As a standing committee the
meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act. The board hires the elected Secretary/Treasurer
as the bookkeeper. The board operates with a written set of policies and procedures.
The PVID has four full-time and seven-part-time employees. The full-time employees include the
superintendent, who has day-to-day responsibility for managing the affairs of the PVID; a secretary-
treasurer, who acts as the chief financial officer; and an assessor-collector who is responsible for
billing and standby assessments. An additional employee serves under the Superintendent as
Operations and Maintenance Supervisor. The seven part-time employees are responsible for
operating and maintaining the system. The PVID contracts for maintenance of the website. Given
the size and nature of the operations of the PVID, the structure appears to be sound because the
PVID appears to be efficiently providing irrigation services to its customers.
The PVID co-sponsors the annual Eel River cleanup event where the public is involved in cleanup
along the river and highways. Volunteers collect trash on 26 miles of county roads and 12 miles of
river. Trash is taken to the Potter Valley Transfer Station.
DETERMINATION:
3.4.6.1 The PVID is governed by a five-member board elected at large from divisions. Board
members receive no compensation.
3.4.6.2 The board meets regularly on the third Wednesday of the month at 7 p.m. at the PVID
office at 10170 Main Street in Potter Valley. Board meetings are noticed according to
the Brown Act.
3.4.6.3 The board functions under a set of by-laws and has one standing committee the Safety
Committee.
3.4.6.4 The PVID has four full-time and seven part-time employees who provide efficient
services to the PVID residents and customers.
3.4.6.5 The PVID maintains a website that allows for communication with the public. It
engages the public through community events such as the Eel River Cleanup.
3.3.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
One of the main functions of LAFCO is the preservation of agricultural land and open space. As an
irrigation district, PVID is responsible for helping to maintain land in productive use for agriculture.
There are no plans to expand the PVID’s sphere of influence. Providing services to additional
customers is limited by the self-imposed moratorium that expires in 2022. There are no policies
that would be of concern or limit the mission of the PVID, as operations of the PVID are consistent
with local LAFCO policies.
DETERMINATION:
3.4.7.1 Because of the moratorium, the PVID is precluded from expanding services or seeking
to expand its SOI. The PVID is responsible for providing irrigation water to maintain
production of agricultural lands, which is consistent with LAFCO policies for
preservation of agricultural land and open space.
3-38
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Potter Valley Irrigation District
3.3.8 – Summary of Determinations
3.4.1.1 The PVID has a population of approximately 1,700, based on CDOF analysis of zip codes
in the 2010 census. A similar analysis with the 2000 census data indicated no growth in
population between 2000 and 2010. The projected population in 2020 is the same in
2010.
3.4.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the SOI of the PVID.
3.4.3.1 The PVID operates under three licenses (5246, 1199, 5545) with the State Water
Resources Control board that allow the PVID to divert up to 22,670 AFY between May 1
and September 30 of each year. As part of this allotment, the PVID has a contract with
PG&E to supply 19,000 AFY irrigation water through 2022.
3.4.3.2 The average annual demand is 16,588 AF and a normal year supply of 22,670 AF. In dry
years the supply is reduced by more than 50 percent. The uncertainty in capacity has
resulted in a moratorium on new customers through 2022.
3.4.4.1 The PVID budget operates on a calendar-year basis. Revenue sources are derived
primarily from property taxes, which accounts for 70 percent of all revenues; water
sales account for 12.5 percent; and standby charges account for 13.5 percent.
Revenues for 2011 amounted to $412,050 and expenses were $299,230.
3.4.4.2 The PVID standby charges are $8.50 per acre per year and water use charges are $4.50
per acre-foot of water.
3.4.4.3 The PVID has shown an average net income of $115,000 over the last five years. The
PVID has sufficient revenues to provide service.
3.4.5.1 The PVID works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. The PVID holds a
seat on the MCIWPC and is active with a number of conservation groups to maintain the
quality of the Upper Main Stem Eel River Watershed.
3.4.6.1 The PVID is governed by a five-member board elected at large from divisions. Board
members receive no compensation.
3.4.6.2 The board meets regularly on the third Wednesday of the month at 7 p.m. at the PVID
office at 10170 Main Street in Potter Valley. Board meetings are noticed according to
the Brown Act.
3.4.6.3 The board functions under a set of by-laws and has one standing committee the Safety
Committee.
3.4.6.4 The PVID has four full-time and seven part-time employees who provide efficient
services to the PVID residents and customers.
3.4.6.5 The PVID maintains a website that allows for communication with the public. It
engages the public through community events such as the Eel River Cleanup.
3.4.7.1 Because of the moratorium, the PVID is precluded from expanding services or seeking
to expand its sphere of influence. The PVID is responsible for providing irrigation water
to maintain production of agricultural lands, which is consistent with LAFCO policies for
preservation of agricultural land and open space.
3-39
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
3.4 – Redwood Valley County Water District
District Profile
The Redwood Valley County Water District (RVCWD) was incorporated on January 16, 1964 under
Sections 30322 and 30323 of the Water Code. The size of the service area is roughly 15 square
miles in a valley 5 miles long by 3 miles wide. The original irrigable acreage in the RVCWD was
estimated between 3,300 and 3,500 acres. That acreage has grown to a gross area of 5,470 acres
as reported in the 2001 Crop and Water Data report to the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation. The
RVCWD went into operation with the dual distribution system for irrigation water service in April
1979 and for domestic water service in November 1979. The RVCWD serves a total of 1,345
equivalent dwelling units and 200 agricultural customers. Exhibit 3.5-1 illustrates the RVCWD
boundaries.
3.4.1 – Growth and Population Projections
One method to estimate population relies on the number of residential connections, multiplied by
the person per household of the unincorporated portion of the County. The method assumes all
residential connections are to single residences. Table 3.4-1 represents population and housing for
2011 from the California Department of Finance. Using 2.49 persons per household and 1,345
connections, the estimated population would be 3,349. The California Department of Health
estimates they serve a population of 3,969; however, since the RVCWD cannot verify that number,
the accuracy of that number is questionable.
Table 3.4-1: Mendocino County Population and Housing—2011
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PERSONS PER
CITY POPULATION HOUSING UNITS HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD
Fort Bragg 7,308 3,206 2,872 2.54
Point Arena 450 225 192 2.34
Ukiah 16,109 6,491 6,161 2.61
Willits 4,898 2,074 1,915 2.56
Unincorporated 59,432 28,417 23,882 2.49
County Total 88,197 40,413 35,022 2.52
Source: California Department of Finance 2011a.
The population of the RVCWD was also studied as a part of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). In a
review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population between 2005 and 2020 was
projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year. Since the analysis was completed before
the economic downturn, it may be optimistic. The same study shows an average 1 percent annual
growth rate between 1990 and 2005. Using the more conservative historical growth rate, the
population would grow to 3,617 in 2020. With the higher population and the higher growth rate,
the population in 2020 may be expected to reach 3,786.
3-41
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
DETERMINATIONS:
3.5.1.1 The population of the RVCWD is estimated at approximately 3,349. The population and
growth study completed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan estimated a growth rate
between 1 percent and 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the
lower rate, so the estimated population of the RVCWD is expected to be approximately
3,617 in 2020.
3.4.2 – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within the sphere of influence. An unincorporated
island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is surrounded or
substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county boundary or
the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically isolated
community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities but the community of Calpella lies just
outside the district boundaries to the south. The Calpella community is served by the Calpella
County Water District that provides both water and sewer and the Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire
District that provides fire protection.
Table 3.4-2 shows the median household income compared with the statewide median household
income, based on the 2010 census. The data show that the median income for Calpella exceeds
the 80-percent threshold and would not be considered a disadvantaged unincorporated community.
Table 3.4-2: Median Household Income Redwood Valley County Water District Communities
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD PERCENT OF MEDIAN CALIFORNIA
LOCATION CENSUS TRACT INCOME HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF $57,708
Calpella 109 $53,725 93
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.5.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the RVCWD
boundaries.
3.4.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The RVCWD’s water supply comes from Lake Mendocino. A pump station located at the Lake
pumps water to a holding reservoir 4.5 miles from the Lake. The holding reservoir has a capacity
of 68 AF. During typical demand, water is pumped to the reservoir from the lake at night to take
advantage of lower electricity rates. From there, domestic water is delivered by gravity flow to
the water treatment plant. The plant can treat up to 1.7 mgd. Treated potable water is pumped
to six covered steel tanks with a total volume of 1.85 million gallons.
3-42
d
R
ik
m
o
T
d
R
ts
e
W
RD J
Inez Way
d
RD I
Laughlin Way ast R
E
Reservoir
Road E
RD M rD *
y
n
o loWa ter Treatment
RD D C
Plant
E School Way
£¤
101
RD B
Uva
Dr
RD A
ST
20
e
v
A
la
rtn
e
C Moore St
Major Roads
Redwood Valley County Water District Boundary Lake Mendocino
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit3_5_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, Esri
£ Exhibit 3.5.1
0 1
Miles Redwood Valley County Water District Boundary Map
E Mulberg & Associates LAFCO of Mendocino Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
Water flows by gravity from these tanks to customers. Irrigation water flows by gravity to the
irrigation distribution system. During periods of high demand gravity flows are augmented by
pressure flows from the lake pumps.
Redwood Valley currently delivers approximately 750 AF for residential and commercial uses, and
1,450 acre-feet for agricultural purposes—a combined total annual demand of 2,200 AFY. The
RVCWD’s water supply consists of a largely un-exercisable right to divert up to 4,900 AF directly
from Lake Mendocino between November 1 and April 30 of each year, and divert surplus water
supplies from RRFC and the Sonoma County Water Agency. Water diversions made according to the
RVCWD’s Lake Mendocino water right can only occur in instances when stream flows in the Russian
River main stem (as measured at the confluence of the East and West forks) exceed 150 cfs and
Lake Mendocino storage exceeds 72,000 acre-feet. This represents a relatively narrow window of
opportunity that can be as much as 70 days in wet years, but as little as one or two days in dry
years. Because of the uncertain supply, the RVCWD is currently under court-ordered moratorium
for domestic connections and a board-initiated moratorium for irrigation connections.
By definition, the water being sold to Redwood Valley by the RRFC and the Sonoma County Water
Agency is surplus to the ongoing needs of the two respective organizations. Since the surplus water
that the RVCWD receives is for residential and commercial use, the RRFC and the Redwood Valley
could agree on a set amount for those uses. That would preclude the RRFC surplus water supply
from being used, at least in part, to meet future water demands in the Ukiah Valley. It would also
provide a more stable source of water for Redwood Valley.
The RVCWD adopted a conservation ordinance in 2007 to deal with droughts such as those that
occurred in 2007–2009. The ordinance is based on six tiers, of which the most severe restrictions
are declared for Tier 6. Tier 4 was implemented in 2009 when Lake Mendocino water levels
receded to record lows and mandatory rationing was instituted by the Mendocino County Board of
Supervisors, resulting in a 50-percent reduction in water use.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.5.3.1 The annual demand is approximately 750 AF domestic and 1,450 AF for irrigation, a
total of 2,200 AF.
3.5.3.2 The RVCWD maintains a 68-acre-foot storage tank of untreated water from which water
is transmitted to the water treatment plant to produce domestic water. The plant has
a capacity of 1.7 mgd.
3.5.3.3 The RVCWD’s supply consists of a right to divert up to 4,900 AF from Lake Mendocino if
flow at the confluence of the forks of the Russian River exceeds 72,000 AF. It is
estimated that water will be available for 70 days in wet years and one or two days in
dry years.
3.5.3.4 As a result of the uncertain supply, the RVCWD is under a moratorium for new domestic
and irrigation connections.
3.4.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Service
The RVCWD operates with a budget of approximately $1 million. The primary source of revenues is
water sales, for domestic and irrigation purposes. It also receives a limited amount of property
3-45
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
tax. Water sales account for approximately 96 percent of all revenues; property taxes and interest
income about 2 percent each. Of the total water sales, 75 percent is for domestic water and 25
percent is for irrigation water. The average volumetric split is 1/3 domestic and 2/3 irrigation.
The actual ratio of domestic to irrigation water is highly weather-dependent. Table 3.4-3 provides
a summary of revenues and expenses for the FY 2007–08 through FY 2009–10.
Table 3.4-3: Redwood Valley County Water District Revenues and Expenditures
FY 2007–08 to FY 2009–10 ($ thousands)
ACCOUNT FY 2007–08 FY 2008–09 FY 2009–10
Total Operating Revenues $1,136.10 $1,126.70 $801.30
Total Operating Expenses 1,363.50 926.80 874.10
Net Operating Income before Depreciation (227.30) 199.90 (72.80)
Depreciation & Amortization 302.90 314.50 320.70
Operating Income (Loss) (530.20) (114.60) (393.50)
Interest Expense (1.10) 1.00 1.90
Other Income 77.80 45.40 28.70
Change in Net Assets (453.50) (70.30) (366.70)
Beginning Net Assets 1,623.40 1,169.90 1,099.60
Ending Net Assets $1,169.90 $1,099.60 $732.90
Source: Bowers 2010, 2011.
As a consequence of the drought in 2009 and restrictions placed on water usage, revenues in
calendar year 2009 were depressed. As a consequence, the board froze salaries of its employees.
The salary freeze has been in place for nearly four-years and RVCWD salaries are becoming less
competitive. The board addressed the salary issue in the 2012–13 budget.
Rates
The RVCWD adopted a new rate structure that became effective January 1, 2010. The rate
structure shown in Table 3.4-4 is the residential and commercial tiered rate structure. There is a
base charge related to the size of the meter and a usage charge. Typical residential rates are $10
per month plus the usage rate. When residential users take service as commercial service, the
monthly per-dwelling fee of $10 applies.
Table 3.4-4: Redwood Valley County Water District Residential/Commercial Meter Charges
Meter Size Base charge (per month)
¾-inch, 1-inch,1.5-inch, 2-inch
$10
(Residential Service)
2-inch $30
3-inch $45
3-46
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
4-inch $60
Source: RVCWD 2012.
The monthly billing formula is the meter charge plus a usage charge, shown in Table 3.4-5.
Although the table shows a rate for each 1,000 gallons used, the customer is billed for actual
number of gallons consumed.
Table 3.4-5: Redwood Valley County Water District Residential/Commercial Usage Charges
Usage (gallons) Charge per 1,000 gallons
1–4,000 $3.75
4,001–8,000 $4.00
8,001–12,000 $4.50
12,001–20,000 $5.00
>20,000 $5.50
Source: RVCWD 2012.
Agricultural customers are charged a meter charge, a minimum acre-foot charge, plus a fee for
usage above the minimum. Unlike the residential rate, which charges for actual gallons used,
irrigation water is sold in 1,000-gallon units. Table 3.4-6 summarizes the agricultural rates.
Table 3.4-6: Redwood Valley County Water District Agricultural Rates
Pre Purchase at Usage per 1,000
Meter Size Meter Charge $225/AF gallons
2-inch $20 1 AF $0.69
4-inch $40 2 AF $0.69
Source: RVCWD 2012.
Long-Term Debt
The RVCWD has two outstanding, long-term debt obligations. One is a loan from the Department of
Water Resources. During the 1992–93 fiscal year, the RVCWD received a loan from the Department
of Water Resources for $52,000. The loan carries interest at 3.2205 percent and is payable in semi-
annual installments of $1,371 over 30 years.
The loan was made in conjunction with a $400,000 grant from the Department of Water Resources
and was used to finance the construction of three water main extensions.
A second debt obligation was for purchase of a 2010 Ford Ranger for $14,350. The loan is payable
monthly at $441.98, which includes principal and interest at 6.79 percent, through January 2013.
A third obligation to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for $7,313,000 has been suspended to allow
the RVCWD to apply for additional water rights. The obligation was suspended under Public Law
3-47
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
110-229 that would allow RVCWD to be free from penalties and interest on the original loan until
RVCWD was able to procure additional non-Federal funding to construct diversion and/or storage
facilities to relieve its moratorium. Lifting the moratorium would allow full design build-out of the
District. That would allow repayment of the second loan which in turn would allow repayment of
the original loans.
Capital Improvements
Each year, the RVCWD addresses capital improvement needs in its budget. Projects include
upgrades to the water treatment plant, meter upgrades, filter upgrades, SCADA upgrades, and
security. Table 3.4-7 shows actual and budgeted capital expenses for FY 2008–09 through 2010–11.
Table 3.4-7: Redwood Valley County Water District Capital Improvement Expense
FY 2008–09 to FY 2010–11
YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT EXPENSE
FY 2008–09 $117,683
FY 2009–10 $ 70,929
FY 2010–11 (Budgeted) $ 74,304
Even with the new rate structure, the RVCWD has been concerned about whether there is sufficient
revenue to fund needed capital improvement projects. The RVCWD is considering hiring a
consultant to review the rate structure in terms of the ability to fund future projects.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.5.4.1 The RVCWD has an annual budget of approximately $1 million.
3.5.4.2 Sources of revenues are water sales, property taxes, and interest. Water sales account
for 96 percent of all operating revenues. The split between domestic and irrigation
revenues is 75 percent and 25 percent, respectively.
3.5.4.3 A new rate schedule went into effect on January 1, 2010. The need for a rate increase
has been shown by the net operating loss in the preceding two fiscal years. The rates
include a meter charge based on the size of the meter plus a usage charge. Domestic
water customers are assessed on a five-tier usage schedule ranging from $3.75 per
1,000 gallons to $5.50. Agricultural customers’ usage charge is a flat $0.69 per 1,000
gallons.
3.5.4.4 The RVCWD has a capital improvement plan with a schedule of projects to be
completed each year. In the last three years, the RVCWD allocated an average of
$87,000 annually for capital improvements.
3.4.5 – Shared Facilities
The RVCWD works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. The RVCWD is very active
with agencies that are involved with the Russian River Watershed and the Eel River related to the
Potter Valley Project that supplies water to Lake Mendocino. The RVCWD also participates in joint
powers agencies to reduce cost of insurance.
3-48
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
The RVCWD works with other county agencies such as the Mendocino County Inland Water and
Power Commission (MCIWPC). The MCIWPC is a joint powers agency that includes Mendocino
County, the City of Ukiah, Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement
District, and Potter Valley Irrigation District. The agency was formed to protect and procure
adequate water supplies for its member agencies and to facilitate coordination between the Potter
Valley Irrigation District and PG&E on the Potter Valley Project.
The RVCWD has worked successfully with Mendocino County Water Agency (MCWA) and Sonoma
County Water Agency (SCWA). RVCWD has a contract for surplus water from SCWA. The RVCWD
continues to work with MCWA and other local water districts regarding their participation in one or
both of the water rights projects.
The RVCWD participates in and monitors meetings of the Eel-Russian River Commission. The Eel-
Russian River Commission was formed in 1978 by supervisors from Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma,
and Lake Counties. The original purpose was to investigate modifying flow agreements.
Participants include the Department of Fish and Wildlife, PG&E, SCWA, and the Department of
Water Resources.
The RVCWD has signed on to the quagga/zebra mussel MOU. The quagga and zebra mussels are
recent invaders to California. The mussels are internationally recognized pests that have caused
significant impacts on water delivery systems, fisheries, and ecosystems, with control costing
millions of dollars annually in many states and countries. The SCWA is preparing the MOU to fund
an assessment of the risk they pose for Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma. The study will cost an
estimated $120,000 and the RVCWD’s contribution would be $5,000.
The RVCWD is a participating member of the Joint Powers Insurance Authority (JPIA). JPIA is an
association of a large number of independent water agencies that have pooled funds to be self-
insured for liabilities up to $1,000,000 per occurrence. The JPIA also purchases excess insurance to
cover each member for liabilities to $50 million per occurrence.
Determinations:
3.5.5.1 The RVCWD works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. For example
the RVCWD is a member of the MCIWPC and is a partner in the assessment of
quagga/zebra mussel impacts on water delivery systems.
3.5.5.2 The RVCWD is a member of the JPIA to reduce insurance costs by joining in a pool with
other agencies.
3.4.6 – Government Structure and Accountability
The RVCWD is governed by a five-member board of directors elected by division to staggered four-
year terms. Board members receive a stipend of $25 per meeting with a maximum of $150 per
month. Board meetings are held regularly on the third Thursday of the month at 7 p.m. at 2370
Webb Ranch Road.
Board meetings are posted to comply with the Brown Act. In addition to notices on its website, the
RVCWD advertises board meetings using two permanent, portable sandwich board signs placed at
3-49
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
two busy intersections in Redwood Valley on the Monday preceding the Thursday meeting. Meeting
notices are also posted at three commercial locations.
The RVCWD has six employees: a full-time General Manager, a full-time office manager, a three-
quarter-time office staff person, and three full-time field technicians. Staffing is sufficient to
perform the functions of the RVCWD.
The RVCWD communicates with residents through its website. The website contains information on
board meetings, the history of the RVCWD, and the process by which water is conveyed from
Lake Mendocino to the treatment plant to residential customers. In addition, the website contains
information on upcoming events and potential areas of concern to customers. The website
includes posted information on the potential consolidation, agenda items of the ad hoc committee,
and the Memorandum of Agreement signed in April 2011. The RVCWD also posted the results of a
survey taken to gain information on the concerns of its customers.
The board has established an ad hoc committee to discuss the possibility of consolidation with the
RRFC. The goal is to be able to secure permanent water rights to provide service to RVCWD
customers. On March 30, 2011, the boards of the RVCWD and the RRFC approved a Memorandum of
Agreement for a consolidation. The agreement had four main points:
RVCWD purchases 3,500 AF to be reassigned from 12947A (SCWA) to 12947B (RRFC).
RRFC abandons its petition for 6,000 AF.
RVCWD and RRFC merge to become new entity.
SCWA agrees not to protest Point Of Use petition for RVCWD rights.
Although the agreement expired in July 2011, the RVCWD has continued its discussions with RRFC
and SCWA. While there appears to be consensus agreement with RRFC, some issues still need to be
addressed with SCWA, including added water allocations to RRFC.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.5.6.1 The RVCWD is governed by a five-member board elected by division to four-year
staggered terms. Board meetings are held regularly on the third Thursday of the month
and noticed according to the Brown Act. The RVCWD is unique in that it uses a
sandwich board to publicize its meetings.
3.5.6.2 The RVCWD has six employees: a general manager, one full-time and one part-time
office staff, and three field technicians. Staffing is sufficient to perform the functions
of the RVCWD.
3.5.6.3 The RVCWD maintains a website that is used to communicate with its residents. It
contains meeting notices, meeting minutes, and other relevant information.
3.5.6.4 One of the key issues is the potential consolidation with the RRFC. An ad hoc
committee has been at work to address issues. The consolidation is complicated by the
interaction with SCWA, which controls water from Lake Mendocino that is critical to
making the consolidation work.
3-50
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
3.4.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
As the RVCWD continues its discussion on consolidation with the RRFC, the LAFCO policies relating
to consolidation apply. The policies are found in Chapter V, Section B 8, 9, and 10. Policy 8 comes
directly from CKH, which asserts that if two districts wish to consolidate and pass substantially
similar resolutions, LAFCO cannot deny them. LAFCO’s actions are subject to protest proceedings
whereby a protest of 25 percent of affected registered voters will trigger an election, and a protest
of 50 percent of affected registered voters will stop the consolidation. Policies 9 and 10 state that
LAFCO cannot materially change the conditions of the consolidation unless agreed upon by the two
districts.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.5.7.1 As the RVCWD is considering consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to
consolidation apply.
3.4.8 – Summary of Determinations
3.5.1.1 The population of the RVCWD is estimated at approximately 3,349. The population and
growth study completed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan estimated a growth rate
between 1 percent and 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the
lower rate, so the estimated population of the RVCWD is expected to be approximately
3,617 in 2020.
3.5.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the RVCWD
boundaries.
3.5.3.1 The annual demand is approximately 750 AF for domestic use and 1,450 AF for
irrigation, a total of 2,200 AF.
3.5.3.2 The RVCWD maintains a 68-acre-foot storage tank of untreated water from which water
is transmitted to the water treatment plant to produce domestic water. The plant has
a capacity of 1.7 mgd.
3.5.3.3 The RVCWD’s supply consists of a right to divert up to 4,900 AF from Lake Mendocino if
flow at the confluence of the forks of the Russian River exceeds 72,000 AF. It is
estimated that water will be available for 70 days in wet years and one or two days in
dry years.
3.5.3.4 As a result of the uncertain supply, the RVCWD is under a moratorium for new domestic
and irrigation connections.
3.5.4.1 The RVCWD has an annual budget of approximately $1 million.
3.5.4.2 Sources of revenues are water sales, property taxes, and interest. Water sales account
for 96 percent of all operating revenues. The split between domestic and irrigation is
75 percent and 25 percent, respectively.
3.5.4.3 A new rate schedule went into effect on January 1, 2010. The need for a rate increase
has been shown by the net operating loss in the preceding two fiscal years. The rates
include a meter charge based on the size of the meter plus a usage charge. Domestic
water customers are assessed on a five-tier usage schedule ranging from $3.75 per
1,000 gallons to $5.50. Agricultural customers’ usage charge is a flat $0.69 per 1,000
gallons.
3-51
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Redwood Valley County Water District
3.5.4.4 The RVCWD has a capital improvement plan with a schedule of projects to be
completed each year. In the last three years, the RVCWD allocated an average of
$87,000 annually for capital improvements.
3.5.5.1 The RVCWD works cooperatively with federal, state, and local agencies. For example,
the RVCWD is a member of the MCIWPC and is a partner in the assessment of the
quagga/zebra mussel impacts on water delivery systems.
3.5.5.2 The RVCWD is a member of the JPIA to reduce insurance costs by joining in a pool with
other agencies.
3.5.6.1 The RVCWD is governed by a five-member board elected by division to four-year
staggered terms. Board meetings are held regularly on the third Thursday of the month
and noticed according to the Brown Act. The RVCWD is unique in that it uses a
sandwich board to publicize its meetings.
3.5.6.2 The RVCWD has six employees: a general manager, one full-time and one part-time
office staff, and three field technicians. Staffing is sufficient to perform the functions
of the RVCWD.
3.5.6.3 The RVCWD maintains a website that is used to communicate with its residents. It
contains meeting notices, meeting minutes, and other relevant information.
3.5.6.4 One of the key issues is the potential consolidation with the RRFC. An ad hoc
committee has been at work to address issues. The consolidation is complicated by the
interaction with SCWA, which controls water from Lake Mendocino that is critical to
successful consolidation.
3.5.7.1 As the RVCWD is considering consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to
consolidation apply.
3-52
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts Russian River Flood Control and Water
Final Municipal Service Review Conservation Improvement District
3.5 – Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District
District Profile
The Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District
(RRFC) was formed to serve, along with the Sonoma County Water Agency, as the local sponsor for
the development of Coyote Dam and Lake Mendocino. The RRFC encompasses approximately
51,000 acres from just north of the Sonoma County line to Calpella. Exhibit 3.5-1 shows the RRFC
boundaries.
The RRFC provides raw water for irrigation and to municipal water purveyors within its boundaries
and place of use. The municipal service provider then treats and distributes the water to its
customers. The following municipal water districts or companies receive water from the RRFC:
City of Ukiah River Estates Mutual Water Company
Millview County Water District Henry Station Mutual Water Company
Calpella County Water District Redwood Valley County Water District
Hopland Public Utility District East Sanel Irrigation District
Rogina Water Company
3.5.1 – Growth and Population Projections
The population of the RRFC can be estimated from the population of the zip codes contained in the
RRFC boundaries. The RRFC covers much of zip code 95449 and 95482. Zip code 95449 covers the
rural area from Hopland to the Sonoma County border. The 2010 Census estimates the population
of zip code 95449 at 1,500. Zip code 95482 includes the City of Ukiah and most of the Ukiah
Valley. The population of the 95482 zip code is 31,800, so the estimated population of the RRFC is
33,300.
The population of the RRFC was also studied as a part of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). In a
review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population of the unincorporated portion
between 2005 and 2020 was projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year. Since the
analysis was completed before the economic downturn, it may be optimistic. The same study
shows an average 1 percent annual growth rate between 1990 and 2005. Based on these growth
rates, the 2020 the population of the RRFC would be between 36,000 and 37,600.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.1.1 The population of the RRFC is estimated at 33,300. Projected growth ranges from 1
percent to 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so
the estimated population of the RRFC is expected to be approximately 36,000 in 2020.
3.5.2 – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
In 2011, the legislature passed SB 244, which was signed into law and became effective January 1,
2012. The new law added a seventh area to evaluate in the MSR. SB 244 requires identification of
disadvantaged unincorporated communities that lie within the RRFC’s SOI or proposed SOI.
3-53
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts Russian River Flood Control and Water
Final Municipal Service Review Conservation Improvement District
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within a city’s sphere of influence. An
unincorporated island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is
surrounded or substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county
boundary or the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically
isolated community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities but the community of Redwood Valley lies
just north of the district boundaries and should be evaluated. Redwood Valley receives water
service from the Redwood Valley County Water District and fire services from the Calpella/
Redwood Valley Fire District. Table 3.5-1 shows the median household income compared with the
statewide median household income, based on the 2010 census. The data show that the median
income for Redwood Valley exceeds the 80-percent threshold, and it should not be considered a
disadvantaged unincorporated community.
Table 3.5-1: Median Household Income RRFC Communities
PERCENT OF MEDIAN
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD CALIFORNIA HOUSEHOLD
LOCATION CENSUS TRACT INCOME INCOME OF $57,708
Redwood Valley 108.01 $53,563 93
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the RRFC
boundaries.
3.5.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The RRFC operates under water right permit 12947B. The RRFC is authorized to divert 8,000 AFY
from Mendocino Lake for domestic, municipal, irrigation, and recreational purposes within the
RRFC service area. This water is diverted and sold as raw water to public water systems, where it
is subsequently treated for municipal use, and to private agricultural entities for irrigation and
frost protection purposes. As of 2010, all but approximately 1,400 AF of the 8,000-acre-foot supply
have been contracted to public water systems and agricultural entities. The balance is considered
surplus water and is currently sold to the Redwood Valley County Water District, where it is used
for municipal and agricultural purposes. Table 3.5-2 provides a summary of municipal water
customers and the amount of water they are contracted to purchase. As seen in the table,
agriculture receives about 58 percent of the annual allocation.
3-54
E School Way
E as
t
R
d
Potter
Valley
Rd
ST
20
E
a
s
ts
id
e
C a Lake Mendocino
lp
e
lla
R
d
Lake
Mendocino Dr
Masonite Industrial Rd
Low Gap Rd £¤
Vichy
Springs
Rd
101
tS E Perkins St
e ta tS E Gobbi St
S
ST
222
Gielow Ln
Scotts
Valley
Rd
Lake County
ST
253
£¤
101
East
s
id
e
R d ST
175
d
R
e
us
o
H
n
ntai
u
Major Roads M o
Russian River Flood Control and Water
Conservation Improvement District Boundary
Ukiah City Boundary
Mendocino County Boundary
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit3_6_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, Esri
Exhibit 3.6.1
£
Russian River Flood Control and Water
0 2
Conservation Improvement District Boundary Map
Miles
E Mulberg & Associates LAFCO of Mendocino Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts Russian River Flood Control and Water
Final Municipal Service Review Conservation Improvement District
Table 3.5-2: Summary of RRFC Water Supply Agreements
AGENCY ANNUAL CONTRACT AMOUNT(AF)
City of Ukiah 800
Willow CWD 515
Millview CWD 970
Calpella CWD 51
Rogina Water Company 400
Hopland PUDa 192
Agriculturalb 3,793
Non-Agricultural Subtotal 2,797
Grand Total 6,590
Notes:
Not located in the UVA
a Includes agricultural users not in the UVA
b The difference between the allocated supply and the maximum quantity
available (8,000 AF) is considered surplus to the needs of the RRFC water
contractors and has historically been sold to the Redwood Valley County
Water District.
Source: Mendocino County Water Agency, 2010; White, 2013.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.3.1 The RRFC is limited to a maximum of 8,000 AFY of water from Lake Mendocino by
water right permit 12947B. Of those 8,000 AF, the RRFC has contracts for 6,600 AF.
The remaining 1,400 AF, when available, are considered surplus and historically have
been sold to the Redwood Valley County Water District.
3.5.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Services
The budget for FY 2012–13 forecasts revenues of $341,895 and expenses of $340,450. The RRFC
receives both property tax and revenues from water sales. Table 3.5-3 summarizes revenues and
expenses for the most recent three years, FY 2009–10 through FY 2011–12.
Table 3.5-3: RRFC Revenues and Expenses FY 2009–10 to FY 2011–12
Account FY 2009–10 FY 2010–11 FY 2011–12
Property Taxes $39,814 $39,875 $40,624
Water Sales $339,645 $347,550 $263,347
Total Income $379,866 $387,448 $304,732
Total Expenses $244,296 $265,872 $305,799
Net Income $121,575 $135,570 ($1,066)
Source: RRFC 2011, 2012.
3-57
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts Russian River Flood Control and Water
Final Municipal Service Review Conservation Improvement District
The table shows that waters sales represent approximately 90 percent and that property taxes are
10 percent. The RRFC contracts with the agencies shown in Table 3.5-23.6.1 at a rate of $47 per
AF. Using that rate, water sales for the three years—FY 2009–10, FY 2010–11, and FY 2011–12—were
7,226 AF, 7,395 AF and 5,603 AF, respectively. The drop in sales can be attributed to the wet
spring experienced in the region. As a result, less irrigation water was needed with the
corresponding drop in sales. It is clear that sales are limited by permit 12947B. Unless the District
can acquire more water rights, the District is near capacity.
Review of revenues and expenses for FY 2011–12 shows a net operating loss. This can be explained
by lower water sales and higher payroll expenses.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.4.1 The RRFC has a budget for FY 2012–13 of approximately $342,000. The RRFC receives
approximately 10 percent of its revenues from property taxes and 90 percent from
water sales. In the last three years, the RRFC has had surplus water that it sells to
RVCWD. Revenues are limited by available water in its water right permit.
3.5.5 – Status and Opportunity for Shared Facilities
The RRFC works cooperatively with other government agencies. It works closely with SCWA to
monitor water levels on Lake Mendocino. The RRFC works with other county agencies such as the
MCIWPC, a joint powers agency that includes Mendocino County, the City of Ukiah, Russian River
Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District, and Potter Valley Irrigation District.
The agency was formed to protect and procure adequate water supplies for its member agencies
and to facilitate coordination between the Potter Valley Irrigation District and PG&E on the Potter
Valley Project.
The RRFC has signed on to the quagga/zebra mussel MOU. Quagga and zebra mussels are recent
invaders to California. The mussels are internationally recognized pests that have caused
significant impacts on water delivery systems, fisheries, and ecosystems, with control costing
millions of dollars annually in many states and countries. The SCWA is preparing the MOU to fund
an assessment of the risk for Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma. The study will cost an estimated
$120,000, shared among signatories.
The RRFC helps fund the Independent Science Review Panel (ISRP), which works with the California
Land Stewardship Institute. The ISRP reviews and provides input on the scientific basis for policies
related to river supply and river management. The General Manager also actively participates in
the Upper Russian River Alliance.
The RRFC’s General Manager has been appointed to the Technical Peer Review Committee of the
North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (NCIRWMP). The goal of the NCIRWMP is
to determine the best way to use state funding for water quality, conservation, recycling and
supply, watershed and fisheries enhancement, stormwater and flood management, and
environment and habitat protection projects. The NCIRWMP is a collaborative effort of seven
North-Coast counties, including Mendocino, Del Norte, Humboldt, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sonoma, and
Trinity. The Technical Peer Review Committee reviews projects and makes recommendations to
3-58
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts Russian River Flood Control and Water
Final Municipal Service Review Conservation Improvement District
the Policy Review Panel of the NCIRWMP. The General Manager has also been active in developing
alternatives to water diversions to deal with frost.
The RRFC also shares the cost for the cooperative water resources program conducted by the U.S.
Geological Survey with SCWA.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.5.1 The RRFC works cooperatively with a number of other water agencies such as SCWA.
The RRFC holds a seat on the IWPC and has participated with other regional agencies in
the study to assess impacts of quagga/zebra mussels.
3.5.6 – Government Structure and Accountability
The RRFC is governed by a five-member board elected at large to staggered four-year terms. The
board meets on the second Wednesday of the month at 5 p.m. at RRFC offices at 151 Laws Avenue
in Ukiah. Meetings are posted according to the Brown Act. Board members receive compensation
of $50 per meeting.
There are four standing committees of the board: Engineering and Operations, Personnel and
Organization, Government Affairs, and Finance.
The RRFC operates with one full-time employee, a general manager who occasionally hires a part-
time office assistant when he takes vacation.
The RRFC communicates with its residents by means of its website and posted meeting notices.
The website was revised and updated in August 2011.
The RRFC has been actively working with the Redwood Valley County Water District on
consolidation of the two districts. The RVCWD receives surplus water from RRFC. In 2011, the two
districts signed a Memorandum of Agreement that has since expired; however, consolidation
depends on being able to secure water rights for an additional 6,000 AF. The application has
received three protest letters. The RRFC has formally responded to all protests. The RRFC and
RVCWD have been in discussion with SCWA to resolve the SCWA’s concerns. Until the protests are
resolved, the application cannot go forward.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.6.1 The RRFC is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. The board meets on the second Wednesday of the month at RRFC headquarters.
The board has four standing committees. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown
Act.
3.6.6.2 The RRFC operates with one full-time employee, the general manager.
3.6.6.3 The RRFC communicates with residents through its website and meeting notices.
3.6.6.4 The RRFC has been actively working with the Redwood Valley County Water District on
a consolidation. Both districts signed a Memorandum of Agreement that has expired.
However, the consolidation hinges on the ability to acquire additional water rights.
3-59
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts Russian River Flood Control and Water
Final Municipal Service Review Conservation Improvement District
3.5.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
As the RRFC continues discussions on consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to
consolidation apply. The policies are found in Chapter V Section B 8, 9, and 10. Policy 8 comes
directly from CKH, which asserts that if two districts wish to consolidate and pass substantially
similar resolutions, LAFCO cannot deny them. LAFCO’s actions are subject to protest proceedings
whereby a protest of 25 percent of affected registered voters will trigger an election, and a protest
of 50 percent will stop the consolidation. Policies 9 and 10 state that LAFCO cannot materially
change the conditions of the consolidation unless agreed upon by the two districts.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.6.7.1 As the RRFC is considering consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to
consolidation apply.
3.5.8 – Summary of Determinations
3.6.1.1 The population of the RRFC is estimated at 33,300. Projected growth ranges from 1
percent annually to 1.63 percent annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower
rate, so the estimated population of the RRFC is expected to be approximately 36,000 in
2020.
3.6.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the RRFC
boundaries.
3.6.3.1 The RRFC is limited to a maximum of 8,000 AFY of water from Lake Mendocino by
water right permit 12947B. Of those, the RRFC has contracts for 6,600 AF. The
remaining 1,400 AF, when available, are considered surplus and historically have been
sold to the Redwood Valley County Water District.
3.6.4.1 The RRFC has a budget for FY 2012–13 of approximately $342,000. The RRFC receives
approximately 10 percent of its revenues from property taxes and 90 percent from
water sales. In the last three years, the RRFC has had surplus water that it sells to
RVCWD. Revenues are limited by available water in its water right permit.
3.6.5.1 The RRFC works cooperatively with a number of other water agencies such as SCWA.
The RRFC holds a seat on the IWPC and has participated with other regional agencies in
the study to assess impacts of quagga/zebra mussels.
3.6.6.1 The RRFC is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. The board meets on the second Wednesday of the month at RRFC headquarters.
The board has four standing committees. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown
Act.
3.6.6.2 The RRFC operates with one full-time employee, the general manager.
3.6.6.3 The RRFC communicates with residents through its website and meeting notices.
3.6.6.4 The RRFC has been actively working with the Redwood Valley County Water District on
a consolidation. Both Districts signed a Memorandum of Agreement that has expired.
However, the consolidation hinges on the ability to acquire additional water rights.
3.6.7.1 As the RRFC is considering consolidation with the RRFC, LAFCO policies relating to
consolidation apply.
3-60
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
3.6 – Willow County Water District
District Profile
The Willow County Water District (WCWD) was formed on July 20, 1950 under section 30321 of the
Water Code. The WCWD provides water service to approximately 990 residential and 60
commercial connections covering approximately 2760 acres located immediately south of Ukiah.
The WCWD also serves 85 customers in the City on South Dora, Rose, and Yokayo Streets. The area
was annexed to the City; however, in order to maintain revenue stability, the WCWD continues to
provide service. Exhibit 3.7-1 shows the WCWD boundaries.
3.6.1 – Population
Population in the WCWD was estimated at 3,760 in 2004. Given the proximity to the City of Ukiah,
where the historic growth has been 0.5 percent per year, the population in 2012 would be 3,910.
The population of the WCWD was also studied as a part of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). In a
review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population between 2005 and 2020 was
projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year. Since the analysis was completed before
the economic downturn, it may be optimistic. The same study shows an average 1 percent annual
growth rate between 1990 and 2005. Using the more conservative growth rate, the WCWD
anticipates a population of 4,222 in 2020. With the higher population and annual growth rate of
1.63 percent, the population in 2020 may be expected to reach 4,418.
DETERMINATION:
3.7.1.1 The current population of the WCWD is estimated at 3,910. The unincorporated
portion of the Ukiah Valley is expected to grow at a rate of 1.00 to 1.63 percent
annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population
of the WCWD is expected to be approximately 4,200 in 2020.
3.6.2 – Disadvantaged Communities
In 2011, the legislature passed SB 244, which was signed into law and became effective January 1,
2012. The new law added a seventh area to evaluate in the MSR. SB 244 requires identification of
disadvantaged unincorporated communities that lie within the District’s SOI or proposed SOI.
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within a city’s sphere of influence. An
unincorporated island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is
surrounded or substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county
boundary or the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically
isolated community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities, but the Hopland community—which lies
just outside the district boundaries—should be evaluated. Table 3.6-1 shows the median household
income compared with the statewide median household income, based on the 2010 census. The
data show that the Hopland community can be considered a disadvantaged unincorporated
3-61
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
community. Despite the designation, the Hopland community does receive essential municipal
services from special districts. The Hopland Public Utilities District provides water and sewer and
the Hopland Volunteer Fire Department provides fire suppression.
Table 3.6-1: Median Household Income Willow County Water District Communities
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD PERCENT OF MEDIAN CALIFORNIA
LOCATION CENSUS TRACT INCOME HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF $57,708
Hopland 118 $44,700 77
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
DETERMINATION:
3.7.2.1 Hopland to the south is adjacent to district boundaries and meets the definition of a
disadvantaged unincorporated community. The Hopland community receives municipal
services from the Hopland Public Utility District, which provides water and sewer, and
the Hopland Volunteer Fire District, which provides fire protection.
3.6.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The WCWD provides both domestic and irrigation water. Exhibit 3.7-2 shows production for the period
of 2000 to 2009. As shown, domestic production ranges up to 1,200 AFY and irrigation water ranges
up to 100 AF. The exhibit also shows that production declined from 2006 to 2009, which coincided
with a severe drought in the area. During that period, Lake Mendocino water levels receded to
record lows, and mandatory rationing—a 50-percent reduction in water use—was instituted by the
Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. Water usage in 2004, a year of near-average precipitation
and a year in which no extraordinary efforts to conserve water occurred, is considered more typical
of an average year. In 2004, domestic production was 1,137 AF and agricultural production was 73
AF, a total production of 1,210 AF. The average production over the ten-year period was 1,094 AF, of
which 94 percent was for domestic use and 6 percent was for irrigation.
The WCWD supplies water through a number of sources, including wells, surface water, and Lake
Mendocino water. The WCWD has surface water rights for 1,440 AFY from November to June and
726 AFY year round through diversion of underflow of the Russian River. The WCWD also contracts
with RRFC for 515 AFY.
3-62
N
H
E Perkins St Vichy
Springs
Rd
ig
h
la
n
d
A
v e E Gobbi St R e W
S
O a k S t tS e ta
E Gobbi St
W a u g h L £¤ 101
c
re
a tio n
R d
atso
n R d
tS
S
n
Sanford Ranch Rd
d
R
re
v
Hastings Ave ST
222
iR
d
lO
Beacon Ln
Rud
d
ic
Jefferson Ln k C
u
n
n
in
g
h
a
m
R
d
Knoll Rd
ak
O
S
S
tate
S
t
T
Plant Rd
a
y
lo
r
D m
R
d
r
h
a
g
n
ni
n
u
C
k
ST
253 d
di c
u
R
Boonville Rd
Fracchia Ln
G
oat
R ock R d Bisby Rd Cox Schroeder Rd
st
si d e R d
a
E
El
Roble
Rd
ST
253
Mcnab Ranch Rd
Major Roads
Willow County Water District Boundary
Ukiah City Boundary
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit3_7_1.mxd Data Sources: City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, Esri
£ Exhibit 3.7.1
0 1
Willow County Water District Boundary Map
Miles
E Mulberg & Associates Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
Exhibit 3.6-2: Willow County Water District Water Production 2000–2009
Source: Mendocino County Water Agency, 2010.
Table 3.6-2 provides a listing of the main components of the water system. As seen in the table,
the WCWD has five wells, of which three are used only during dry months. The total capacity of
the two well fields is 2,700 gallons per minute. The WCWD does not operate a treatment plant.
Domestic water is treated in the pump house at the well site.
In addition, there are nine storage tanks with a capacity of 1,348,000 gallons. The WCWD has
signed a contract to replace the 100,000-gallon storage tank at Firecrest 1 with a 350,000-gallon
tank. When that work is complete, the WCWD will have a storage capacity of 1.598 million gallons.
The WCWD office location on Laws Avenue serves as the utility yard and shop.
3-65
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
Table 3.6-2: Willow County Water District System Components
Location Component Description
Norgard Lane Well Field Three wells Not used in winter—pump capacity
0.7 mgd/750 gpm
Burke Hill Well Field Wells 7 & 8 Pump capacity 1.4 mgd/2,000 gpm
Stipp Lane Storage Storage tank 500,000 gallon capacity
Spanish Canyon 1 Two booster pumps 0.28 mgd
Spanish Canyon 2 Two storage tanks 500,000 gallon/200,000 gallon
Spanish Canyon 3 One storage tank 15,000 gallons
Firecrest 1 One storage tank, two 350,000 gallons/0.20 mgd
booster pumps
Firecrest 2 One storage tank, two 10,000 gallons/0.19 mgd
booster pumps
Oak Knoll 1 One storage tank, two 10,000 gallons/0.20 mgd
booster pumps
Oak Knoll 2 One storage tank 10,000 gallons
Crestview 1 Two booster pumps 0.18 mgd
Crestview 2 One storage tank 3,000 gallons
Source: Redding, 2006.
Projected supply and demand are shown in Table 3.6-3. Since 2004 was a good representation of a
normal year, it serves as a benchmark. With conservation the average production for 2004 would
be sufficient to meet projected demand through 2015. However, the WCWD has sufficient water
rights and purchase agreements to meet future demands, assuming no conservation programs for
normal, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios.
3-66
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
Table 3.6-3: Willow County Water District Supply and Demand (AFY)
SCENARIO 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Demand (no 20X20 conservation)1 1,301 1,451 1,602 1,752 1,904
Demand (with conservation)1 1,041 1,161 1,282 1,402 1,523
2004 Production 1,210 1,210 1,210 1,210 1,210
Normal/Single Dry Year Supply
Lake Mendocino 515 515 515 515 515
Surface Water Rights 2,166 2,166 2,166 2,166 2,166
Totals 2,681 2,681 2,681 2,681 2,681
Extended/Critical Dry Year Supply
Lake Mendocino 386 386 386 386 386
Surface Water Rights 1,922 1,922 1,922 1,922 1,922
Totals 2,308 2,308 2,308 2,308 2,308
Note:
1 Based on Ukiah Valley Area Plan preferred project alternative normal year demand
Source: Mendocino County Water Agency 2010, Table 2-12 and Table 6-1.
DETERMINATION:
3.7.3.1 During a normal year such as 2004, the WCWD distributed 1,210 AF of water for
domestic and irrigation uses. Between 2000 and 2009, the average production was
1,094 AF, of which 94 percent was for domestic uses.
3.7.3.2 The WCWD maintains a storage capacity of 1.348 million gallons in nine storage tanks
strategically located throughout the WCWD. It has surface water rights of 2,166 AF and
can purchase up to 515 AF from RRFC.
3.7.3.3 Demand in 2010 was 1,301 AF and is expected to increase to 1,904 AF in 2030 if
required conservation measures are not put in place. Total supply from all sources is
estimated at 2,681 AF in a normal year and 2,308 AF in an extended dry year. On that
basis, the WCWD has sufficient capacity to meet anticipated demand.
3.6.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Services
Over the last three years, the WCWD operated with a budget of around $680,000. Of the total
anticipated revenues, approximately 73 percent are from water sales. Exhibit 3.6-3 shows the
distribution of water sales revenues as an average of the budgeted values for FY 2009–10 through
FY 2011–12. The exhibit shows residential customers account for 80 percent of water sales.
Management services represent another source of revenue. The WCWD has contracts to manage
and staff the Calpella County Water District, the Hopland Public Utility District, and the River
Estates Mutual Water Company. Revenues from these management contracts account for
approximately 17 percent of all revenues.
3-67
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
Exhibit 3.6-3: Willow County Water District Distribution of Water Sales Revenues
Source: Redding 2012a.
The largest expenses are salaries. Since WCWD has a contract to manage Calpella CWD and
Hopland PUD, the WCWD allocates part of its salary expenses to be charged against contracts with
those districts.
The WCWD continues to fund capital improvements. Over the three years from FY 2009-10 to FY
2011–12, capital improvements averaged 14 percent of expenses or just over $100,000 per year.
The WCWD initiates projects when funds are available. As a result, the WCWD has no long-term
debt. Its capital improvement plan is a 15-year list of projects. Most recently, it has increased
capacity on one of the storage tanks and has replaced many of the original pipes from the 1950s.
Rates
WCWD water rates and connection fees are shown in Table 3.6-4.
Table 3.6-4: Willow County Water District Water Rates and Connection Fees
(Effective May 20, 2012)
% BASE USAGE
USE CUSTOMERS 0-4500 GALLONS EACH ADDITIONAL 1,000 GALLONS
Domestic Stage 1 94 $15.00 $1.40
Domestic Stage 2 2 $17.15 $1.55
Domestic Stage 3 1 $18.25 $1.85
Domestic Stage 4 1 $19.45 $2.05
Irrigation — — $1.40
Source: Redding 2012b.
3-68
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
Irrigation customers are charged at $1.40 per thousand gallons with a standby charge of $180 per
year. Connection fees are $750 for ¾-inch service and $1,000 for 1-inch service.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.7.4.1 The WCWD budget is approximately $680,000, which is sufficient to fund domestic and
irrigation services. Water sales account for 70 percent of all revenues; of that total,
approximately 81 percent comes from residential sales, 14 percent comes from
commercial or sales to businesses, and 5 percent comes from industrial customers.
3.7.4.2 The WCWD also receives revenue from management contracts. It currently provides
staffing for the Calpella County Water District, the Hopland Public Utility District, and
the River Estates Mutual Water Company.
3.7.4.3 The WCWD has a long-term capital improvement plan funded as “pay-go,” which means
that projects are initiated as funding becomes available. The WCWD has no long-term
debt obligations.
3.6.5 – Status and Opportunity for Shared Facilities
This section will focus on potential opportunities to provide more efficient services to City
residents. Such opportunities could include not only sharing physical facilities but also working
regionally with other service providers to exchange knowledge and participate in joint ventures for
new or expanding facilities. Sharing facilities can lead to cost savings and a more efficient delivery
of municipal services. This section will also discuss management efficiencies and staffing.
The WCWD works cooperatively with other agencies in the area. Cooperation among the water
agencies is facilitated by the fact that RRFC, Millview, Calpella, Hopland, and Willow all have
offices in the 151 Laws Avenue building. The WCWD has an emergency intertie with the City of
Ukiah. In case of an emergency, water can flow freely to the WCWD or to the City.
Management Efficiencies
Management of district services is clearly defined. One measure of management efficiency is long-
range planning. The WCWD has a 15-year capital improvement plan, a disaster plan, and it
maintains a policy and procedure manual.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.7.5.1 The WCWD works with other water agencies in the Ukiah Valley and maintains an
emergency intertie with the City of Ukiah. Cooperation among the water agencies is
facilitated by the fact that RRFC, Millview CWD, Calpella CWD, Hopland PUD, Ukiah
Valley Sanitation District, and Willow CWD all have offices in the 151 Laws Avenue
building.
3.7.5.2 One measure of management efficiency is long-range planning. The WCWD has a
capital improvement plan, a disaster plan, and a policy and procedure manual.
3.6.6 – Government Structure and Accountability
The WCWD is governed by a five-member board of directors, elected at large to four-year
staggered terms. Each member receives a stipend of $25 per meeting. Members meet regularly on
3-69
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
the second Monday of the month at 7:30 p.m. at WCWD offices at 151 Laws Avenue. Meetings are
noticed according to the Brown Act.
The WCWD has five full-time employees: two in management, two in operations, and one support
person. Office staff also address customer concerns about billing and service. The WCWD
maintains regular office hours and has an answering service to forward calls during after-hours
emergencies.
The WCWD does not have a website. However, it communicates with its customers through its
noticing procedure and with bill stuffers—flyers or newsletters that are included with the monthly
bill. Establishment of a website would be desirable and should be considered.
The WCWD has management agreements with three other water agencies: Calpella County Water
District CWD, Hopland PUD, and River Estates Mutual Water Company. Under the agreements,
WCWD provides staffing, office space, and field staff. Other than the boards of CCWD and the
HPUD, the districts are essentially one with WCWD. The agreements represent a functional
consolidation of the three districts.
One reason the three districts have not consolidated is their desire to maintain community
identity. Although having separate districts is one way, other ways include community advisory
councils that would be made up of concerned residents of Calpella and Hopland. Community
advisory councils would be able to focus on their respective communities and would maintain a
standing with the board of directors. Other options include establishing districts so that
representation on the board would be sure to include residents of Calpella and Hopland. Over the
years, there have many discussions regarding a regional water agency for the Ukiah Valley. Such a
consolidation would need to involve the City of Ukiah.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.7.6.1 The WCWD is governed by a five-member board of directors elected at large to four-
year staggered terms. Directors receive a stipend of $25 per meeting.
3.7.6.2 The board meets regularly on the second Monday of the month at district headquarters.
Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
3.7.6.3 The WCWD has five employees, each with well-defined responsibilities.
3.7.6.4 The WCWD does not have a website but communicates with residents by posting the
agenda. The WCWD also maintains regular office hours to answer billing questions and
provide customer service.
3.7.6.5 The WCWD provides staffing for Calpella CWD and Hopland PUD through management
contracts. The contracts provide for what can be considered a functional consolidation
of the two districts with Willow CWD.
3.6.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
As the Willow CWD has contracted with Calpella CWD and Hopland PUD for a functional
consolidation, the three districts at some point may want to formally apply to LAFCO for
consolidation. In that case the LAFCO policies relating to consolidation would apply.
3-70
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
Policies relating to consolidation are found in Chapter V Section B and Section C under
reorganization. The consolidation can be initiated by petition (section 4); by the action of the
boards of the three agencies (sections 8, 9, and 10); and section C, which relates to a LAFCO-
initiated consolidation. If the action is initiated by petition, section 4 requires the signatures of 5
percent of the registered voters.
If action is initiated by the districts, section 8 requires the districts to adopt substantially similar
resolutions. In that case, LAFCO cannot deny the consolidation and can only make changes to the
terms with the consent of the districts.
A LAFCO-initiated consolidation must be based on an initial study that recommends consolidation.
Policy C 6 requires a second study called a “Reorganization Study” or a reorganization committee
to establish terms of the consolidation. The LAFCO action is subject to protest proceedings.
DETERMINATIONS:
3.7.7.1 The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to
consolidation, should that action be of interest to Calpella CWD, Hopland PUD, and
Willow CWD.
3.6.8 – Summary of Determinations
3.7.1.1 The current population of the WCWD is estimated at 3,910. The unincorporated
portion of the Ukiah Valley is expected to grow at a rate of 1.00 to 1.63 percent
annually. Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population
of the WCWD is expected to be approximately 4,200 in 2020.
3.7.2.1 Hopland to the south is adjacent to district boundaries and meets the definition of a
disadvantaged unincorporated community. The Hopland community receives municipal
services from the Hopland Public Utility District, which provides water and sewer, and
the Hopland Volunteer Fire District, which provides fire protection.
3.7.3.1 During a normal year such as 2004, the WCWD distributed 1,210 AF of water for
domestic and irrigation uses. Between 2000 and 2009, the average production was
1,094 AF, of which 94 percent was for domestic uses.
3.7.3.2 The WCWD maintains a storage capacity of 1.348 million gallons in nine storage tanks
strategically located throughout the WCWD. It has surface water rights of 2,166 AF and
can purchase up to 515 from RRFC.
3.7.3.3 Demand in 2010 was 1,301 AF and is expected to increase to 1,904 AF in 2030 if
required conservation measures are not put in place. Total supply from all sources is
estimated at 2,681 AF in a normal year and 2,308 AF in an extended dry year. On that
basis, the WCWD has sufficient capacity to meet anticipated demand.
3.7.4.1 The WCWD budget is approximately $680,000, which is sufficient to fund domestic and
irrigation services. Water sales account for 70 percent of all revenues; of that total,
approximately 81 percent comes from residential sales, 14 percent comes from
commercial or sales to businesses, and 5 percent comes from industrial customers.
3.7.4.2 The WCWD also receives revenue from management contracts. It currently provides
staffing for the Calpella County Water District, the Hopland Public Utility District, and
the River Estates Mutual Water Company.
3-71
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Willow County Water District
3.7.4.3 The WCWD has a long-term capital improvement plan funded as “pay-go,” which means
projects are initiated as funding becomes available. The WCWD has no long-term debt
obligations.
3.7.5.1 The WCWD works with other water agencies in the Ukiah Valley and maintains an
emergency intertie with the City of Ukiah. Cooperation among the water agencies is
facilitated by the fact that RRFC, Millview CWD, Calpella CWD, Hopland PUD, Ukiah
Valley Sanitation District, and Willow CWD all have offices in the 151 Laws Avenue
building.
3.7.5.2 One measure of management efficiency is long-range planning. The WCWD has a
capital improvement plan, a disaster plan, and a policy and procedure manual.
3.7.6.1 The WCWD is governed by a five-member board of directors elected at large to four-
year staggered terms. Board members receive a stipend of $25 per meeting.
3.7.6.2 The board meets regularly on the second Monday of the month at district headquarters.
Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
3.7.6.3 The WCWD has five employees, each with well-defined responsibilities.
3.7.6.4 The WCWD does not have a website but communicates with residents by posting the
agenda. The WCWD also maintains regular office hours to answer billing questions and
provide customer service.
3.7.6.5 The WCWD provides staffing for Calpella CWD and Hopland PUD through management
contracts. The contracts provide for what can be considered a functional consolidation
of the two districts with Willow CWD.
3.7.7.1 The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to
consolidation, should that action be of interest to Calpella CWD, Hopland PUD, and
Willow CWD.
3-72
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
4:
MULTIPLE SERVICE DISTRICTS
4.1 – Calpella County Water District
District Profile
The Calpella County Water District (CCWD) was formed in 1955 under the County Water District
Law. The CCWD is located in the northwest corner of the UVAP area and currently provides water
and sewer services to approximately 140 residential and 25 commercial water connections and 103
sewer connections in the community of Calpella and the surrounding area. In addition, there is an
area to the west that is not part of the CCWD where the CCWD has an out-of-area service
agreement to provide water for non-agricultural uses. The area consists of 46 parcels and
approximately 233 acres. In total, the CCWD serves an area of approximately 1,297 acres. The
CCWD boundaries along with the present sphere of influence are shown in Exhibit 4.1-1.
4.1.1 – Growth and Population Projections
The population of the Calpella community, based on the 2010 census, is 679. Table 4.1-1 shows
the population of Calpella relative to the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County. The table shows
the persons per household is slightly higher than the City and the County.
Table 4.1-1: 2010 Population Calpella CWD
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PERSONS PER
GEOGRAPHIC AREA POPULATION HOUSING UNITS HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD
Calpella 679 272 253 2.68
Ukiah 16,069 6,488 6,158 2.61
County Total 87,841 40,323 34,945 2.51
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
The population of the CCWD was also studied as a part of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). In a
review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population between 2005 and 2020 was
projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year. Since the analysis was completed before
the economic downturn, it may be optimistic. The same study shows an average 1 percent annual
growth rate between 1990 and 2005. Using the more conservative growth rate, the expected
population in 2020 would reach 730.
DETERMINATION:
4.1.1.1 The current population of the CCWD is estimated at 679. The unincorporated portion
of the Ukiah Valley is expected to grow at a rate of 1.00 to 1.63 percent annually.
Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population of the
CCWD is expected to be 730 in 2020.
4-1
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
4.1.2 – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within the sphere of influence. An unincorporated
island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is surrounded or
substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county boundary or
the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically isolated
community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities but the community of Redwood Valley lies
just outside the district boundaries to the north. The Redwood Valley community is served by the
Redwood Valley County Water District, which provides water and the Redwood Valley/Calpella Fire
District, which provides fire protection.
Table 4.1-2 shows the median household income compared with the statewide median household
income, based on the 2010 census. The data show that the median income for Redwood Valley
exceeds the 80-percent threshold and should not be considered a disadvantaged unincorporated
community.
Table 4.1-2: Median Household Income - Calpella CWD Communities
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD PERCENT OF MEDIAN CALIFORNIA
LOCATION CENSUS TRACT INCOME HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF $57,708
Redwood Valley 108.01 $53,563 93
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.1.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the CCWD
boundaries.
4.1.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
The Calpella County Water District provides both water and wastewater services. Exhibit 4.1-1 also
shows the location of facilities operated by the CCWD.
Water
Calpella’s water supply consists of groundwater from a single groundwater well with a rated
capacity of 25 gallons per minute (40 AFY), and surface water (51 AF) purchased from the RRFC and
wheeled to Calpella by Millview CWD. Limited emergency water supplies are available via an
intertie with Redwood Valley. Calpella does not own or operate any water treatment facilities.
Water treatment services for surface water are provided on a continuing basis by Millview CWD.
The CCWD has no water rights.
4-2
U
v
a
D
r
@ Calpella / Redwood Valley Inter-tie
ST
20
N
S
tate
S
t
d
R
Mill
e
bl
a
e ur
v D
A
la
rtn
e
C
*
50,000 Gal
Moore St Tank
Marina Dr
*
250,000 Gal Tank
d
pella
R
al
G e
C
o ld
G st
si d
u a
lc
h
E
R
d Sewage Treatment Facility
Craw
@
Ca
f
l
o
p
rd
e
Ralnl
c
a
h
R d
/ Millview Inter-tie
£¤
101
Pom
a
Ln N
S
tate
S
t
d
R
a
ell
p
Major Roads al
C
e
C
C
a
a
l
l
p
p
e
e
l
l
l
l
a
a
W
W
a
a
t
t
e
e
r
r
D
D
i
i
s
s
t
t
r
r
i
i
c
c
t
t
Boundary Eastsi d
(Out of District Service Agreement Area Boundary)
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit4_1_1.mxd Data Sources: County of Mendocino, Esri
£
Exhibit 4.1.1
0 0.5
Calpella County Water District Boundary Map
Miles
E Mulberg & Associates LAFCO of Mendocino Ukiah Valley Special Districts MSR
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
Exhibit 4.1-2 shows system sources and demand for the period 2000 to 2006. The exhibit shows
demand increase from approximately 100 AF to 120 AF. It also shows production from the one well
is fairly consistent at 30 to 40 AF, which is about 30 percent of demand, and that imported water
supplies most of the demand or an average of 70 percent. Water usage in 2004, a year of near-
average precipitation, is considered more realistic and the best available representation of current
average annual water production. During 2004, the Calpella well produced 35 AF, imported water
was 84 AF, and total demand was 119 AF. Of the 84 AF of imported water 51 AF was purchased
from RRFC. The data show that the CCWD was able to purchase additional to meet demand.
Exhibit 4.1-2: Water Demand 2000–2006
Source: Mendocino County Water Agency, 2010.
The CCWD maintains two storage tanks. One has a capacity of 250,000 gallons, built in 2001, while
the other has the capacity of 50,000 gallons. The 250,000-gallon facility was at 83-percent
capacity, while the 50,000-gallon facility is was at 17 percent capacity in 2006. The storage
facilities provide a three-day supply for average daily demand and a two-day supply based on
maximum daily demand.
Table 4.1-3 shows projected demand and supply. With a maximum pump capacity of 40 AFY and a
recent contract for 101 AF from RRFC, the maximum the CCWD can supply is 140 AF. The table
shows that there is insufficient supply to meet future demands without purchasing water from
other sources.
4-5
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
Table 4.1-3: Projected Supply and Demand Calpella CWD
CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Water Demands
Table 2-12 (no 20x20 conservation) 140 175 210 243 279
With 20x20 conservation 112 140 168 194.4 223.2
Water Supply
Normal/Single Dry Year
Lake Mendocino 51 51 51 51 51
Groundwater 40 40 40 40 40
Totals: 91 91 91 91 91
Extended/Critical Dry Year
Lake Mendocino 38 38 38 38 38
Groundwater 40 40 40 40 40
Totals: 78 78 78 78 78
Source: Mendocino County Water Agency 2010.
The CCWD has adequate infrastructure capacity but lacks additional water capacity. The Calpella
Water District is currently under a new hookup moratorium because of the lack of a reliable water
supply.
DETERMINATION:
4.1.3.1 The average normal year demand is 119 AF. The CCWD operates one well with a
capacity of 40 AF and in order to meet demand must contract with RRFC for the
remainder. Because of geographical constraints, the CCWD must contract with Millview
County Water District for treatment and transport.
4.1.3.2 Because of the uncertainty in water supply, the CCWD is under a new hookup
moratorium.
Wastewater
The CCWD provides sewer service to the Calpella community and surrounding areas. The CCWD
services 113 sewer connections.
The wastewater treatment plant is on the east side of Highway 101 (Exhibit 4.1-1) in an agricultural
and rural residential setting approximately 0.67 mile south of Calpella. The site is bounded on the
west by railroad tracks, on the east by the Russian River, and on the north and south by
undeveloped land.
4-6
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
The major treatment plant components include two aerated lagoons, a facultative pond in the area
of the former holding and polishing pond, a chlorine contact pipe in the area of the former
sedimentation basin, and three percolation ponds (Exhibit 4.1-1) . Other key components include
an influent pump station, headworks, and a control building.
Untreated wastewater entering the plant is pumped from the influent pump station to the aerated
lagoons. The aerated lagoons are operated in series. Effluent is directed to the facultative pond
where further treatment by natural aeration and biological activity occurs. Effluent from the
facultative pond is directed to the chlorine contact chamber where the wastewater remains for a
minimum 30-minute contact time. Side gates control effluent flow rates to the percolation ponds;
effluent samples are collected on a regular basis by the treatment plant. Disposal in the ponds,
which is rotated every 30 days, is accomplished by a combination of evaporation and percolation.
The CCWD performed a study in 1995 that showed the facility nearing capacity. In 2001, the CCWD
started construction of the Wastewater Treatment Feasibility Improvement Project, which was
completed in 2004. The current average dry weather flow (ADWF) was estimated at 36,000 gpd.
The 2004 improvements allowed for an ADWF of 80,000 gpd. Peak daily flow capacity is 200,000
gpd. The 80,000 gpd can accommodate a population of 1,000.
DETERMINATION:
4.1.3.3 The CCWD serves 103 sewer connections and operates a wastewater treatment plant.
The capacity of the plant was increased to 80,000 gpd. In 2007, the average daily flow
rate was estimated at 32,000 gpd. The CCWD has additional treatment capacity and
can accommodate up to 1,000 residents, which is about 300 more than the current
population of the CCWD.
4.1.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Services
The CCWD’s revenues are primarily fees and charges for water and wastewater services. The
CCWD also receives a limited amount of property tax for its wastewater services.
The budget for the last three years has been fairly consistent, with a total income of approximately
$207,000 and expenses of approximately $223,000. Table 4.1-4 shows the budget for the current
fiscal year for water and wastewater. The budgets for the last three years have been identical;
therefore, only the most recent budget is shown. The table shows a positive difference between
revenues and expenditures, not considering depreciation. However, the annual budget does
include an allowance for depreciation of $22,000 for water and $30,000 for wastewater assets. As
a result, the budget shows a deficit of approximately $15,000.
4-7
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
Table 4.1-4: Calpella CWD FY 2011–12 Budget
REVENUES
EXPENSE LESS LESS TOTAL
SERVICE REVENUES DEPRECIATION DIFFERENCE DEPRECIATION EXPENSES
Water $109,870 $106,103 $3,767 $22,000 ($18,233)
Wastewater $97,050 $ 64,153 $32,897 $30,000 $2,897
Total $206,920 $170,256 $36,664 $52,000 ($15,336)
Source: Redding 2012b.
Exhibit 4.1-3 shows the distribution of revenue sources based on average of actual revenues for the
FY 2007–08 to FY 2009–10 for both water and sewer. The average total revenues for that period
were $200,905. As shown, water sales are the majority of revenues.
Exhibit 4.1-3: Calpella CWD Revenue Sources
Source: California State Controller 2009, 2011a, 2011b.
Table 4.1-5 shows actual revenues and expenses for FY 2007–08 to FY 2009–10. Revenues for sewer
services include property tax. As seen in the table, expenses have exceeded revenues. Expenses
include depreciation, so that the CCWD does not actually run out of cash. When equipment needs
to be replaced, depreciation will have to be accounted for.
4-8
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
Table 4.1-5: CCWD Actual Revenues and Expenses FY 2007/08 - FY 2009/10
ACCOUNT FY 2007–08 FY 2008–09 FY 2009–10
Revenues
Water Sales $119,643 $115,584 $101,776
Sewer Charges $94,716 $97,341 $93,285
Total Revenues $214,359 $212,925 $195,061
Expenses
Water $143,678 $132,899 $141,346
Sewer $102,248 $108,198 $108,041
Total Operating Expenses $245,096 $240,050 $248,799
Net ($30,737) ($27,125) ($53,738)
Depreciation $63,866 $54,421 $56,452
Source: California State Controller 2009,2011a, 2011b.
Rates and Connection Fees
Table 4.1-6 shows domestic water and sewer rates. Stage 2 rates are specifically for Marina
Estates.
Table 4.1-6: Calpella CWD Domestic Water and Sewer Rates
USAGE
BASE EACH ADDITIONAL 1,000
USE 0-7,500 GALLONS GALLONS
Stage 1 $25.00 $2.75
Stage 2 $28.75 $3.00
Sewer $35.00 $1.85
Hydrant Water $48.001 $4.00
Note:
1 For 0 to 12,000 gallons
Source: Redding 2012c.
Water connection fees are $1,500 for a ¾-inch line and $2,500 for a 1-inch line. Current industry
standard is 1-inch for new residences. However, there will be no new connections until the
moratorium is lifted. Connection fees for sewer service are $1,400 with an average monthly charge
of $28 per single-family residence.
Long-Term Debt
In 1979, the CCWD secured a revenue bond for $31,300. The bond is due in 2019. The CCWD pays
$1,000 a year to repay the bond.
4-9
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
DETERMINATIONS:
4.1.4.1 Revenue sources are water sales, sewer charges, and limited amount of property taxes.
Proportionally, property tax accounts for 8 percent, sewer charges account for 39
percent, and water sales account for 53 percent.
4.1.4.2 The CCWD has a budget of income averaging approximately $207,000 and expenses of
averaging approximately $223,000. The actuals for FY 2007–08 through FY 2009–10 also
show deficits.
4.1.4.3 In 1979, the CCWD secured a revenue bond for $31,300. The bond is due in 2019. The
CCWD pays $1,000 a year to repay the bond.
4.1.5 – Status and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
In 1993, the CCWD agreed to share office space and staff services with the Willow County Water
District (WCWD). The CCWD relies on the general manager, office personnel, and maintenance
staff of the WCWD. As such, the CCWD has no employees; the Board of Directors works directly
with Willow CWD staff.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.1.5.1 The CCWD shares office space with the WCWD. The CCWD has a contract with WCWD
for staff services that includes administrative services as well as operations. The CCWD
has no employees.
4.1.6 – Government Structure and Accountability
A five-member board is elected at large to four-year terms. Board members receive a stipend of
$40 per meeting up to $80 per month. The board meets on the second Wednesday of each month
at 6 p.m. at Calpella Elementary School on Moore Street in Calpella. Meeting notices are posted on
the front door of the CCWD Office on Laws Avenue and at the Calpella Elementary School. The
CCWD keeps a mailing list of interested parties who receive a notice by mail. The CCWD does not
maintain a website.
The minutes are compiled in a minutes book. The CCWD maintains a set of policies and procedures,
which was last updated in August of 2005. Each board member files a public disclosure document
with the County.
Since the CCWD has no employees, it contracts with WCWD for staff services, and its office is co-
located with the WCWD; consolidation should be considered. One possible adverse impact is the
loss of identity; however, that can be remedied by electing the WCWD board of directors by district
so that Calpella would have at least one director. Alternately, the consolidated district could
establish a community advisory committee for the Calpella Community.
In addition, the CCWD may want to consider annexation of the Out of Area Service Agreement
(OASA) area. Should that occur, the CCWD would have to establish two zones of service, one for
water only and one for water and sewer. Since the CCWD receives a share of the property tax,
annexation could provide for additional needed revenues.
4-10
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
DETERMINATIONS:
4.1.6.1 The CCWD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. Board members receive a stipend of $40 per meeting up to $80 per month. The
board meets on second Wednesday of each month at 6 p.m. at Calpella Elementary
School on Moore Street in Calpella.
4.1.6.2 Meeting notices are posted on the front door of the CCWD Office on Laws Avenue and
at the Calpella Elementary School. The CCWD keeps a mailing list of interested parties
who wish to receive a notice. The CCWD does not maintain a website.
4.1.6.3 The CCWD and the Commission should consider a change in organization that could
include annexation of the OASA and/or consolidation with WCWD.
4.1.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
CCWD has an out-of-area service agreement for the area west of the CCWD’s boundaries that
should be considered for annexation. In addition, CCWD has contracted with Willow CWD for a
functional consolidation with WCWD the districts at some point may want to formally apply for
consolidation with LAFCO. In that case, the LAFCO policies relating to annexation and
consolidation would apply.
LAFCO policies in Chapter V Section B and Section D under reorganization would apply. Should the
CCWD decide to annex the territory LAFCO policies, Chapter V Section D 9 requires that a
completed MSR and sphere update be submitted as part of the application. Completion of this
study satisfies the MSR requirement. The policy also allows the consideration of the sphere update
with the annexation. The moratorium may further simplify the process since the CCWD is
precluded from serving new customers. That would allow the Commission to reaffirm the current
sphere along with the annexation.
The consolidation can be initiated by petition (section 4); by the action of the boards of the three
agencies (sections 8, 9, and 10); and by LAFCO, section C, which relates to a LAFCO-initiated
consolidation. If the action is initiated by petition, section 4 requires the signatures of 5 percent
of the registered voters.
If action is initiated by the districts, section 8 requires the districts to adopt substantially similar
resolutions. In that case, LAFCO cannot deny the consolidation and can only make changes to the
terms with the consent of the districts.
A LAFCO-initiated consolidation must be based on an initial study that recommends consolidation.
Policy C 6 requires a second study called a “Reorganization Study” or a reorganization committee
to establish terms of the consolidation. The LAFCO action is subject to protest proceedings.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.1.7.1 The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to
annexation and consolidation should that action be of interest to CCWD and WCWD.
4-11
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Calpella County Water District
4.1.8 – Summary of Determinations
4.1.1.1 The current population of the CCWD is estimated at 679. The unincorporated portion
of the Ukiah Valley is expected to grow at a rate of 1.00 to 1.63 percent annually.
Economic conditions would favor the lower rate, so the estimated population of the
CCWD is expected to be 730 in 2020.
4.1.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the vicinity of the CCWD
boundaries.
4.1.3.1 The average normal year demand is 119 AF. The CCWD operates one well with a
capacity of 40 AF and in order to meet demand must contract with RRFC for the
remainder. Because of geographical constraints, the CCWD must contract with Millview
County Water District for treatment and transport.
4.1.3.2 Because of the uncertainty in water supply, the CCWD is under a new hookup
moratorium.
4.1.3.3 The CCWD serves 103 sewer connections and operates a wastewater treatment plant.
The capacity of the plant was increased to 80,000 gpd. In 2007, the average daily flow
rate was estimated at 32,000 gpd. The CCWD has additional treatment capacity and
can accommodate up to 1,000 residents, which is about 300 more than the current
population of the CCWD.
4.1.4.1 Revenue sources are water sales, sewer charges, and limited amount of property taxes.
Relative proportions are property tax, 8 percent; sewer charges, 39 percent; and water
sales, 53 percent.
4.1.4.2 The CCWD has a budget of income averaging approximately $207,000 and expenses of
averaging approximately $223,000. The actuals for FY 2007–08 through FY 2009–10 also
show deficits.
4.1.4.3 In 1979, the CCWD secured a revenue bond for $31,300. The bond is due in 2019. The
CCWD pays $1,000 a year to repay the bond.
4.1.5.1 The CCWD shares office space with the WCWD. The CCWD has a contract with WCWD
for staff services that includes administrative services as well as operations. The CCWD
has no employees.
4.1.6.1 The CCWD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. Board members receive a stipend of $40 per meeting up to $80 per month. The
board meets on second Wednesday of month at 6 p.m. at Calpella Elementary School
on Moore Street in Calpella.
4.1.6.2 Meeting notices are posted on the front door of the CCWD Office on Laws Avenue and
at the Calpella Elementary School. The CCWD keeps a mailing list of interested parties
who wish to receive a notice. The CCWD does not maintain a website.
4.1.6.3 The CCWD and the Commission should consider a change in organization that could
include annexation of the OASA and/or consolidation with WCWD.
4.1.7.1 The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to
annexation and consolidation should that action be of interest to CCWD and WCWD.
4-12
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
4.2 – Hopland Public Utility District
District Profile
The Hopland Public Utility District (HPUD) established in 1955 is located approximately 12 miles
south of Ukiah and outside the Ukiah Valley Area Plan study area. Hopland PUD originally provided
water, wastewater, and fire services. The fire department became a separate entity in 1995.
WCWD operated the system from 1983 to 1992 and more recently was asked by the board of
directors to resume operating the system under a staffing agreement. The boundaries of HPUD are
shown in Exhibit 4.2-1.
The HPUD now provides water and sewer service to the Hopland community. There are 350 water
connections and 303 sewer connections. The HPUD had been wheeling water to the Hopland Band
of the Pomo Indian Tribe and their casino. In September 2007, the California Department of Public
Health imposed a moratorium on new water hookups by the HPUD after concluding the District
pumped 24.1 million more gallons of water from the Russian River than was permitted. The
moratorium was lifted in 2011, as the HPUD was able to show compliance.
4.2.1 – Growth and Population Projections
The population of Hopland was estimated at 756 by the 2010 Census. Table 4.2-1 shows the
population of Hopland compared with the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County. It is important to
note that the persons per household in Hopland are higher than in Ukiah and the County.
Table 4.2-1: Population 2010 Census Hopland PUD
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PERSONS PER
GEOGRAPHIC AREA POPULATION HOUSING UNITS HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD
Hopland 756 287 263 2.87
Ukiah 16,069 6,488 6,158 2.61
County Total 87,841 40,323 34,945 2.51
Source: U.S. Census 2010.
In a review completed in 2007 for the Ukiah Valley, the population of the unincorporated portion
between 2005 and 2020 was projected to increase at a rate of 1.63 percent per year. Since the
analysis was completed before the economic downturn, it may be optimistic. The same study
shows a historic average growth rate of 1 percent between 1990 and 2005.
An alternate method is to compare populations of zip codes from 2000 to 2010, then estimate the
growth rate and apply it to the population of Hopland from the 2010 census. The zip code area is
much larger than the area of the HPUD and the population in 2000 was 1,359. The 2010 census
estimated a population of 1,507. That represents 10-percent growth in 10 years or approximately
1 percent per year. Using that growth rate, the estimated population in Hopland in 2020 would be
830.
4-13
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.1.1 The population of Hopland is estimated 756 by the 2010 Census. Growth in the
previous 10 years was 10 percent or about 1 percent per year. Using the 1-percent
growth rate, the population would be estimated at 830 in 2020.
4.2.2 – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities
By definition, a disadvantaged unincorporated community consists of at least 10 dwelling units in a
fringe, island, or legacy community with a median household income of 80 percent or less of the
statewide median household income. It further defines an unincorporated fringe community as any
inhabited and unincorporated territory that is within the sphere of influence. An unincorporated
island community is defined as any inhabited and unincorporated territory that is surrounded or
substantially surrounded by one or more cities or by one or more cities and a county boundary or
the Pacific Ocean. An unincorporated legacy community refers to a geographically isolated
community that is inhabited and has existed for at least 50 years.
There are no island communities or legacy communities or fringe communities adjacent to the
HPUD’s boundaries. Therefore, there are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the
sphere of influence of the HPUD.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the sphere of influence
of the HPUD.
4.2.3 – Present and Planned Capacity of Public Facilities
Hopland provides both water and wastewater services to its customers. It has several facilities
within its district boundaries.
Water
Hopland currently provides water to approximately 350 service connections, as well as a nearby,
tribally owned casino. Exhibit 4.2-1 also shows the location of the water facilities and storage
facilities. Current annual water demands are estimated to be approximately 350 AF.
The HPUD has no water rights. HPUD purchases up to 400 AF of water per year from the RRFC.
Hopland may have the opportunity to purchase additional surplus water from RRFC, since only
6,600 AF of a total of 8,000 AF are under contract.
The HPUD maintains two storage tanks, one to the east and one to the west. The east tank has a
capacity of 300,000 gallons and the west tank has a capacity of 500,000 gallons. Total storage
capacity is 800,000 gallons or about half the summer supply.
4-14
H
ew
litt
S
turtevant
R
d E
as
tsid
e
R
d
East Tank
!"
Capacity:0.3MG
West Tank
!"
Capacity:0.5MG
£¤
Feliz
Creek
Rd
101
* Well #2
R
u
s
s
i
a
Macmillan Dr n
R
* W ell #3 i v
Ralph
Bettcher
Dr e
r
1st
Ln
MM
Wastewater Treatment
oo
uu Facility
nn
ttaa
iinn
HH
oo
uu
ss
ee
RR
dd
Duncan
Springs Rd E
a
stsid
e
R
d
Hopland Public Utility District Boundary
!"
Above Ground Tank
Wastewater Treatment Facility
Major Roads
Russsian River
Created August, 2012 - Exhibit4_2_1.mxd Data Sources: County of Mendocino, Esri
£ Exhibit 4.2.1
0 1
Miles Hopland Public Utility District Boundary Map
E Mulberg & Associates
LAFCO of Mendocino Municipal Service Review City of Ukiah
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.3.1 The HPUD serves 350 water customers but has no water rights. The HPUD maintains
two storage tanks with a capacity of 800,000 gallons, which is approximately half the
summer supply.
4.2.3.2 Current demand is 350 AFY. The HPUD contracts with RRFC for up to 400 AF of Lake
Mendocino water. The HPUD has sufficient water capacity.
Wastewater
Hopland has 303 sewer connections. The current average daily flow (ADF) is 45,000 gpd compared
with a capacity of 90,000 gpd. The daily peak flow capacity is 220,000. The HPUD has sufficient
capacity to double its sewer connections.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.3.3 The HPUD has 303 sewer connections. Average daily flow is 45,000 gpd, while capacity
is 90,000 gpd. The peak daily flow capacity is 220,000. The HPUD has the capacity to
double its sewer customers.
4.2.4 – Financial Ability to Provide Services
The HPUD provides both water and sewer services with an annual operating budget of $470,000.
Over the four-year period from FY 2008–09 to FY 2011–12, operating revenues averaged $514,000.
Revenues are broken down as shown in Exhibit 4.2-2. The exhibit shows a majority of revenues are
derived from sewer charges.
Exhibit 4.2-2: Hopland PUD Distribution of Revenues FY 2008–09 to FY 2011–12
Source: Celentano, Michael 2010, 2011, 2012.
Table 4.2-2 shows revenues and expenses for the last four fiscal years. The table shows operating
income is positive each year. However, interest expense is substantial so that there is a net loss
4-17
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
for three of the four-years. The interest expense is associated with long-term debt as described
below.
Table 4.2-2: Hopland PUD Summary of Revenues and Expenses FY 2008–09 to FY 2011–12
ACCOUNT FY 2008–2009 FFY 2009–2010 FY 2010–2011 FY 2011–2012
Total Operating Revenue $511,163 $535,208 $522,228 $487,693
Total Operating Expenses 496,631 492,813 431,103 456,759
Operating Income 14,532 42,395 91,125 30,934
Interest expense (72,059) (62,172) (64,314) (62,586)
Total Non-Operating
Revenues (Expenses) (81,164) (100,974) (53,526) (58,149)
Net Income (Loss) ($66,632) ($58,579) $37,599 ($27,215)
Source: Celentano, Michael 2010, 2011, 2012.
Rates and Connection Fees
HPUD has a rate schedule that is easy to administer. Water rates are $22.00 for the first 6,000
gallons and $1.00 for each thousand gallons thereafter. The sewer rate is $62.40 per residential
equivalent unit. Connection fees are $2,950 for water and $6,866 for sewer.
Long-Term Debt
The HPUD has three long-term debt obligations. They include both bonds and loans for the sewer
system and loans for the water system. The total obligation as of June 30, 2012 is $1,380,221.
In 1974, the HPUD issued general obligation sewer bonds at an aggregate amount of $187,000. The
interest rate of 5 percent is payable each year on the first day of January and the last day of July.
As of June 30, 2012, the balance is $6,000 with payments of $3,000 due in FY 2012–13.
The HPUD received a loan from CALTRANS for the sewer system for $300,000. The interest rate is
the rate of earnings of the State’s Surplus Money Investment Fund, currently at 0.49 percent.
Principal and interest is payable June 1 and December 1. The current balance is $90,000, with
payments of $36,053 due in FY 2012–13.
The HPUD received a loan of $1,489,000 for its water system from the Rural Utility Service, which
is part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development Agency. The interest rate is 4.75
percent payable each year on April 1 and September 1. The loan requires the HPUD to establish a
separate debt service reserve in the amount equal to the average annual loan installment. The
current balance is $1,284,000 with payments of $23,000 due in FY 2012–13.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.4.1 The HPUD has a budget that averages $470,000. Revenues are primarily sewer charges,
which make up 56 percent of all revenues, and water sales, which are 36 percent.
4-18
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
4.2.4.2 The long-term debt obligation is $1,380,221. Annual principal interest payments
amount to $62,000 in FY 2012–13.
4.2.4.3 Operating revenues exceed operating expenses; however, net operating revenues were
less than interest expenses for long-term debt three of the last four-years.
4.2.5 – Status and Opportunities for Shared Facilities
The HPUD has entered into a joint powers agreement (JPA) with Special District Risk Management
Authority (SDRMA) for insurance. SDRMA’s purpose is to jointly fund and develop programs to
provide stable, efficient, and long-term risk financing for special districts.
In 2008, the HPUD agreed to share office space and staff services with the WCWD. The HPUD relies
on the general manager, office personnel, and maintenance staff of the WCWD. As such, the HPUD
has no employees. Similar to CCWD, the Board of Directors works directly with staff of WCWD.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.5.1 The HPUD shares office space with the staff of WCWD as part of its staff services
agreement. The HPUD has no employees.
4.2.6 – Governance and Accountability
A five-member board elected at large to four-year terms meets on the second Thursday of the
month at the Old Train Depot at 6:30 p.m. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
Minutes are compiled in a minutes book.
Board members receive a stipend of $84.40 per month. The stipend is deducted from their water
and sewer bill. Each board member files a public disclosure document with the County. There are
no standing committees.
The HPUD does not have a website. Residents are welcome at noticed board meetings. The
contract with the WCWD allows the HPUD to maintain an office where staff can communicate with
customers and the public.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.6.1 The HPUD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. They meet on the second Thursday of each month at 6:30 p.m. at the Old Train
Depot. Directors receive a monthly stipend of $84.40, which is deducted from their
water and sewer bill.
4.2.6.2 The HPUD keeps a minute book. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act. The
contract with WCWD allows the HPUD to maintain an office where staff can respond to
customers and the public.
4.2.7 – LAFCO Policies Affecting Service Delivery
HPUD has contracted with WCWD for staff services. At some point, HPUD may want to formally
apply to LAFCO for consolidation with WCWD. In that case, the LAFCO policies in Chapter V Section
D under reorganization would apply.
4-19
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
The consolidation can be initiated by petition (section 4); by the action of the boards of the two
agencies (sections 8, 9,and 10); and section C, which relates to a LAFCO-initiated consolidation. If
the action is initiated by petition, section 4 requires the signatures of 5 percent of the registered
voters.
If action is initiated by the districts, section 8 requires the districts to adopt substantially similar
resolutions. In that case, LAFCO cannot deny the consolidation and can only make changes to the
terms with the consent of the districts.
A LAFCO-initiated consolidation must be based on an initial study that recommends consolidation.
Policy C 6 requires a second study called a “Reorganization Study” or a reorganization committee
to establish terms of the consolidation. The LAFCO action is subject to protest proceedings.
DETERMINATIONS:
4.2.7.1 The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to
consolidation, should that action be of interest to HPUD and WCWD.
4.2.8 – Summary of Determinations
4.2.1.1 The population of Hopland is estimated 756 by the 2010 Census. Growth in the
previous 10 years was 10 percent or about 1 percent per year. Using the 1 percent
growth rate, the population would be estimated at 830 in 2020.
4.2.2.1 There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the sphere of influence
of the HPUD.
4.2.3.1 The HPUD serves 350 water customers, but has no water rights. The HPUD maintains
two storage tanks with a capacity of 800,000 gallons, which is approximately half the
summer supply.
4.2.3.2 Current demand is 350 AFY. The HPUD contracts with RRFC for up to 400 AF of Lake
Mendocino water. The HPUD has sufficient water capacity.
4.2.3.3 The HPUD has 303 sewer connections. Average daily flow is 45,000 gpd, while capacity
is 90,000 gpd. The peak daily flow capacity is 220,000 gallons. The HPUD has the
capacity to double its sewer customers.
4.2.4.1 The HPUD has a budget that averages $470,000. Revenues are derived primarily from
sewer charges, which make up 56 percent of all revenues, and water sales which are 36
percent.
4.2.4.2 The long-term debt obligation is $1,380,221. Annual principal interest payments
amount to $62,000 in FY 2012–13.
4.2.4.3 Operating revenues exceed operating expenses; however, net operating revenues were
less than interest expenses for long-term debt three of the last four-years.
4.2.5.1 The HPUD shares office space with the staff of WCWD as part of its staff services
agreement. The HPUD has no employees.
4.2.6.1 The HPUD is governed by a five-member board elected at large to four-year staggered
terms. It meets on the second Thursday of each month at 6:30 p.m. at the Old Train
Depot. Directors receive a monthly stipend of $84.40, which is deducted from their
water and sewer bill.
4-20
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Hopland Public Utility District
4.2.6.2 The HPUD keeps a minutes book. Meetings are noticed according to the Brown Act.
The contract with WCWD allows the HPUD to maintain an office where staff can
respond to customers and the public.
4.2.7.1 The only LAFCO policies that could affect service delivery are those related to
consolidation should that action be of interest to HPUD and WCWD.
4-21
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Recommendations
5: RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations are based on the evaluation of each district’s ability to provide effective and
efficient services during the five-year horizon of this MSR. From the analysis provided in the
recently adopted Ukiah Valley Area Plan and historic growth rates, growth of 1 percent or less
during the next five years is anticipated. Recommendations fall into four categories:
consolidations, annexations, reviewing rates, and sphere of influence.
5.1 – Consolidations
Ukiah Valley Fire District
The Ukiah Valley Fire District has completed a functional consolidation with the City of Ukiah Fire
Department. Not only did the City hire the UVFD fire chief to serve in a similar capacity, but it has
also agreed to share personnel and equipment. The arrangement allows for three–person engine
companies at the District’s North State Street station and the South State Street station that would
respond to calls from the Cal Fire dispatch center. As of March 2013, the dispatch center will serve
both the City and the District. The arrangement also allows the City to locate its ambulances at
the Ukiah station at 300 Seminary Avenue. Since the District and the City have an automatic aid
agreement, dispatch of ambulance service, providing advanced life support, would not be affected.
Three-person engine companies would be a significant improvement in services.
To that end, the District and the City should work on a formal consolidation that would include a
more formal chain of command, common training, and updated equipment. The City maintains 12
apparatus, 10 of which are scheduled for replacement within the next five years. Of those 10, four
are overdue for replacement. The District has five engines, three of which are over 15 years old
and in need of replacement. In addition, the patrol mini pumper is 22 years old and should also be
replaced. A consolidation could help fund new equipment.
Redwood Valley County Water District and Russian River Flood Control
Both RVCWD and RRFC have expressed interest in consolidation. A consolidation would offer
RVCWD a more reliable source of water and the RRFC an opportunity to acquire more water rights.
In fact, there is a pending application with the SWRCB for an additional 6,000 AF of water rights.
The RRFC is in the process of meeting with the authors of protest letters to help resolve protests.
The consolidation hinges on an agreement with SCWA, which controls much of the water in Lake
Mendocino. Should the water rights application be approved and both districts adopt substantially
similar resolutions to consolidate, LAFCO cannot turn them down.
Willow County Water District / Calpella County Water District / Hopland Public Utility
District
Willow CWD has management agreements with both Calpella CWD and Hopland PUD whereby
Willow CWD provides office space, administrative staff, and field staff for the two districts. Both
Calpella and Hopland have no employees, so the management agreements represent a functional
consolidation of the three districts. Other than maintaining separate boards directors, CCWD and
HPUD are essentially one with Willow CWD. Given this arrangement, the Districts should consider
consolidation so that policies and service delivery are consistent.
5-1
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review Recommendations
The three districts have not yet consolidated because they desire to maintain community identity.
Although having separate districts is one way to maintain identity, other ways include community
advisory councils that would be made up of concerned residents of Calpella and Hopland.
Community advisory councils would be able to focus on their respective communities and have
standing with the board of directors. Other options include establishing districts so that
representation on the board would be sure to include residents of Calpella and Hopland.
Nevertheless, the three districts should evaluate the options.
5.2 – Annexations
Calpella County Water District
Calpella CWD provides water services to the area of the Central Avenue corridor west of US 101.
The District has been providing services since 2001. According to LAFCO policies, Calpella CWD
should consider annexation.
One concern with annexation is that the District is under a moratorium for new water service
connections. Since the Calpella CWD already provides services, there would be no additional
hookups that would violate the moratorium. Annexation may allow the District to collect some
additional property tax revenue. Since the average of revenues and expenditures has shown a
deficit in the last couple of years, the added property tax may help resolve the deficit.
Should the District pursue annexation, it may have to establish two zones of services. One zone
would provide water and sewer. The other zone would provide water only.
5.3 – Other
Hopland Public Utility District
A review of the financial statements for Hopland PUD shows that although its revenues exceed
expenses, the interest payments on debt service have exceeded net income in two of the last three
years. One solution would be to perform a rate study and adopt a rate schedule that provides
sufficient revenue to cover debt service.
Websites
Of the eight districts included in this municipal service review, only three districts—Redwood
Valley, RRFC, and PVID—have websites. Websites are recognized as a way to notice a public
meeting. Websites are an inexpensive way to communicate with residents and other agencies.
The other five—UVFD, WCWD, MCWD, CCWD, and HPUD—do not. One drawback to having a website
is that state law requires meetings to be noticed on the website. If the server is down or if for
some unforeseen circumstance the agenda could not be posted in time, the District may be in
violation of the Brown Act. The Legislature will be addressing that issue in upcoming sessions.
Each district should evaluate the advantage of enhanced accountability in determining whether or
not to establish a website.
5-2
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review References
6:
REFERENCES
Bartlett, John . 2012a. Personal communication: email May 25, 2012.
Bartlett, John . 2012b. Personal communication: email July 23, 2012.
Bartlett, John . 2013. Personal communication: fax April 9, 2013.
Bowers, Rick. 2010. Redwood Valley County Water District Financial Statements June 30,2009.
June 30.
Bowers, Rick. 2011. Redwood Valley County Water District Financial Statements June 30, 2010.
June 7, 2011.
Bradley, Tim. 2012. Personal communication: telephone. October 23, 2012.
Brelje & Race Consulting Civil Engineers. 1995. Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements. June
20.
Cal EPA. 2001. State Water Resources Control Board. Amended License for Diversion and Use of
Water. Website: http://swrcb2.waterboards.ca.gov/ewrims/wrims-data
/l005246%20a013557.pdf. Accessed July 13, 2012.
Cal EPA. 2008. State Water Resources Control Board Wastewater User Charge Survey FY 2007–08.
May 1.
California Department of Finance. 2011. Census 2010 Demographic Profile Summary File Table 2:
Land Area, Population and Population Density, April 1, 2010 Zip Code Tabulation Areas in
California. August 26.
California Department of Finance. 2011a. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities,
Counties, and the State, 2010–2011, with 2010 Benchmark. Sacramento, California. May.
California Department of Finance.2011b. Land Area, Population and Population Density, April 1,
2010 Zip Code Tabulation Areas in California. Generated on August 26.
California Department of Finance.2011b. Land Area, Population and Population Density, April 1,
2000 Zip Code Tabulation Areas in California. September 14.
California State Controller. 2010. Special Districts Annual Report Fiscal Year 2007–08. February 2.
California State Controller. 2011a. Special Districts Annual Report Fiscal Year 2008–09. April 26.
California State Controller. 2011b. Special Districts Annual Report Fiscal Year 2009–10. December
13, 2011.
Celentano, Michael. 2010. Hopland Public Utility District Financial Statements June 30,2010 and
2009. September 8.
Celentano, Michael. 2012. Hopland Public Utility District Financial Statements June 30,2011 and
2010. September 27.
Celentano, Michael. 2012a. Hopland Public Utility District Financial Statements June 30,2012 and
2011. September 18.
City of Ukiah. 2007a. Fire Services Master Plan.
City of Ukiah. 2007b. Minutes Ad Hoc Fire Integration Study Committee. October 1. Website:
http://www.cityofukiah.com/pdf/fire_department/fdim_100107.PDF. Accessed October
20, 2012.
City of Ukiah. 2011. Urban Water Management Plan. June 9.
City of Ukiah. 2012. Fiscal Year 2012–2013 Sewer Operations Fund.
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review References
City of Ukiah. 2012a. City Council Workshop: Alternative Fire Service Arrangements. February 15.
City of Ukiah. 2012b. Staff Report: Consider approval of:
Authorize listed budget amendment, repurposing funds from 105.2101.250.000 ($144,000) for
the purpose of chief services ($42,000) and volunteer stipend program ($102,000).
Authorize the city manager to sign a cooperative agreement with Hopland Fire District and
Ukiah Valley Fire District to share fire chief services at a cost of $42,000 per year ($3,500 per
month), from fund 105.2101.250.000.
Authorize negotiations with both Ukiah Valley Fire District and Hopland Fire District to
establish a volunteer stipend program to augment fire services for the greater Ukiah Valley
Area.
Authorize staff to explore options with CAL FIRE for combining City Of Ukiah and Ukiah
Valley Fire District dispatching services. August 1.
City of Ukiah. 2012c. Staff Report. Consider approval of:
Authorize the city manager to contract with the Ukiah Valley Fire District to establish a
volunteer stipend program to augment fire services for the greater Ukiah area, utilizing
$102,400 in funding from fund 105.2101.250.000.
Authorize staff to move to a boundary drop concept for fire services between the City of
Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley Fire District and move to a 3-person engine company staffing
concept. October 3.
City of Ukiah. 2012d. Staff Report: Consider authorizing the city manager to sign a cooperative
agreement with CAL FIRE for fire dispatching services, and make appropriate budget
amendments. October 17.
Dickerson, John. 2012. Personal communication: email. November 15.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2007. Ukiah Valley Growth Prospects. March.
Eel River Recovery Project. 2012. Website: http://www.eelriverrecovery.org/. Accessed October
25, 2012.
Elliott, Steve. 2005. LAFCO Commission of Mendocino Ukiah Valley/Russian River Watershed MSR
Questionnaire. September 22.
Elliott, Steve. 2012a. General Manager, Potter Valley Irrigation District. Personal communication:
telephone. July 18.
Elliott, Steve. 2012b. General Manager, Potter Valley Irrigation District. Personal communication:
letter. July 21.
Elliott, Steve. 2013. General Manager, Potter Valley Irrigation District. Personal communication:
email. January 9.
Emergency Services Consulting. 2007. Ukiah Fire Department Ukiah, California Fire Protection and
Emergency Services Master Plan. April.
Fire Safe Council. 2011. Website: http://firesafemendocino.org/history.htm. Accessed
September 7, 2011.
Grebil. 2012. Making a Positive Difference Every Day. February.
Kleinfelder, Inc. 2005. Well Installation and Second Quarter 2005 Groundwater Monitoring Report
Calpella Wastewater Treatment Plant Calpella, CA. August 26.
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review References
Koehler, Bill. 2012. General Manager Redwood Valley County Water District. Personal
communication: email. November 29.
Koehler, Bill. 2013a. General Manager Redwood Valley County Water District. Personal
communication: email. February 12.
Koehler, Bill. 2013b. General Manager Redwood Valley County Water District. Personal
communication: email. April 8.
LAFCO of Mendocino County. 2005. Survey Questionnaire. September 22.
Leonard Charles and Associates. 2011. Draft 2007 Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft Program EIR.
January.
McCosker, Darin. 2005. LAFCO Commission of Mendocino Ukiah Valley/Russian River Watershed
MSR Questionnaire. December 21.
McMichael, Frank. 2012a. General Manager, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Personal
communication: E-mail. November 8.
McMichael, Frank. 2012b. General Manager, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Personal
communication: E-mail. December 28.
McMichael, Frank. 2013a. General Manager, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Personal
communication: E-mail. January 9.
McMichael, Frank. 2013b. General Manager, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Personal
communication: E-mail. February 20.
McMichael, Frank. 2013c. General Manager, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Personal
communication: E-mail. April 9.
Mendocino County LAFCO. 2002. Master Services Element and annexation Plan for the Calpella
county Water District. May.
Mendocino County Planning and Building Services. 2011. Ukiah Valley Area Plan. August.
Mendocino County Water Agency. 2010. UVAP Water Supply Assessment. October 10, 2010.
Mendocino County. 2009. Mendocino County General Plan. August.
Mendocino County. 2010. Mendocino County Housing Element. March.
Mendocino Fire Safe Council. 2012. Accessed October20, 2012. Website:
http://www.firesafemendocino.org/sponsors.html.
NOAA Fisheries Service. 2012. Recovery Plan for the Evolutionary Significant Unit of Central
California Coast Coho Salmon. September.
North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2012. Irrigation Lands Discharge Program
Development. February. Website: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast
/water_issues/programs/agricultural_lands/pdf/120227/sub_group/Presentation_February
_2012.pdf. Accessed October 25, 2012.
Office of Planning and Research. 2003. Municipal Service Review Guidelines.
Pacific Forest and Watershed Land Stewardship Council. 2012. Website:
http://www.stewardshipcouncil.org/. Accessed October 25, 2012.
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2007b. Potter Valley Irrigation District Bylaws & Ordinances.
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2007a. Potter Valley Irrigation 2007 Annual Budget.
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2008. Potter Valley Irrigation District 2008 Annual Budget.
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2009. Potter Valley Irrigation District 2009 Annual Budget.
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2010. Potter Valley Irrigation District 2010 Annual Budget.
LAFCO of Mendocino County
Ukiah Valley Special Districts
Final Municipal Service Review References
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2011. Potter Valley Irrigation District 2011 Annual Budget.
Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2012. Website:www.pottervalleywater.org. Accessed January 10,
2012.
RBF Consulting. 2011. New Ukiah Courthouse Draft Environmental Impact Report. October.
Redding, Dave. 2006. Personal communication: Willow County Water District questionnaire.
February.
Redding, Dave. 2007. Calpella County Water District Municipal Service Review Questionnaire.
Redding, Dave. 2012a. Personal communication: meeting. July 9.
Redding, Dave. 2012b. Personal communication: letter. July 9.
Redding, Dave. 2012c. Personal communication: letter. July 11.
Redding, Dave. 2012d. Personal communication: letter. Budgets FY 2009/10 through FY 2011/12.
July 11.
Redding, Dave. 2012e. Personal communication: fax. Water Rates. October 31.
Redding, Dave. 2012f. Personal communication: fax. October 31.
Redding, Dave. 2012g. Personal communication: telephone. November 6.
Redwood Valley County Water District. 2012. Website: www.rvcwd.org. Accessed April 13, 2012.
Redwood Valley County Water District. 2012a. Board meeting minutes. February 16.
Redwood Valley County Water District. 2012b. Board meeting minutes. March 15.
Redwood Valley County Water District. 2012c. Board meeting minutes. September 20.
RRFC. 2011. Meeting Minutes. Russian River Flood Control District Profit & Loss June 30,2010
through June 30, 2011. July 7.
RRFC. 2012. Meeting Minutes. Russian River Flood Control District Profit & Loss June 30,2010
through June 30, 2011. July 5.
UC San Diego. 2012. California Sea Grant Program. Quagga/Zebra Mussel Monitoring. Website:
http://ca-sgep.ucsd.edu/focus-areas/healthy-coastal-marine-ecosystems/quaggazebra-
mussel-monitoring. Accessed October 25, 2012.
Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. 2012. Website: http://www.ukiahvalleysd.com. Accessed
November 7, 2012.
U.S. Census. 2010. Website: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/popmap/ipmtext.php?fl=06.
Accessed July 18, 2012.
U.S. Census. 2010. Website: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/popmap/ipmtext.php?fl=06.
Accessed July 18, 2012.
U.S. Census. 2010. Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages
/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t. Accessed February 20, 2012.
U.S. Census. 2010. Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages
/productview.xhtml?fpt=table. Accessed January 25, 2012.
U.S. Census. 2010. Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages
/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_10_5YR_DP03. Accessed November 8, 2012.
White, Sean. 2012. Personal communication: telephone: October 29.
White, Sean. 2013. Personal communication: email: January 9.
Willow County Water District 1993. Resolution Number 198. Setting policy regarding employee
benefits and expenses shared between Willow County Water District and Calpella County Water
District